The Trump administration is working on a proposal that would require green card applicants to post a $100,000 bond before entering the United States. The bond would only be refunded once the applicant becomes a citizen.
The State Department is developing the plan. The bond amount could vary depending on individual circumstances and country of origin, and officials are considering launching a pilot program in select nations before any broader rollout.
The stated goal is straightforward: immigrants coming to America should be financially self-sufficient. They should contribute to the country rather than rely on government support from the moment they arrive.
As originally reported, the proposal draws on logic that economist Milton Friedman laid out decades ago. Open immigration functioned effectively when America had no welfare state, because the lack of a social safety net acted as its own filter. People who came to the country had no choice but to be self-reliant. That natural filter no longer exists. Friedman’s argument was clear: a welfare state and unrestricted immigration cannot sustainably coexist. Unlimited demand on a finite system eventually breaks it.
The $100,000 bond is designed to restore that filter in a modern context. It does not block legal immigration outright. It does not target any specific nationality, ethnicity, or religion. It simply asks that prospective permanent residents demonstrate real financial capacity, not just a signed declaration, before settling here.
Critics will argue the requirement is unfair to lower-income immigrants. But the core question is not about sympathy. It is about whether the United States has an obligation to absorb unlimited numbers of people who will immediately depend on government support, while American citizens who need those same services wait behind them.
The existing public charge rule was supposed to address this concern. In practice, it has been litigated into near-irrelevance and is inconsistently enforced. A bond requirement is concrete and enforceable. It does not rest on a bureaucrat’s subjective forecast of someone’s financial future. It requires demonstrated financial capacity, full stop.
The policy is still being finalized. The bond amount may be adjusted. A pilot program will likely precede full implementation. Getting the details right is worth the extra time.
The underlying principle, however, is sound. Legal immigration should benefit the country receiving immigrants. A financial bond requirement is a practical, enforceable way to help ensure it does.