Voglio sapere a riguardo di…

47028

Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 160 / Monday, August 23, 2021 / Proposed Rules
III. Request for Information
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS

DHS is publishing this ANPRM to seek broad public feedback on the public charge ground of inadmissibility that will inform DHSs consideration of further rulemaking action. DHS is in the process of preparing a regulatory proposal that will be fully consistent with law; that will reflect empirical evidence to the extent relevant and available; that carefully considers public comments; that will be clear, fair, and comprehensible for officers as well as for noncitizens and their families; that will lead to fair and consistent adjudications and thus avoid unequal treatment of similarly situated individuals; and that will not otherwise unduly impose barriers for noncitizens seeking admission or adjustment of status in the United States.29 DHS also intends to ensure that any regulatory proposal does not unduly interfere with the receipt of public benefits by applicants and their families, particularly in light of the COVID19
pandemic and the resulting long-term public health and economic impacts in the United States.30
DHS welcomes and will carefully consider public input on all aspects of public charge inadmissibility in its ongoing rulemaking efforts in this area, consistent with its broad authority to administer the U.S. immigration system.
In addition to inviting written comments, DHS is providing the public with the opportunity to participate in virtual public listening sessions. For information about those sessions, please see the Public Participation and Dates sections of this document.
29 See Executive Order 14012 Restoring Faith in Our Legal Immigration System and Strengthening Integration and Inclusion Efforts for New Americans, 86 FR 8277 Feb. 5, 2021.
30 See, e.g., International Labor Organization, Food and Agricultural Organization of the United Nations, International Fund for Agricultural Development, and World Health Organization Joint Statement, Impact of COVID19 on peoples livelihoods, their health and our food systems 2020, https www.who.int/news/item/13-10-2020impact-of-covid-19-on-peoples-livelihoods-theirhealth-and-our-food-systems last visited Jul. 14, 2021; Pew Research Center, A Year Into the Pandemic, Long-Term Financial Impact Weighs Heavily on Many Americans 2021, https
www.pewresearch.org/social-trends/wp-content/
uploads/sites/3/2021/03/PSD_03.05.21.covid_
.impact_fullreport.pdf last visited Jul. 14, 2021;
Health Affairs, Spillover Effects of the COVID19
Pandemic Could Drive Long-Term Health Consequences for Non-COVID19 Patients 2020, https www.healthaffairs.org/do/10.1377/
hblog20201020.566558/full/ last visited Jul. 14, 2021.

VerDate Sep<11>2014

16:56 Aug 20, 2021

Jkt 253001

A. Purpose and Definition of Public Charge
B. Prospective Nature of the Public Charge Inadmissibility Determination
1. Background
1. Background
As noted, the INA does not define the term public charge, but specifies that consular and immigration officers must, at a minimum, consider the noncitizens age; health; family status; assets, resources, and financial status; and education and skills when making public charge inadmissibility determinations.31
As part of this rulemaking, DHS
expects to codify a definition of public charge that 1 is consistent with law; 2
is easily understood; 3 is straightforward to apply in a fair, consistent, and predictable manner; 4
reflects consideration of relevant national policies; and 5 will not unduly impose barriers for noncitizens seeking admission or adjustment of status in the United States.

As noted in the 1999 Interim Field Guidance, the existing test for adjudicating public charge inadmissibility has been developed in several Service, BIA, and Attorney General decisions and has been codified in the Service regulations implementing the legalization provisions of the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986. These decisions and regulations, and section 212a4 itself, create a totality of the circumstances test. 33
The vacated 2019 Final Rule also required that the public charge inadmissibility determination be based on the totality of the aliens circumstances by weighing all factors that are relevant to whether the alien is more likely than not at any time in the future to receive one or more public benefits. 34 Under the vacated 2019
Final Rule, at a minimum, officers were to consider all of the mandatory factors set forth in the statute, as well as the noncitizens prospective immigration status and expected period of admission, and where applicable a sufficient Affidavit of Support Under Section 213A of the INA.35
Through a future rulemaking, DHS
may seek to clarify how officers should consider a noncitizens past and present circumstances in determining the likelihood that they will become a public charge at any time in the future.

2. Questions for the Public DHS welcomes public comment on all aspects of the topic described above, and would particularly benefit from commenters addressing one or more of the following questions, including the reasoning, data, and information behind their comments:
1. How should DHS define the term public charge?
2. What data or evidence is available and relevant to how DHS should define the term public charge?
3. How might DHS define the term public charge, or otherwise draft its rule, so as to minimize confusion and uncertainty that could lead otherwiseeligible individuals to forgo the receipt of public benefits?
4. What national policies, including the policies referenced throughout this ANPRM, policies related to controlling paperwork burdens on the public, and policies related to promoting the public health and general well-being, should DHS consider when defining the term public charge and administering the statute more generally?
5. What potentially disproportionate negative impacts on underserved communities e.g., people of color, persons with disabilities could arise from the definition of public charge and how could DHS avoid or mitigate them?
6. What tools and approaches can DHS use to ensure that future rulemaking is appropriately informed by available evidence? 32
31 See INA section 212a4B, 8 U.S.C.
1182a4B.
32 Consistent with Executive Orders 12866 and 13563, DHS is committed to evidence-based
PO 00000

Frm 00004

Fmt 4702

Sfmt 4702

2. Questions for the Public DHS welcomes public comment on all aspects of the topic described above, but would particularly benefit from commenters addressing one or more of the following questions, including the reasoning, data, and information that inform their comments:
policymaking. DHS is aware of at least one recent attempt to use available data and machine-learning tools to estimate the probability of a noncitizen becoming a public charge as that term was defined under the 2019 Final Rule. See Mitra Akhtari et al., Estimating the Likelihood of Becoming a Public Charge, N.Y.U. J. Legis. & Pub. Poly Quorum Aug. 2, 2021, https nyujlpp.org/quorum/
estimating-the-empirical-likelihood-of-becoming-apublic-charge/ accessed Aug. 4, 2021. DHS
welcomes comments on the approach described in that paper; alternative approaches that may appropriately leverage available evidence and tools;
and the potential implications of such approaches for this rulemaking.
33 See 64 FR 28689, 28690 May 26, 1999.
34 See 84 FR 41292, 41502 Aug. 14, 2019.
35 See 84 FR 41292, 41423 Aug. 14, 2019.

E:FRFM23AUP1.SGM

23AUP1