United States: Lawsuit Seeks to Enjoin Recent USCIS Policies Affecting Adjustment of Status Applicants

Today, a coalition of foreign nationals, unions, and other organizations – including the American Association of University Professors, Service Employees International Union, and Americans for Immigrant Justice, among others – filed a lawsuit in the federal district court of Massachusetts, alleging that two recent U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) policies impacting the adjustment of status green card application process violate the Administrative Procedure Act (APA). The case is American Association of University Professors et al. v. U.S. Department of Homeland Security et al., 1:26-cv-14527 (D. Mass., filed Oct. 5, 2026).

The legal challenge asserts that the following two USCIS memoranda and related policies are unlawful:

• USCIS Adjustment of Status discretionary adjudication policy memorandum: In effect since late May 2026, this policy treats a foreign national’s decision to apply for their green card in the United States using the adjustment of status process – instead of applying at a U.S. consulate abroad through the immigrant visa process – as a negative discretionary factor in the adjudication of their adjustment application. The policy represents a significant departure from decades of USCIS policy and practice that did not treat immigrant visa processing as the standard green card pathway in comparison to the adjustment of status process.
• USCIS Policy Alert on evidence, requests for evidence, and notices of intent to deny: Under this policy, in effect since early August 2026, USCIS granted adjudicating officers full discretion to deny benefit requests that did not include all initial evidence or that did not initially establish benefit eligibility, without providing the applicant an opportunity to submit further evidence. Under the prior USCIS policy, officers were instructed to issue a request for further evidence (RFE) or notice of intent to deny (NOID) when they deemed initial evidence to be missing or when the record failed to establish eligibility for the immigration benefit.
  

  Both USCIS policies were effective immediately and applied retroactively to applications already pending with the agency. The lawsuit complaint contends that by making the adjustment of status process more challenging and less certain, foreign nationals face the risk of family separation and disruption to their education and employment in the United States.

  Plaintiffs seek a preliminary injunction that would temporarily block implementation of the two USCIS policies while litigation continues. They also seek a court order permanently vacating and enjoining implementation of the policies as contrary to law and in excess of statutory authority, in violation of APA notice-and-comment requirements, arbitrary and capricious, and in violation of the Fifth Amendment Due Process Clause, among other requests.