Courts and Democratic-led states are mounting legal challenges to the Trump administration’s visa and green card restrictions.
Published September 15, 2026
President Donald Trump’s administration suffered two setbacks on immigration policy as a federal judge blocked a proposed visa cap and dozens of Democratic-led states launched legal challenges to the sweeping residency restrictions.
A federal judge on Monday blocked the government from setting a deadline on how long foreign students and journalists can stay in the country without applying for an extension. At the same time, a broad coalition of states sued to block another federal rule that allows immigration authorities to deny green cards to immigrants who legally use public benefits.
Recommended stories
list of 4 itemsend of list
Court suspends visa cap
The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) regulations were scheduled to go into effect Tuesday before U.S. District Judge F. Dennis Saylor IV in Boston granted an injunction sought by a coalition of labor unions and higher education advocacy groups.
Under President Trump’s proposed restrictions, F visas for international students and J visas, which allow cultural exchange programs in the United States, would be limited to four years. I visas for journalists are currently valid for several years, but are limited to 240 days.
Saylor, an appointee of Republican President George W. Bush, said DHS’s rationale for national security and the need to prevent fraud in the visa program was “extremely weak.”
He noted that the existing system has enabled tens of millions of academics to contribute to groundbreaking research and significant economic expansion, and warned that the damage to higher education and the U.S. economy as a whole would be “catastrophic.”
The measure will affect about 1.6 million international students on F visas and 500,000 exchange students on J visas.
State challenges utility rate rules
Two lawsuits were filed Monday in federal court in Manhattan alleging they would block DHS regulations scheduled to go into effect Friday. The measure aims to expand the criteria by which immigration officials consider applicants inadmissible for “official offences,” a legal standard that has historically applied primarily to individuals who are likely to depend on the government for their livelihood.
New York, California, and Illinois are leading a coalition of 22 states and the District of Columbia seeking to block the policy, along with a parallel lawsuit by six cities and counties.
Under the Biden administration, immigration officials could consider cash assistance when reviewing green card applicants, but were prohibited from penalizing the use of non-cash aid such as food assistance or Medicaid. The Trump administration is now seeking to reinstate the first-term policy, which treated non-cash aid as a disqualifying factor, while also expanding scrutiny to the benefits families of applicants receive.
A DHS spokesperson defended the regulation, calling the plaintiffs “left-wing leaders” who “feared losing federal funding because hundreds of thousands of illegal aliens and noncitizens could be excluded from American welfare programs.”
New York City Mayor Zoran Mamdani said in a statement that the rule is “aimed at keeping immigrant families away from the programs that have kept people fed and healthy for decades.”
The lawsuit claims the government overstepped its legal authority by circumventing Congress, which has the sole authority to set standards for permanent residency.
Plaintiffs allege that the administration has imposed illegal restrictions that violate federal law by penalizing applicants who legally take advantage of non-cash assistance such as food stamps and Medicaid.
