New Route to Permanent Residency

Summary#

The Hong Konger Promise of Refuge Act would amend the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) to create a new route to lawful permanent resident status (green-card status) for certain Hong Kong residents with Deferred Enforced Departure (DED). Its stated goal is to authorize that status adjustment; the bill does not guarantee any broader outcome.

  • The USCIS Director must grant lawful permanent resident status to a qualifying person who meets the bill’s conditions and applies within one year after enactment. The bill does not define “permanent resident of Hong Kong.”
  • The main applicant must have received DED under one of three named presidential memoranda or extensions; continuously lived in the United States since January 15, 2025, with no more than 180 days of authorized absences; not returned to Hong Kong or China since then; meet the bill’s criminal-conviction and extradition conditions; and apply on time.
  • A qualifying applicant’s spouse, children, and unmarried adult sons and daughters may also adjust status, subject to the bill’s admissibility and deportability rules and exceptions.
  • Applicants may not be detained, removed, or placed in removal proceedings while their applications are pending, and must be authorized to work.
  • For specified grounds, the bill waives inadmissibility rules in INA sections 212(a)(4), (5), (6)(A), (7), and (9)(B), and deportability rules in section 237(a)(3)(A) and (5). If status is granted, prior removal orders are cancelled and permanent residence is effective from the person’s U.S. arrival date. The bill also adds this route to a provision exempting people from numerical limits.

What it means for you#

  • Hong Kong residents with DED: The bill would create a route to permanent resident status if you meet every listed condition and apply on time. It does not make all Hong Kong residents, or all people with DED, eligible.
  • Family members: Spouses, children, and unmarried adult sons and daughters could apply under the bill. They would still have to meet its rules, subject to the specified waivers.
  • Applicants: After submitting an application, you would have protection from detention, removal, and removal proceedings while it is pending, and work authorization. The bill does not set a decision deadline.
  • Other people: The bill does not directly change immigration status for people outside the groups it covers.
  • Status: This is an introduced bill referred to the House Judiciary Committee, not a law. Whether it will pass is uncertain. The supplied material does not include the INA text, so I could not verify how this proposal compares with all current law.

Money#

No cost estimate is provided in the supplied materials. No publicly available information.

  • USCIS would have to process applications, but the bill gives no staffing or cost estimate.
  • The bill does not specify an application fee or provide funding for the work.

What is unclear#

  • “Permanent resident of Hong Kong” is not defined in the bill.
  • The bill does not set application procedures beyond requiring information the USCIS Director may reasonably require. It does not give decision standards, timelines, or appeal rules.
  • The bill does not say how the application process would work for family members or define “children.”
  • The supplied material does not include the INA provisions the bill refers to, so the exact effect of the listed waivers and numerical-limit exemption could not be checked against current law.
  • The bill does not set a general start date; the application deadline would be one year after enactment.

Case for#

  • The bill appears intended to offer a path to more lasting status for people from Hong Kong who received DED and meet strict residence and other conditions.
  • A possible argument for the approach is that it gives eligible applicants and their families a route to permanent status rather than leaving their future dependent on DED.
  • Work authorization and protection from removal while an application is pending could provide greater security during the application process.

Case against#

  • The bill leaves “permanent resident of Hong Kong” undefined, which could make eligibility uncertain.
  • It requires USCIS to process applications but provides no funding estimate, staffing plan, decision deadline, or appeal process.
  • The bill makes permanent residence effective from the applicant’s U.S. arrival date if status is granted. The supplied material does not explain how that retroactive date would affect other legal matters.
  • The specified waivers and the numerical-limit exemption could have significant effects, but the supplied material does not include the related INA text needed to assess their full scope.