Unions, university faculty groups and six green card applicants sued the Department of Homeland Security and USCIS on October 5 over two policies they say make Adjustment of statusThe process of applying for a green card from within the United States, rather than through a consulate abroad. Filed on Form I-485.See it in the glossary harder for people already living in the United States. The federal complaint, filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts, challenges a May memo that treats adjustment as an extraordinary form of relief and an August policy that lets officers deny applications without first asking for more evidence.
Who filed the lawsuit
The plaintiffs are the American Association of University Professors and its Harvard Faculty and Boston University chapters, the Service Employees International Union with its Local 509 and 32BJ affiliates, Americans for Immigrant Justice, and six individual green card applicants. The defendants are DHS, USCIS, DHS Secretary Markwayne Mullin and USCIS Director Joseph Edlow, both sued in their official capacities.
The plaintiffs are represented by Democracy Forward, the American Immigration Council, the American Immigration Lawyers Association and Colombo & Hurd, according to a Democracy Forward release.
What adjustment of status means
Adjustment of status lets an eligible person in the United States apply for permanent residence on Form I-485Application to Register Permanent Residence or Adjust Status, the form used to apply for a green card from inside the United States.See it in the glossary without leaving the country. The alternative is Consular processingApplying for an immigrant visa at a U.S. embassy or consulate abroad, as an alternative to adjustment of status inside the United States.See it in the glossary, where the applicant completes the Immigrant visaA visa issued at a consulate to a person intending to live permanently in the United States. On admission the holder becomes a permanent resident.See it in the glossary process at a U.S. embassy or consulate abroad. Our guide to adjustment of status versus consular processing covers how the two routes differ.
The route is widely used. The complaint cites DHS data showing that 782,800 of 1,364,090 people who became permanent residents in fiscal year 2024, or 57 percent, did so through adjustment.
The May memo on adjustment of status
USCIS issued policy memorandum PM-602-0199 on May 21, 2026. The USCIS memo describes adjustment as a discretionary benefit and an act of administrative grace. It says Congress generally expected people paroled into the country or admitted as nonimmigrants to leave once their stay ended if they wanted to pursue permanent residence.
The complaint says the memo tells officers to count a choice to adjust instead of consular processing as an adverse factor, one that applicants must overcome with “unusual or even outstanding” equities. The memo names limited exceptions for dual-intent nonimmigrant categories and for categories where adjustment is the only path to permanent residence. It adds that holding dual-intent status does not by itself justify a favorable decision, the complaint says.
After the memo came out, DHS described it as not a blanket policy change, according to a law firm’s account of the agency’s statements. Officers, DHS said, would keep making case-by-case decisions.
The August policy on denials without a request for evidence
On August 5, USCIS issued Policy Alert PA-2026-05. It restores officers’ full discretion to deny a benefit request without first sending a Request for Evidence (RFE)A USCIS notice asking for additional documents or information before a decision can be made on an application or petition.See it in the glossary or a Notice of Intent to Deny (NOID)A written USCIS notice saying the agency intends to deny a petition or application, explaining why, and giving the filer a chance to respond. Under 8 CFR 103.2(b)(8), the response time cannot exceed 30 days. Since a policy update on August 5, 2026, USCIS officers may in some cases deny a case without first issuing a NOID or a Request for Evidence.See it in the glossary when required initial evidence is missing or the record does not establish eligibility.
The alert applies to requests pending on August 5 as well as those filed after it. It replaces June 2021 guidance that generally told officers to issue one of those notices when more evidence might establish eligibility. USCIS says the change will discourage “frivolous, placeholder, or incomplete filings.” Regulations already allowed denial without a notice in some circumstances, the complaint notes.
What the plaintiffs argue
The complaint lists six counts. It argues that the May memo exceeds USCIS’s authority under the Immigration and Nationality Act, is arbitrary and capricious, was issued without notice-and-comment rulemaking, and conflicts with binding agency regulations and decisions. It makes the same arguments against the August policy.
The plaintiffs also argue that the two policies together act retroactively, in violation of the Administrative Procedure Act and the Fifth Amendment’s Due Process Clause. Their reasoning: people who filed before May 21 had no reason to submit evidence on a factor that did not yet exist, and could now be denied without a chance to respond.
The complaint adds that Congress has amended the adjustment statute at least 25 times since 1952 without ever imposing a general requirement that eligible applicants leave the country.
What the individual applicants describe
Maria Francisca Guardado, who has lived in the United States since 1998, filed for adjustment in October 2022. The complaint says USCIS found her eligible but denied the application on September 2 as a matter of discretion, citing her immigration history, a 1999 arrest with a charge that was later dismissed, and alleged nondisclosures on earlier Temporary Protected Status (TPS)A designation that lets nationals of certain countries facing conflict or disaster stay and work in the United States temporarily.See it in the glossary applications. Her Motion to reopenA request asking an immigration judge or the Board of Immigration Appeals to reopen a case after a decision so new facts or evidence can be considered. As a general rule it must be filed within 90 days of the final order, and only one is generally allowed, with exceptions set out in INA 240(c)(7) and the regulations.See it in the glossary or reconsider is pending.
Another plaintiff, Miriam Esther Moreno Coto, has lived in the country for about 26 years and has three U.S. citizen children. She says an officer repeatedly asked at a July interview why she was seeking adjustment rather than consular processing. These accounts are allegations in a court filing, not findings by the court.
Why the consular route is part of the case
The complaint argues that leaving the country is riskier now than in past years. It points to the State Department’s January pause on immigrant visas for nationals of 75 countries, which a federal court later vacated, and to an August 13 Board of Immigration Appeals decision that affects some people who travel on advance parole. Our reports cover the 75-country visa ruling and the advance parole decision. For background on staying in the country while applying, see applying for a green card without leaving the U.S.
What happens next
The plaintiffs ask the court to block the two policies, ultimately set them aside, and order USCIS to decide affected applications under controlling Board of Immigration Appeals precedent. As of October 7, the court has not ruled on any of the claims. The complaint does not itself change how USCIS handles applications.