ivanidea

Not sure if this will affect me getting citizenship in a few years time:

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/imm...m_npd_nn_fb_ma

Whilst I haven't received any government benefits (not paid enough into the system), my US wife did a few years ago (prior to me meeting her), when she was unemployed. My wife is obviously worried by this article. Personally, I'll just wait and see (what else can I do)?

At the moment, it looks more to be 'race' related.

Rete

Your naturalization eligibility is based on YOU and not on your wife. Besides her government benefits was probably unemployment benefits, which she paid into while working. It was not a hand out nor is it means tested benefit.

Twinkle0927

civilservant

The public charge limitation that applies to immigrant visas does not currently apply to N400 applications, and that cannot be changed unilaterally without Congress because it is set down in law in the INA. I don't see what the fuss is about.

scrubbedexpat099

Remember a lot of the stuff on line is politically motivated and should be take with a bucket of salt.

Rete

It does happen and most often in it due to accepting Medicaid. One former poster of this forum had breast cancer. Husband was confined to a wheelchair due to a broken neck and could not walk. He was on social security disability and Medicaid. She had a green card and no healthcare insurance. The hospital social workers got her on Medicaid to pay all the medical costs of her testing, surgery, medications, chemo, radiation. That is similar to the Haitian immigrant who got Medicaid to help his daughter in the article. This former poster never naturalized, never had the money for the fee and no means to get to Pittsburgh for the test/interview. If this were to pass should she be rejected? Who knows.

scrubbedexpat099

I have seen quite a few posts where people bring over elderly parents and want to know what benefits they can get.

In some places you can apply as a GC holder for Medicaid from day 1

newacct

However, there is a public charge ground of deportability in the INA, INA 237(a)(5), that says people who become a public charge within 5 years of entry are deportable, unless they can show it is due to causes that arose after entry. So depending on how they change the definition of public charge, it can affect green card holders applying for naturalization, because you can't naturalize if you are being deported.

scrubbedexpat099

Hmm

Did not know that so thanks

So in my State Medicaid for example require 5 years so ties in.

States like California who supply it from Day 1 also make the Immigrant deportable.

Way to go California.

MarieTh

I have been researching this topic myself having re-immigrated back to the USA April 2017 - a long story, but I am back! I just signed up for Covered CA as I had changed jobs and no longer had health care benefits and fit all other requirements such as lower income.

A lawful permanent resident (green card holder) is eligible for Medi-Cal regardless of their date of entry if they meet all other eligibility requirements. Under currentMedi-Cal policy, eligible green card holders get full scope Medi-Cal in California even if they have been in the United States for less than 5 years.Jun 24, 2015

From the PUblic Charge USCIS Fact Sheet

Benefits Not Subject to Public Charge Consideration

Under the agency guidance, non-cash benefits and special-purpose cash benefits that are not intended for income maintenance are not subject to public charge consideration. Such benefits include:

• Medicaid and other health insurance and health services (including public assistance for immunizations and for testing and treatment of symptoms of communicable diseases, use of health clinics, short-term rehabilitation services, prenatal care and emergency medical services) other than support for long-term institutional care

If anyone has any further information on this topic I would be grateful to hear it.

jxv73

The plan is to redefine "public charge". They could go back and Rescind AOS. But they have a 5 year limitation on that (and Rescission is rarely used, although that could change). As for the impact on Naturalization, USCIS would have to make an argument that there was fraud in the original immigrant petition,or somehow there was abuse of welfare benefits which would lead the applicant to fail the Good Moral Character test. But if the original petition was legitimate, and the LPR did not abuse welfare/medicaid, the redefinition of "public charge" should not affect Naturalization.

MarieTh

Thank you that is also good to know - I hope to apply for my citizenship just as soon as I can, been back now 1.5 years and counting

scrubbedexpat099

I have seen cases recently where they have asked for Medical Insurance details for elderly parents, might be an issue if you supply all this and sign up for Medicaid on arrival.

newacct

Yes, under the current guidance, non-cash benefits like Medicaid, WIC, CHIP, Food Stamps, Obamacare subsidies, etc. are not considered for public charge determinations. That's what this proposed rule is trying to change; all those non-cash means-tested benefits will be considered for public charge determinations under the new rule. You can find a draft text of the proposal from March (Google for "Read the Trump administration’s draft proposal penalizing immigrants who accept almost any public benefit"; I don't have enough posts to post links). They haven't actually published an official proposed rule yet.

On page 209-210 of that draft it says benefits that were not considered under the previous guidance (e.g. non-cash benefits) will not be considered as long as you don't use them after 60 days after the final rule is published. So this is only for going forward, not benefits you received in the past.

Most of the draft is about public charge inadmissibility. But since you are a permanent resident, you don't care so much about inadmissibilty (unless you leave the US for more than 180 days, since shorter absences do not count as seeking admission) as deportability. The draft doesn't say much about deportability; on page 220 they started a new section about public charge deportability, but didn't finish it -- it just says "[TO BE INSERTED]", so we will have to see a more finished text to know how they are going to handle it.

civilservant

I note with interest that there is also a provision on page 208 for checking the applicants credit history and credit score in relation to the public charge determination, that's never been the case before as far as I am aware.