Public Charge Rule (1615-AD06) Litigation Tracker

Current status (September 24, 2026): The new public charge rule took effect on September 18, 2026, and is being enforced as normal. No court has blocked it. There are three lawsuits in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, all assigned to Judge Ronnie Abrams, with a joint initial conference for all three set for October 9 (court order). According to the public dockets, none of the three has asked for a preliminary injunction.

What is this about?

On July 20, 2026, DHS published the final rule "Public Charge Ground of Inadmissibility," RIN 1615-AD06, Federal Register document number 2026-14539 (91 FR 45324), effective September 18. It rescinds the 2022 rule. The 2022 rule looked only at cash assistance and long-term institutional care; the new rule drops the list, and officers may weigh any kind of "means-tested" public benefit as part of the totality of the circumstances.
It mainly affects people filing Form I-485 to adjust status inside the U.S.: applications postmarked or electronically filed on or after September 18 are subject to the new rule. Benefits received before September 18 are still evaluated under the 2022 standard.
Three groups of plaintiffs have sued, all asking the court to vacate the rule under the Administrative Procedure Act:
- 22 states plus the District of Columbia, led by the New York Attorney General: State of New York v. U.S. Department of Homeland Security, case number 1:26-cv-07978
- 6 cities and counties led by New York City (New York City, Chicago, the City and County of San Francisco, Santa Clara County, Seattle, and King County, Washington): City of New York v. U.S. Department of Homeland Security, case number 1:26-cv-07982
- 4 New York immigrant service organizations (Make the Road New York, The Legal Aid Society, Association to Benefit Children, and African Communities Together): Make the Road New York v. U.S. Department of Homeland Security, case number 1:26-cv-08129
What do the states argue? The complaint lists three causes of action. The core argument: for more than 140 years, "public charge" has meant a person primarily dependent on the government for long-term support, and Congress has repeatedly kept that meaning. The new rule removes the line and leaves it to officers' case-by-case judgment, which exceeds the agency's statutory authority and is arbitrary and capricious. The plaintiffs also argue that USCIS's adjudication guidance itself sets rules, yet did not go through public notice and comment.
Full name of the court: the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York.
Unlike the F/J/I rule: here the plaintiffs did not get an injunction before the effective date. The rule is already being enforced, and the litigation is catching up from behind.

Timeline

November 19, 2025: DHS publishes the proposed rule (Federal Register 2025-20278)
July 20, 2026: Final rule published, effective September 18 (Federal Register 2026-14539)
August 18, 2026: USCIS issues accompanying adjudication guidance (USCIS alert)
September 14, 2026: 22 states plus D.C. sue with a 75-page complaint, asking the court to vacate the rule, declare it unlawful, and set aside the USCIS guidance (complaint, New York Attorney General press release)
September 14, 2026: 6 cities and counties sue; that day's complaint was rejected over a signature problem and refiled September 15 (docket, New York City Mayor's Office press release)
September 16, 2026: Judge Abrams sets an initial conference in the states' case for 3:00 p.m. on October 9 (docket)
September 17, 2026: 4 immigrant service organizations sue and ask for their case to be consolidated with the states' case (docket)
September 18, 2026: The rule takes effect; the same day, USCIS incorporates the adjudication guidance into Volume 8, Part G of the Policy Manual (Policy Manual updates)
September 23, 2026: The organizations' case is accepted as related and reassigned to Judge Abrams (docket)
September 24, 2026: The cities' and counties' case is also reassigned to Judge Abrams; the judge orders the parties to file a joint status letter and proposed case management plan by October 2, with a joint initial conference for all three cases on October 9 (order)

Which sources did we check?

Source	What we checked	Result (September 24, 2026)
CourtListener docket database (RECAP), 1:26-cv-07978	Progress in the states' case; any injunction motion	Latest entries September 24, 2026 (Nos. 37–39, contents not available); before that, only attorney appearances and service filings; no motion for a preliminary injunction or stay
CourtListener, 1:26-cv-07982	Progress in the cities' and counties' case	Latest entry September 24, 2026 (No. 31, conference order); no injunction motion
CourtListener, 1:26-cv-08129	Progress in the organizations' case	Latest entries September 24, 2026 (Nos. 28–30, contents not available); no injunction motion
CourtListener full-text search for "Public Charge Ground of Inadmissibility" and "91 Fed. Reg. 45324"	Whether other courts have similar lawsuits	Only the three cases above. One other hit, a Second Circuit appeal (Catholic Legal Immigration Network v. Rubio), concerns the State Department's policy pausing immigrant visas for 75 countries (Southern District of New York 1:26-cv-00858; an August 24 judgment vacated that policy and the government has appealed), not this rule
Federal Register (RIN 1615-AD06)	Any document postponing or amending the rule	Only the 2025 proposed rule and the 2026 final rule; no new documents
USCIS Policy Manual updates	Implementation	Guidance incorporated into Volume 8, Part G on September 18; no statement about the litigation since
USCIS "Public Charge" page	Official explanation	Still the archived 2022 page and out of date; don't rely on it for the current rule

How does this affect you?

Employment-based and family-based applicants filing an I-485 on or after September 18: The new rule applies to you, and the lawsuits don't change that. Prepare your application using the new form and the new standard.

If you filed before September 18: Under the text of the rule, your whole application is governed by the old rule. No need to refile.

If someone in your household receives benefits: Benefits received before September 18 are evaluated under the 2022 standard. Benefits received after that will be weighed as part of the overall assessment, but the rule does not say "receiving benefits means denial." Whether to keep receiving a given benefit is the moment to talk to a lawyer; don't cut off your children's health coverage or food assistance based on something you read online. As for benefits received by other household members, under the text of the rule they matter to you in only two situations: the benefit is a source of your own financial support, or the person receiving it is someone you are legally required to support.

Refugees, asylees, T/U visa holders, VAWA self-petitioners and other exempt categories: Statutory exemptions are not affected.

What you don't need to do: Don't assume the rule has been paused because of news that "22 states sued." It is being enforced right now.

What to watch next

October 2, 2026: The parties in all three cases file a joint status letter and case management plan with the court. It will state which motions they plan to file, which is the first chance to see whether the plaintiffs will seek a preliminary injunction or an expedited ruling.
3:00 p.m., October 9, 2026: Judge Abrams holds the joint initial conference for all three cases (by video conference by default).
The government's deadline to formally answer the complaints (calculated from the date of service; no specific date has appeared on the docket yet).
Whether USCIS adjusts the Policy Manual in response to the litigation, and any new documents in the Federal Register.

This article is for general information and is not legal advice.