The U.S. Supreme Court agreed to hear a case that hopes to reinstate the so-called “public charge” rule at the state level. The case is brought by a group of Republican attorneys general for various states, including Arizona who is representing other participating states. Regional governments are also party to the case, including the San Francisco City Attorney’s Office, the Santa Clara County Counsel’s Office, and the California Attorney General’s Office.

The court agreed to consider a state’s right to defend a federal rule after the U.S. government stops defending the rule. The focus is not on the legal validity of the “public charge” rule itself.

The “public charge” rule was originally enacted by President Trump. The rule was immediately met with several court cases and was mostly blocked. President Biden abandoned the rule in March 2021, stating no further action to defend the policy would be taken, and all appeals were dropped. A Second Circuit appeal that the Supreme Court had already agreed to hear was dropped, along with petitions for writs of certiorari, which is a court process that asks for a judicial review of a decision of a lower court or government agency.

The Supreme Court will hear arguments about the states’ rights to intervene. However, they denied certiorari on two questions that focus on the validity of the rule itself. The “public charge” rule limited access to green cards for individuals who could not prove self-sufficiency, and who could potentially rely on government assistance programs, like food stamps or Medicaid. The court also denied requests from the attorneys general to reconsider the “public charge” rule.

If the states are not allowed to intervene, it could be the end of the policy, as five federal judges have previously issued injunctions barring the policy. In December 2020, the Ninth Circuit panel upheld two injunctions. They found that using the wealth test, the U.S. Department of Homeland Security didn’t determine the financial effects of the test and didn’t address concerns about the impact on public health and safety.

Appellate courts agreed to stay all orders blocking the public charge policy until after appeals were resolved. However, in early March, the Biden administration announced they would no longer defend the policy. As a result, the lower-court injunctions stopping the policy took effect.

Later in March, 11 states requested the option to defend the wealth test. That bid was denied in a Ninth Circuit ruling in April.

If you have questions about immigration policy or your specific situation, contact us at ILBSG. We continue to monitor ongoing policy debates and put our expertise to work for you.

public charge rule supreme court