A new immigration rule introduced by the Trump administration took effect on Friday, reigniting controversy over how green card applications are assessed. The policy expands the definition of “public charge,” making it harder for many legal immigrants to obtain permanent residency if they receive or are deemed likely to need public assistance.
 The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) announced the rule in July, stating that it restores the principle of self-reliance among immigrants. Under the revised policy, immigration officers can consider a broader range of public benefits—including food stamps, Medicaid, housing subsidies, childcare support, and even tax credits—when evaluating applicants. The rule also allows benefits received by family members, including U.S. citizen children, to be factored into decisions.
 This marks a significant departure from the 1999 Clinton-era definition, which limited “public charge” to those primarily dependent on cash aid or long-term institutional care. The Trump administration had previously attempted a similar expansion in 2019, but that rule was struck down in federal court and later rescinded by the Biden administration in 2022.
 According to DHS, about 588,000 applicants undergo public charge reviews annually. However, the broader impact could be far greater, with an estimated 950,000 people potentially avoiding enrollment in programs such as Medicaid, food stamps, and rental assistance out of fear that participation could jeopardize their immigration status.
 Immigration advocates warn that the rule will discourage families from accessing essential services. “No parent should ever have to choose between feeding their children and keeping their family together,” said Clarissa Hayes of the Food Research & Action Center. Advocacy groups argue that the policy could harm millions of immigrant households, reduce participation in safety net programs, and cost state economies billions of dollars.
 Legal challenges have already been filed. A coalition of 22 states and the District of Columbia, led by New York, sued in federal court earlier this week, arguing that the rule gives immigration officials excessive discretion and undermines the original meaning of “public charge.” Several cities, including New York City, have also filed lawsuits, citing risks to public health and economic stability. Advocacy organizations joined the legal fight on Thursday, calling the rule “cruel” and harmful to immigrant families.
 Federal District Court Judge Ronnie Abrams has scheduled an initial hearing for October 9 in the Southern District of New York. Until then, the rule remains in effect, intensifying debate over immigration policy and its impact on families across the United States.