Programs That Help Migrant Families Buy a Home

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 help. Programs such equally the Supplemental Diet Assistance Plan (SNAP, formerly known every bit the Food Stamp Program), nonemergency Medicaid, Supplemental Security Income (SSI), and Temporary Assist 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. on temporary visas.

Nonetheless, 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 manner similar to U.S. citizens. Once the laws were implemented, most lawfully residing immigrants were barred from receiving assistance nether 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 intendance, chore-preparation, nutrition, and cash aid programs due to fright and confusion caused by the laws' complexity and other intimidating factors. As a result, the participation of immigrants in public benefits programs decreased sharply after passage of the 1996 laws, causing severe hardship for many low-income immigrant families who lacked the support available to other low-income families.^[ii]

Efforts to accost the chilling furnishings and confusion have continued since that time. The Trump assistants's exclusionary policies compounded the problem, making it fifty-fifty more difficult to ensure that eligible immigrants and their family members would secure services.

This commodity 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 cover more than eligible noncitizens or by spending state funds to cover at least some of the immigrants who are ineligible for federally funded services.

In determining an immigrant'southward eligibility for benefits, it is necessary to sympathize the federal rules as well as the rules of the state 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 police force created two categories of immigrants for benefits eligibility purposes: "qualified" and "not qualified." Contrary 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 displacement/removal, and conditional entrants
people granted parole by the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) for a period of at least ane twelvemonth
Cuban and Haitian entrants
certain driveling immigrants, their children, and/or their parents^[four]
certain survivors of trafficking^[5]
individuals residing in the U.Southward. pursuant to a Compact of Free Association (COFA) (for Medicaid purposes only)^[6]

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

In the years since the initial definition became police, there accept 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 every bit refugees, regardless of whether they have a qualified immigrant status.^[8] In 2003, Congress antiseptic that "derivative beneficiaries" listed on trafficking survivors' visa applications (spouses and children of developed trafficking survivors; spouses, children, parents, and minor siblings of child survivors) as well may secure federal benefits.^[9] By 2009, Iraqis and Afghans granted Special Immigrant visas similarly became eligible for benefits to the aforementioned extent as 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 but, citizens of Micronesia, Marshall Islands, and Palau who reside in the U.South. pursuant to a Compact 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 constabulary prohibits not-qualified immigrants from enrolling in most "federal public do good programs."^[13] Federal public benefits include a variety of safety-net services paid for by federal funds.^[14] Merely the welfare law's definition does not specify which programs are covered past the term, leaving that clarification to each federal do good–granting agency. In 1998, the U.Due south. Section of Health and Human Services (HHS) published a notice clarifying which of its programs fall under the definition.^[15] The listing of 31 HHS programs includes Medicaid, the Children'southward Health Insurance Program (Scrap), Medicare, TANF, Foster Intendance, Adoption Assistance, the Child Care and Evolution Fund, and the Low-Income Abode Energy Assistance Program. Whatever new programs must be 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 detect clarifies that not every benefit or service provided within these programs is a federal public benefit. For example, in some cases non all of a program'south benefits or services are provided to an individual or household; they may extend, instead, to a community of people — every bit in the weatherization of an entire apartment building.^[16]

The welfare law likewise attempted to force states to pass additional laws, subsequently August 22, 1996, if they cull to provide land public benefits to certain immigrants.^[17] Such micromanagement of state affairs by the federal government is potentially unconstitutional nether the Tenth Amendment.^[eighteen]

Exceptions to the Restrictions

The law includes of import exceptions for sure types of services. Regardless of their immigration condition, not-qualified immigrants are eligible for emergency Medicaid^[19] if they are otherwise eligible for their state's Medicaid program.^[twenty] The police force does not restrict access to public health programs that provide immunizations and/or treatment of catching disease symptoms (whether or non those symptoms are caused by such a affliction). School breakfast and lunch programs remain open to all children regardless of immigration status, and every country has opted to provide access to the Special Supplemental Diet Program for Women, Infants and Children (WIC).^[21]

Brusque-term noncash emergency disaster assistance remains available without regard to clearing status. Also exempted from the restrictions are other in-kind services necessary to protect life or safety, every bit long as no individual or household income qualification is required. In 2001, the U.S. attorney general published a final order specifying the types of benefits that come across these criteria. The attorney full general's list includes child and developed 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; disability or substance corruption services necessary to protect life or safety; and programs to protect the life or rubber of workers, children and youths, or community residents.^[22]

Verification Rules

When a federal agency designates a program equally a federal public benefit foreclosed to not-qualified immigrants, the law requires the land or local agency to verify the immigration and citizenship status of all program applicants. However, many federal agencies have non specified which of their programs provide federal public benefits. Until they practice, state and local agencies that administer the programs are not obligated to verify the immigration status of people who apply for them.

And under an important exception contained in the 1996 immigration law, nonprofit charitable organizations are not required to "decide, verify, or otherwise require 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 Benefit Programs

Congress restricted eligibility even for many qualified immigrants past arbitrarily distinguishing between those who entered the U.Due south. before or "on or later" the appointment the police was enacted, August 22, 1996. The constabulary barred nearly immigrants who entered the U.S. on or subsequently that date from "federal means-tested public benefits" during the five years later they secure qualified immigrant status.^[24] This waiting period is often referred to every bit the five-yr bar. Federal agencies clarified that the "federal means-tested public benefits" are Medicaid (except for emergency services), Scrap, TANF, SNAP, and SSI.^[25]

TANF, Medicaid, and CHIP

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

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

In 2009, when Congress first reauthorized the CHIP programme, states were granted an selection to provide federally funded Medicaid and CHIP to "lawfully residing" children and/or pregnant persons regardless of their appointment of entry into the U.South.^[29] 30-v states plus the District of Columbia (as of July 2021) have opted to take advantage of this federal funding for immigrant health care coverage,^[30] which became available on April ane, 2009.

Seventeen states plus the District of Columbia use federal funds to provide prenatal intendance regardless of immigration status, under the Scrap program'due south option enabling states to enroll fetuses in Flake. Thus the pregnant person's fetus is technically the recipient of Bit-funded services. This approach potentially limits the scope of services available to the pregnant person to those directly related to the fetus's health.

The Commune 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 as the Affordable Care Act (ACA),^[31] did not alter immigrant eligibility for Medicaid or CHIP, it provided new pathways for lawfully nowadays immigrants to obtain health insurance. Coverage purchased in the ACA's health insurance marketplaces is available to lawfully present noncitizens whose immigration status makes them ineligible for Medicaid.^[32]

SNAP

Although the 1996 law severely restricted immigrant eligibility for the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP, formerly known as the Food Stamp Program), subsequent legislation restored admission for many immigrants. Qualified immigrant children, refugees, people granted asylum or withholding of displacement/removal, Cuban/Haitian entrants, certain Amerasian immigrants, Iraqi and Afghan Special Immigrants, survivors of trafficking, qualified immigrant veterans, active duty military and their spouses and children, lawful permanent residents with credit for 40 quarters of piece of work history, certain Native Americans, lawfully residing Hmong and Laotian tribe members, and immigrants receiving disability-related assistance are eligible regardless of their date of entry into the U.South.^[33] Qualified immigrant seniors who were born before August 22, 1931, may exist eligible if they were lawfully residing in the U.Due south. on August 22, 1996. Other qualified immigrant adults, however, must wait until they take been in qualified status for 5 years before they can secure critical nutrition assist.

Vi states — California, Connecticut, Illinois, Maine, Minnesota, and Washington — provide state-funded nutrition aid 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 post-obit the welfare police'due south passage achieved a fractional restoration of these benefits, pregnant gaps in eligibility remain. For example, SSI continues to exclude not-qualified immigrants who were not already receiving the benefits, equally well as most qualified immigrants who entered the state after the welfare law passed and seniors without disabilities who were in the U.Due 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) can receive SSI, but merely during the first seven years after having obtained the relevant status. The main rationale for the seven-year time 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.S. citizens. Even so, a combination of factors, including immigration backlogs, processing delays, former statutory caps on the number of asylees who can conform their clearing status, linguistic communication barriers, and other obstacles, made it incommunicable for many of these individuals to naturalize within vii years. Although Congress enacted an extension of eligibility for refugees who faced a loss of benefits due to the seven-year 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.

Five states — California, Hawaii, Illinois, Maine, and New Hampshire — provide cash aid 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 Touch of Sponsorship on Eligibility

Under the 1996 welfare and immigration laws, family members and some employers eligible to file a petition to help a person immigrate must get financial sponsors of the immigrant by signing a contract with the regime (an affirmation of support). Nether the enforceable affidavit (Form I-864), the sponsor promises to support the immigrant and to repay certain benefits that the immigrant may use.

Congress imposed additional eligibility restrictions on immigrants whose sponsors sign an enforceable affidavit of support. When an agency is determining a lawful permanent resident'southward fiscal eligibility for TANF, SNAP, SSI, nonemergency Medicaid, or CHIP,^[38] in some cases the law requires the bureau to "deem" the income of the immigrant'south sponsor or the sponsor's spouse every bit available to the immigrant. The sponsor'southward income and resources are added to the immigrant's, which often disqualifies the immigrant as over-income for the plan. The 1996 laws imposed deeming rules in certain programs until the immigrant becomes a citizen or secures credit for twoscore quarters (approximately 10 years) of work history in the U.Southward.

Domestic violence survivors and immigrants who would go hungry or homeless without help ("indigent" immigrants) are exempt from sponsor deeming for at least 12 months.^[39] Some programs employ additional exemptions from the sponsor-deeming rules.^[forty] The U.S. Department of Agriculture (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 about Eligibility

Confusion about eligibility rules pervades benefit agencies and immigrant communities. The confusion stems from the circuitous interaction of the immigration and welfare laws, differences in eligibility criteria for various state and federal programs, and a lack of adequate training on the rules every bit clarified by federal agencies. Consequently, many eligible immigrants have assumed that they should not seek services, and eligibility workers take turned away eligible immigrants mistakenly.

Fear of Being Considered a Public Accuse

The clearing laws allow officials to deny an application for lawful permanent residence or to deny a noncitizen entry into the U.Due south. if the authorities determine that the person is "likely to become a public charge."^[42] In deciding whether an immigrant is likely to get a public charge, immigration or consular officials review the "totality of the circumstances," including the person's health, historic period, income, education and skills, employment, family circumstances, and, nearly importantly, the affidavits of support.

The misapplication of this public charge ground of inadmissibility immediately after the welfare law passed contributed significantly to the chilling effect on immigrants' access to services. The law on public charge did non change in 1996, and use 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 most these rules, even so, became widespread.^[43] Immigrants' rights advocates, health care providers, and state and local governments organized to persuade federal agencies to clarify the limits of the rules. In 1999, the Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS, whose functions were afterwards causeless by the Department of Homeland Security, or DHS) issued helpful guidance and a proposed regulation on the public charge doctrine.^[44] The guidance clarifies that receipt of health intendance and other noncash benefits will non jeopardize the immigration status of recipients or their family members by putting them at adventure of being considered a public accuse.^[45]

The Trump administration attempted to modify these rules dramatically by issuing rules that would make it much more difficult for low- and centre-income families to emigrate, and that profoundly exacerbated the spooky issue on access to services. Multiple courts plant that the rules were probable unlawful. The Biden administration dismissed the appeals of these decisions, immune an order vacating the DHS rule to have effect, and formally withdrew the prior administration's DHS public charge dominion. Information technology 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 about the public charge rules remain, deterring many eligible immigrants from seeking disquisitional services.^[46]

Requirement of Affidavits of Support

The 1996 laws enacted rules that arrive more difficult to immigrate to the U.S. to reunite with family members. Effective Dec 19, 1997, relatives (and some employers) who sponsor an immigrant accept been required to meet strict income requirements and to sign a long-term contract, or affidavit of back up (USCIS Form I-864), promising to maintain the immigrant at 125 pct 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 Flake. Regulations about the affidavits of support 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 means-tested public benefits for which sponsors will exist liable.^[48]

Most states have not designated which programs would requite ascension to sponsor liability, and, for various reasons, agencies by and large have non attempted to seek reimbursement from sponsors. Still, 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 age and older) spoke a linguistic communication other than English at home.^[49] Although 97 per centum of long-term immigrants to the U.S. eventually larn to speak English language well,^[50] many are in the procedure of learning the linguistic communication, and around viii.2 percent of people living in the U.S. speak English language less than very well.^[51] These limited–English proficient (LEP) residents cannot effectively utilize for benefits or meaningfully communicate with a health intendance provider without linguistic communication assistance.

Title Half-dozen of the Ceremonious Rights Human action of 1964 and its implementing regulations prohibit recipients of federal funding from discriminating on the footing of national origin, which has been interpreted to prohibit bigotry based on language. Benefit agencies, wellness care providers, and other entities that receive federal fiscal help are required to take "reasonable steps" to assure that people who are LEP have "meaningful admission" to federally funded programs, but compliance with this law varies widely, and language access remains a claiming.^[52]

Section 1557 of the Affordable Care Human action prohibits discrimination on the basis of race, color, national origin, sex, age, or disability in health programs or activities that receive federal funding or are administered by an executive agency or any entity established under Championship 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 suggest new regulations in the spring of 2022.^[54]

Verification

Rules that crave benefit agencies to verify applicants' clearing or citizenship status take been misinterpreted by some agencies, leading some to demand immigration documents or Social Security numbers (SSNs) in situations when applicants are not required to submit such information.

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

However, important protections for immigrants who are subject to verification remain in identify. Applicants for major benefits are guaranteed a "reasonable opportunity" to provide requested immigration documents, including, in some cases, receipts confirming that the person has practical for replacement of lost documents. In the federal programs that are required past law to use Salve, applicants who declare that they take a satisfactory status and who provide documents within the reasonable opportunity flow should remain eligible for assistance while verification of their status is pending. And information submitted to the Salve system may not be used for civil immigration enforcement purposes.

The 1997 guidance recommends that agencies make decisions well-nigh financial and other eligibility factors before asking an bidder for information about their immigration status.

Questions on Application Forms

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

SSNs are not required for people seeking only emergency Medicaid.^[60]

In 2001, HHS said that states providing Chip through separate programs (rather than through Medicaid expansions) are authorized, simply not obligated, to require SSNs on their Chip applications.^[61]

Reporting to the Department of Homeland Security

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

In 2000, federal agencies outlined the express circumstances under which the reporting requirement is triggered.^[64] But people who are actually seeking benefits (not relatives or household members applying on their behalf) are subject to the reporting requirement. Agencies are not required to report such applicants unless there has been a formal determination, bailiwick to administrative review, on a claim for SSI, public housing, or TANF. The conclusion that the person is unlawfully nowadays also must be supported by a determination by the immigration regime, "such every bit a Terminal Order of Deportation."^[65] Findings that do non meet these criteria (e.chiliad., a DHS response to a Relieve estimator inquiry indicating an immigrant's status, an oral or written admission by an applicant, or suspicions of bureau workers) are insufficient to trigger the reporting requirement. Agencies are non required to submit reports to DHS unless they have knowledge that meets the to a higher place requirements. Finally, the guidance stresses that agencies are not required to brand immigration status determinations that are non necessary to ostend eligibility for benefits.

There is no federal reporting requirement in health programs. To address the concerns of eligible citizens and immigrants in mixed–clearing status households, the DHS issued a memo in 2013 confirming that information submitted by applicants or family members seeking Medicaid, CHIP, or health care coverage nether the Affordable Intendance Act would not be used for ceremonious immigration enforcement purposes.^[66]

Looking Ahead

The 1996 welfare police produced abrupt decreases in public benefits participation by immigrants. Proponents of welfare "reform" saw that fact every bit evidence of the police'due south success, noting that a reduction of welfare use, specially among 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 safety of their residents unless everyone in the community had access to health care, safety working conditions, and economic support. Numerous jurisdictions offered curt-term disaster assistance, stimulus payments, or other relief to individuals who were excluded from federal economic impact payments and unemployment insurance programs. Some offered tax credits or basic income to a subset of residents regardless of their clearing status.

These efforts, while helpful, were not sufficient to run across the need or to accost the longstanding racial disparities in access to care, support, and opportunities. Understanding that our lives, health, and economic security are interconnected, policymakers are exploring new strategies for ensuring that all community members tin thrive.

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

NOTES

[1] Personal Responsibility and Piece of work Opportunity Reconciliation Deed of 1996 (hereinafter "welfare constabulary"), Pub. L. No. 104– 193, 110 Stat. 2105 (Aug. 22, 1996); and Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibleness Act of 1996 (hereinafter "IIRIRA"), enacted as Division C of the Defence Department Appropriations Act, 1997, Pub. L. No. 104–208, 110 Stat. 3008 (Sept. 30, 1996).

[2] Michael Fix and Jeffrey Passel, The Scope and Impact of Welfare Reform'southward Immigrant Provisions (Give-and-take Paper No. 02-03) (The Urban Plant, January. 2002), www.urban.org/research/publication/scope-and-impact-welfare-reforms-immigrant-provisions.

[3] 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 accept an approved visa petition filed by a spouse or parent, a self-petition nether the Violence Against Women Deed (VAWA) that has been approved or sets along a prima facie case for relief, or an approved application for cancellation of removal under VAWA. The spouse or child must accept been battered or subjected to extreme cruelty in the U.S. by a family fellow member with whom the immigrant resided, or the immigrant's parent or child must have been subjected to such treatment. The immigrant must also demonstrate a "substantial connectedness" between the domestic violence and the need for the benefit being sought. And the battered immigrant, parent, or child must not be living with the abuser. While many people who have U visas have survived domestic violence, they are not considered qualified battered immigrants under this definition.

[five] Survivors of trafficking and their derivative beneficiaries who obtain a T visa or whose awarding for a T visa sets along 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 Act of 2008, Pub. L. 110–457, § 211 (December. 23, 2008).

[6] 8 U.S.C. § 1641(b)(8).

[7] Throughout the residue of this article, qualified volition exist understood to have this detail meaning, equally 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 chosen "permanently residing in the U.S. nether color of constabulary" (PRUCOL). PRUCOL is not an immigration status, but 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 aware of a person's presence in the U.S. only has no plans to deport or remove them from the country. A few states, including California and New York, continue to provide services to immigrants meeting this definition, using state or local funds.

[8] The Victims of Trafficking and Violence Protection Act of 2000, Pub. L. 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 same extent equally refugees, without regard to their immigration status. To receive these benefits, the survivor must exist either under 18 years of age or certified past the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) every bit willing to aid in the investigation and prosecution of severe forms of trafficking in persons. In the certification, HHS confirms that the person either (a) has fabricated a bona fide application for a T visa that has not been denied, or (b) is a person whose continued presence in the U.S. is being ensured by the chaser general in order to prosecute traffickers in persons.

[ix] Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act of 2003, Pub. 50. No. 108–193, § 4(a)(2) (Dec. 19, 2003).

[x] Iraqis and Afghans granted Special Immigrant visas (SIV) under the Refugee Crisis in Iraq Human action of 2007 § 1244(g) (subtitle C of championship XII of division A of Public Law 110-181; 122 Stat. 398) or the Afghan Allies Protection Human action of 2009 § 602(b)(8) (championship VI of division F of Public Law 111- 8; 123 Stat. 809) are eligible for benefits to the aforementioned extent as refugees. Section of Defense Appropriations Deed, 2010, Pub. L. No. 111-118, § 8120 (Dec. 19, 2009). Afghans granted special immigrant parole (who accept applied for SIV) are considered covered under this human activity and are besides eligible for benefits to the same extent as refugees. "Afghan Special Immigrant Parolee and Lawful Permanent Resident Status" (USCIS, Aug. 12, 2021), https://world wide web.uscis.gov/save/whats-new/afghan-special-immigrant-parolee-and-lawful-permanent-resident-status.

[11] Extending Government Funding and Delivering Emergency Assistance Act, Pub. Fifty. 117-43 (Sept. 30, 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 after September 30, 2022 — too are eligible for federal benefits to the same extent as refugees. Eligibility for this group continues until March 31, 2023, or the cease of their parole term, whichever is subsequently.

[12] Consolidated Appropriations Human activity, 2021, Pub. 50. 116-260, § 208(c) (Dec. 27, 2020).

[xiii] Welfare law § 401 (8 U.Due south.C. § 1611).

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

[15] HHS, Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996 (PRWORA), "Interpretation of 'Federal Public Benefit,'" 63 Fed. Reg. 41658–61 (Aug. iv, 1998). The HHS detect clarifies that not every benefit or service provided inside these programs is a federal public do good.

[16] HHS, Partition of Energy Assistance, Office of Community Services, Memorandum from Janet G. Fox, Director, to Low Income Domicile Free energy Assist Program (LIHEAP) Grantees and Other Interested Parties, re. Revision-Guidance on the Interpretation of "Federal Public Benefits" Nether the Welfare Reform Law (June 15, 1999).

[17] Welfare law § 411 (viii UsC. § 1621).

[18] Meet, e.thousand., Matter 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 iii, 2015, Appellate Division, Second Department Per Curiam) (holding that the requirement under 8 U.S.C. § 1621(d) that states must pass legislation in order 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 divers as "a medical condition (including emergency labor and commitment) manifesting itself past acute symptoms of sufficient severity (including severe pain) such that the absenteeism of immediate medical attention could reasonably be expected to result in: (A) placing the patient's wellness in serious jeopardy, (B) serious impairment to bodily functions: or (C) serious dysfunction of whatsoever bodily organ or part." 42 U.S.C. § 1396b(v).

[20] Welfare law § 401(b)(1)(A) (8 The statesC. § 1611(b)(1)(A)).

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

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

[23] IIRIRA § 508 (viii United statesC. § 1642(d)).

[24] Welfare police § 403 (8 UsC. § 1613).

[25] HHS, Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996 (PRWORA), "Interpretation of 'Federal Ways-Tested Public Benefit,'" 62 Fed. Reg. 45256 (Aug. 26, 1997); U.S. Dept. of Agriculture (USDA), "Federal Means Tested Public Benefits," 63 Fed. Reg. 36653 (July 7, 1998). The Chip program, created after the passage of the 1996 welfare law, was later designated as a federal ways-tested public do good plan. See Health Care Financing Administration, "The Administration's Response to Questions about the Land Child Wellness Insurance Program," Question xix(a) (Sept. eleven, 1997).

[26] States were besides given an option to provide or deny federal TANF and Medicaid to most qualified immigrants who were in the U.S. before Aug. 22, 1996, and to those who enter the U.S. on or later that engagement, once they take completed the federal 5-year bar. Welfare law § 402 (eight U.Due south.C. § 1612). Merely one state, Wyoming, denies Medicaid to immigrants who were in the country when the welfare law passed. Colorado'south proposed termination of Medicaid to these immigrants was reversed past the state legislature in 2005 and never took effect. In addition to Wyoming, half-dozen states (Mississippi, Montana, Due north Dakota, Due south Carolina, South Dakota, and Texas) require lawful permanent residents who complete the five-year bar to accept credit for twoscore quarters of work history in the U.South. in order to authorize for Medicaid. South Carolina and Texas, however, provide health coverage to lawfully residing children, while Due south Carolina and Wyoming embrace lawfully residing meaning persons regardless of their date of entry into the U.S. Five states (Indiana, Mississippi, Ohio, South Carolina, and Texas) fail to provide TANF to all qualified immigrants who complete the federal 5-year waiting period. For more detail, see NILC's "Table: Overview of Immigrant eligibility for Federal Programs," endnotes five-7, at world wide web.nilc.org/table_ovrw_fedprogs/.

[27] For purposes of the exemptions described in this article, the term Amerasians applies but to individuals granted lawful permanent residence under a special statute enacted in 1988 for Vietnamese Amerasians. See § 584 of the Foreign Operations, Consign Financing, and Related Programs Appropriations Act, 1988 (equally independent in § 101(c) of Public Police 100-202 and amended by the ninth proviso nether Migration and Refugee Assistance in Title Two of the Foreign Operations, Export Financing, and Related Programs Appropriations Human activity, 1989, Public Law 100-461, as amended).

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

[29] Section 214 of the Children's Health Insurance Program Reauthorization Human action of 2009 (CHIPRA) (H.R.ii), Public Police force 111-iii (February. 4, 2009).

[thirty] Postpartum care is not covered past these federal funds unless a country normally pays for this care as part of a bundled payment or global fee method. HHS Letter to State Health Officials (November. 12, 2002). See also Medical Aid Programs for Immigrants in Diverse States (National Immigration Law Centre, July 2021), world wide web.nilc.org/medical-assistance-various-states/.

[31] Pub. Law No. 111-148, as amended past the Wellness Care and Education Deed of 2010, Pub. Law No. 111-152. For more than information near immigrant eligibility for coverage under the Affordable Intendance Act, see Immigrants and the Affordable Care Human activity (ACA) (NILC, January. 2014), www.nilc.org/immigrantshcr/.

[32] For more than information on the ACA, see NILC's fact sheets at www.nilc.org/acafacts/.

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

[34] See NILC's updated tables on land-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 go citizens or secure credit for xl quarters of work history (including work performed past a spouse during matrimony, persons "holding out to the community" as spouses, and by parents before the immigrant was eighteen years onetime).

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

[38] Welfare constabulary § 421 (8 United states of americaC. § 1631).

[39] IIRIRA § 552 (eight UsC. § 1631(e) and (f)).

[40] Children, for case, are exempt from deeming in the Supplemental Nutrition Aid Program. In states that choose to provide Medicaid and CHIP to lawfully residing children and pregnant persons, regardless of their date of entry, deeming and other sponsor-related barriers exercise not use to these groups.

[41] 7 C.F.R. § 274.3(c). Encounter also Supplemental Nutrition Aid Program: Guidance on Non-Denizen Eligibility (USDA, June 2011), https://fns-prod.azureedge.internet/snap/eligibility/non-citizen-eligibility. Come across as well Deeming of Sponsor's 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-denizen. Federal agencies (HHS and USDA) posted boosted guidance pursuant to the Trump administration's May 23, 2019, memorandum on enforcing the responsibilities of sponsors. President Biden rescinded this memorandum on February two, 2021, directing agencies to review all actions taken in accordance with the Trump memorandum.

[42] INA § 212(a)(4).

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

[44] DOJ, "Field Guidance on Deportability and Inadmissibility on Public Charge Grounds," 64 Fed. Reg. 28689–93 (May 26, 1999); come across also DOJ, "Inadmissibility and Deportability on Public Charge Grounds," 64 Fed. Reg. 28676–88 (May 26, 1999); U.Southward. Dept. of State, INA 212(A)(4) Public Charge: Policy Guidance, 9 FAM xl.41.

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

[46] See, due east.g., Research Documents Impairment of Public Charge Policy During the COVID-xix Pandemic (Protecting Immigrant Families, Apr. 2021), https://protectingimmigrantfamilies.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/04/PIF-Documenting-Damage-Fact-Canvas-two.pdf.

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

[48] U.S. 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 2, 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: Economic, Demographic, and Financial Effects of Immigration (Washington, DC: National Academy Press, 1997), www.nap.edu/itemize.php?record_id=5779#toc, p. 377.

[51] American Community Survey, supra note 50.

[52] Run into the federal interagency language admission website, www.lep.gov, for a variety of materials, including guidance from the U.Due south. Dept. of Justice and federal benefit agencies.

[53] 42 United statesC. § 18116.

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

[55] DOJ, "Interim Guidance on Verification of Citizenship, Qualified Alien Status and Eligibility Under Championship IV of the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996," 62 Fed. Reg. 61344–416 (Nov. 17, 1997). In Aug. 1998, the bureau issued proposed regulations that draw heavily on the acting guidance and the Systematic Alien Verification for Entitlements (SAVE) programme. Encounter DOJ, "Verification of Eligibility for Public Benefits," 63 Fed. Reg. 41662–86 (Aug. 4, 1998). Last regulations accept not yet been issued. Once the regulations go final, states will take two years to implement a conforming system for the federal programs they administer.

[56] SAVE is used to help state benefits agencies verify eligibility for several major benefits programs. See 42 U.Due south.C.§ 1320b-7. DHS verifies an bidder's immigration status by borer numerous databases and/or through a manual search of its records. This data is used only to verify eligibility for benefits and may not be used for ceremonious immigration enforcement purposes. Come across the Clearing Reform and Control Deed of 1986, 99 Pub. Fifty. 603, § 121 (Nov. half-dozen, 1986); DOJ, "Verification of Eligibility for Public Benefits," 63 Fed. Reg. 41662, 41672, and 41684 (Aug. four, 1998). Come across also The Systematic Conflicting Verification for Entitlements (SAVE) Program: A Fact Sail (American Immigration Council, Dec. fifteen, 2011), https://www.americanimmigrationcouncil.org/research/systematic-alien-verification-entitlements-save-programme-fact-canvas.

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

[58] Letter 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 State Applications for Medicaid, Country Children's Health Insurance Program (SCHIP), Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF), and Food Postage stamp Benefits" (Sept. 21, 2000).

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

[threescore] The Medicaid rules also require that agencies aid 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(e), (f), and (h).

[61] HHS, Health Care Financing Administration, Acting Final Rule, "Revisions to the Regulations Implementing the Land Children'southward Wellness Insurance Program," 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, only proposes to brand SSNs mandatory for Scrap applicants. 76 Fed. Reg. 51148, 51191-two, 51197 (Aug. 17, 2011).

[62] Welfare law § 404, amended by BBA §§ 5564 and 5581(a) (42 UsC. §§ 608(thousand), 611a, 1383(e), 1437y).

[63] Id. See likewise H.R. Rep. 104–725, 104th Cong. 2d Sess. 382 (July 30, 1996). The Food Stamp Program (now called the Supplemental Nutrition Help Plan, or SNAP) had a reporting requirement that preexisted the 1996 police force.

[64] Social Security Administration, HHS, U.S. Dept. of Labor, U.Southward. Dept. of Housing and Urban Development, and DOJ – Immigration and Naturalization Service, "Responsibleness of Certain Entities to Notify the Immigration and Naturalization Service of Whatever Conflicting Who the Entity 'Knows' Is Non Lawfully Present in the United States," 65 Fed. Reg. 58301 (Sep. 28, 2000). USDA similarly has clarified that "State agencies must conform to the reporting requirements of the Interagency Discover." Meet Supplemental Diet Help Program: Guidance on Non-Citizen Eligibility (USDA, June 2011), https://fns-prod.azureedge.net/snap/eligibility/not-citizen-eligibility, pp. 48-52. See also 7 C.F.R. § 273.4(b)(1).

[65] Id.

[66] Clarification of Existing Practices Related to Sure Health Care Data (DHS, Oct. 25, 2013), www.ice.gov/doclib/ero-outreach/pdf/ice-aca-memo.pdf.

combsunth1962.blogspot.com

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