If you’re filing a family-based green card petition, you may assume that once your I-130 is approved, you’re protected from deportation. That assumption could be dangerously wrong. Under 2025 USCIS guidance, the agency can refer applicants to immigration court for removal proceedings after filing I-130—even if the petition is approved—when the beneficiary is technically “removable.”
What the August 2025 Policy Says
On August 1, 2025, USCIS updated its Policy Manual to add a new section on “Removable Aliens” under the chapter on Adjudication of Family-Based Petitions. The language is stark: “If USCIS determines the alien beneficiary is removeable and amenable to removal from the United States USCIS may issue a Notice to Appear (NTA) placing the beneficiary in removal proceedings.” USCIS Policy Manual, Vol. 6, Pt. B, Ch. 5.
The update explicitly warns that “a family-based petition accords no immigration status nor does it bar removal.” Id.
This August policy builds on a broader February 2025 memorandum that dramatically expanded USCIS’s approach to NTA issuance. USCIS Policy Memorandum PM-602-0187. That memo stated the agency would “no longer exempt classes or categories of removable aliens from potential enforcement, which includes referring cases to ICE and issuance of NTAs.” Id. By June 2025, USCIS reported it had initiated removal proceedings against more than 26,000 individuals since February under the new guidance. USCIS Press Release, June 12, 2025.
When This Can Happen
Certain applicants are significantly more vulnerable under the new framework:
- Those who entered without inspection. Under INA § 212(a)(6)(A)(i), a person present in the United States “without being admitted or paroled” is inadmissible. If you crossed the border without being processed at a port of entry, you are removable regardless of your current relationship status. An approved I-130 does not change this.
- Visa overstays with substantial unlawful presence. Individuals who entered lawfully but remained past their authorized stay are technically removable and may be flagged when their case is reviewed. Unlawful presence of more than 180 days can also trigger the three- and ten-year bars under INA § 212(a)(9)(B). USCIS, Unlawful Presence and Inadmissibility.
- Those with prior immigration violations. Previous removal orders, immigration fraud findings, or other violations create elevated risk. The February 2025 NTA memorandum specifically directs officers to issue NTAs when fraud or material misrepresentation is part of the record. USCIS Policy Memorandum PM-602-0187.
- Applicants who cannot adjust status. Under INA § 245(a), adjustment of status requires that the applicant have been “inspected and admitted or paroled” into the United States. USCIS Policy Manual, Vol. 7, Pt. B, Ch. 2. Many I-130 beneficiaries do not meet this threshold and must instead leave and consular process abroad. Filing an I-130 alone, without eligibility for adjustment, may effectively alert USCIS to a removable person’s presence.
- Those subject to expedited removal. Individuals who have been in the United States for less than two years are particularly vulnerable because they can potentially be removed quickly without a full immigration court hearing under INA § 235(b)(1).
The Difference Between I-130 Approval and Adjustment Eligibility
This distinction is at the heart of the problem. The I-130 petition establishes only that a qualifying relationship exists—that your U.S. citizen or permanent resident spouse, parent, or child is who they claim to be and that you are related as stated.
It does not grant any immigration status. It does not provide a work permit. It does not protect against removal.
To obtain a green card, the beneficiary must also be eligible to adjust status (or complete consular processing) and must be admissible to the United States. 8 C.F.R. § 245.1. Many grounds can block adjustment: entry without inspection, certain criminal convictions, fraud, prior removal orders, and specific health-related issues.
An I-130 approval simply means you cleared one hurdle. If you cannot clear the others—and if you are unlawfully present—you remain removable even with that approved petition in hand.
Why This Changes the Calculus for Some Applicants
Before 2025, many immigration practitioners advised clients that filing for adjustment of status was relatively low-risk even for those with complicated histories. The thinking was that USCIS rarely issued NTAs in family-based cases, particularly for people without criminal records who were simply trying to legalize their status.
That calculation has shifted. Under current policy, a denied I-485 can trigger immediate referral to immigration court. Even appearing for an interview may create risk if the officer determines the applicant is removable.
For beneficiaries who entered without inspection and lack a pathway to adjustment (such as Section 245(i) coverage), the strategic question becomes whether filing an I-130 at all makes sense—or whether it simply creates a paper trail that leads to removal proceedings.
Applicants must now carefully evaluate their complete immigration history, potential grounds of inadmissibility, and whether they have viable relief before any application is filed. In some cases, consular processing abroad—despite the risks of triggering unlawful presence bars—may be safer than remaining in the United States and interacting with USCIS.
What to Do Now
If you’re considering filing an I-130 or I-485, or if you have a pending family-based petition, a thorough legal analysis is essential. An immigration attorney can help you assess your exposure, identify potential grounds of removability, and determine whether waivers or other relief may be available.
The 2025 policy changes mean that immigration benefit applications are no longer purely benefit applications—they are also potential enforcement triggers. Planning accordingly is no longer optional.
This article provides general information, not legal advice. Consult with a qualified immigration attorney from the Law Office of Matthew W. Peterson about your individual situation.
