2026年9月14日 15:08:21 UTC / 路透社
记者：内特·雷蒙德
2026年9月14日 下午3:08 UTC 更新于59分钟前
2026年6月25日，美国纽约市，纽约州总检察长莱蒂夏·詹姆斯在一场有移民维权人士参与的集会上发言，当天美国最高法院裁定允许特朗普政府取消数十万海地和叙利亚移民的临时保护身份（TPS）。… 获取授权许可阅读更多
- 内容摘要
- 特朗普政府新规将于周五生效
- 新规将扩大“公共负担”群体范围
- 纽约州牵头多州起诉该新规
- 纽约市与芝加哥另有独立诉讼
- 起诉方称新规违法，应予以叫停
9月14日（路透社）——数十个由民主党掌控的美国州、县和城市于周一起诉唐纳德·特朗普政府，试图阻止一项新移民规定，该规定将允许移民官员拒绝向领取食品券、医疗补助等公共福利的人士发放绿卡。
在曼哈顿联邦法院提起的两起诉讼中，各州及地方政府对一项将于周五生效的联邦新规提出质疑，该新规称申请合法永久居留权的人士不应成为主要依赖政府福利的“公共负担”。
开启您的晨间资讯：《每日庭审简报》将最新法律新闻直接发送至您的邮箱。点击此处订阅。
广告 · 滚动继续阅读
美国国土安全部于今年7月公布了这项新规。新规恢复了这位共和党总统首任任期内2019年出台的一项政策，该政策在民主党总统乔·拜登政府时期被废除；拜登政府2022年对“公共负担”的定义进行了缩窄。
国土安全部未立即回应置评请求。
根据美国法律，长期以来移民官员有权认定那些可能成为主要依赖政府供养的“公共负担”的人士不得入境。
在拜登政府时期的规定下，移民官员可以考虑移民此前或当前领取的补充保障收入和现金援助，但不会将食品券、面向低收入人群的政府医疗项目医疗补助等非现金福利纳入考量。
广告 · 滚动继续阅读
2019年的特朗普政府旧规曾将这些非现金福利列为考量因素，而新规或将重新纳入此类福利。
起诉各州认为，新规未明确列出哪些福利会对绿卡申请人产生不利影响，导致家庭无法确定哪些援助形式可能危及自身移民身份。
“这项新规利用了这种恐惧心理，指望家庭主动放弃他们依法应享有的食品援助、医保覆盖和其他公共福利，”民主党籍纽约州总检察长莱蒂夏·詹姆斯在一份声明中表示。
她所在的州与加利福尼亚州、伊利诺伊州一同牵头了由23个州和哥伦比亚特区发起的诉讼，对该新规提出质疑。另一起诉讼则由纽约市、芝加哥、旧金山和西雅图等六个市县提起。
起诉方称，这项新规违反了《行政程序法》，因为它超出了国土安全部的法定权限，背离了国会长期以来对“公共负担”条款的既定释义。
特朗普首届政府此前出台的类似规定曾因同类诉讼被判违宪，拜登政府在出台自身新规前也撤销了对该项旧政策的辩护。
广告 · 滚动继续阅读
内特·雷蒙德 波士顿报道；威尔·邓纳姆 编辑
我们的准则：路透社诚信报道原则
States, cities sue to block Trump immigration rule on public benefits
2026-09-14 15:08:21 UTC / Reuters
By Nate Raymond
September 14, 2026 3:08 PM UTC Updated 59 mins ago
New York Attorney General Letitia James speaks during a rally with immigration advocates, on the day of the U.S. Supreme Court ruling allowing the Trump administration to strip Temporary Protected Status (TPS) protections from hundreds of thousands of Haitian and Syrian migrants, in New York City, U.S., June 25, 2026…. Purchase Licensing RightsRead more
- Summary
- Trump administration rule set to take effect on Friday
- It allows expansion of who counts as a “public charge”
- New York leads lawsuit by states challenging rule
- New York City and Chicago are part of separate suit
- Lawsuits say rule is unlawful and should be blocked
Sept 14 (Reuters) – Dozens of Democratic-led U.S. states, counties and cities sued President Donald Trump’s administration on Monday to block a new rule that would allow immigration officials to deny green cards to people who use public benefits such as food stamps and Medicaid.
In two lawsuits filed in Manhattan federal court, the states and local governments challenged a federal rule set to take effect on Friday that says people applying to become lawful permanent residents should not be “public charges” who are primarily dependent on government benefits.
Jumpstart your morning with the latest legal news delivered straight to your inbox from The Daily Docket newsletter. Sign up here.
Advertisement · Scroll to continue
The Department of Homeland Security rule was announced in July. It revives a policy adopted in 2019 during the Republican president’s first term in office that was abandoned under Democratic President Joe Biden’s administration, which in 2022 adopted a narrower definition of who would be a “public charge.”
The department did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
Under U.S. law, immigration officials have long been allowed to deem people inadmissible if they determine they would likely become “public charges” who would primarily depend on the government for support.
Under the Biden-era rule, immigration officials could consider immigrants’ prior or current receipt of supplemental security income and cash assistance but not their receipt of non-cash benefits such as food stamps and Medicaid, the government healthcare program for low-income people.
Advertisement · Scroll to continue
Those non-cash benefits had been factors under the 2019 rule and may now be considered again under the new policy.
The states argue there are no clear limits on which benefits could count against a green card applicant, leaving families guessing which forms of assistance could jeopardize their immigration status.
“This rule preys on that fear and counts on families forfeiting the food assistance, healthcare coverage and other public benefits to which they are legally entitled,” New York Attorney General Letitia James, a Democrat, said in a statement.
Her state, along with California and Illinois, is leading a lawsuit by 23 states and the District of Columbia challenging the rule. A second case was filed by six cities and counties including New York City, Chicago, San Francisco and Seattle.
The lawsuits argue that the new rule violates a federal law called the Administrative Procedure Act because it exceeds DHS’s statutory authority and departs from the longstanding meaning of the public charge provision established by Congress.
Similar lawsuits led to rulings against the prior rule the first Trump administration had adopted, and the Biden administration dropped the government’s defense of the policy before adopting its own rule.
Advertisement · Scroll to continue
Reporting by Nate Raymond in Boston; Editing by Will Dunham
Our Standards: The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles.
REUTERS/露西·尼科尔森 购买授权，打开新标签页