Adjustment of Status Adjudication Changes in 2026

Can USCIS approve the petition behind your green card case, find that an immigrant visa is available, and still deny Form I-485? 

In 2026, that question matters more than before. On May 21, 2026, USCIS issued Policy Memorandum PM-602-0199, directing officers to give renewed attention to the discretionary nature of adjustment of status and whether an applicant should receive permanent residence inside the United States rather than complete immigrant visa processing abroad.

The memorandum did not eliminate adjustment of status or rewrite INA §245. It changes how USCIS says officers should evaluate whether an otherwise eligible applicant deserves a favorable exercise of discretion. An online immigration lawyer can review both statutory eligibility and discretionary risk before an applicant files, attends an interview, or responds to USCIS.

Did USCIS Eliminate Adjustment of Status in 2026?

No. Adjustment of status remains authorized by federal law.

8 U.S.C. §1255(a) permits certain applicants who were inspected and admitted or paroled into the United States to seek lawful permanent residence when they satisfy the statutory requirements. The statute also expressly makes adjustment subject to government discretion.

The 2026 change concerns how that discretion is exercised, not whether Form I-485 still exists. Applicants may therefore satisfy the technical requirements for adjustment and still face a separate discretionary determination.

What Changed in the May 21 2026 USCIS Memo?

PM-602-0199 places greater emphasis on whether the totality of an applicant’s circumstances supports granting permanent residence inside the United States.

The analysis now places increased importance on:

• Positive and negative discretionary factors;
• The applicant’s immigration history;
• Compliance with prior nonimmigrant status;
• Conduct inconsistent with the purpose of a temporary admission;
• Family, employment, and community equities; and
• Whether consular immigrant visa processing is more appropriate.

The practical change is significant. Eligibility asks whether the applicant may adjust status. Discretion asks whether USCIS should grant adjustment.

Can USCIS Deny Form I-485 Even If I Am Legally Eligible?

Yes.

The discretionary language appears directly in INA §245(a). An approved I-130, I-140, or other immigrant petition establishes the basis for permanent residence, but it does not automatically compel approval of Form I-485.

USCIS can separately evaluate admissibility, adjustment bars, immigration history, credibility, and discretionary considerations.

This is particularly important in employment-based cases. Approval of an employer’s immigrant petition does not necessarily resolve issues USCIS may identify when adjudicating the employee’s adjustment application. A business immigration attorney can therefore examine the I-485 record separately from the underlying employment petition.

What Positive Factors Can Help an I-485 Application?

A favorable discretionary record may include facts showing meaningful ties, compliance, and contributions to the United States.

The Eleventh Circuit’s discussion of adjustment discretion in Guadarrama v. U.S. Attorney General addresses factors historically considered in discretionary adjustment decisions, including family relationships, hardship, and residence in the United States.

Depending on the case, positive equities may include:

• Long-term lawful residence;
• U.S. citizen or permanent resident relatives;
• Hardship to family members;
• Stable employment;
• Payment of taxes;
• Professional or economic contributions;
• Community involvement;
• Education or professional accomplishments; and
• Consistent immigration compliance.

These factors are not a mechanical checklist. Their importance depends on the applicant’s entire record.

What Negative Factors Can USCIS Consider?

Adverse immigration history may now receive greater attention during adjustment adjudication.

Potential concerns include:

• Unauthorized employment;
• Failure to maintain status;
• Overstays;
• Fraud or material misrepresentation;
• Criminal conduct where legally relevant;
• Failure to comply with prior immigration obligations; and
• Conduct inconsistent with the purpose of admission.

One fact can create more than one legal issue. Unauthorized employment, for example, can trigger statutory adjustment restrictions for certain applicants through INA §245(c), while some employment-based applicants may receive limited protection through INA §245(k).

An immigration lawyer should therefore ask two separate questions: Does the conduct make the applicant legally ineligible, and can USCIS also weigh it negatively as a discretionary factor?

Does a Clean Immigration Record Guarantee Approval?

No.

A history without violations is favorable, but the new policy gives applicants a reason to identify affirmative equities rather than rely only on the absence of negative facts.

An applicant who has maintained lawful status for years may document that history clearly. A professional may establish employment and economic contributions. A family-based applicant may establish strong family ties or hardship.

The goal is not to overwhelm USCIS with character evidence. It is to make the facts supporting favorable discretion visible when they are legally relevant.

Are F-1 TN J-1 E-3 and Other Temporary Visa Holders Facing More Scrutiny?

Potentially.

The 2026 policy places greater attention on whether conduct in the United States was consistent with the temporary purpose of admission. Applicants in classifications that generally do not provide the same dual-intent protections as H-1B or L-1 may therefore face questions concerning when permanent immigration plans developed and whether they complied with their original status.

USCIS may examine:

• The classification used to enter;
• Representations made during visa processing or admission;
• Maintenance of status;
• Changes of status;
• Unauthorized employment; and
• The timing and development of permanent-residence plans.

Being an F-1 student, TN professional, J-1 exchange visitor, or E-3 worker does not automatically make someone ineligible for adjustment. The complete immigration history matters.

Do H-1B and L-1 Applicants Still Have Dual Intent?

Yes.

H-1B and L-1 classifications continue to recognize dual intent, meaning qualifying workers may maintain temporary status while lawfully pursuing permanent residence. The May 2026 memorandum did not eliminate that protection.

Dual intent, however, does not guarantee approval of Form I-485. USCIS can still examine the applicant’s complete adjustment record and discretionary factors.

An H-1B employee may have maintained status, obtained an approved I-140, and waited for visa availability without violating immigration law. Those facts can strengthen the record, but the I-485 remains a separate adjudication.

Does USCIS Now Require Everyone to Use Consular Processing?

No.

The memorandum gives greater significance to immigrant visa processing through a U.S. consulate, but it does not create a universal rule requiring eligible applicants to leave the United States.

Applicants should not abandon a pending adjustment application or depart solely because the policy memorandum exists.

Adjustment of status and consular processing are legally different procedures. There are different ways how the adjustment of status can allow qualifying applicants to obtain permanent residence without leaving the United States.

Should I Leave the United States and Use Consular Processing Instead?

Not without individualized legal review.

Departure can create consequences far more serious than the discretionary concern an applicant is attempting to avoid. Depending on the history, leaving may implicate inadmissibility provisions in 8 U.S.C. §1182, including unlawful-presence bars.

Before choosing consular processing, applicants should evaluate:

• Unlawful presence;
• Prior status violations;
• Grounds of inadmissibility;
• Waiver requirements;
• Employment interruption;
• Family separation;
• Consular processing delays; and
• Consequences for a pending Form I-485.

An online immigration lawyer will review those consequences before an applicant changes course.

Does the New Policy Apply to Already Pending I-485 Applications?

Yes. The May 21 memorandum became effective immediately, making the new adjudication approach relevant to pending as well as newly filed applications.

Applicants with existing cases should pay particular attention before:

• An adjustment interview;
• A Request for Evidence;
• A Notice of Intent to Deny;
• International travel; or
• A material change in immigration circumstances.

A case prepared before May 21, 2026 may still satisfy the statutory requirements while containing little evidence addressing the discretionary factors USCIS now says officers should evaluate more deliberately.

Should Applicants Submit Evidence of Positive Equities?

When the case warrants it, yes.

The strongest approach is targeted evidence rather than unnecessary volume. Family hardship should be documented when it matters. Long lawful residence should be established clearly. Employment or economic contributions should be supported when relevant. An adverse incident should be addressed directly instead of buried beneath unrelated exhibits.

The best immigration attorney can determine which positive equities strengthen the legal record and which documents add pages without answering a discretionary concern.

Can USCIS Raise Discretion at an Interview RFE or NOID?

Yes.

An adjustment interview can address immigration history, prior entries, employment, status compliance, family relationships, admissibility, and other facts relevant to the application. The 2026 policy gives applicants additional reason to prepare for questions concerning discretionary factors.

A Request for Evidence or Notice of Intent to Deny may also raise a discretionary concern.

The response must address the actual issue. An approved I-140 does not answer a question about a status violation. A birth certificate does not explain why an adverse immigration fact should be outweighed by positive equities.

A strong response separates statutory eligibility from discretion and answers both when USCIS challenges both.

Did the 2026 Memo Change INA §245?

No.

Congress has not repealed or amended the basic adjustment mechanism in INA §245. PM-602-0199 is an agency policy memorandum governing how USCIS says existing discretionary authority should be exercised.

That distinction is legally important. Applicants still have statutory rights and limitations created by Congress, while USCIS retains discretion where the statute grants it.

The safest strategy is therefore to establish eligibility, build the discretionary record, and preserve legal arguments if USCIS attempts to impose a requirement that the governing law does not contain.

Get Help With Your I-485 From a Top-Rated Immigration Lawyer

IBP Immigration Law can evaluate whether your Form I-485 establishes eligibility, addresses adverse immigration history, and presents the positive equities needed for USCIS’s 2026 discretionary analysis. Contact us today to have an immigration lawyer review your adjustment of status case before filing, interview, RFE, NOID, or a decision to pursue consular processing.