The US State Department issued a telegram on Thursday (November 6th) instructing US embassies worldwide to implement new visa screening rules based on the “Public Charge” clause in immigration law. This move signifies a reinstatement and expansion of a standard from the Trump era that had been relaxed during President Biden’s term.
According to the latest guidance from the State Department, consular officers are required to directly deny visa issuance to any applicants deemed likely to rely on US “public benefits.” Officers may consider various factors such as the applicant’s health, age, English proficiency, financial status, and even long-term medical needs.
The telegram emphasizes that “self-sufficiency has always been a long-standing principle of US immigration policy, and the grounds for inadmissibility based on ‘public charge’ have existed in our immigration laws for over a century.”
Applicants who have previously received US government cash assistance or have a history of being institutionalized may be grounds for visa denial.
The guidance instructs officials to conduct a comprehensive review of each application, including the self-sufficiency declaration, visa application, medical reports, financial sponsorship letter, and any information discovered during the screening process.
Elderly visa applicants nearing retirement will face particularly stringent scrutiny, focusing on their future employment prospects and ability to support themselves after retirement.
The guidance mentions that “long-term institutional care (such as residing in a nursing home) may cost hundreds of thousands of dollars annually and should be considered.”
This new guidance stems from an executive order signed by President Trump, aiming to ensure that “welfare funded by taxpayer dollars does not flow to ineligible foreigners.”
The telegram stresses that consular officers have the discretion to determine whether visa applicants fall under the category of “public charge,” with the burden of proof resting on the applicants. Officers are instructed to conduct a “comprehensive and thorough review” of each case and assess the “applicant’s entire circumstances” before issuing any visas.
The telegram also adds, “There is no ‘one-size-fits-all’ standard of judgement. All aspects of the case must be considered, and it must be determined whether the applicant’s situation… indicates a high likelihood of becoming a public charge at any time.”
According to the division of roles, the State Department is responsible for determining who can obtain visas overseas, while the Department of Homeland Security decides who can ultimately enter the US and who can adjust status after entry. Both agencies operate under the same immigration laws, but the State Department’s guidance applies to overseas consular officers, granting them broad discretionary power to refuse visas on the grounds of public charge.
The telegram indicates that the Trump administration is expanding the interpretation of public charge, directing US consular officers to conduct a “comprehensive and thorough review” of visa applicants and to verify all supporting financial documents.
During President Trump’s first term, receiving benefits was considered as a factor in approving green cards. Included welfare programs were Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), Medicare Part D for prescription drugs for elderly and disabled individuals, and Section 8 housing vouchers.
This policy faced legal challenges and was revised during the Biden administration to limit the scope of “public charge” welfare to cash assistance and long-term institutional care, excluding items such as food stamps, Medicaid, and housing vouchers.
For more details on how the Trump administration defined “public charge,” refer to the detailed explanation provided by the US Citizenship and Immigration Services on July 8, 2025. The document explains which public benefits could be considered as “public charge” grounds for inadmissibility and which benefits are exempt from the analysis. (Reference: USCIS Memorandum: Strengthening Enforcement of “Public Charge” Provisions)