The Public Charge Rule Changes on September 18, 2026: What Green Card Applicants in Texas Can Have Reviewed

What Changed, and When

The Department of Homeland Security published a final rule titled Public Charge Ground of Inadmissibility, 91 Fed. Reg. 45324 on July 20, 2026. It carries CIS No. 2857-26, DHS Docket No. USCIS-2025-0304, and RIN 1615-AD06, and it amends 8 C.F.R. Parts 103 and 212.

The effective date is stated plainly in the rule: “The final rule is effective on September 18, 2026.”

What the rule does is a rescission rather than a replacement. It removes the 2022 public charge regulation from the Code of Federal Regulations and puts nothing in its place. The regulatory text is one line: “Remove Sec. Sec. 212.20 through 212.23.” In the preamble, DHS itemizes the four sections being struck:

• 8 C.F.R. 212.20 — “Removal in its entirety of the language defining the categories of aliens subject to the public charge ground of inadmissibility.”
• 8 C.F.R. 212.21 — “Removal of the definitions, including the definitions of ‘likely at any time to become a public charge,’ ‘receipt (of public benefits),’ ‘public cash assistance for income maintenance,’ and ‘long-term institutionalization at government expense.’”
• 8 C.F.R. 212.22 — removal of the language on “an alien’s current and/or past receipt of means-tested public benefits, the totality of the circumstances analysis, and receipt of public benefits by an alien in an exempt category.”
• 8 C.F.R. 212.23 — “Removal of the language listing exemptions and waivers to the public charge ground of inadmissibility.”

DHS is explicit that no new regulation follows: “DHS has determined regulations are unnecessary for the effective implementation of the public charge ground of inadmissibility and will not issue replacement regulations at this time.” The rule also states that “DHS is not implementing the provisions of the 2019 Final Rule in this final rule.”

One widely repeated description of this rule is not accurate, and it is worth correcting. A number of summaries say the change returns the government to the 1999 Interim Field Guidance. The rule says otherwise. DHS describes the result as “a departure from the 1999, 2019, and 2022 public charge efforts,” and writes that “As was the case prior to the 1999 Interim Field Guidance, DHS will now consider any receipt of means-tested public benefits in the totality of the circumstances.” DHS also states directly: “Importantly, DHS is not providing a definition for public charge in this final rule.”

The rule went through ordinary notice and comment. DHS published a proposed rule on November 19, 2025 (90 FR 52168), the comment period closed December 19, 2025, and DHS reports it “received 8,846 comments on the proposed rule, the majority of which opposed the rule.” DHS states it is “issuing this final rule as proposed.”

Who in Texas This Reaches

The rule is national and applies by filing date, not by state. Its own applicability language is the sentence to read twice:

“This rule applies to applications for admission made on or after September 18, 2026 or applications for adjustment of status postmarked or electronically submitted on or after September 18, 2026. Receipt of means-tested public benefits before September 18, 2026 will be considered consistently with the 2022 Final Rule.”

In practical terms, the filing date of the Form I-485 is the hinge. DHS adds a detail that matters to anyone who has had a filing rejected and refiled: “To determine whether a case was postmarked before the effective date of the rule, DHS will consider the postmark date for the application or petition currently before USCIS, not the postmark date for any previously-filed application or petition USCIS rejected.”

The scale, in the agency’s own figures:

• “DHS estimates the projected annual average total population of aliens filing a Form I-485 is 727,192.”
• Of those, “the projected annual average total population of aliens seeking an adjustment of status that would be subject to review for inadmissibility on the public charge ground is 587,706.”
• DHS separately estimates that up to 1,265,993 individuals and 35,294 households nationally “may choose to disenroll from or forgo enrollment in public benefits programs” under its primary scenario. That figure is DHS’s estimate of people dropping benefits — it is not an estimate of denials.

How many of those filings come from people living in Texas is not publicly broken out in the rule, and we are not going to invent a number. What is on the record is that the rule reaches anyone filing an adjustment application from anywhere in the United States, including every Texas metro we serve, and that mixed-status households are squarely within DHS’s own analysis: “Individuals who might choose to disenroll from or forgo future enrollment in a public benefits program include aliens as well as U.S. citizens who are members of mixed-status households.”

Two limits on reach are stated in the rule and are easy to miss:

• “This rule does not apply to U.S. citizens and aliens exempt from the public charge ground of inadmissibility.”
• It does not change consular processing abroad: “this rule does not revise DOS standards or processes.”

What This Changes Legally

The statute did not change. Section 212(a)(4) of the Immigration and Nationality Act, 8 U.S.C. 1182(a)(4), still requires officers to consider, at a minimum, the applicant’s “age; health; family status; assets, resources, and financial status; and education and skills.” What changed is the regulatory framework layered on top of it.

DHS describes what officers may weigh after September 18: “(1) the mandatory statutory factors in section 212(a)(4)(B) of the Immigration and Nationality Act…; (2) the alien’s receipt of means-tested public benefits; (3) any other individualized case-specific factors and circumstances relevant to an alien’s case; and (4) any empirical data relevant to an alien’s self-sufficiency.”

On specific benefits, the rule declines to exclude any category, and it also declines to make any of them decisive:

• “DHS is not codifying replacement regulations for the 2022 Final Rule or excluding any means-tested public benefits from consideration, including Medicaid.”
• “Receiving Medicaid or other means-tested benefits is not outcome determinative, but rather, one consideration in the totality of the circumstances.”
• On timing: “DHS notes Medicaid and other previously excluded means-tested public benefits will only be considered if received (or applied for) on or after the effective date of this final rule.”
• On housing: “DHS will not consider the receipt of previously excluded means-tested benefits, including housing benefits, if received before the effective date of this final rule as this rule operates prospectively.”

Eligibility for benefits is not changed by this rule. DHS states it twice, and the wording is worth quoting exactly: “This rule neither alters eligibility to receive means-tested public benefits, nor states that an individual who is eligible for those benefits should not receive those benefits.” And: “neither the public charge ground of inadmissibility nor this final rule govern eligibility for means-tested public benefits; rather they govern which aliens are inadmissible and, therefore, ineligible for admission and adjustment of status.”

The rule does not tell anyone to drop their benefits. In DHS’s words: “this rule does not direct or require aliens to disenroll from means-tested public benefits.” The rule does add that where there is evidence of past receipt, “USCIS may request the alien clarify whether he or she is continuing to receive means-tested public benefits, or has disenrolled,” and “USCIS will consider any evidence the alien provides demonstrating that he or she has disenrolled.” Whether keeping or ending a benefit is the right course in any particular household is exactly the kind of question that turns on individual facts — including the health and finances of everyone in the home — and it is a question for a lawyer who can see those facts, not for a general article.

Whose benefits count. DHS clarifies that it “is only considering means-tested public benefits received by the alien, and not the alien’s family members, such as U.S. citizen children, unless… the alien is legally obligated to support those family members and the receipt by those family members is based on the alien’s income falling below a certain threshold, or the alien’s means of support stems from the receipt of means-tested public benefits by the family member.”

Statutory exemptions are unchanged. Removing 8 C.F.R. 212.23 removed the regulatory list of exemptions, not the exemptions themselves. DHS is direct about this: “This rule changes which public benefits are considered in a public charge inadmissibility determination, not which aliens are exempt from the public charge ground of inadmissibility,” and “these exemptions are statutory and will not be impacted by the removal of the regulations.” The rule names several by way of example — refugees and asylees under INA sections 207(c)(3) and 209(c); VAWA self-petitioners; applicants for and holders of T and U nonimmigrant status; and certain battered noncitizens who are “qualified aliens” under PRWORA. DHS says it “will retain the list on the USCIS website, in the USCIS Policy Manual, and on the Form I-485.” Whether a particular person falls inside one of those categories is a legal question with real consequences, and it is one an immigration lawyer can answer from the file.

A benefits transition detail that is easy to miss. For benefits received before September 18, DHS will look only at the narrower 2022 list — SSI, TANF, state, tribal, territorial and local cash assistance for income maintenance, and long-term institutionalization at government expense. But there is a straddle rule: “if such benefits were certified or approved for receipt for a period that extends to or beyond the effective date of this final rule, DHS would consider this receipt unless the alien withdrew such application or notified the relevant agencies he or she no longer wanted to receive the benefits.”

Finally, DHS says the written guidance officers will actually use is coming separately: “USCIS will issue nonbinding subregulatory guidance that will go into effect on the effective date of this final rule… in the USCIS Policy Manual.”

What Kind of Option Might Apply

Nothing here decides any individual case, and the historical numbers in DHS’s own analysis are worth keeping in view before anyone assumes the worst. Over the five years DHS studied, “the estimated total population of aliens denied on public charge grounds ranged from a low of 41 in FY 2022 to a high of 95 in FY 2023.” DHS puts the average at about 65 denials a year, which it calculates as “0.0087 percent” of the Form I-485 applicant population. DHS adds that it “is unable to project the future number of denials due to data limitations,” so those figures describe the past and not a prediction.

With that context, the questions an immigration attorney is positioned to work through with a client include:

• Whether the applicant falls into one of the statutory exempt categories in the first place, in which case the public charge ground does not apply to them at all.
• How the filing date interacts with the September 18 line, and what that means for a case that is being assembled now.
• How the statutory factors — age, health, family status, assets and resources, education and skills — are documented in a particular file, including an affidavit of support, employment history, and evidence of resources.
• How benefits in a mixed-status household are treated, given DHS’s statement that it considers the applicant’s own receipt and not a U.S. citizen child’s, subject to the support-obligation caveat quoted above.
• What the straddle rule means for a benefit that was approved earlier but runs past September 18.
• What options exist if a case is denied — a topic that reaches into removal defense, and a reason many families talk to counsel before rather than after a decision.

None of these have a general answer. They have a file-specific answer, which is the point of talking to a lawyer.

Why Acting Quickly Can Matter

The date is the reason. September 18, 2026 is a filing-date line drawn in the rule itself, and applications postmarked or electronically submitted on or after that date are reviewed under the new framework, while earlier filings are not. A case that is nearly ready is in a different position than one that is months from assembly, and only someone looking at the actual file can tell which is which.

There is a second timing point. The benefits transition rule turns on what was received, and when, and for what certified period — facts that get harder to reconstruct as time passes. Gathering benefit records, approval notices and dates while they are easy to obtain gives a lawyer something concrete to work from.

It is best to talk to an immigration lawyer before making changes to a household’s benefits or to a pending filing. Both decisions can be difficult to undo, and both depend on facts that are specific to one family.

Sources

1. GovInfo — Official PDF of the final rule, Public Charge Ground of Inadmissibility, 91 Fed. Reg. 45324 (July 20, 2026), pp. 45324–45477
2. Federal Register — final rule landing page, DHS Docket No. USCIS-2025-0304, RIN 1615-AD06
3. 8 U.S.C. Sec. 1182 — Inadmissible aliens, including the public charge ground and its statutory factors at (a)(4)
4. eCFR — 8 C.F.R. Part 212, Documentary Requirements and Waivers
5. USCIS Policy Manual — where the replacement subregulatory guidance is to be published
6. The National Law Review — DHS Rescinds 2022 Public Charge Rule
7. Ogletree Deakins — DHS Rescinds 2022 Public Charge Rule
8. Immigrant Legal Resource Center — Latest on Public Charge
9. Miller Mayer — DHS Rescinds Public Charge Regulation