by Jose D. Roman | Mar 1, 2026 | Consumer Advocacy, Legal Bulletin, Medicaid, Medicaid Updates
As a New Jersey Medicaid lawyer, I’m often asked whether immigrants—especially those who are undocumented—can qualify for Medicaid or other forms of public health coverage. The answer is complicated, because eligibility depends on a mix of federal law, state initiatives, and funding streams that shift with each legislative cycle. The short answer is that New Jersey offers more inclusive health coverage than most states, but many immigrants still face limits depending on their immigration status.
Lawfully Present vs. Undocumented: A Crucial Distinction
Federal Medicaid law draws a sharp line between immigrants who are “lawfully present” and those who are “undocumented.” Lawfully present immigrants include lawful permanent residents (green card holders), refugees, asylees, victims of trafficking, certain humanitarian parolees, and others permitted to live in the U.S. under federal immigration law.
Many of these immigrants can qualify for Medicaid, though most must first wait five years after obtaining status before they become eligible. Historically, refugees, asylees, and trafficking victims were exempt from that five-year bar and could access coverage immediately. As explained below, the One Big Beautiful Bill Act (OBBBA) has significantly changed this going forward, with major provisions taking effect October 1, 2026.
By contrast, undocumented immigrants—those without lawful status—cannot enroll in full Medicaid coverage under federal law. But in New Jersey, there are exceptions and state-funded programs that fill some of the gaps.
New Jersey’s State Initiatives: Expanding Coverage for Children and Families
One of the most significant New Jersey state programs is Cover All Kids. Enacted into law in 2021, the program was implemented in phases, with full coverage for undocumented children taking effect on January 1, 2023, under Governor Murphy’s administration. It allows all children under 19 to receive NJ FamilyCare coverage regardless of immigration status, as long as they meet the income and residency rules. It is a groundbreaking policy that recognizes every child’s need for health care, no matter where they were born. It’s important to understand how it’s funded. Because federal Medicaid and Children’s Health Insurance Program (CHIP) funds cannot be used for undocumented children, Cover All Kids is paid for entirely by New Jersey.
New Jersey also provides coverage for pregnant women, though the scope depends on immigration status. U.S. citizens and lawfully present immigrants with low are eligible for full NJ FamilyCare/Medicaid coverage during pregnancy, with postpartum coverage continuing for 12 months after delivery. Undocumented women who do not qualify for full Medicaid may be eligible for the NJ Supplemental Prenatal and Contraceptive Program (NJSPCP), which covers outpatient prenatal and family planning services. Emergency labor and delivery for undocumented women may be covered separately under Emergency Medicaid, described below.
Emergency Coverage for All
Even for those who don’t qualify for Medicaid benefits, emergency medical care remains available. Through the Medical Emergency Payment Program (commonly called Emergency Medicaid), immigrants—regardless of status—can receive coverage for treatment of life-threatening conditions, including labor and delivery.
This program is not purely state-funded. Federal law allows states to receive federal Medicaid matching funds for emergency services provided to individuals who are otherwise Medicaid-eligible but not lawfully present. New Jersey is a Medicaid expansion state, meaning it currently receives approximately 90% federal reimbursement for these emergency services, with the state covering the remainder. Hospitals remain legally required under the federal Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act to provide emergency stabilization to any patient regardless of immigration status or ability to pay. Only true emergencies qualify for Emergency Medicaid; any non-emergency care for undocumented immigrants must be fully funded by the state if offered at all.
The “One Big Beautiful Bill” and Its Sweeping Impact on Immigrant Coverage
The One Big Beautiful Bill Act (OBBBA), signed into law on July 4, 2025, makes the most far-reaching changes to immigrant Medicaid eligibility since the 1996 welfare reform law. While much public attention has focused on work requirements and hospital reimbursements, the OBBBA’s effects on immigrant health coverage are equally significant.
The key changes for New Jersey residents are:
- Refugees, asylees, humanitarian parolees, and trafficking victims lose federal Medicaid and CHIP eligibility entirely (effective October 1, 2026). Under prior law, these groups were exempt from the five-year waiting period and could access Medicaid immediately upon receiving status. Under the OBBBA, they are removed from the definition of “qualified alien” for Medicaid purposes altogether. Only green card holders (lawful permanent residents), certain Cuban and Haitian entrants, and citizens of Freely Associated States remain eligible for federal Medicaid. States may still choose to cover lawfully residing children and pregnant women using their own funds.
- Emergency Medicaid federal reimbursement is reduced (effective October 1, 2026). For undocumented immigrants who would otherwise be Medicaid-eligible, the federal matching rate for emergency services drops from New Jersey’s current 90% expansion rate to approximately 50–65%. This does not eliminate emergency coverage, but it significantly increases the financial burden on the state.
- Cover All Kids remains intact because it is funded entirely by New Jersey for undocumented children. The OBBBA does not penalize states for using their own dollars to cover undocumented children.
These changes mean that thousands of New Jersey residents who are lawfully present in the United States—people who went through the legal process to obtain refugee, asylee, or humanitarian parole status—will lose access to federally funded health coverage starting October 2026, unless Congress acts.
What Democrats Want to Restore
In response, Democratic lawmakers in Congress have proposed measures to reverse several of these cuts. Their efforts aim to restore the federal Medicaid matching funds eliminated under the OBBBA, particularly for emergency medical services and for programs that assist lawfully present immigrants whose eligibility was stripped.
The Democratic proposals also seek to eliminate new work requirements, restore funding to rural hospitals, and extend enhanced ACA premium tax credits (topics not covered in this article). As the nonpartisan Kaiser Family Foundation has noted, these proposals do not create new eligibility for undocumented immigrants (who were already ineligible for federally funded coverage before the OBBBA). Rather, they aim to restore coverage for lawfully present immigrants like refugees and asylees, and to ensure that mixed-status families don’t lose access to care because of shifting political priorities or administrative red tape.
In addition, Democrats want to reinstate the higher federal cost-sharing for emergency services provided to immigrants without legal status—in practical terms, restoring the 90% reimbursement for states like New Jersey that maintain immigrant-inclusive safety nets.
Where Things Stand Now
New Jersey continues to be one of the more immigrant-friendly states when it comes to health coverage. Undocumented children remain protected under Cover All Kids. Lawfully present pregnant women receive full Medicaid with 12 months of postpartum coverage. Emergency care remains available to all through Emergency Medicaid, even as the federal government will cover a lower share of those costs beginning in October 2026.
However, the most significant near-term threat is to lawfully present immigrants—refugees, asylees, and humanitarian parolees—who will lose federal Medicaid eligibility entirely under the OBBBA unless that provision is reversed. Whether New Jersey chooses to bridge the gap with state dollars, as it has done for undocumented children, remains to be seen.
From a policy perspective, the direction of federal law will determine how sustainable New Jersey’s approach remains. If the state continues to shoulder the costs of inclusivity while federal funding shrinks, the long-term pressure on the state budget will grow. On the other hand, restoring the federal match for emergency and qualified immigrant coverage could stabilize the system and maintain access for some of New Jersey’s most vulnerable residents.
Final Thoughts
As a Medicaid lawyer practicing in New Jersey, I see firsthand how these laws affect real people. Families trying to navigate complex immigration and health systems often face confusion, fear, and financial strain. Understanding who qualifies—and how programs like Cover All Kids and Emergency Medicaid are funded—is essential for both residents and practitioners.
The bottom line is this: New Jersey has built a relatively compassionate model that balances legal restrictions with state-funded solutions. But that balance depends heavily on federal cooperation. With the OBBBA’s sweeping changes to lawfully present immigrant eligibility and the ongoing debate in Congress, the future of immigrant health coverage in New Jersey will likely hinge on how much support Washington is willing to restore.
by Jose D. Roman | Feb 12, 2026 | Medicaid, Medicaid Planning, Power of Attorney
When caring for an aging parent or a disabled loved one, convenience and simplicity is usually the goal, especially when it comes to managing money. Many families find it convenient to add a parent’s name to a college aged child’s account or an adult child’s name to an aging parent’s account, assuming this is a smart way to deposit money and manage bills.
However, in the world of New Jersey Medicaid, this convenience can become a costly crisis. When a loved one needs to apply for Medicaid, that joint account might be the very thing that triggers a denial.
The Rule You Need to Know: N.J.A.C. 10:71-4.1(d)2
New Jersey Medicaid doesn’t view joint accounts the way you do. Their treatment of these funds is governed by N.J.A.C. 10:71-4.1(d)2. The regulation states:
When a savings or checking account is held by the eligible individual with other parties, all funds in the account are resources to the individual so long as he or she has unrestricted access to the funds (that is, an “or” account), regardless of their source. When the individual’s access to the account is restricted (that is, an “and” account), the county welfare agency shall consider a pro rata share of the account toward the appropriate resource maximum, unless the client and the other owner demonstrate that actual ownership of the funds is in a different proportion.
This regulation establishes a harsh default presumption: If your name is on it, you own it.
The impact on eligibility depends entirely on one small word on the bank statement: “or” versus “and.” If an account is titled with “or,” the applicant has “unrestricted access” to the funds. Under the law, 100% of the balance is counted as a resource for the Medicaid applicant. It doesn’t matter if the non-Medicaid applicant deposited every cent of that money. Medicaid assumes the entire balance belongs to the person applying for benefits. If the account is an “and” account that requires both signatures for a withdrawal, Medicaid typically counts a pro rata share (usually 50/50) toward the applicant’s resource limit. While this is slightly better than the “or” scenario, it still places the burden of proof on you to show that the ownership should be divided differently.
With Medicaid resource limits being extremely low, ranging from $2,000 to $6,000 depending on the program and marital status, counting accounts with funds that really don’t belong to the Medicaid applicant can present a real problem.
Can You Fight the Presumption?
Whether the account it titled “and” or “or,” the County social services agency reviewing the Medicaid application will not simply take your word for it. To prove the money doesn’t belong to the applicant, you must provide clear documentary evidence that proves the applicant does not own the money. This includes copies of checks and deposit slips showing where the funds originated as well as a detailed paper trail of how the money was spent. If you can show that all the money coming in and out belonged to and was spent on the non-applicant you may be able to convince the County case handler to disregard the account. Even with solid evidence the County social services agency reviewing the application may still take a hard stance, count the funds toward the resource limit, and deny the application. In sum - rebutting these claims is most often an uphill battle. Absent clear proof, the County will count the funds against the applicant.
The Better Way: Power of Attorney
A joint bank account is not an asset-protection strategy and not a good way to manage an aging or disabled individual’s money. If the goal is to help a loved one manage their income and pay bills, the proper tool is a Power of Attorney (POA). A POA allows you to manage the funds without making those funds yours in the eyes of Medicaid. It provides the same convenience without the massive eligibility risk.
The Bottom Line
Adding a name to an account without legal guidance is a common mistake that creates a mountain of paperwork to undo. Effective Medicaid planning requires understanding how New Jersey actually applies its regulations, rather than relying on assumptions.
by Jose D. Roman | Oct 7, 2025 | Legal Bulletin, Medicaid, Medicaid Planning, Medicaid Updates
When applying for Medicaid or completing annual renewal paperwork in New Jersey, deadlines are critical. Missing a due date for requested documents can lead to a denial of the application or termination of benefits—sometimes with devastating consequences. But what happens if you mail documents on time but the agency later claims they were received late or not at all? Can you rely on the legal principle called the Mailbox Rule to prove that you provided a timely response?
What Is the Mailbox Rule?
The Mailbox Rule is a common-law legal doctrine that creates a rebuttable presumption of receipt. If a letter is properly addressed, stamped, and mailed, the law presumes it was received by the addressee in the normal course of mail delivery. The New Jersey Supreme Court affirmed this rule in SSI Medical Services, Inc. v. State, 146 N.J. 614, 621 (1996), explaining:
Where the evidence shows that a letter properly directed was mailed and not returned, a presumption arises that it reached its destination in due course of mail and was actually received by the person to whom it was addressed.
Medicaid and the Limits of the Mailbox Rule: A.N. v. Passaic County (2024)
In a 2024 Medicaid Fair Hearing matter, A.N. v. Passaic County Board of Social Services, an applicant submitted a Medicaid application on January 31, 2024. The agency sent a written request for income verification, giving a deadline of March 2. The applicant later claimed he mailed the requested documents, but the county said they were never received—and no proof of mailing was provided.
In reviewing the case, the administrative law judge acknowledged the Mailbox Rule under SSI Medical Services and the traditional presumption that mailed documents are received. However, the judge concluded that there was no evidence that the requested documents were mailed or emailed. Because the applicant failed to provide reliable proof of mailing (e.g., a copy of postmarked mail, certified mail receipt, tracking number, fax confirmation, sent email), the agency’s determination stood, and the application was denied.
Key Takeaways
- The mailbox rule is recognized in the Medicaid application context in New Jersey.
- Applicants bear the burden of proving compliance with submission deadlines.
- Testimony of mailing alone is likely not sufficient for court – you need to keep proof of mailing.
Best Practices for Medicaid Applicants
- Use certified or priority mail with a tracking number and return receipt.
- Retain copies of all submitted documents, including the envelope with the postmark.
- Follow up with the agency to confirm receipt—by phone, email, or in writing—and document all communications.
- Do not rely solely on regular mail, especially for time-sensitive or high-stakes Medicaid communications.
Conclusion
While the Mailbox Rule offers some protection in many legal contexts, it provides limited security in New Jersey Medicaid matters. Administrative agencies and courts expect actual, verifiable receipt of applications, verifications, and renewals. If you or your client is dealing with Medicaid, don’t take chances—take steps to ensure every document is received and acknowledged.
by Jose D. Roman | Jun 24, 2025 | Estate Administration, Estate Planning, Last Will and Testament, Power of Attorney, Probate
The Revised Uniform Fiduciary Access to Digital Assets Act (RUFADAA) was enacted in New Jersey to provide clarity and structure for fiduciaries seeking access to a decedent’s or incapacitated person’s digital assets. The law balances the privacy expectations of individuals with the practical needs of estate and trust administration.
Key Definitions
- Digital Asset: An electronic record in which an individual has a right or interest, such as email accounts, social media profiles, cryptocurrency, or cloud-stored files.
- Fiduciary: A person authorized to act on behalf of another, including:
- Executor or administrator of an estate
- Agent under a power of attorney
- Trustee
- Court-appointed guardian
- Custodian: A person or business that stores digital assets (e.g., Google, Meta, Apple).
Fiduciary Access Categories
RUFADAA applies to four types of fiduciaries:
- Personal Representatives (Executors/Administrators) – May access the digital assets of a deceased individual.
- Agents under a Power of Attorney – May manage digital assets during the principal’s lifetime, if specifically authorized.
- Trustees – May access digital assets titled in the name of the trust.
- Court-Appointed Guardians – May access digital assets with court approval.
Hierarchy of Access Authorization
RUFADAA establishes a three-tiered system to determine fiduciary authority:
1. Online Tools
If the digital service provider (such as Google or Facebook) offers a tool for account holders to direct post-death access (e.g., Google’s Inactive Account Manager or Facebook’s Legacy Contact), that direction overrides any conflicting instructions in a will, trust, or power of attorney.
2. Legal Documents
If no online tool exists or is used, instructions provided in estate planning documents control. These documents must specifically authorize access to digital assets; general powers are not sufficient.
3. Terms of Service Agreements (TOSAs)
If neither an online tool nor legal documents address the issue, the service provider’s Terms of Service Agreement governs access. Most TOSAs restrict access to authorized users only.
Scope of Access
Fiduciaries may seek access to:
- Content: The actual substance of communications (e.g., emails, messages), which requires explicit authorization.
- Catalog Information: Metadata such as sender, recipient, and timestamps, which may be accessible with broader authority.
Service providers may limit access to catalog information if content access is not authorized.
Steps for Fiduciaries to Request Access
Fiduciaries must usually provide the custodian with:
- A written request for access;
- A certified copy of the death certificate (for estates);
- Documentation of fiduciary authority (e.g., letters testamentary, power of attorney, or court order); and
- A copy of the will, trust, or other document granting digital access rights.
In some cases, custodians may require a court order to release certain information.
Custodian Protections
- Custodians are not liable for acts done in good faith under RUFADAA.
- They are permitted to request additional documentation or a court order.
- Custodians may limit access to specific portions of data or provide it in alternative formats.
User Privacy and Federal Law Compliance
- If the account holder prohibited disclosure via legal documents or online tools, fiduciaries cannot override that instruction.
- RUFADAA does not override federal privacy laws, such as the Stored Communications Act or the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act.
Practical Takeaways for New Jersey Residents
- Estate planning documents should expressly authorize access to digital assets.
- Individuals should consider using online tools offered by service providers to designate account access.
- To avoid confusion and uncertainty, make sure there is no conflict between estate planning documents and online tools offered by service providers
- Appointing a digital executor or agent can help ensure smooth management of online accounts.
- Without proper planning, loved ones may be unable to access essential financial or personal information stored digitally.
by Jose D. Roman | Jun 17, 2025 | Estate Administration, Estate Planning, Last Will and Testament, Power of Attorney
In today’s world, estate planning isn’t just about physical property or bank accounts. Increasingly, individuals are amassing significant digital assets—social media accounts, cryptocurrency, online business platforms, cloud storage, digital photos, frequent flyer miles, and more. If you’re a New Jersey resident, planning for these assets is not only prudent but essential. Without a clear plan, your digital legacy could be lost, inaccessible, or mismanaged after death.
What Are Digital Assets?
Digital assets include any online account or digital file that you own or control. This could be:
- Financial accounts like PayPal, Venmo, cryptocurrency wallets, and investment apps
- Social media and email (Facebook, Instagram, Gmail)
- Subscriptions (Netflix, Dropbox, Amazon)
- Online businesses or monetized content on platforms like Etsy, YouTube, or Substack
- Intellectual property such as domain names, eBooks, or digital art stored online
New Jersey and the Revised Uniform Fiduciary Access to Digital Assets Act
New Jersey has adopted Revised Uniform Fiduciary Access to Digital Assets Act(RUFADAA), a law that governs how fiduciaries (like executors of a will or agents under a power of attorney) can access your digital assets. Under RUFADAA:
- You can authorize or restrict access to digital assets via a will, trust, or power of attorney.
- If no specific authorization exists, the service provider’s Terms of Service Agreement usually controls access.
- Some platforms allow you to name a “legacy contact” (Facebook for example) or designate what happens to your data after death (Google Inactive Account Manager).
Why You Need a Digital Estate Plan
Without proper planning, loved ones may not be able to access essential financial records or sentimental content. Worse, your identity or business could be compromised if unattended digital accounts remain open.
A digital estate plan ensures:
- Access to critical financial information
- Protection of sensitive personal data
- A clear path for digital legacies or online businesses
- Fulfillment of your final wishes, including digital memorials or deletions
Steps to Include Digital Assets in Your Estate Plan
- Inventory your digital assets. List your accounts, usernames, and approximate value or importance.
- Choose an agent. Name someone you trust to handle these assets—this can be part of your will or separate, depending on complexity.
- Document access. Store passwords securely using a password manager and include instructions in a secure letter of instruction or digital vault.
- Provide legal authorization. Update your estate planning documents to explicitly authorize access to digital assets in accordance with RUFADAA.
- Review terms of service. For major accounts, check if the provider allows you to set legacy preferences.
A Final Word
In New Jersey, failing to address your digital assets in your estate plan can create legal uncertainty and emotional stress for your loved ones. As technology continues to evolve, so too must our approach to estate planning. If you’re unsure where to begin, consult an estate planning attorney who understands the unique challenges and opportunities posed by digital assets.