USCIS policies can rapidly change. This post should not be construed as legal advice.
Last month, I wrote about USCIS Policy Memorandum PM-602-0199, which reframed adjustment of status as a discretionary benefit and “extraordinary relief.” The initial headlines caused significant concern, and my message in that previous article was straightforward: read the memo carefully, not just the press release. A month later, there is more to say. The situation has continued to develop, and applicants with pending cases deserve a clear picture of where things stand.
Since Policy Memorandum PM-602-0199 was issued, both USCIS and the Department of Homeland Security have made additional public statements that soften some of the most alarming interpretations. The phrase “only in extraordinary circumstances,” which appeared in the USCIS press release and generated the loudest headlines, does not appear anywhere in the text of the memo itself. In late May and early June, government spokespeople confirmed that cases will continue to be reviewed on a case-by-case basis, which is consistent with what the memo directs. A senior White House official was reported as describing the policy as “a housekeeping matter, not a change of strategy.”
That clarification matters, but it does not mean applicants should move on without taking a closer look at their cases. The memo remains in effect, and its practical consequences are already visible.
This is the part that deserves the most attention. Even as the public messaging has softened, immigration attorneys around the country are reporting real changes in how cases are being handled.
Officers are issuing more Requests for Evidence, asking applicants to affirmatively document why they chose to apply for a green card inside the United States rather than through consular processing abroad. Immigration attorneys have reported that RFEs are arriving focused specifically on entry intent, the applicant’s immigration history, and the availability of consular options.
Applicants with scheduled adjustment of status interviews are now being asked questions such as: Why did you apply here rather than at a consulate abroad? Are there reasons you could not apply from your home country? What family ties do you have there?
If you have an interview coming up, it is worth preparing clear, honest answers to these questions with the help of an immigration attorney.
Meeting the basic eligibility requirements is no longer sufficient on its own. USCIS officers are now expected to find affirmative evidence of positive equities, including family relationships, employment history, community ties, tax compliance, and a clean immigration record, rather than simply checking that the paperwork is complete. Think of this as building a case for approval, not just filing a form.
One of the most common questions since May is whether PM-602-0199 affects applications that were already pending before the memo was issued. USCIS has confirmed that the new guidance applies to pending I-485 cases, not only new filings. An application filed before May 22, 2026, will still be adjudicated under the new discretionary framework when an officer reviews it.
If you have a pending case, this is not a reason to withdraw your application or take sudden action. But it is a reason to be proactive. Gathering documentation now, before an RFE arrives, puts you in a stronger position.
Not every applicant faces the same level of scrutiny. Understanding where your case falls is an important first step. Also, USCIS field offices across the country have been applying, or not applying, this policy consistently.
Cases most likely to receive heightened review include those involving prior immigration status violations, visa overstays, unauthorized employment, or entry on a single-intent visa, such as a B-2 tourist visa or F-1 student visa, where the applicant is now pursuing a green card.
The 90-day rule is particularly relevant here: applicants who marry a U.S. citizen and file for adjustment within 90 days of entry on a B-2 visa may face a presumption of misrepresentation, and PM-602-0199 adds a second layer of discretionary scrutiny on top of that existing concern.
Spouses of U.S. citizens with no criminal record and no prior immigration violations continue to be among the better-positioned applicants, though even these cases are seeing more documentation requests than they would have a year ago. Employment-based applicants with dual-intent visa status, particularly H-1B holders with long-term compliance and a clean record, are also comparatively well situated. Employment-based immigration cases with concurrent I-140 and I-485 filings may have additional statutory arguments supporting their right to adjust status in the United States.
Legal challenges to the memo are anticipated, and several immigration law firms have signaled they are preparing to file. The primary argument is that USCIS cannot effectively alter substantive policy through an internal memorandum without going through the public notice-and-comment process required by the Administrative Procedure Act (APA). Courts have blocked aggressive immigration policies before, but whether or how quickly litigation proceeds and what relief it might provide remains uncertain.
Planning your case around the hope of a favorable court ruling is not a sound strategy, and applicants should prepare accordingly.
Do not send unsolicited documentation to USCIS. If you receive an RFE, treat it as an opportunity to build a thorough discretionary record — and respond with the help of an immigration attorney.
A strong initial submission matters more now than it did a year ago. That means documenting your positive equities from the beginning, addressing any potential negative factors directly with evidence, and not leaving gaps in your record for an officer to fill in unfavorably. The strongest applications are those built with the discretionary analysis already in mind.
Please speak with an immigration attorney before taking any action. Leaving the United States in certain situations can trigger a three or ten-year bar to reentry, and that consequence can be difficult or impossible to undo. Although some people may be eligible to apply for a waiver to be able to re-enter the U.S. prior to the three or ten years passing, others will not be eligible. The right path depends entirely on your individual circumstances and immigration history.
A month after the May 21 memo, the honest summary is this: the law has not changed, and adjustment of status remains a viable path for eligible applicants. But the standard of care in how cases are documented and presented has shifted in a meaningful way. The applicants who navigate this environment well will be those who treat their cases not as paperwork exercises, but as opportunities to present a clear, well-supported argument for why they deserve to remain in the United States.
If you have questions about how this policy may affect your specific situation, I encourage you to speak with an immigration attorney before making any decisions. You can schedule a consultation or call my office at 801-883-8204.
I post regular updates on immigration law and policy changes on TikTok, Instagram, Facebook, LinkedIn, and YouTube.
1. USCIS Policy Memorandum PM-602-0199 (May 21, 2026): https://www.uscis.gov/sites/default/files/document/memos/PM-602-0199-AdjustmentOfStatusAndDiscretion-20260521.pdf
2. USCIS News Release, “Will Grant Adjustment of Status Only in Extraordinary Circumstances” (May 22, 2026): https://www.uscis.gov/newsroom/news-releases/us-citizenship-and-immigration-services-will-grant-adjustment-of-status-only-in-extraordinary
3. American Immigration Council, Analysis of PM-602-0199 (updated June 1, 2026): https://www.americanimmigrationcouncil.org/blog/green-card-news-uscis-memo/
4. AILA Practice Pointer on PM-602-0199 (May 27, 2026): https://www.aila.org
EN 
ES