Lilia Ulloa of Riverside said she panicked when she first heard about the Trump Administration’s new public charge rule, which authorizes officials to consider immigrants' use of certain public benefits, including Medicaid, when deciding whether to grant them green cards.

Ulloa's 14-year-old son, United States-born Juan Carlos Mendez, has Down Syndrome and gets speech, language, occupational and behavioral therapies at a Riverside County public school. In the past, she had consented to the school district billing Medi-Cal, the state's Medicaid program, for his special education services.

After hearing about the rule change, Ulloa, an immigrant from Mexico who is preparing to apply for a green card, faced a daunting question. She wondered: Given the new rule, could her son’s use of Medi-Cal funds jeopardize her ability to become a permanent resident of the United States?

“At first, I panicked,” said Ulloa, a mother of four who lives in Riverside. “I was practically hysterical.”

Under the new rule, which was finalized in August and takes effect Oct. 15, officials will analyze whether a green card applicant used certain public benefits as a way to determine whether he or she is likely to rely on the government for support in the future. But officials will not consider the benefits used by an applicant's family members, unless they are also applying for a green card — an important caveat that immigrant parents like Ulloa are sometimes missing as they struggle to parse fact, fiction and fear about the new hundreds of pages-long rule.

Now, advocates say the new rule is having a chilling effect on immigrant families' use of a wide range of benefits. Some undocumented parents are even re-thinking using services for which their American-born children are eligible, causing U.S. citizen children to become, according to Lena Silver, an attorney with Neighborhood Legal Services of Los Angeles County, the “very harmed bystanders” of the new policy.

It's hard to quantify how many immigrant parents, like Ulloa, are regretting their decision to consent to school districts accessing Medi-Cal dollars to pay for their United States-born children's special education therapies, on account of the new public charge rule.

But one Riverside County mother told The Desert Sun that she had removed her son, a 15-year-old U.S. citizen with autism, from public school and enrolled him in home school, and said she knew of three other parents who had done the same. Like Ulloa, she said she was concerned that by consenting to the use of Medi-Cal funds for her son's speech and language therapies, she had jeopardized her future in the country.

Erin Quinn, senior staff attorney with the Immigrant Legal Resource Center in San Francisco, said immigration, health and education advocates had predicted the new rule would deter confused and fearful immigrant families from accessing services to which their children are entitled. She alleged the rule is intended to have such an effect, since undocumented people are generally ineligible for the benefits affected by the rule.

Advocates raised such concerns during the rule's public comment period but the federal government moved forward with it anyway, she said, erroneously implying that undocumented immigrants are a drain on public benefits. That, she said, is "one of the reasons we think it's a direct attack on our immigrant community and racist in intention."

"These children end up being maybe collateral damage or possibly pawns in a government policy," she said.

Breaking down the rule change

U.S. immigration law has long required that people seeking legal status in the country be self-sufficient, according to U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services.

Until now, immigration officials would consider whether an immigrant used certain cash benefits as part of his or her green card application process. Those benefits included:

Supplemental Security Income

CalWORKS, a state program that provides cash aid and services to eligible families with children at home

Long-term institutional care paid for by the federal government

Officials also would consider other factors — including the immigrant's age, income, education level and ability to speak English, and whether she or he has the support of others — as part of the green card application. If officials decided he or she was likely to rely on the government for support in the future, then they could deny the application.

Once the administration’s new public charge rule takes effect Oct. 15, officials can also point to an immigrant's use of certain public benefits as evidence that he or she is likely to rely on the government for support in the future. Those benefits include:

Medi-Cal, the state's Medicaid program

CalFresh, the state's food stamp program

Section 8, a federal program that helps low-income families rent housing

Public housing

These benefits, which are intended to support low-income people and families, are generally only available to eligible immigrants.

Beginning Oct. 15, along with looking at an immigrant's past use of public benefits, officials also will give more weight to factors that could negatively impact someone's green card application, like having a low income, low education level or limited English skills, tilting the scales away from letters of support from sponsors. If officials decide the immigrant could become a public charge based on these factors, they can deny that person a green card or visa.

There are some important caveats:

The rule doesn't consider benefits used by an applicant's family members.

The rule doesn't apply to other benefits, including the Women, Infants and Children program, or WIC, a federal program that provides food for low-income mothers and children, or Head Start, a federal program that provides comprehensive early childhood education to low-income kids and families.

It doesn’t apply to immigrants’ use of school meals, food banks or shelters.

It doesn't apply to people who use Emergency Medi-Cal or pregnant women who use Medi-Cal up to 60 days after birth.

It doesn't apply to public benefits paid for by the state government. In California, for example, it won't pertain to undocumented children and adults ages 25 and younger who will qualify for Medi-Cal as of January.

It doesn't apply to refugees, asylees or people applying for or holding visas due to being survivors of trafficking, domestic violence or other serious crimes.

The State of California has sued to block the rule, as have other states and advocacy organizations.

Confusion, mistrust surround new rule

Despite the caveats, fear borne out of misinformation and, in some cases, mistrust of the federal government, has spurred some immigrant parents to make tough choices between the health and well-being of their families and their own futures in the United States.

Johanna, an undocumented immigrant from Mexico and mother of two who lives in Moreno Valley, pulled her son out of a high school in the Val Verde Unified School District and enrolled him in an online home school in late August. She acted, she said, because she was concerned that she had previously consented to a Riverside County school district accessing Medi-Cal dollars to pay for special education services for her son, a 14-year-old U.S. citizen with autism.

Parents can sign a form consenting to school districts submitting claims to Medi-Cal for certain services as part of students' Individualized Education Program, or IEP, according to the Riverside County Special Education Local Plan Area, which provides guidance and support to local educational agencies for implementation of the federal Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act.

The consent is voluntary and can be revoked at any time. If parents don’t consent to the use of Medi-Cal funds, the district must still ensure that all required special education and services are provided to the student at no cost.

An immigrant's consenting to his or her citizen child's use of public benefits would not be considered as part of the public charge determination, said Quinn of the Immigrant Legal Resource Center, but "convincing a parent of that is really tough."

Johanna had already revoked her consent for the use of Medi-Cal dollars, but she said she was haunted by the memory of signing the documents.

“Many parents don’t know what to do now,” Johanna said in Spanish. “I had to sit down with my family and analyze what is best for me and what is best for my son.”

The Desert Sun is not using her last name because she fears she could be targeted by immigration officials.

Several weeks into homeschooling, Johanna said her son is happy. He still receives all the services outlined in his individualized education program over video conference, she said.

Lily Corzo, executive director of Learning Rights Law Center, which advocates for education equity for low-income and disadvantaged students in the public school system in the Los Angeles area, said she hadn’t heard about such concerns. She said she understands why some parents would be nervous about the rule change, even though a U.S. citizen child’s use of services should not impact a parent’s green card application.

“I can see how there is confusion,” she said, adding: “They think of themselves as a family unit.”

Luz Gallegos, community programs director for TODEC Legal Center in Coachella, said people need clear information about the rule. Even then, she said, they will make decisions about their families’ use of benefits that allow them to remain safe and sane.

“Regardless of what the law says, right now the community doesn’t trust the government and we cannot judge them,” Gallegos said. “We just want them to know the most up-to-date information, know their rights and know their legal options.”

'Don't want him to be a burden'

Also regretting having previously consented to the use of Medi-Cal funds, Lilia Ulloa said she briefly considered removing J.C., as she calls her son, from a middle school in the Alvord Unified School District in Riverside and homeschooling him.

Ulloa has long advocated for her son’s access to education, but she found herself weighing his rights with her desire to gain legal status, so she can continue caring for him. Before Ulloa made any decisions about her son's educational future, however, she dedicated herself to learning more about the policy change.

The facts, she said, have converted her fears into mere worries.

“As of now, we’re leaving him in school,” Ulloa said in Spanish on a recent afternoon. “We don’t want to take away his opportunity to grow and become a productive member of society.”

At school, she said, J.C. takes history, math and science classes with other special education students, and participates in physical education and music classes with the rest of the kids his age. He also loves dancing to the electronic music of Daft Punk and eating at Pizza Hut and dreams of being a firefighter

“We don’t want him to be a burden," she said. "We want him to work. We don’t want him to depend on a Social Security check.”

Ulloa said immigrant families should get all the facts about the public charge rule.

"If you have any doubts, you should contact a good lawyer," Ulloa said, "not a close friend, not an aunt, not a neighbor."

Rebecca Plevin reports on immigration for The Desert Sun. Reach her at rebecca.plevin@desertsun.com. Follow her on Twitter at @rebeccaplevin.