In a move that has left many in the immigration community bewildered, the United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) announced last week that foreign nationals in the country temporarily seeking green cards must now apply from their home countries instead of within the US.

This policy change, which potentially impacts hundreds of thousands of applicants annually, is part of a broader strategy by President Donald Trump's administration to limit legal immigration pathways.

Immigration attorneys are finding themselves inundated with calls and inquiries from anxious clients seeking clarity on how this shift will affect their applications.

According to Flavia Santos Lloyd, an immigration attorney whose phone has been ringing non-stop since the announcement, while the policy is designed to slow down applications, it also creates a chilling effect that may cause some to hesitate or even abandon their legal pursuit of permanent residence.

The new policy, which took effect immediately, requires most applicants for adjustment of status to return to their home countries to apply.

Exceptions will be considered in "extraordinary circumstances" and for those who can demonstrate they provide an economic benefit or are in the national interest.

However, the exact criteria and how these exceptions will be applied remain unclear, leading to widespread confusion among immigration professionals and applicants alike.

Charles Kuck, an immigration attorney and critic of the policy, views it as a scare tactic aimed at discouraging individuals from pursuing legal pathways to residency.

He anticipates that legal challenges will follow this change, aiming to push back against what he deems a restrictionist approach to immigration law.

Among those most affected are individuals in specific categories such as those on nonimmigrant visas like H-1Bs (for high-skilled workers) and religious workers, who might be exempt due to their "dual-intent" nature, allowing for a transition from nonimmigrant to immigrant status.

Others, including refugees and asylum seekers, as well as individuals with humanitarian parole, face uncertainty regarding how the new policy will impact their already complex application processes.

The shift in policy also introduces new challenges during the application process.

For instance, applicants are now being asked unprecedented questions designed to assess why they should be allowed to apply from within the US and to demonstrate a lack of financial dependence on American welfare systems.

These developments have left many questioning whether such measures are aimed at weeding out applicants who may in the future become "public charges," even though this requirement traditionally applies only after an individual has secured permanent residence.

While initial reactions suggest that some categories of applicants might be exempt, leading to a selective application of this policy, immigration practitioners advise against drawing definitive conclusions until further clarification and guidance are provided.

As the situation evolves, many are closely monitoring the administration's next steps and preparing for potential legal challenges aimed at preserving the integrity of legal immigration pathways.

The new policy has sparked concerns over its deterrent effect on companies seeking to sponsor foreign workers and highlights the ongoing tension in American immigration policy between limiting overall numbers and maintaining a system that allows skilled workers and families to settle in the US.