An Examination of Public Benefit Enrollment Data in Minnesota Immigrant Households as Evidence of Public Charge Chilling Effect

In this Article, the Author will examine means-tested benefit enrollment data for Minnesota immigrant households to see if this data supports existence of a chilling effect through decreased immigrant household enrollment in these programs following publication of the public charge regulations.Additionally, while several previous studies using survey data support the existence of a public charge chilling effect, this Article will build on this previous work by analyzing primary enrollment data provided directly by the Minnesota Department of Human Services (MN-DHS), the agency administering these programs.Part I of this Article will define the public charge ground of inadmissibility under section 212(a)(4) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) and will provide a history of the public charge ground of inadmissibility and enforcement of the public charge statute prior to 2016.Part II of this Article will summarize the rollout of the public charge regulations by the first Trump Administration.This Part will include discussion of leaked draft executive orders and proposed regulations in 2017 and 2018, changes to the Foreign Affairs Manual (FAM) guidance on public charge in early 2018, and the proposed and final public charge regulations in 2018 and 2019, respectively.Part II will also provide a summary of litigation challenging the final public charge regulations in 2019, including the February 2020 U.S. Supreme Court Order lifting a lower court preliminary injunction and allowing the final regulation to go into effect.Part III of this Article will discuss the chilling effect of the public charge regulations within immigrant communities, both in terms of contemporaneous anecdotal reports and recent studies, using survey data, to determine impact of the public charge rule on immigrant receipt of means-tested benefits.Part III will also discuss the resulting harm to immigrant households when families forgo means-tested public benefits, such as food insecurity and poor health outcomes due to lack of medical coverage.Part IV of the Article will then examine enrollment data from 2013 to 2021 for federal means-tested programs in Minnesota, provided directly by MN-DHS, to determine if there were reductions in enrollment following publication of leaked drafts and the proposed and final public charge regulations in the Federal Register.This examination will include an analysis of immigrant household enrollment data for the Minnesota Family Investment Program (MFIP), the Minnesota state-based family cash assistance program funded by Temporary Assistance to Needy Families 2025]PUBLIC CHARGE CHILLING EFFECT 75 (TANF) federal block grant funds, and the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP).Finally, Part V will provide recommendations to states on how to combat fear within immigrant communities and encourage eligible immigrant families