As “Gold Card” visa faces a federal lawsuit, questions emerge over what a lawful investment-based immigration program should look like. Legal experts Jill Jones explains why the long-standing EB-5 program with its statutory safeguards and job-creation mandate offers a stark contrast.
We haven’t yet completed the first quarter of 2026 and a lot has happened in immigration already.
While late last year ended with the launching of the Trump Gold Card Visa program. February saw, Trump administration being sued in federal court over the much-talked about Gold Card. A program that promises those who can pay a fee of $1 million per individual an expedited entry to a U.S. green card or permanent residency.
The lawsuit was filed by the American Association of University Professors along with a group of immigrant professionals in the Federal District Court in Washington, D.C.
The lawsuit raises an important: what should a lawful, functioning investment immigration program actually look like in the United States?
And how do the current developments measure against the existing congressionally authorized EB-5 Immigrant Investor Program? Jill Jones, General Counsel at JTC Group – a global professional services business talks to the American Bazaar on how the statutory safeguards in the EB-5 program protect investors, support U.S. developers, and align immigration policy with measurable economic outcomes and why it matters right now.
American Bazaar: The Trump “Gold Card” is attracting attention at home and abroad. How should the United States structure a lawful and functional investment-based immigration program?
Jill Jones: A lawful and functional investment-based immigration program must resemble other investments made in the US that do not carry an immigration component. Making a donation to the US Treasury is not an investment, it is a purchase. There is no expectation of getting a return on those funds or even getting the initial investment back.
READ: US immigration crackdown drives census count down by millions (
An investment, by definition, is the allocation of resources, most often money, into assets, projects, or financial instruments with the expectation of generating future returns, income, or appreciation. Unlike donations, investments involve taking a risk with the hope of growing wealth, which, in the case of EB-5 program includes receipt of a green card over time.
The EB-5 program has existed for more than 30 years. What factors have allowed it to endure across multiple administrations and shifting political climates?
EB-5 has always enjoyed bipartisan support. It has not, to date, been used as a bargaining chip for either side of the aisle. Despite the amount of media attention on a few failed EB-5 projects over the years, there are far more instances of successful projects bringing catalytic change to communities in the US. Ultimately, the Regional Center Program has existed this long, because it is working. That is why we need to change the narrative and highlight these successes.
What distinguishes a congressionally authorized program like EB-5 from executive-driven immigration proposals?
Stability and longevity. Congressionally authorized programs can only be amended or terminated by further congressional action which likely requires a notice and comment period to evaluate the pros and cons of the proposed changes. An executive- driven immigration can be changed or terminated by a unilateral executive action. This could come from the very next administration, or even from the very same administration that created it, should the circumstances change.
What statutory safeguards are built into the EB-5 program to ensure compliance with federal law?
The EB-5 Reform and Integrity Act of 2022 came with a host of “integrity measures”. Today’s version of EB-5 is far more sophisticated than it was in early years. As the program continued to grow and bring financing to areas and projects that might not otherwise have gotten completed, lawmakers saw the need to tighten up its compliance framework.
Today, EB-5 projects are tasked with providing transparency, enhanced due diligence, and accountability though requirements for reporting and oversight that are designed to enhance the integrity of the offerings.
Read: From biometrics to H-1B visas: Major US immigration policy shifts in 2025 (December 31, 2025)
Why is it important that investment-based immigration programs operate within a clear statutory framework?
When it comes to granting residency to foreign nationals there will always be a concern that the program can be abused or taken advantage of leading to criminals or laundered money entering the US. When the program is operated within a strict statutory framework, it is easy to see that proper due diligence is and has been performed, and the benefits the program is intended to provide have truly been realized.
In general terms, how might proposals like the “Gold Card” differ in structure or oversight from the EB-5 program?
The Gold Card on one hand is very simple. Perform due diligence on the applicant and his/her source of funds and provide a green card in return. The challenge is to convince the court of public opinion that green cards for sale are a good thing. The EB-5 Program is not only an immigration program but also a job creation program.
While far more palatable in the court of public opinion, this requires oversight and expertise beyond the applicant or the investment. It delves into understanding the underlying project, whether it lies in an underserved area, whether the jobs it purports to create have materialized, and whether or not the investment has been taken with a risk of gain or loss for the proper period of time.