A New Chapter for Adjustment of Status? What Green Card Applicants May Need to Prepare for in a More Discretion-Oriented Era
Posted on June 21, 2026 by Warren Wen | Category: English
A New Chapter for Adjustment of Status?
What Green Card Applicants May Need to Prepare for
in a More Discretion-Oriented Era
For generations, immigration lawyers have been trained to think in checklists:
Approved petition.
Current priority date.
Lawful entry.
Supporting documents.
Interview.
Decision.
Simple enough.
Yet anyone who has practiced immigration law long enough eventually discovers something slightly uncomfortable: Immigration law has never been entirely mechanical.
Especially when Adjustment of Status (“AOS”) is involved.
Recent discussions surrounding USCIS’s renewed emphasis on discretionary review have created understandable anxiety across immigrant communities.
Some people heard: “Green card applicants may have to leave the United States.”
Others worried: “Even if I qualify, perhaps remaining in the U.S. is no longer enough.”
And many quietly began asking a deeper question:
Has obtaining permanent residence become harder—or simply more uncertain?
Legally speaking, USCIS has not eliminated Adjustment of Status.
Agency officials later clarified that no dramatic policy reversal had occurred and that officers have always possessed discretionary authority under existing law.
But sometimes the most important changes in immigration are not changes to statutes.
They are changes in emphasis.
For years, many applicants approached Adjustment of Status by asking:
“Do I qualify?”
Increasingly, another question may be returning to the front of the conversation:
“Why should USCIS exercise discretion favorably in my case?”
That distinction matters.
Because discretion does not mean randomness.
But neither does it mean automation.
I. Discretion Is Not the Same Thing as Improvisation
The word “discretion” makes people nervous.
It sounds subjective. It sounds personal.
Occasionally, it sounds suspiciously like: it depends.
But discretion has always existed in immigration law. INA §245 does not say an applicant shall be adjusted. It says adjustment may be granted.
That single word has lived quietly inside the statute for decades.
Most of the time, applicants did not notice. Until recently.
Administrative precedent and federal courts have repeatedly reminded adjudicators that discretion cannot become arbitrary decision-making.
Cases must be evaluated through reasoned analysis, balancing, and consideration of the totality of circumstances.
That means something important: Discretion creates preparation opportunities.
It does not eliminate them.
II. Why Matter of Blas Suddenly Feels More Relevant
Among immigration lawyers, one case has quietly reappeared in conversations: Matter of Blas.
Some applicants hear this and assume:
“I now have to prove extraordinary hardship.”
Not exactly. That is not the lesson. The real lesson of Blas is more subtle.
Approval is not always driven solely by eligibility.
Officers may consider positive and negative factors together. Positive factors often include:
- Family unity;
- Long-term lawful presence;
- Employment history;
- Tax compliance;
- Community involvement;
- Children’s interests;
- Stability and future plans.
Negative factors may include:
- Immigration history concerns;
- Inconsistencies;
- Violations;
- Credibility issues.
Notice what is missing. There is no line requiring applicants to become superheroes.
But there is a reminder: People are more than forms.
Which explains a trend many practitioners have quietly adopted:
Preparing not only a filing package—but also an equity package.
III. Filing for AOS May Require More Than Eligibility Documents
Historically, many applicants focused on technical requirements.
Increasingly, stronger cases also tell a coherent human story.
Family-Based Applicants
Consider organizing evidence in layers:
Layer One — Timeline Materials
How did the relationship develop?
Meeting.
Dating.
Living together.
Engagement.
Marriage.
Filing.
Simple chronology often answers complicated questions.
Layer Two — Shared Life Evidence
Joint accounts.
Lease.
Insurance.
Taxes.
Photographs.
Not to impress. To explain.
Layer Three — Positive Equities
Community involvement.
Family responsibilities.
Volunteer work.
Long-term plans.
Layer Four — Explanatory Materials
Tourist visa followed by marriage?
Status changes?
Extensions?
Sometimes silence creates more confusion than explanation.
Employment-Based Applicants
Employment cases may increasingly benefit from showing:
Not only:
“I can work.”
But also:
“My work matters.”
Examples include:
Employer support letters.
Recent payroll history.
Tax records.
Project summaries.
Evidence of long-term contribution.
National interest narratives.
Professional development plans.
A résumé shows what you did.
A good filing helps explain why it matters.
IV. Interview Preparation: Expect More Questions About Choices
Many applicants prepare only for factual questions.
Increasingly, they should prepare for judgment questions.
Questions such as:
Why choose Adjustment of Status?
Why not consular processing?
What changed after entry?
How would departure affect your family or work?
Notice something.
These are not trick questions.
They are story questions.
The goal is rarely perfection.
The goal is credibility.
Our practical suggestion:
Tell the truth.
Avoid absolutes.
Do not over-lawyer your own life.
V. Bring More Than Documents to the Interview
Many applicants arrive with interview notices and folders. Bring those. But also consider bringing context. Think in three categories:
Core Package
Eligibility documents.
Equity Package
Positive factors.
Supplement Package
Explanatory materials.
Will officers always collect them?
No.
Will they always matter?
No.
Can they matter?
Sometimes enormously.
Because in practice, credibility often moves cases more than completeness.
VI. What History Quietly Reminds Us
Older cases still have something to say.
Matter of Arai reminds us that positive factors matter.
Matter of Cavazos reminds us that preconceived intent is not automatically fatal.
Matter of Ibrahim reminds us that family unity remains important.
Matter of Mendez-Moralez reminds us that balancing has always existed.
History’s message is surprisingly calm: The rules may evolve.
Human judgment never disappeared.
Closing Thoughts
If you are preparing to file—or preparing for an I-485 interview—
Do not panic.
But do not prepare the same way people did five years ago.
Because the question may no longer be only:
“Do I qualify?”
Another question may quietly be returning:
“Why should USCIS allow me to complete this journey here?”
For years, applicants prepared documents.
Perhaps now, some should also prepare stories.
Not fictional stories.
Real ones.
Who you are.
Why you came.
Why you stayed.
And why this country may wish to keep listening.
Immigration, after all, has always been a story told between people and nations.
This article is only for your reference. Please do not apply mechanically to any exact cases. You are welcome to consult our attorneys at Liu & Associates, P.C. For contact information, please click here.