We Need More Homes, Not More Rules
By Mark Thiele, NAHRO CEO
February 23, 2026 — Secretary Scott Turner argues in his recent Washington Post op-ed that HUD’s proposed rule on Verification of Eligible Status (2026-03405) will “redirect $218 million to American families” and restore integrity to housing programs. But a careful reading of Section 214 of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1980 and of HUD’s own proposal shows that this rule risks collateral damage to the very Americans it claims to help and the agencies doing the work to home them.
At its core, Section 214 is about financial assistance, not immigration enforcement. The statute prohibits HUD from providing assistance to ineligible noncitizens, while expressly allowing prorated assistance so eligible members of mixed-status families can still receive help. Current regulations faithfully implement that balance. They ensure no federal dollars are paid on behalf of ineligible individuals, while protecting eligible citizens, often children, from losing housing because of another household member’s status.
The proposed rule upends that equilibrium.
First, it eliminates the long-standing “not contending eligible status” option and limits prorated assistance to a temporary condition. Section 214 does not require universal verification of every household member, nor does it restrict proration to a short-term bridge. By narrowing prorated assistance, HUD risks denying subsidies to eligible Americans who are fully entitled to them under statute. That is not strengthening compliance – it is rewriting the law.
Second, the numbers cited in the op-ed warrant scrutiny. The Secretary references “200,000 incomplete or unknown eligibility” cases identified through SAVE/EIV data matching. But those records may include elderly residents over age 62 who were never required to verify immigration status. He also cites “24,000 ineligible” individuals – yet those individuals are not receiving subsidy. Many are in prorated households precisely because they did not contend eligibility. Under current law, exactly zero financial assistance flows on their behalf.
The promise to “redirect $218 million” assumes a cost-free one-to-one swap: remove mixed-status families and house others. That is not how housing works. Evicting a mixed-status family would not automatically create equivalent assistance for a new household. Instead, it forces families to choose between separation and homelessness.
Three in four eligible families nationwide already go unassisted – not because of ineligible participants, but because of insufficient appropriations. This proposal does not add a single new voucher or public housing unit. It merely reshuffles scarce resources, while imposing additional administrative costs on both Public Housing Agencies (PHAs) and private landlords. Revising admissions and recertification processes for nearly nine million residents to pursue 24,000 non-subsidized individuals is a sweeping response with minimal fiscal return. And eligible citizens in those households would lose support congress has explicitly preserved for them.
Even more troubling, the proposed rule would require PHAs to inform DHS whenever they determine a household member is present in violation of immigration law. HUD’s mission is housing. Turning housing providers into immigration enforcement intermediaries stretches Section 214 beyond recognition and risks chilling eligible families from seeking critical assistance.
The National Association of Housing and Redevelopment Officials (NAHRO) envisions “thriving communities with affordable homes for all.” Its mission centers on creating and preserving affordable housing and supporting local agencies that administer programs efficiently and fairly. This proposal does not advance that vision. It casts a wide net that will ensnare eligible Americans, shifts focus from housing stability to immigration enforcement and imposes costs that likely exceed any speculative savings.
If Congress wishes to change Section 214, it can do so. Until then, HUD should faithfully implement the law as written: protect assistance for citizens and eligible noncitizens, maintain prorated safeguards for mixed families, and focus on the real crisis – far too little housing and too little funding.