A Plain-Language Guide for Family and Employment-Based Applicants

If you have seen headlines in the past week about the government “ending green cards inside the United States” or requiring everyone to leave the country to apply for permanent residence, take a breath. The reality is more nuanced — and for most applicants in a well-prepared, clean-record situation, it is far less dramatic than the news cycle suggests.

Here is what actually happened, what it means for you, and how to approach it wisely without panic.

What Just Happened

On May 21, 2026, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) issued a new internal policy memorandum — officially called PM-602-0199 — with a long and somewhat alarming title: “Adjustment of Status is a Matter of Discretion and Administrative Grace, and an Extraordinary Relief that Permits Applicants to Dispense with the Ordinary Consular Visa Process.”

A USCIS press release followed the next day, declaring that the agency “will grant Adjustment of Status only in extraordinary circumstances.” That phrase set off widespread alarm across the immigration community and in the media.

Understanding the difference between that press release and what the memo itself actually says is the key to understanding your situation clearly.

A Quick Refresher: What Is “Adjustment of Status”?

Adjustment of Status (AOS) is the process by which someone who is already physically present in the United States applies for a green card — lawful permanent residence — without having to leave the country first. Instead of traveling abroad to a U.S. consulate or embassy to finish the process (called “consular processing”), you complete it right here on U.S. soil by filing Form I-485.

For many families and workers, this is the pathway of choice: you stay in the country, maintain your job and home life, and wait for your case to be decided. It has been used by millions of people for decades.

What the Memo Actually Says

The memo does not eliminate adjustment of status. It does not create new eligibility requirements. It does not prohibit anyone from filing an I-485 who was eligible to file one before it was issued.

What it does do is remind USCIS officers — loudly and formally — that approving an adjustment of status application has always been a matter of discretion. That means that even if someone technically meets the legal requirements, an officer has the authority to deny the case if the overall facts and circumstances don’t support approval.

Specifically, the memo instructs officers to actively weigh factors such as:

• Whether the applicant has maintained their immigration status (or violated it)
• Whether they engaged in unauthorized employment
• Whether they overstayed a visa
• Whether their conduct after entering the U.S. was consistent with the purpose of their visa
• Prior arrests, fraud, or misrepresentation to any government agency
• Whether the applicant could — and arguably should — pursue a green card through the normal consular process abroad instead

The memo also requires officers to issue a written explanation of any case denied on purely discretionary grounds, laying out the positive and negative factors they weighed. That is actually a meaningful protection for applicants.

The Phrase “Only in Extraordinary Circumstances” — Where Did It Come From?

This is important: that phrase does not appear anywhere in the body of the policy memo itself. It came from a political statement made by a USCIS official to the press — not from the operative guidance that officers will use when deciding your case.

Multiple immigration attorneys across the country who have reviewed the full memo agree: the actual text is a reaffirmation of longstanding legal principles, not a dramatic new standard. As one immigration attorney put it, the memo “just states that adjustment of status is discretionary, it’s the noncitizen’s burden of proof, and adjustment should only be granted in meritorious cases” — which has always been the law.

The law has not changed. The regulation has not changed. What has changed is the tone and emphasis of the internal guidance officers receive when they pick up your file.

What This Means for Family-Based Applicants

If you are married to a U.S. citizen, or are an immediate relative (parent, minor child) of a U.S. citizen, your statutory position remains strong. Congress built specific legal protections into the immigration statute for immediate relatives that exempted them from certain bars to adjustment of status that apply to other applicants.

However — and this is the honest part — the memo does not explicitly exempt immediate relatives from the discretionary analysis. That tension is likely to be challenged in court, and we expect litigation on this point.

What this means practically for family-based applicants:

• If you entered the U.S. lawfully, have maintained your status, have no criminal history, and have no prior immigration violations, your case remains strong and you should not assume the worst.
• If your case involves any complications — an overstay, a prior removal, unauthorized work, or a complex entry history — this memo increases the importance of having experienced counsel review your situation before you file.
• Applicants who entered on a tourist (B-1/B-2) visa and immediately began a green card process based on marriage will face more scrutiny around whether they had “preconceived immigrant intent” at the time of entry. This was always an issue; it is now more prominently on officers’ radar.

What This Means for Employment-Based Applicants

For workers pursuing green cards through an employer sponsor, the picture is similarly nuanced.

Who is in a comparatively stronger position:

• H-1B and L-1 visa holders — The memo explicitly acknowledges that “dual intent” visa categories (H-1B, L-1, O-1, E-3, among others) are fully compatible with pursuing adjustment of status. If you are in one of these classifications and have maintained lawful status throughout your time in the U.S., your case is not the primary target of this memo.
• Workers with clean, continuous lawful status and long-term compliance records — A consistent immigration history with no gaps, no violations, and no unauthorized employment is the strongest position to be in.
• Asylees, refugees, and certain humanitarian categories — These groups are largely unaffected by the discretionary analysis this memo focuses on.

Who should proceed with added care:

• F-1 students transitioning quickly to employment-based green card cases, particularly those with any history of status issues, Day-1 CPT arrangements, or unauthorized employment.
• Individuals on visas that do not permit dual intent (like B visas, F visas, or J visas without a waiver) who are simultaneously pursuing permanent residence — this is where the “preconceived immigrant intent” concern is most acute.
• Anyone with a gap in lawful status, even a brief one, should consult counsel before filing.

The Bigger Picture: Why Is This Happening?

This memo is part of a broader policy direction from the current administration to scrutinize immigration benefits more carefully and encourage more applicants to pursue green cards through consular processing abroad rather than from within the United States. The administration’s view is that nonimmigrant visas (tourist visas, student visas, work visas) are issued with the expectation that the holder will eventually depart, and that adjusting status inside the country is a privilege — not a right.

That view is legally defensible — adjustment of status has always been discretionary under the statute — but it is also contested. The Immigration and Nationality Act explicitly provides adjustment of status as an alternative to consular processing, and many legal experts expect the courts to push back on an interpretation that effectively dismantles that alternative through the exercise of discretion. Litigation is expected.

How to Approach This: Cautious and Informed, Not Paralyzed

The right response to this memo is not panic — it is preparation. Here is what we recommend:

If you have a pending I-485 application: Do not withdraw it. Continue to attend all biometrics appointments and interviews as scheduled. Maintain your current immigration status and do not allow any gaps in your lawful presence. Gather and organize documentation of your status history. Be aware that Requests for Evidence (RFEs) or Notices of Intent to Deny (NOIDs) may become more common, but these are not final denials — they are opportunities to respond.

If you are planning to file: Now is the time to have a thorough consultation with immigration counsel before filing — not after. The goal is to identify any potential vulnerabilities in your case, address them strategically, and present the strongest possible record with your initial filing. A well-prepared, proactively documented application is your best shield.

If your case has complications: Do not try to navigate this alone. The memo has elevated the stakes for cases involving any immigration violations, status gaps, unauthorized work, or complex entry histories. These situations require experienced legal guidance before any decisions are made.

If you are considering consular processing as an alternative: This is now worth discussing in earnest. For some applicants — particularly those outside the U.S. or those whose history in the U.S. creates more risk than benefit — consular processing may be a more predictable path. It is not appropriate for everyone, and it comes with its own risks and timelines, but it deserves a serious conversation.

The Bottom Line

The law has not changed. If you were eligible to apply for adjustment of status before May 21, 2026, you remain eligible after it. What has changed is the level of scrutiny that will be applied to your case — and the importance of presenting it well.

This is a moment to be thoughtful, not fearful. The vast majority of applicants with clean immigration histories, maintained status, and properly prepared applications are not the intended target of this memo. But the landscape has shifted, and awareness of that shift — combined with good legal guidance — is the appropriate response.

We are monitoring this situation closely as courts begin to weigh in and as USCIS begins applying this guidance in real cases. We will update our clients as the picture becomes clearer.

If you have questions about how this memo affects your specific situation, please reach out. Every case is different, and individualized guidance is more important now than ever.