The Department of Homeland Security has clarified its recent green card policy, assuring that not all immigrants must leave the U.S. to obtain permanent residency amid widespread confusion.
Following a significant policy announcement regarding green card applicants, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) has sought to clarify its position, indicating that not all immigrants will need to leave the United States to secure permanent residency.
Last week, the DHS made headlines when it stated that immigrants seeking permanent residency would generally need to exit the U.S. while awaiting their green cards. However, after facing considerable backlash and confusion, the department issued a clarification on May 29, 2026, asserting that this was not a blanket policy change and that many applicants could remain in the country.
A DHS spokesperson explained that the announcement was intended to remind immigration officers of their existing discretionary authority to allow certain applicants to stay in the U.S. while waiting for their green cards. This clarification followed fears among immigrants and their advocates regarding a potential policy shift that could significantly affect their residency applications. “This was just a reminder to officers of their discretionary authority, which has always existed on a case-by-case basis,” the spokesperson stated.
Historically, U.S. immigration policy has permitted many immigrants to apply for permanent residency from within the country, especially those sponsored by employers or close relatives. In 2024 alone, approximately 1.4 million green cards were issued, with around 820,000 granted through a process known as “adjustment of status.” This process allows individuals to apply for green cards while residing in the U.S., thereby avoiding complications that may arise from leaving the country.
Under previous guidance, many immigrants, including those who had overstayed visas, were allowed to remain in the U.S. while their applications were processed. However, the recent announcement suggested that only those who qualify for “extraordinary” exemptions would be able to stay, raising concerns about the implications for family-sponsored applicants who might not have the necessary business visa.
The response to the initial announcement was swift and critical. Immigration lawyers expressed worries that the policy could unintentionally create significant barriers for those seeking residency. Sarah Pierce, a former U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) official, remarked that the administration’s approach seemed characterized by “shock and awe” rather than a strategic vision that serves the country’s best interests.
Benjamin Johnson, executive director of the American Immigration Lawyers Association, noted that the ambiguity of the original announcement posed challenges for potential legal actions. “It does make it more difficult to figure out what you’re suing for when you don’t know what this thing really is,” he said, highlighting the confusion surrounding the scope of the changes.
Business groups also expressed concerns about the potential implications of the policy. Neil Bradley, executive vice president and chief policy officer at the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, acknowledged that while the administration’s efforts to reduce illegal immigration were commendable, they should focus on enhancing the legal immigration system instead. Bradley warned that the changes could disrupt businesses that rely on high-skilled foreign labor.
In response to the initial announcement, many employers voiced apprehension about the impact on their foreign workforce, particularly those on H-1B and other temporary visas waiting for green cards. Bernard Wolfsdorf, managing partner at Wolfsdorf Rosenthal, emphasized that these workers are vital to maintaining America’s technological edge, and the possibility of being forced to leave the country may deter them from pursuing their applications.
As the DHS attempts to clarify its position, lingering questions remain about how the new guidance will be implemented. Confusion persists regarding whether individuals from countries where immigrant visa processing has been paused will be required to leave the U.S. to apply for green cards and under what circumstances exemptions might apply based on national interest.
The muddled rollout of the policy has raised concerns that it may discourage potential immigrants altogether. Data from the hiring platform Indeed indicates a sharp decline in interest from foreign job-seekers in U.S. positions, reflecting the anxiety stemming from the recent announcements. Victoria Slatton, managing partner at Slatton & Hass, commented on the panic the memo has caused, suggesting it may effectively dissuade individuals from even considering the application process.
Ultimately, the DHS’s recent clarifications appear to be an effort to alleviate fears and confusion surrounding immigration policy. However, the effectiveness of these efforts remains uncertain as stakeholders continue to navigate the implications of the announced changes, according to Source Name.