An immigration policy change that sparked concern among attorneys and applicants appears to have been short-lived, according to immigration lawyer and entrepreneur Melissa Velloza.
Velloza says federal officials have reversed guidance that threatened to complicate the green card application process for many immigrants already living in the United States.
In a video shared on Instagram, Velloza told followers that immigration officers have been instructed to continue processing adjustment-of-status applications under normal procedures, effectively abandoning a controversial policy directive that had alarmed immigration advocates and legal professionals.
“The illegal memo is now history and everyone can proceed with filing their adjustment to status like this never happened,” Velloza said.
According to the attorney, immigration lawyers learned that the administration had rescinded guidance issued just days earlier that would have required officers to ask additional questions when determining whether certain green card applicants could remain in the United States while their applications were being processed.
Velloza said officers were informed that they no longer needed to apply the new screening approach and were directed instead to continue adjudicating adjustment-of-status cases under existing standards.
Adjustment of status is the process that allows eligible individuals already present in the United States to apply for lawful permanent residency without leaving the country.
The procedure is widely used by immigrants who qualify through family relationships, employment sponsorships, humanitarian programs, and other legal pathways.
The attorney argued that the reversal came after immigration lawyers across the country mobilized quickly to challenge the policy.
“We had backends from AILA, the American Immigration Lawyers Association,” Velloza said, referring to efforts by legal advocates to organize responses and prepare challenges to the guidance.
She added that attorneys participated in training sessions to discuss strategies for opposing the memo during immigration interviews if necessary.
Velloza characterized the now-abandoned directive as both legally questionable and harmful, suggesting that officials recognized it would face significant legal scrutiny.
While the federal government has not publicly linked the reversal to potential litigation, immigration attorneys and advocacy groups have frequently challenged immigration policies they believe exceed statutory authority or conflict with existing regulations.
For immigrants currently pursuing lawful permanent residency, Velloza’s message was one of reassurance.
“Talk about some good prayers and legal warriors,” she said. “We are back up guys.”
The attorney also used the moment to encourage people not to lose hope during periods of uncertainty in immigration law, where policies can change rapidly and often face legal challenges before taking full effect.
“This is exactly why I don’t get stressed or feel defeated too quick,” Velloza said. “One thing I know, God is going to do what he has to do.”
Her comments come as immigration policy continues to be one of the most closely watched and heavily litigated areas of federal law, affecting millions of individuals and families seeking permanent legal status in the United States.
