(UNITED STATES) — Senator Ruben Gallego, Democrat of Arizona, launched a legislative effort on June 3, 2026 to repeal a Trump administration green card policy that sharply restricts applications filed from inside the United States and pushes most immigrants into consular processing abroad.

Gallego opened the effort with a letter to the U.S. Government Accountability Office seeking a legal opinion on whether the new USCIS memorandum counts as a rule under the Congressional Review Act. If the GAO agrees, Congress could move to overturn the policy with a simple majority vote.

“I said I would do everything to fight Trump’s anti-family green card policy, and now I’m doing just that. But this is just the first step. I’ll keep pushing so that American children aren’t left without a parent,” Gallego said.

The policy at the center of the dispute is memorandum PM-602-0199, issued on May 21, 2026. It directs immigration officers to approve adjustment of status, the process of applying for permanent residence from within the country, only in “extraordinary circumstances.”

That marks a sharp break from long-running practice. Adjustment of status has been the standard path for immigrants already in the United States to become lawful permanent residents without leaving their jobs, homes, or families while a case is pending.

Under the new Trump green card policy, most applicants, including people married to U.S. citizens, students, and temporary workers such as H-1B holders, are expected to leave the country and apply at a U.S. consulate in their home country. Officer discretion remains, but the memo narrows in-country approvals to exceptional cases.

USCIS spokesman Zach Kahler framed the change as a return to what the agency sees as the statute’s original design. “We’re returning to the original intent of the law to ensure aliens navigate our nation’s immigration system properly. From now on, an alien who is in the U.S. temporarily and wants a Green Card must return to their home country to apply, except in extraordinary circumstances. This policy allows our immigration system to function as the law intended instead of incentivizing loopholes,” Kahler said on May 22, 2026.

After public criticism, the Department of Homeland Security issued a statement on May 30, 2026 that cast the memorandum in narrower terms. “This policy will not prevent any alien from obtaining a green card who legitimately and properly qualify. the guidance was just a reminder to officers of their discretionary authority,” DHS said.

Gallego’s move does not itself block the memo. His letter starts a procedural fight over whether the memorandum fits the legal definition of a rule, a threshold question that matters because the Congressional Review Act applies only if the action falls within that framework.

The debate reaches beyond procedure because the memo shifts power inside the immigration system. Officers now have broad discretion to decide what qualifies as extraordinary, and that standard appears in the memo without a fixed list that would cabin those judgments.

That discretion carries higher stakes once an applicant leaves the country. A denial at a consulate abroad generally does not face judicial review, unlike many USCIS decisions made inside the United States, leaving applicants with far less room to challenge an adverse result.

Critics of the policy have focused on the effect on families. Requiring a spouse or parent to depart for consular processing can split households for months or years while they wait for an overseas appointment and decision.

Departure can also trigger immigration penalties that do not arise while the person remains in the United States pursuing adjustment of status. People with lapses in lawful status risk unlawful presence bars of 3 years or 10 years if they leave to apply abroad, which can keep them from returning even if they had been living with family in the United States.

Analysts estimate the policy could affect up to 1.2 million applicants currently waiting for adjustment of status. They also estimate the shift could cut in-country green card issuances by half, a change that would move a large share of adjudications out of USCIS field offices and into U.S. consulates overseas.

Gallego’s criticism centers on those family and legal consequences. His statement described the policy as anti-family, and his reference to American children being left without a parent places the political fight around household disruption at the center of his repeal effort.

The administration has defended the policy in legal and procedural terms, not as a formal bar to permanent residence. Kahler called in-country green card processing a loophole, while DHS later emphasized that the memorandum does not prevent approval for applicants who “legitimately and properly qualify.”

Those positions are not identical. USCIS described a broad return to consular processing, while DHS later described the memo as a reminder of discretionary authority, language that softens the appearance of a categorical change without retracting the instruction itself.

The question before the GAO now is narrow but important. If the office concludes that PM-602-0199 is a rule, the CRA route becomes available and Gallego can try to turn opposition to the Trump green card policy into a congressional vote.

That route appeals to lawmakers because it avoids waiting for a court challenge to unfold over many months. Congress can rescind a covered rule through a simple majority, though Gallego would still need enough votes to move the repeal through both chambers.

The administration’s policy also changes the practical meaning of adjustment of status itself. What had served for decades as the ordinary in-country path to permanent residence now survives, under the memo, as an exception reserved for extraordinary circumstances.

Families already in the system now face a different set of calculations. An applicant who once expected to remain in the United States through a green card case may instead have to decide whether leaving the country risks separation, delay, or a reentry bar.

Official statements and related material have appeared in the USCIS newsroom, DHS press releases, and on Gallego’s official site. On June 3, 2026, Gallego turned those policy documents into the opening move of a repeal campaign, using the Congressional Review Act to challenge a memo that reaches into the lives of immigrants waiting to become permanent residents without leaving home.