US green card applicants must now apply from abroad under

Published: 23 May 2026. The English Chronicle Desk. The English Chronicle Online

Foreign nationals seeking to obtain permanent residency in the United States will now be required to complete their green card applications from outside the country under a major policy shift announced by the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), marking one of the most significant changes to US immigration procedures in decades.

The decision, implemented through the US Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS), will require many applicants who are already living in the United States to return to their home countries to complete the process through consular channels operated by the US Department of State. The move is expected to reshape how hundreds of thousands of immigration cases are processed annually.

Under the new directive, individuals who previously applied for “adjustment of status” while residing legally or temporarily in the country will now, in many cases, be required to leave the US and apply through overseas embassies and consulates. Officials say the change is intended to tighten procedural oversight and ensure compliance with immigration law.

The announcement was made via a policy memorandum issued by US Citizenship and Immigration Services, which stated that immigration officers will evaluate cases individually and determine whether any exceptional circumstances justify allowing applicants to remain in the country during processing.

The Department of Homeland Security said the policy is designed to “ensure the immigration system functions as intended,” arguing that the previous framework allowed procedural loopholes that enabled prolonged stays while applications were pending. Officials added that the change would strengthen border control and improve consistency in visa adjudication.

However, the policy has drawn strong criticism from immigration advocates, legal experts, and humanitarian organisations, who warn that it could disrupt families, workplaces, and long-term communities across the country. Critics argue that forcing applicants to leave the US during processing could separate families for extended periods and create severe financial and emotional hardship.

Immigration attorneys have also raised concerns about the scale of uncertainty the policy introduces. Many applicants currently living and working legally in the United States may be required to depart without clear timelines for return, depending on how consular processing schedules are managed in their home countries.

Advocacy groups such as HIAS, which provides services to refugees and vulnerable migrants, have warned that the policy could place at-risk individuals in dangerous situations. They argue that some applicants may be forced to return to countries they fled due to persecution, violence, or instability, potentially exposing them to harm while their applications are processed abroad.

According to estimates from migration policy analysts, more than one million people are currently waiting for green card decisions in the United States. The backlog has been attributed to long-standing administrative delays, visa caps, and increased demand across employment-based and family-based immigration categories.

Under the previous system, many applicants were able to remain in the country while their status adjustments were reviewed, a process that could take years due to extensive vetting and bureaucratic delays. The new policy effectively ends that pathway for a large portion of applicants, shifting the burden of processing to US embassies abroad.

The change also raises questions about how existing pending applications will be handled. Officials have not yet clarified whether individuals already in the pipeline will be exempt or required to leave the country during adjudication. This uncertainty has led to concern among employers and families who rely on long-term immigration stability.

Policy analysts say the decision represents a broader tightening of immigration rules under the administration of Donald Trump, which has already implemented a series of measures aimed at reducing legal and irregular immigration flows. These include visa duration reductions for certain categories of travellers and increased enforcement actions targeting visa overstays.

Supporters of the policy argue that it restores integrity to the immigration system by ensuring that applicants undergo full vetting in their country of origin, rather than while residing in the United States. They also claim it reduces administrative strain on domestic immigration offices and discourages misuse of temporary entry pathways.

Opponents, however, say the policy will create logistical bottlenecks in already overburdened consular systems abroad, potentially lengthening processing times even further. Many US embassies and consulates already face significant backlogs, particularly in countries with high demand for immigration services.

Legal experts have also warned that the policy may face court challenges, particularly if it is found to disproportionately affect certain groups or undermine existing rights under immigration law. Some attorneys argue that the change could conflict with established interpretations of “adjustment of status” procedures that have been in place for more than half a century.

The DHS has defended the policy, stating that officers will retain discretion to grant exceptions in extraordinary cases. However, critics argue that discretionary systems often lead to inconsistent outcomes and uncertainty for applicants.

The broader political context is also shaping reactions to the announcement. Immigration remains one of the most contentious issues in US politics, with ongoing debates over border security, labour shortages, and humanitarian obligations. The new policy is expected to intensify those debates, particularly as it affects mixed-status families and long-term residents awaiting permanent residency decisions.

Economists and labour market analysts have also expressed concern about potential impacts on industries that rely heavily on immigrant workers, including healthcare, construction, and agriculture. Disruptions in the green card pipeline could affect workforce stability and hiring processes across multiple sectors.

For now, applicants are being advised to seek legal guidance and monitor updates from USCIS and the Department of State as implementation details are clarified. Immigration experts say the full consequences of the policy will depend heavily on how exceptions are applied and how quickly consular processing systems can adapt.

As the United States continues to reshape its immigration framework, the change marks a decisive shift toward stricter procedural controls, raising fundamental questions about mobility, residency rights, and the balance between enforcement and humanitarian protection.