New lawsuits filed in Manhattan challenge the public charge rule, with New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani and state Attorney General Letitia James seeking to block a federal policy they say will make it harder for lawful immigrants to secure green cards and visas.
The rule, scheduled to take effect Friday, would allow immigration officers to deny applications if they conclude an immigrant is likely to use programs such as Medicaid or food assistance. Mamdani described the measure as a cruel and unlawful change that penalizes people for using benefits to which they are lawfully entitled.
In coordinated filings, Mamdani led a coalition of cities and counties, including Chicago, San Francisco, Santa Clara County, Seattle and King County, in a lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York. James, joined by more than 20 states, filed a similar case in the same court.
The complaints argue the administration unlawfully rewrote the longstanding definition of a public charge. For over a century, the term referred to someone primarily dependent on government assistance. The new policy, the filings say, would let officials count a wide range of benefits against applicants, including those used by family members of U.S. citizens.
How the public charge rule could affect services
The plaintiffs warn the policy could push households to forgo preventive health care, nutrition support and school meals to improve their odds of approval, with consequences for public health, safety and education. The states’ filing cites risks from delayed care, including late-stage disease detection, unintended pregnancies, poor birth outcomes and higher mortality associated with advanced illness. They contend federal officials failed to properly weigh these impacts before finalizing the change.
The lawsuits also challenge what they describe as unfettered discretion for immigration officers, asserting the rule lacks clear, workable standards and invites arbitrary and inconsistent decisions.
James said families should not have to sacrifice essential support out of fear that seeking assistance could jeopardize their status. The suits ask the court to declare the rule unlawful and prevent the government from enforcing it. Mamdani said the aim is a permanent block, not just a temporary injunction.
The Department of Homeland Security, named as the lead defendant, dismissed the challenges as ideological, suggesting that so-called sanctuary jurisdictions fear losing federal funds if noncitizens withdraw from welfare programs.
James previously prevailed in a 2020 lawsuit against an earlier attempt to alter the public charge definition during the Covid-19 pandemic. In that case, a federal judge ruled Homeland Security lacked authority to impose the change, a decision later upheld by the Second Circuit.
The dispute over the policy comes as federal courts continue to wrestle with immigration-related challenges, including cases that reach the Supreme Court for review.