Status as of October 7, 2026. A coalition of organizations, unions and individual green card applicants filed a federal lawsuit on October 5 challenging two USCIS policies affecting adjustment of status and denials without additional evidence. Both policies remain in effect. No court has blocked them.
The case, American Association of University Professors et al. v. Mullin et al., No. 1:26-cv-14527, was filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts. The plaintiffs ask the court to block and ultimately set aside a May 2026 adjustment-of-status policy and an August 2026 evidence policy.
The May adjustment-of-status policy
The first challenged policy was issued by USCIS on May 21, 2026. It treats adjustment of status as a discretionary benefit and directs officers to consider an applicant's decision to seek permanent residence inside the United States rather than through consular processing abroad as a negative factor.
The plaintiffs argue that the policy effectively puts applicants into a more demanding discretionary framework even when Congress has made them statutorily eligible to adjust status. Plaintiff materials describe the policy as requiring unusually strong countervailing considerations to overcome that negative factor.
The lawsuit does not dispute that adjustment of status has a discretionary component. It challenges the way USCIS has structured and applied that discretion.
The August evidence policy
The second challenged policy concerns Requests for Evidence, or RFEs, and Notices of Intent to Deny, or NOIDs. According to the complaint and plaintiff materials, the August policy gives USCIS officers broader authority to deny a benefit request without first giving the applicant another opportunity to supply missing evidence.
The plaintiffs argue that this is especially consequential for people who filed applications before the new adjustment policy existed and therefore could not have anticipated what additional discretionary evidence USCIS would later expect.
Who filed the lawsuit
The plaintiffs include the American Association of University Professors and its Harvard and Boston University chapters, the Service Employees International Union and affiliates, Americans for Immigrant Justice, and individual adjustment-of-status applicants.
They allege violations of the Administrative Procedure Act and ask the court to block the policies and require USCIS to adjudicate affected applications under controlling law.
What changes today
Nothing has been suspended by the filing of the complaint. A lawsuit does not itself invalidate an agency policy.
As of October 7, USCIS continues to adjudicate Form I-485 applications under its current policies while the case proceeds. Any later injunction, stay, dismissal or final judgment would be a separate development.
Factum Immigration's Green Card guide explains adjustment of status, consular processing and the role of USCIS discretion.
Frequently asked questions
Have the challenged USCIS adjustment policies been blocked?
No. As of October 7, 2026, the lawsuit has been filed but no court order has suspended the two challenged USCIS policies.
What does the lawsuit challenge about adjustment of status?
The plaintiffs challenge a May 2026 policy that directs officers to treat the choice to seek adjustment in the United States rather than consular processing abroad as a negative discretionary factor.
What does the lawsuit challenge about RFEs and NOIDs?
The plaintiffs also challenge an August 2026 policy that gives USCIS broader authority to deny applications without first issuing a Request for Evidence or Notice of Intent to Deny.
Official sources
Disclaimer: Factum Immigration provides general information, not legal advice. For guidance on an individual case, consult a licensed immigration attorney.