DHS Clarifies Green Card Policy: Most Immigrants Can Still Apply for Adjustment of Status in the United States.

May 31, 2026

Last week, we analyzed USCIS's newly issued policy memorandum regarding Adjustment of Status (AOS) applications and the agency's stated intent to limit adjustment eligibility to "extraordinary circumstances."

The announcement immediately caused concern among immigrants, employers, and immigration attorneys because it appeared to signal a dramatic shift in decades of immigration practice. Many feared that immigrants seeking permanent residence would be required to leave the United States and complete immigrant visa processing abroad, even when they were otherwise eligible to adjust status inside the country.

Now, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) has issued a clarification that significantly narrows the scope of those concerns based on a report from New York Times.

What Did DHS Clarify?

According to DHS, the recent USCIS announcement was not intended to create a blanket rule requiring adjustment applicants to leave the United States.

Instead, DHS now states that immigration officers have always possessed discretionary authority to determine whether an applicant should pursue permanent residence through adjustment of status in the United States or through consular processing abroad.

In other words, the agency now characterizes the policy memorandum as a reminder of existing officer discretion rather than a wholesale elimination of adjustment of status.

This clarification is important because adjustment of status remains one of the most valuable immigration benefits available to eligible immigrants. It allows applicants to remain with their families, continue employment, and obtain work authorization while awaiting adjudication of their green card applications.

Why Did the Original Announcement Cause Panic?

The original USCIS announcement suggested that applicants would generally be required to return to their home countries unless extraordinary circumstances justified adjustment of status.

Such a policy would have created serious consequences for many immigrants:

• Families could be separated for months or years.

• Employers could lose key employees.

• Applicants could become subject to unlawful presence bars after departing the United States.

• Consular processing delays could significantly increase waiting times.

• Applicants would lose procedural protections available during adjustment of status.

Many immigration attorneys interpreted the announcement as a potential attempt to curtail one of the most commonly used pathways to permanent residence.

Who Could Still Face Increased Scrutiny?

Although DHS clarified that most applicants are not automatically required to leave the United States, the agency's statements suggest that certain categories may receive heightened review.

DHS officials specifically referenced:

• Visa overstays;

• Individuals who violated their nonimmigrant status;

• Applicants from countries identified as heavy users of public benefits; and

• Cases where officers believe consular processing may be more appropriate.

At this point, DHS has not published formal guidance explaining how officers will exercise this discretion.

As a result, significant uncertainty remains.

Family-Based Immigration May Be Most Affected.

Family-based applicants may face the greatest risk from increased discretionary review.

Historically, many immigrants entered the United States lawfully, later married U.S. citizens, and successfully adjusted status despite having overstayed their visas.

If USCIS increasingly directs these applicants to pursue immigrant visa processing abroad, some individuals could trigger three-year or ten-year unlawful presence bars upon departure from the United States.

This issue is particularly significant because immediate relatives of U.S. citizens have traditionally benefited from broad adjustment eligibility under the Immigration and Nationality Act.

Whether USCIS intends to alter longstanding practices in this area remains unclear.

Impact on Employment-Based Immigration.

The DHS clarification is also welcome news for employers and highly skilled foreign workers.

The original announcement generated significant concern among H-1B professionals, multinational executives, researchers, physicians, engineers, and other employment-based immigrants who have waited years for green card availability.

If these individuals were required to leave the United States and complete consular processing abroad, employers could face:

• Workforce disruptions;

• Project delays;

• Increased immigration uncertainty;

• Additional government processing delays; and

• Risks associated with consular visa refusals.

At present, DHS's clarification suggests that employment-based adjustment applicants should continue to have access to the adjustment process, although increased questioning during interviews may occur.

What Should Immigrants Do Now?

The answer is not panic.

The law governing adjustment of status has not changed. Congress has not amended INA §245. USCIS has not eliminated adjustment of status. No regulation has been issued requiring applicants to depart the United States.

However, applicants should expect increased scrutiny regarding:

• Their immigration history;

• Prior status violations;

• Periods of unlawful presence;

• Eligibility for adjustment under INA §245; and

• Whether USCIS believes adjustment should be granted as a matter of discretion.

Individuals with complicated immigration histories should seek legal advice before filing or attending an adjustment interview.

aiLegal's View

The DHS clarification confirms what many immigration attorneys suspected after reviewing the original announcement: the legal authority for adjustment of status remains intact.

Nevertheless, the government's messaging indicates a broader effort to narrow immigration benefits through discretionary decision-making rather than through statutory changes enacted by Congress.

Immigrants should closely monitor future USCIS guidance and policy memoranda. How immigration officers exercise this discretion in actual cases will ultimately determine whether the policy becomes a meaningful change or simply a clarification of existing authority.

For now, most eligible immigrants can still pursue adjustment of status in the United States.

The key question is no longer whether adjustment of status exists—it does.

The question is how aggressively USCIS will use its discretionary authority in the months ahead.