Immigration News and Their Us Family on Public Assistance

Overview of Immigrant Eligibility for Federal Programs

Updated OCTOBER 2021

By Tanya Broder, Gabrielle Lessard, and Avideh Moussavian

The major federal public benefits programs have long excluded some non–U.S. citizens from eligibility for assistance. Programs such as the Supplemental Diet Assistance Plan (SNAP, formerly known every bit the Food Stamp Programme), nonemergency Medicaid, Supplemental Security Income (SSI), and Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) and its precursor, Aid to Families with Dependent Children (AFDC), were largely unavailable to undocumented immigrants and people in the U.s.a. on temporary visas.

However, the 1996 federal welfare and immigration laws introduced an unprecedented era of restrictionism.^[1] Prior to the enactment of these laws, lawful permanent residents of the U.S. generally were eligible for assistance in a style similar to U.S. citizens. Once the laws were implemented, well-nigh lawfully residing immigrants were barred from receiving assistance under the major federal benefits programs for five years or longer.

Even where eligibility for immigrants was preserved by the 1996 laws or restored by subsequent legislation, many immigrant families hesitate to enroll in critical health care, task-training, nutrition, and cash assist programs due to fear and confusion caused by the laws' complication and other intimidating factors. Every bit a event, the participation of immigrants in public benefits programs decreased sharply after passage of the 1996 laws, causing astringent hardship for many depression-income immigrant families who lacked the support available to other low-income families.^[ii]

Efforts to accost the chilling effects and confusion take connected since that time. The Trump administration's exclusionary policies compounded the trouble, making information technology fifty-fifty more difficult to ensure that eligible immigrants and their family unit members would secure services.

This article focuses on eligibility and other rules governing immigrants' access to federal public benefits programs. Many states have attempted to fill some of the gaps in noncitizen coverage resulting from the 1996 laws, either past electing federal options to comprehend more eligible noncitizens or past spending land funds to comprehend at least some of the immigrants who are ineligible for federally funded services.

In determining an immigrant's eligibility for benefits, it is necessary to understand the federal rules also as the rules of the land in which an immigrant resides. Updates on federal and country rules are available on NILC's website.^[3]

Immigrant Eligibility Restrictions

Categories of Immigrants: "Qualified" and "Not Qualified"

The 1996 welfare law created two categories of immigrants for benefits eligibility purposes: "qualified" and "non qualified." Opposite to what these names suggest, the law excluded many people in both groups from eligibility for many benefits, with a few exceptions. The "qualified" immigrant category includes:

lawful permanent residents, or LPRs (people with dark-green cards)
refugees, people granted asylum or withholding of deportation/removal, and conditional entrants
people granted parole by the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) for a period of at least one year
Cuban and Haitian entrants
sure abused immigrants, their children, and/or their parents^[four]
certain survivors of trafficking^[5]
individuals residing in the U.S. pursuant to a Compact of Free Association (COFA) (for Medicaid purposes only)^[6]

All other immigrants, including undocumented immigrants, as well equally many people who are lawfully present in the U.S., are considered "non qualified."^[seven]

In the years since the initial definition became law, there have been a few expansions of access to benefits. In 2000, Congress established a new category of noncitizens — survivors of trafficking — who are eligible for federal public benefits to the same extent as refugees, regardless of whether they have a qualified immigrant status.^[8] In 2003, Congress clarified that "derivative beneficiaries" listed on trafficking survivors' visa applications (spouses and children of adult trafficking survivors; spouses, children, parents, and small siblings of child survivors) also may secure federal benefits.^[nine] By 2009, Iraqis and Afghans granted Special Immigrant visas similarly became eligible for benefits to the same extent every bit refugees.^[10] In 2021, Congress extended the same benefits eligibility to certain Afghans paroled into the U.S.^[11] And in 2020, Congress declared that, for Medicaid purposes simply, citizens of Micronesia, Marshall Islands, and Palau who reside in the U.S. pursuant to a Meaty of Free Association (COFA migrants) would be considered "qualified" immigrants.^[12]

Federal Public Benefits Generally Denied to "Not Qualified" Immigrants

With some important exceptions detailed below, the law prohibits not-qualified immigrants from enrolling in almost "federal public benefit programs."^[13] Federal public benefits include a variety of safety-internet services paid for past federal funds.^[fourteen] Simply the welfare law'south definition does not specify which programs are covered by the term, leaving that clarification to each federal benefit–granting agency. In 1998, the U.S. Section of Health and Human Services (HHS) published a detect clarifying which of its programs fall under the definition.^[15] The list of 31 HHS programs includes Medicaid, the Children'southward Wellness Insurance Program (Scrap), Medicare, TANF, Foster Care, Adoption Assistance, the Child Intendance and Development Fund, and the Low-Income Domicile Energy Aid Plan. Any new programs must exist designated as federal public benefits in order to trigger the associated eligibility restrictions and, until they are designated as such, should remain open up to broader groups of immigrants.

The HHS observe clarifies that not every benefit or service provided within these programs is a federal public benefit. For instance, in some cases not all of a program's benefits or services are provided to an private or household; they may extend, instead, to a community of people — as in the weatherization of an entire apartment edifice.^[16]

The welfare law also attempted to force states to pass additional laws, after August 22, 1996, if they choose to provide state public benefits to certain immigrants.^[17] Such micromanagement of state diplomacy past the federal government is potentially unconstitutional under the Tenth Amendment.^[xviii]

Exceptions to the Restrictions

The law includes important exceptions for certain types of services. Regardless of their immigration status, not-qualified immigrants are eligible for emergency Medicaid^[19] if they are otherwise eligible for their state'south Medicaid plan.^[20] The police does non restrict admission to public health programs that provide immunizations and/or handling of communicable illness symptoms (whether or not those symptoms are acquired past such a disease). School breakfast and lunch programs remain open to all children regardless of immigration status, and every state has opted to provide access to the Special Supplemental Nutrition Programme for Women, Infants and Children (WIC).^[21]

Short-term noncash emergency disaster aid remains available without regard to immigration status. Also exempted from the restrictions are other in-kind services necessary to protect life or safety, as long as no individual or household income qualification is required. In 2001, the U.South. attorney general published a final order specifying the types of benefits that see these criteria. The attorney full general's list includes child and adult protective services; programs addressing atmospheric condition emergencies and homelessness; shelters, soup kitchens, and meals-on-wheels; medical, public health, and mental health services necessary to protect life or safety; inability or substance abuse services necessary to protect life or prophylactic; and programs to protect the life or safety of workers, children and youths, or community residents.^[22]

Verification Rules

When a federal agency designates a programme as a federal public benefit foreclosed to non-qualified immigrants, the constabulary requires the state or local agency to verify the clearing and citizenship status of all program applicants. Notwithstanding, many federal agencies have not specified which of their programs provide federal public benefits. Until they do, state and local agencies that administer the programs are not obligated to verify the clearing condition of people who use for them.

And under an important exception contained in the 1996 immigration police, nonprofit charitable organizations are not required to "determine, verify, or otherwise crave proof of eligibility of any bidder for such benefits." This exception relates specifically to the immigrant benefits restrictions in the 1996 welfare and immigration laws.^[23]

Eligibility for Major Federal Do good Programs

Congress restricted eligibility even for many qualified immigrants by arbitrarily distinguishing between those who entered the U.S. before or "on or afterwards" the date the law was enacted, August 22, 1996. The law barred most immigrants who entered the U.S. on or after that appointment from "federal ways-tested public benefits" during the five years subsequently they secure qualified immigrant condition.^[24] This waiting period is often referred to as the five-yr bar. Federal agencies antiseptic that the "federal means-tested public benefits" are Medicaid (except for emergency services), CHIP, TANF, SNAP, and SSI.^[25]

TANF, Medicaid, and Scrap

States can receive federal funding for TANF, Medicaid, and Chip to serve qualified immigrants who have completed the federal 5-yr bar.^[26] Refugees, people granted asylum or withholding of displacement/removal, Cuban/Haitian entrants, certain Amerasian immigrants,^[27] Iraqi and Afghan Special Immigrants, and survivors of trafficking are exempt from the five-twelvemonth bar, as are qualified immigrants who are veterans or active duty military and their spouses and children. In addition, children who receive federal foster care and COFA migrants are exempt from the five-yr bar in the Medicaid plan.

Over half of the states accept used state funds to provide TANF, Medicaid, and/or CHIP to some or all of the immigrants who are subject field to the five-year bar on federally funded services, or to a broader group of immigrants.^[28] Several states or counties provide health coverage to children or pregnant persons regardless of their immigration condition.

In 2009, when Congress starting time reauthorized the CHIP plan, states were granted an option to provide federally funded Medicaid and Flake to "lawfully residing" children and/or meaning persons regardless of their appointment of entry into the U.S.^[29] Thirty-five states plus the Commune of Columbia (as of July 2021) have opted to have advantage of this federal funding for immigrant health care coverage,^[30] which became bachelor on April 1, 2009.

Seventeen states plus the District of Columbia use federal funds to provide prenatal care regardless of immigration status, under the Fleck plan's pick enabling states to enroll fetuses in CHIP. Thus the pregnant person's fetus is technically the recipient of CHIP-funded services. This approach potentially limits the scope of services bachelor to the pregnant person to those directly related to the fetus's health.

The District of Columbia, New Jersey, and New York provide prenatal care to women regardless of immigration status, using state or local funds.

Although the federal health care reform law, known equally the Affordable Care Act (ACA),^[31] did non alter immigrant eligibility for Medicaid or CHIP, information technology provided new pathways for lawfully present immigrants to obtain wellness insurance. Coverage purchased in the ACA's health insurance marketplaces is available to lawfully present noncitizens whose immigration condition makes them ineligible for Medicaid.^[32]

SNAP

Although the 1996 police force severely restricted immigrant eligibility for the Supplemental Diet Assistance Plan (SNAP, formerly known every bit the Food Stamp Program), subsequent legislation restored access for many immigrants. Qualified immigrant children, refugees, people granted asylum or withholding of deportation/removal, Cuban/Haitian entrants, certain Amerasian immigrants, Iraqi and Afghan Special Immigrants, survivors of trafficking, qualified immigrant veterans, agile duty military and their spouses and children, lawful permanent residents with credit for twoscore quarters of work history, certain Native Americans, lawfully residing Hmong and Laotian tribe members, and immigrants receiving disability-related help are eligible regardless of their date of entry into the U.S.^[33] Qualified immigrant seniors who were born earlier August 22, 1931, may be eligible if they were lawfully residing in the U.S. on August 22, 1996. Other qualified immigrant adults, however, must look until they have been in qualified status for 5 years before they tin can secure critical diet assistance.

Six states — California, Connecticut, Illinois, Maine, Minnesota, and Washington — provide land-funded nutrition assistance to some or all of the immigrants who were rendered ineligible for the federal SNAP program.^[34]

SSI

Congress imposed its harshest restrictions on immigrant seniors and immigrants with disabilities who seek assistance under the SSI program.^[35] Although advancement efforts in the two years following the welfare law's passage achieved a fractional restoration of these benefits, significant gaps in eligibility remain. For example, SSI continues to exclude not-qualified immigrants who were not already receiving the benefits, likewise as nigh qualified immigrants who entered the state later the welfare law passed and seniors without disabilities who were in the U.South. before that date.^[36]

"Humanitarian" immigrants (including refugees, people granted asylum or withholding of deportation/removal, Amerasian immigrants, Cuban and Haitian entrants, Iraqi and Afghan Special Immigrants, and survivors of trafficking) tin receive SSI, simply only during the first seven years after having obtained the relevant status. The chief rationale for the seven-year fourth dimension limit was that it was intended to provide a sufficient opportunity for humanitarian immigrant seniors and those with disabilities to naturalize and retain their eligibility for SSI as U.Southward. citizens. However, a combination of factors, including immigration backlogs, processing delays, onetime statutory caps on the number of asylees who tin adjust their immigration status, language barriers, and other obstacles, fabricated it incommunicable for many of these individuals to naturalize inside vii years. Although Congress enacted an extension of eligibility for refugees who faced a loss of benefits due to the seven-twelvemonth time limit in 2008, that extension expired in 2011.^[37] Subsequent attempts to reauthorize the extension were unsuccessful, and the termination from SSI of thousands of seniors and people with disabilities continues.

5 states — California, Hawaii, Illinois, Maine, and New Hampshire — provide cash assistance to certain immigrant seniors and people with disabilities who were rendered ineligible for SSI; some others provide much smaller general assistance grants to these immigrants.

The Impact of Sponsorship on Eligibility

Under the 1996 welfare and immigration laws, family unit members and some employers eligible to file a petition to assist a person emigrate must become financial sponsors of the immigrant by signing a contract with the government (an affidavit of support). Under the enforceable affidavit (Form I-864), the sponsor promises to support the immigrant and to repay certain benefits that the immigrant may utilise.

Congress imposed additional eligibility restrictions on immigrants whose sponsors sign an enforceable affidavit of support. When an agency is determining a lawful permanent resident's financial eligibility for TANF, SNAP, SSI, nonemergency Medicaid, or Scrap,^[38] in some cases the law requires the agency to "deem" the income of the immigrant'due south sponsor or the sponsor's spouse as available to the immigrant. The sponsor's income and resources are added to the immigrant'south, which ofttimes disqualifies the immigrant as over-income for the program. The 1996 laws imposed deeming rules in certain programs until the immigrant becomes a citizen or secures credit for xl quarters (approximately x years) of work history in the U.S.

Domestic violence survivors and immigrants who would go hungry or homeless without assistance ("indigent" immigrants) are exempt from sponsor deeming for at least 12 months.^[39] Some programs apply boosted exemptions from the sponsor-deeming rules.^[xl] The U.South. Department of Agronomics (USDA) has issued helpful guidance on the indigence exemption and other deeming and liability issues.^[41]

Beyond Eligibility: Overview of Barriers That Impede Access to Benefits for Immigrants

Confusion nearly Eligibility

Defoliation about eligibility rules pervades benefit agencies and immigrant communities. The confusion stems from the complex interaction of the immigration and welfare laws, differences in eligibility criteria for various country and federal programs, and a lack of adequate training on the rules equally antiseptic by federal agencies. Consequently, many eligible immigrants accept causeless that they should not seek services, and eligibility workers have turned away eligible immigrants mistakenly.

Fear of Being Considered a Public Charge

The immigration laws allow officials to deny an application for lawful permanent residence or to deny a noncitizen entry into the U.Southward. if the regime decide that the person is "probable to become a public accuse."^[42] In deciding whether an immigrant is probable to become a public charge, clearing or consular officials review the "totality of the circumstances," including the person'southward health, historic period, income, education and skills, employment, family circumstances, and, nigh importantly, the affidavits of back up.

The misapplication of this public accuse ground of inadmissibility immediately later the welfare law passed contributed significantly to the chilling effect on immigrants' access to services. The law on public charge did non modify in 1996, and utilise of programs such as Medicaid or SNAP had never weighed heavily in determining whether individuals were inadmissible under the public charge ground.

Confusion and fear well-nigh these rules, however, became widespread.^[43] Immigrants' rights advocates, wellness intendance providers, and state and local governments organized to persuade federal agencies to analyze the limits of the rules. In 1999, the Clearing and Naturalization Service (INS, whose functions were afterwards assumed by the Section of Homeland Security, or DHS) issued helpful guidance and a proposed regulation on the public charge doctrine.^[44] The guidance clarifies that receipt of wellness intendance and other noncash benefits will not jeopardize the clearing condition of recipients or their family members past putting them at risk of being considered a public charge.^[45]

The Trump administration attempted to alter these rules dramatically past issuing rules that would make information technology much more difficult for low- and middle-income families to immigrate, and that greatly exacerbated the spooky result on admission to services. Multiple courts plant that the rules were likely unlawful. The Biden administration dismissed the appeals of these decisions, allowed an order vacating the DHS rule to have upshot, and formally withdrew the prior administration's DHS public accuse dominion. It has announced its intention to promulgate new public charge rules. In the meantime, the principles articulated in the 1999 Field Guidance govern public charge decisions.

Specially given these developments, widespread confusion and concern most the public charge rules remain, deterring many eligible immigrants from seeking critical services.^[46]

Requirement of Affidavits of Support

The 1996 laws enacted rules that make it more than hard to immigrate to the U.S. to reunite with family members. Effective December nineteen, 1997, relatives (and some employers) who sponsor an immigrant have been required to meet strict income requirements and to sign a long-term contract, or affidavit of support (USCIS Course I-864), promising to maintain the immigrant at 125 percent of the federal poverty level and to repay any ways-tested public benefits the immigrant may receive.^[47]

The specific federal benefits for which sponsors may be liable accept been defined to be TANF, SSI, SNAP, nonemergency Medicaid, and Chip. Regulations about the affidavits of back up issued in 2006 make clear that states are not obligated to seek reimbursement from sponsors and that states cannot collect reimbursement for services used prior to issuance of public notification that the services are considered ways-tested public benefits for which sponsors will exist liable.^[48]

Most states have not designated which programs would give rise to sponsor liability, and, for various reasons, agencies generally have non attempted to seek reimbursement from sponsors. However, the specter of making their sponsors liable financially has deterred eligible immigrants from applying for critical services.

Language Admission

Many immigrants face significant linguistic and cultural barriers to obtaining benefits. As of 2019, approximately 22 percent of the U.S. population (five years of historic period and older) spoke a language other than English at home.^[49] Although 97 percentage of long-term immigrants to the U.South. eventually larn to speak English language well,^[l] many are in the process of learning the language, and effectually eight.2 pct of people living in the U.Due south. speak English less than very well.^[51] These express–English language practiced (LEP) residents cannot effectively apply for benefits or meaningfully communicate with a health care provider without language help.

Championship VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and its implementing regulations prohibit recipients of federal funding from discriminating on the basis of national origin, which has been interpreted to prohibit bigotry based on language. Benefit agencies, health care providers, and other entities that receive federal financial aid are required to take "reasonable steps" to assure that people who are LEP have "meaningful access" to federally funded programs, simply compliance with this law varies widely, and linguistic communication access remains a claiming.^[52]

Section 1557 of the Affordable Intendance Act prohibits discrimination on the basis of race, colour, national origin, sex, age, or inability in health programs or activities that receive federal funding or are administered past an executive bureau or any entity established nether Title I of the ACA, which created the health insurance marketplaces such as HealthCare.gov.^[53]

Regulations finalized in 2020 rolled back aspects of section 1557's implementation, as provided in 2016 regulations, including narrowing the scope of its coverage and some specific provisions related to language access. The Biden assistants has indicated that it will advise new regulations in the spring of 2022.^[54]

Verification

Rules that require benefit agencies to verify applicants' immigration or citizenship condition have been misinterpreted past some agencies, leading some to demand immigration documents or Social Security numbers (SSNs) in situations when applicants are non required to submit such information.

In 1997, the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ), the department primarily responsible for implementing and enforcing immigration laws prior to the creation of DHS in 2002, issued interim guidance for federal benefit providers to utilise in verifying immigration condition.^[55] The guidance, which remains in effect, directs benefit agencies already using the Systematic Alien Verification for Entitlements (SAVE) process to continue to practice so.^[56] Previously, the employ of Save in the SNAP program was an option that could exist exercised by each state, but the 2014 Farm Bill mandated that SAVE be used in SNAP nationwide.^[57]

Withal, important protections for immigrants who are subject to verification remain in place. Applicants for major benefits are guaranteed a "reasonable opportunity" to provide requested immigration documents, including, in some cases, receipts confirming that the person has applied for replacement of lost documents. In the federal programs that are required by police force to use SAVE, applicants who declare that they have a satisfactory status and who provide documents within the reasonable opportunity period should remain eligible for help while verification of their condition is pending. And data submitted to the Salve system may non be used for civil immigration enforcement purposes.

The 1997 guidance recommends that agencies make decisions about financial and other eligibility factors before request an applicant for information about their immigration status.

Questions on Awarding Forms

Federal agencies have worked to reduce the spooky consequence of immigration status–related questions on benefit applications. In 2000, HHS and USDA issued a "Tri-Agency Guidance" document, recommending that states delete from benefit applications questions that are unnecessary and that may chill participation past immigrant families.^[58] The guidance confirms that just the immigration condition of the bidder for benefits is relevant. It encourages states to let family unit or household members who are not seeking benefits to be designated as nonapplicants early in the application procedure. Similarly, under Medicaid, TANF, and SNAP, only the applicant must provide a Social Security number. In 2011, the USDA issued a memo instructing states to apply these principles in their online application procedures.^[59]

SSNs are not required for people seeking only emergency Medicaid.^[lx]

In 2001, HHS said that states providing Chip through carve up programs (rather than through Medicaid expansions) are authorized, but not obligated, to crave SSNs on their CHIP applications.^[61]

Reporting to the Section of Homeland Security

Another common source of fearfulness in immigrant communities stems from a 1996 provision that requires benefits-administering agencies to report to DHS people who the agencies know are not lawfully present in the U.S. This requirement is, in fact, quite narrow in telescopic.^[62] It applies only to three programs: SSI, certain federal housing programs, and TANF.^[63]

In 2000, federal agencies outlined the limited circumstances under which the reporting requirement is triggered.^[64] Only people who are actually seeking benefits (not relatives or household members applying on their behalf) are subject to the reporting requirement. Agencies are non required to written report such applicants unless there has been a formal determination, subject to administrative review, on a claim for SSI, public housing, or TANF. The conclusion that the person is unlawfully present likewise must exist supported by a determination by the immigration authorities, "such as a Last Order of Deportation."^[65] Findings that do not encounter these criteria (e.one thousand., a DHS response to a SAVE reckoner inquiry indicating an immigrant's status, an oral or written access by an bidder, or suspicions of agency workers) are insufficient to trigger the reporting requirement. Agencies are not required to submit reports to DHS unless they have knowledge that meets the above requirements. Finally, the guidance stresses that agencies are not required to make immigration status determinations that are non necessary to confirm eligibility for benefits.

At that place is no federal reporting requirement in health programs. To accost the concerns of eligible citizens and immigrants in mixed–immigration condition households, the DHS issued a memo in 2013 confirming that information submitted by applicants or family unit members seeking Medicaid, CHIP, or health care coverage under the Affordable Care Human action would not exist used for civil immigration enforcement purposes.^[66]

Looking Alee

The 1996 welfare law produced abrupt decreases in public benefits participation by immigrants. Proponents of welfare "reform" saw that fact every bit prove of the law'due south success, noting that a reduction of welfare use, particularly amidst immigrants, was precisely what the legislation intended. The wisdom of these restrictions increasingly has been called into question, including the unfairness of excluding immigrants from programs that are supported past their taxes.

During the COVID-19 pandemic, many states and localities recognized that they could not protect the health and rubber of their residents unless everyone in the customs had access to wellness intendance, condom working conditions, and economic support. Numerous jurisdictions offered brusk-term disaster assistance, stimulus payments, or other relief to individuals who were excluded from federal economical impact payments and unemployment insurance programs. Some offered tax credits or basic income to a subset of residents regardless of their immigration status.

These efforts, while helpful, were non sufficient to meet the need or to address the longstanding racial disparities in admission to care, support, and opportunities. Agreement that our lives, health, and economic security are interconnected, policymakers are exploring new strategies for ensuring that all community members can thrive.

This article, "Overview of Immigrant Eligibility for Federal Programs," is periodically updated equally new developments warrant. The edition published immediately prior to this July 2021 edition was dated December 2015.

NOTES

[i] Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996 (hereinafter "welfare law"), Pub. Fifty. No. 104– 193, 110 Stat. 2105 (Aug. 22, 1996); and Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Human action of 1996 (hereinafter "IIRIRA"), enacted as Division C of the Defense force Department Appropriations Human activity, 1997, Pub. L. No. 104–208, 110 Stat. 3008 (Sept. thirty, 1996).

[ii] Michael Ready and Jeffrey Passel, The Scope and Touch on of Welfare Reform'south Immigrant Provisions (Discussion Paper No. 02-03) (The Urban Found, Jan. 2002), www.urban.org/research/publication/scope-and-impact-welfare-reforms-immigrant-provisions.

[three] Guide to Immigrant Eligibility for Federal Programs update page, world wide web.nilc.org/updatepage/.

[4] To be considered a "qualified" immigrant nether the battered spouse or child category, the immigrant must have an approved visa petition filed by a spouse or parent, a self-petition under the Violence Against Women Act (VAWA) that has been approved or sets forth a prima facie example for relief, or an canonical awarding for cancellation of removal nether VAWA. The spouse or child must have been dilapidated or subjected to extreme cruelty in the U.S. by a family member with whom the immigrant resided, or the immigrant's parent or child must take been subjected to such treatment. The immigrant must also demonstrate a "substantial connection" between the domestic violence and the need for the benefit existence sought. And the battered immigrant, parent, or child must not exist living with the abuser. While many people who have U visas have survived domestic violence, they are not considered qualified battered immigrants nether this definition.

[five] Survivors of trafficking and their derivative beneficiaries who obtain a T visa or whose awarding for a T visa sets forth a prima facie case are considered "qualified" immigrants. This group was added to the definition of "qualified" by the William Wilberforce Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Deed of 2008, Pub. L. 110–457, § 211 (Dec. 23, 2008).

[6] eight U.s.a.C. § 1641(b)(8).

[vii] Throughout the remainder of this article, qualified will be understood to have this detail significant, as will not-qualified; they will non be enclosed in quotation marks.

Before 1996, some of these immigrants were served by benefit programs under an eligibility category called "permanently residing in the U.S. under colour of law" (PRUCOL). PRUCOL is not an immigration status, merely a benefit eligibility category that has been interpreted differently depending on the benefit program and the region. Generally, it means that the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) is enlightened of a person'southward presence in the U.S. merely has no plans to deport or remove them from the land. A few states, including California and New York, go on to provide services to immigrants coming together this definition, using state or local funds.

[8] The Victims of Trafficking and Violence Protection Human action of 2000, Pub. Fifty. No. 106–386, § 107 (October. 28, 2000). Federal agencies are required to provide benefits and services to individuals who take been subjected to a "severe form of trafficking in persons" to the aforementioned extent as refugees, without regard to their immigration status. To receive these benefits, the survivor must exist either nether 18 years of historic period or certified past the U.Due south. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) as willing to assist in the investigation and prosecution of astringent forms of trafficking in persons. In the certification, HHS confirms that the person either (a) has made a bona fide application for a T visa that has not been denied, or (b) is a person whose connected presence in the U.S. is being ensured past the chaser full general in order to prosecute traffickers in persons.

[9] Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Human activity of 2003, Pub. Fifty. No. 108–193, § iv(a)(2) (Dec. 19, 2003).

[10] Iraqis and Afghans granted Special Immigrant visas (SIV) under the Refugee Crisis in Iraq Deed of 2007 § 1244(g) (subtitle C of championship XII of division A of Public Police force 110-181; 122 Stat. 398) or the Afghan Allies Protection Act of 2009 § 602(b)(8) (title 6 of partition F of Public Law 111- eight; 123 Stat. 809) are eligible for benefits to the aforementioned extent as refugees. Department of Defense Appropriations Act, 2010, Pub. L. No. 111-118, § 8120 (Dec. nineteen, 2009). Afghans granted special immigrant parole (who have applied for SIV) are considered covered nether this act and are also eligible for benefits to the aforementioned extent every bit refugees. "Afghan Special Immigrant Parolee and Lawful Permanent Resident Condition" (USCIS, Aug. 12, 2021), https://www.uscis.gov/save/whats-new/afghan-special-immigrant-parolee-and-lawful-permanent-resident-condition.

[11] Extending Government Funding and Delivering Emergency Assistance Human activity, Pub. L. 117-43 (Sept. xxx, 2021). Afghans granted humanitarian parole between July 31, 2021, and September 30, 2022 — and their spouses and children, and parents or guardians of unaccompanied children granted parole afterwards September 30, 2022 — likewise are eligible for federal benefits to the same extent as refugees. Eligibility for this group continues until March 31, 2023, or the stop of their parole term, whichever is afterwards.

[12] Consolidated Appropriations Human action, 2021, Pub. L. 116-260, § 208(c) (Dec. 27, 2020).

[13] Welfare law § 401 (8 U.s.a.C. § 1611).

[14] "Federal public benefit" is described in the 1996 federal welfare law as (a) whatever grant, contract, loan, professional license, or commercial license provided by an agency of the U.S. or by appropriated funds of the U.Due south., and (b) any retirement, welfare, health, disability, public or assisted housing, postsecondary education, nutrient assistance, unemployment, benefit, or whatsoever other similar do good for which payments or assist are provided to an individual, household, or family eligibility unit of measurement by an agency of the U.Due south. or appropriated funds of the U.S.

[xv] HHS, Personal Responsibleness and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Human action of 1996 (PRWORA), "Estimation of 'Federal Public Benefit,'" 63 Fed. Reg. 41658–61 (Aug. four, 1998). The HHS detect clarifies that not every do good or service provided within these programs is a federal public benefit.

[sixteen] HHS, Partitioning of Free energy Assistance, Function of Community Services, Memorandum from Janet Thousand. Fox, Director, to Low Income Home Energy Help Program (LIHEAP) Grantees and Other Interested Parties, re. Revision-Guidance on the Interpretation of "Federal Public Benefits" Under the Welfare Reform Law (June 15, 1999).

[17] Welfare police force § 411 (8 U.S.C. § 1621).

[18] Run into, e.g., Affair of Application of Cesar Adrian Vargas for Admission to the Bar of the State of New York (2015 NY Slip Op 04657; decided on June 3, 2015, Appellate Division, 2nd Department Per Curiam) (holding that the requirement under 8 U.Due south.C. § 1621(d) that states must laissez passer legislation in society to opt out of the federal prohibition on issuing professional licenses — in this instance, admission to the New York State bar — to undocumented immigrants infringes on New York Country's 10th amendment rights).

[19] Emergency Medicaid covers the treatment of an emergency medical condition, which is defined as "a medical condition (including emergency labor and commitment) manifesting itself by acute symptoms of sufficient severity (including severe pain) such that the absence of firsthand medical attention could reasonably exist expected to result in: (A) placing the patient's wellness in serious jeopardy, (B) serious damage to bodily functions: or (C) serious dysfunction of any actual organ or part." 42 U.South.C. § 1396b(v).

[20] Welfare police force § 401(b)(ane)(A) (8 The statesC. § 1611(b)(i)(A)).

[21] Welfare law § 742 (8 U.S.C. § 1615).

[22] U.Due south. Dept. of Justice (DOJ), "Final Specification of Customs Programs Necessary for Protection of Life or Safety under Welfare Reform Legislation," A.G. Society No. 2353– 2001, 66 Fed. Reg. 3613–sixteen (Jan. sixteen, 2001).

[23] IIRIRA § 508 (8 UsaC. § 1642(d)).

[24] Welfare constabulary § 403 (8 The statesC. § 1613).

[25] HHS, Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996 (PRWORA), "Interpretation of 'Federal Ways-Tested Public Do good,'" 62 Fed. Reg. 45256 (Aug. 26, 1997); U.S. Dept. of Agriculture (USDA), "Federal Means Tested Public Benefits," 63 Fed. Reg. 36653 (July vii, 1998). The Scrap program, created later on the passage of the 1996 welfare law, was later designated equally a federal means-tested public do good program. See Wellness Care Financing Administration, "The Administration'south Response to Questions nigh the Land Child Health Insurance Programme," Question 19(a) (Sept. eleven, 1997).

[26] States were also given an pick to provide or deny federal TANF and Medicaid to almost qualified immigrants who were in the U.Southward. before Aug. 22, 1996, and to those who enter the U.South. on or after that date, once they have completed the federal 5-year bar. Welfare law § 402 (8 U.S.C. § 1612). Only one state, Wyoming, denies Medicaid to immigrants who were in the state when the welfare law passed. Colorado's proposed termination of Medicaid to these immigrants was reversed by the country legislature in 2005 and never took effect. In addition to Wyoming, six states (Mississippi, Montana, Due north Dakota, South Carolina, Due south Dakota, and Texas) require lawful permanent residents who complete the five-year bar to accept credit for 40 quarters of piece of work history in the U.S. in order to qualify for Medicaid. South Carolina and Texas, however, provide health coverage to lawfully residing children, while South Carolina and Wyoming cover lawfully residing significant persons regardless of their date of entry into the U.Due south. Five states (Indiana, Mississippi, Ohio, South Carolina, and Texas) fail to provide TANF to all qualified immigrants who complete the federal five-year waiting period. For more particular, meet NILC'south "Tabular array: Overview of Immigrant eligibility for Federal Programs," endnotes v-vii, at world wide web.nilc.org/table_ovrw_fedprogs/.

[27] For purposes of the exemptions described in this article, the term Amerasians applies only to individuals granted lawful permanent residence under a special statute enacted in 1988 for Vietnamese Amerasians. Run across § 584 of the Strange Operations, Export Financing, and Related Programs Appropriations Deed, 1988 (every bit independent in § 101(c) of Public Law 100-202 and amended by the 9th proviso under Migration and Refugee Assist in Title 2 of the Foreign Operations, Export Financing, and Related Programs Appropriations Act, 1989, Public Law 100-461, as amended).

[28] See Guide to Immigrant Eligibility for Federal Programs, 4th ed. (National Immigration Constabulary Center, 2002), and updated tables at www.nilc.org/updatepage/.

[29] Department 214 of the Children'due south Health Insurance Program Reauthorization Act of 2009 (CHIPRA) (H.R.2), Public Police force 111-three (February. four, 2009).

[30] Postpartum care is not covered by these federal funds unless a state normally pays for this care every bit role of a bundled payment or global fee method. HHS Alphabetic character to State Health Officials (November. 12, 2002). See also Medical Aid Programs for Immigrants in Various States (National Clearing Law Center, July 2021), www.nilc.org/medical-aid-various-states/.

[31] Pub. Police No. 111-148, equally amended by the Wellness Care and Instruction Act of 2010, Pub. Law No. 111-152. For more information most immigrant eligibility for coverage under the Affordable Care Act, see Immigrants and the Affordable Intendance Act (ACA) (NILC, January. 2014), www.nilc.org/immigrantshcr/.

[32] For more than data on the ACA, encounter NILC's fact sheets at world wide web.nilc.org/acafacts/.

[33] For the purpose of "immigrants receiving disability-related assist," disability-related programs include SSI, Social Security inability, state disability or retirement pension, railroad retirement disability, veteran'due south disability, inability-based Medicaid, and disability-related General Assistance, if the disability determination uses criteria every bit stringent as those used for SSI.

[34] See NILC'due south updated tables on state-funded services at www.nilc.org/updatepage/.

[35] Welfare law § 402(a) (8 UsaC. § 1612(a)).

[36] Most new entrants cannot receive SSI until they become citizens or secure credit for 40 quarters of work history (including work performed by a spouse during matrimony, persons "holding out to the community" every bit spouses, and past parents before the immigrant was eighteen years one-time).

[37] The SSI Extension for Elderly and Disabled Refugees Act, Pub. Law. 110-328 (Sept. 30, 2008).

[38] Welfare constabulary § 421 (8 U.Due south.C. § 1631).

[39] IIRIRA § 552 (8 U.S.C. § 1631(e) and (f)).

[twoscore] Children, for example, are exempt from deeming in the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Programme. In states that cull to provide Medicaid and Fleck to lawfully residing children and significant persons, regardless of their date of entry, deeming and other sponsor-related barriers exercise non use to these groups.

[41] seven C.F.R. § 274.3(c). Meet also Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program: Guidance on Non-Denizen Eligibility (USDA, June 2011), https://fns-prod.azureedge.net/snap/eligibility/non-citizen-eligibility. See also Deeming of Sponsor'south Income and Resources to a Non-Citizen (HHS, TANF-ACF-PI-2003–03, April. 17, 2003), https://www.acf.hhs.gov/ofa/policy-guidance/tanf-acf-pi-2003-03-deeming-sponsors-income-and-resources-non-citizen. Federal agencies (HHS and USDA) posted additional guidance pursuant to the Trump administration's May 23, 2019, memorandum on enforcing the responsibilities of sponsors. President Biden rescinded this memorandum on February 2, 2021, directing agencies to review all deportment taken in accordance with the Trump memorandum.

[42] INA § 212(a)(iv).

[43] Claudia Schlosberg and Dinah Wiley, The Impact of INS Public Charge Determinations on Immigrant Access to Health Care (National Health Law Programme and NILC, May 22, 1998), https://www.montanaprobono.net/geo/search/download.67362.

[44] DOJ, "Field Guidance on Deportability and Inadmissibility on Public Accuse Grounds," 64 Fed. Reg. 28689–93 (May 26, 1999); see likewise DOJ, "Inadmissibility and Deportability on Public Accuse Grounds," 64 Fed. Reg. 28676–88 (May 26, 1999); U.Due south. Dept. of State, INA 212(A)(4) Public Charge: Policy Guidance, 9 FAM 40.41.

[45] The apply of all health care programs, except for long-term institutionalization (e.g., Medicaid payment for nursing home care), was declared to be irrelevant to public accuse determinations. Programs providing cash assistance for income maintenance purposes are the only other programs that are relevant in the public accuse determination. The determination is based on the "totality of a person's circumstances," and therefore even the past use of cash assistance can be weighed against other favorable factors, such as a person'due south current income or skills or the contract signed by a sponsor promising to support the intending immigrant.

[46] See, e.g., Research Documents Harm of Public Accuse Policy During the COVID-19 Pandemic (Protecting Immigrant Families, April. 2021), https://protectingimmigrantfamilies.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/04/PIF-Documenting-Harm-Fact-Sheet-2.pdf.

[47] Welfare law § 423, amended by IIRIRA § 551 (8 The statesC. § 1183a).

[48] U.Due south. Dept. of Homeland Security, "Affidavits of Support on Behalf of Immigrants," 71 Fed. Reg. 35732, 35742–43 (June 21, 2006). On May 23, 2019, the Trump administration issued a memorandum on enforcing the responsibilities of sponsors. President Biden rescinded the memorandum through an executive order issued on February two, 2021, directing agencies to review all actions taken in accordance with the Trump memorandum.

[49] Selected Social Characteristics in the United States (American Communities Survey table, 2019).

[50] James P. Smith and Barry Edmonston, eds., The New Americans: Economical, Demographic, and Financial Effects of Clearing (Washington, DC: National Academy Press, 1997), www.nap.edu/catalog.php?record_id=5779#toc, p. 377.

[51] American Community Survey, supra note 50.

[52] See the federal interagency language access website, world wide web.lep.gov, for a variety of materials, including guidance from the U.S. Dept. of Justice and federal do good agencies.

[53] 42 U.S.C. § 18116.

[54] Uniform Regulatory Agenda, (Role of Direction and the Upkeep, Bound 2021). https://www.reginfo.gov/public/do/eAgendaViewRule?pubId=202104&RIN=0945-AA17.

[55] DOJ, "Acting Guidance on Verification of Citizenship, Qualified Alien Status and Eligibility Nether Title Four of the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996," 62 Fed. Reg. 61344–416 (Nov. 17, 1997). In Aug. 1998, the agency issued proposed regulations that draw heavily on the interim guidance and the Systematic Conflicting Verification for Entitlements (Salvage) program. See DOJ, "Verification of Eligibility for Public Benefits," 63 Fed. Reg. 41662–86 (Aug. 4, 1998). Final regulations have non still been issued. Once the regulations become terminal, states volition have two years to implement a conforming system for the federal programs they administer.

[56] Salve is used to assist land benefits agencies verify eligibility for several major benefits programs. See 42 United statesC.§ 1320b-7. DHS verifies an applicant's immigration condition by tapping numerous databases and/or through a manual search of its records. This information is used but to verify eligibility for benefits and may not exist used for civil immigration enforcement purposes. Meet the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986, 99 Pub. 50. 603, § 121 (Nov. half-dozen, 1986); DOJ, "Verification of Eligibility for Public Benefits," 63 Fed. Reg. 41662, 41672, and 41684 (Aug. 4, 1998). Encounter besides The Systematic Alien Verification for Entitlements (Salvage) Programme: A Fact Sail (American Clearing Council, Dec. 15, 2011), https://world wide web.americanimmigrationcouncil.org/research/systematic-alien-verification-entitlements-save-programme-fact-sail.

[57] 113 Pub. Fifty. 79, § 4015 (Feb. 7, 2014).

[58] Alphabetic character and accompanying materials from HHS and USDA to State Health and Welfare Officials: "Policy Guidance Regarding Inquiries into Citizenship, Immigration Status and Social Security Numbers in Country Applications for Medicaid, State Children's Health Insurance Plan (SCHIP), Temporary Help for Needy Families (TANF), and Food Stamp Benefits" (Sept. 21, 2000).

[59] Conforming to the Tri-Bureau Guidance through Online Applications (USDA, Feb. 2011), world wide web.fns.usda.gov/sites/default/files/Tri-Agency_Guidance_Memo-021811.pdf.

[lx] The Medicaid rules also crave that agencies assist eligible applicants in obtaining an SSN, may non delay or deny benefits awaiting issuance of the SSN, and provide exceptions for individuals who are ineligible for an SSN or who have well-established religious objections to obtaining one. 42 C.F.R. § 435.910(east), (f), and (h).

[61] HHS, Health Intendance Financing Administration, Acting Final Rule, "Revisions to the Regulations Implementing the Country Children's Health Insurance Plan," 66 Fed. Reg. 33810, 33823 (June 25, 2001). The proposed rule on Medicaid and CHIP eligibility under the Affordable Care Act of 2010 codifies the Tri-Agency Guidance, restricting the information that may be required from nonapplicants, merely proposes to brand SSNs mandatory for Bit applicants. 76 Fed. Reg. 51148, 51191-2, 51197 (Aug. 17, 2011).

[62] Welfare law § 404, amended by BBA §§ 5564 and 5581(a) (42 United states of americaC. §§ 608(g), 611a, 1383(e), 1437y).

[63] Id. Run across also H.R. Rep. 104–725, 104th Cong. 2d Sess. 382 (July 30, 1996). The Food Postage Program (now called the Supplemental Nutrition Help Program, or SNAP) had a reporting requirement that preexisted the 1996 law.

[64] Social Security Administration, HHS, U.Southward. Dept. of Labor, U.S. Dept. of Housing and Urban Development, and DOJ – Immigration and Naturalization Service, "Responsibility of Sure Entities to Notify the Immigration and Naturalization Service of Any Alien Who the Entity 'Knows' Is Not Lawfully Nowadays in the Usa," 65 Fed. Reg. 58301 (Sep. 28, 2000). USDA similarly has clarified that "State agencies must arrange to the reporting requirements of the Interagency Find." Come across Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Plan: Guidance on Non-Citizen Eligibility (USDA, June 2011), https://fns-prod.azureedge.net/snap/eligibility/non-citizen-eligibility, pp. 48-52. Run across also 7 C.F.R. § 273.4(b)(i).

[65] Id.

[66] Description of Existing Practices Related to Certain Health Care Information (DHS, Oct. 25, 2013), world wide web.ice.gov/doclib/ero-outreach/pdf/ice-aca-memo.pdf.

galeclund1971.blogspot.com

Source: https://www.nilc.org/issues/economic-support/overview-immeligfedprograms/