Fact Check: Seven states, along with the District, allow immigrants who are not living legally in the country to enroll — with full benefits — in their state’s Medicaid program.

Fact Check: Seven states, along with the District, allow immigrants who are not living legally in the country to enroll — with full benefits — in their state’s Medicaid program.

Published June 14, 2025
±
VERDICT
Partially True

# Fact Check: "Seven states, along with the District, allow immigrants who are not living legally in the country to enroll — with full benefits — in t...

Fact Check: "Seven states, along with the District, allow immigrants who are not living legally in the country to enroll — with full benefits — in their state’s Medicaid program."

What We Know

The claim that "seven states, along with the District, allow immigrants who are not living legally in the country to enroll — with full benefits — in their state’s Medicaid program" is based on the current landscape of Medicaid eligibility for undocumented immigrants in the United States. As of 2025, several states have expanded their Medicaid programs to include unauthorized immigrants, particularly for specific groups such as children and pregnant individuals. For instance, California has allowed all adults without legal status to enroll in its Medi-Cal program since 2024, providing coverage to approximately 1.6 million immigrants (NPR).

Additionally, Minnesota has recently expanded its Medicaid program to cover undocumented children and has seen over 20,000 enrollments since the program's implementation in January 2025 (NPR). According to a report by Newsweek, a total of 14 states offer some form of health coverage to undocumented immigrants, although the specifics of coverage can vary significantly by state (Newsweek).

Analysis

The claim is partially true because while it accurately states that several states and the District of Columbia provide Medicaid benefits to undocumented immigrants, the specifics of "full benefits" and the exact number of states may require clarification. The term "full benefits" can be misleading as it implies comprehensive coverage, which may not be uniformly available across all states. For example, while California provides extensive coverage, other states may limit benefits to certain groups, such as children or pregnant individuals (NPR, Newsweek).

Moreover, the political climate surrounding Medicaid for undocumented immigrants is fluid. Recent proposals in states like California and Minnesota indicate potential rollbacks of benefits due to budget constraints, which could affect future enrollment and coverage (NPR). This suggests that while the current situation allows for enrollment, the sustainability of these programs is under scrutiny, and changes could occur that would alter the availability of benefits.

The sources used for this analysis are credible, with NPR being a well-respected news organization known for its in-depth reporting on health care issues, and Newsweek providing a comprehensive overview of state policies regarding health coverage for undocumented immigrants. Both sources rely on factual reporting and expert opinions, making them reliable for understanding the current state of Medicaid eligibility for undocumented immigrants.

Conclusion

The verdict is Partially True. The claim correctly identifies that several states and the District of Columbia allow undocumented immigrants to enroll in Medicaid; however, the specifics regarding the number of states and the extent of benefits provided can vary. Additionally, the ongoing political discussions about potential rollbacks in coverage highlight that the situation is subject to change, which may affect the accuracy of the claim in the future.

Sources

  1. Unauthorized immigrants could lose health care in states
  2. Map Shows 14 States Offering Health Coverage ... - Newsweek
  3. Health Care Coverage (Maps)
  4. Key Facts on Health Coverage of Immigrants

Have a claim you want to verify? It's 100% Free!

Our AI-powered fact-checker analyzes claims against thousands of reliable sources and provides evidence-based verdicts in seconds. Completely free with no registration required.

💡 Try:
"Coffee helps you live longer"
100% Free
No Registration
Instant Results

Comments

Leave a comment

Loading comments...

More Fact Checks to Explore

Discover similar claims and stay informed with these related fact-checks

Fact Check: Trump administration denied disaster funding requests from seven states this spring.
Partially True
🎯 Similar

Fact Check: Trump administration denied disaster funding requests from seven states this spring.

Detailed fact-check analysis of: Trump administration denied disaster funding requests from seven states this spring.

Jun 29, 2025
Read more →
Fact Check: Transcript
00:00
911 was a false flag. For the
first 10 years, I did not think
anything other than the
official narrative then after
being shown a video, a close up
video of building number seven
coming down and that got me
going because it's obvious to
me that building seven was was
a controlled demolition because
the building collapses from the
bottom down. The trade centers
were unique in that they were
designed to withstand the
00:33
impact of a a a jet. From what
I understand the the outer
skeleton of the building. The
outer columns was like a a fish
net and you had these inner
core columns which was
substantial thick steel beams
to withstand four or five times
what the loads were. Got it.
The engineers always over
design a building. No steel
frame building has ever
collapsed before or since 9/
eleven. So that should say
something right there. And it
said that building seven it was
01:05
aggressive collapse that it was
caused by fire but progressive
collapse unlike the twin
towers, the twin towers
collapse from the top down.
That's a progressive collapse.
Sure. Floor by floor by floor.
But if you look at the videos
of building seven collapsing,
it collapses uniformly, it's
collapsing from the bottom, the
building stays intact all the
way to the bottom of the ground
and you could see the sides
caving in on it. For a building
to collapse uniformly which the
video show all the load bearing
it would have to have failed
01:36
simultaneously. Now, fire
doesn't act like that. I came
across an analogy of the twin
towers and if you could
visualize cast iron stoves
stacked. One on top of each
other. The stoves up at the
top. Yes, there's fire and
they've been damaged but the
stoves on the bottom, they
haven't been damaged. Okay. So,
the structure underneath all of
that is intact. So, it's
impossible for a building to
collapse near free fall speed
and increase. Without a
02:07
controlled demolition. You're
running into the path of most
resistance. I something else is
going on. I don't believe that
it was just the planes or the
fires I think that and they
examine the dust and they found
what they call thermitic
material which is like a
explosive incendiary which was
in the dust samples and that's
documented. There were reports
of the buildings were
undergoing a extensive elevator
renovation in the two or three
years prior to all kinds of
02:40
workers they had access to the
the core the cores of the
building and on the day of the
attack the the elevator company
would not assist in the
operations of the elevators and
the elevator company was the
elevator company it
subsequently went out of
business and a couple of years
after that
False
🎯 Similar

Fact Check: Transcript 00:00 911 was a false flag. For the first 10 years, I did not think anything other than the official narrative then after being shown a video, a close up video of building number seven coming down and that got me going because it's obvious to me that building seven was was a controlled demolition because the building collapses from the bottom down. The trade centers were unique in that they were designed to withstand the 00:33 impact of a a a jet. From what I understand the the outer skeleton of the building. The outer columns was like a a fish net and you had these inner core columns which was substantial thick steel beams to withstand four or five times what the loads were. Got it. The engineers always over design a building. No steel frame building has ever collapsed before or since 9/ eleven. So that should say something right there. And it said that building seven it was 01:05 aggressive collapse that it was caused by fire but progressive collapse unlike the twin towers, the twin towers collapse from the top down. That's a progressive collapse. Sure. Floor by floor by floor. But if you look at the videos of building seven collapsing, it collapses uniformly, it's collapsing from the bottom, the building stays intact all the way to the bottom of the ground and you could see the sides caving in on it. For a building to collapse uniformly which the video show all the load bearing it would have to have failed 01:36 simultaneously. Now, fire doesn't act like that. I came across an analogy of the twin towers and if you could visualize cast iron stoves stacked. One on top of each other. The stoves up at the top. Yes, there's fire and they've been damaged but the stoves on the bottom, they haven't been damaged. Okay. So, the structure underneath all of that is intact. So, it's impossible for a building to collapse near free fall speed and increase. Without a 02:07 controlled demolition. You're running into the path of most resistance. I something else is going on. I don't believe that it was just the planes or the fires I think that and they examine the dust and they found what they call thermitic material which is like a explosive incendiary which was in the dust samples and that's documented. There were reports of the buildings were undergoing a extensive elevator renovation in the two or three years prior to all kinds of 02:40 workers they had access to the the core the cores of the building and on the day of the attack the the elevator company would not assist in the operations of the elevators and the elevator company was the elevator company it subsequently went out of business and a couple of years after that

Detailed fact-check analysis of: Transcript 00:00 911 was a false flag. For the first 10 years, I did not think anything other than the official narrative then after being shown a video, a close up video of building number seven coming down and that got me going because it's obvious to me that building seven was was a controlled demolition because the building collapses from the bottom down. The trade centers were unique in that they were designed to withstand the 00:33 impact of a a a jet. From what I understand the the outer skeleton of the building. The outer columns was like a a fish net and you had these inner core columns which was substantial thick steel beams to withstand four or five times what the loads were. Got it. The engineers always over design a building. No steel frame building has ever collapsed before or since 9/ eleven. So that should say something right there. And it said that building seven it was 01:05 aggressive collapse that it was caused by fire but progressive collapse unlike the twin towers, the twin towers collapse from the top down. That's a progressive collapse. Sure. Floor by floor by floor. But if you look at the videos of building seven collapsing, it collapses uniformly, it's collapsing from the bottom, the building stays intact all the way to the bottom of the ground and you could see the sides caving in on it. For a building to collapse uniformly which the video show all the load bearing it would have to have failed 01:36 simultaneously. Now, fire doesn't act like that. I came across an analogy of the twin towers and if you could visualize cast iron stoves stacked. One on top of each other. The stoves up at the top. Yes, there's fire and they've been damaged but the stoves on the bottom, they haven't been damaged. Okay. So, the structure underneath all of that is intact. So, it's impossible for a building to collapse near free fall speed and increase. Without a 02:07 controlled demolition. You're running into the path of most resistance. I something else is going on. I don't believe that it was just the planes or the fires I think that and they examine the dust and they found what they call thermitic material which is like a explosive incendiary which was in the dust samples and that's documented. There were reports of the buildings were undergoing a extensive elevator renovation in the two or three years prior to all kinds of 02:40 workers they had access to the the core the cores of the building and on the day of the attack the the elevator company would not assist in the operations of the elevators and the elevator company was the elevator company it subsequently went out of business and a couple of years after that

Jul 28, 2025
Read more →
Fact Check: Myanmar has seven states, with Kayah being the smallest.
True
🎯 Similar

Fact Check: Myanmar has seven states, with Kayah being the smallest.

Detailed fact-check analysis of: Myanmar has seven states, with Kayah being the smallest.

Jul 3, 2025
Read more →
Fact Check: Trump administration denied disaster mitigation funding for seven states this spring.
Needs Research

Fact Check: Trump administration denied disaster mitigation funding for seven states this spring.

Detailed fact-check analysis of: Trump administration denied disaster mitigation funding for seven states this spring.

Jun 29, 2025
Read more →
Fact Check: Trump administration denied disaster mitigation funding to seven states this spring.
Needs Research

Fact Check: Trump administration denied disaster mitigation funding to seven states this spring.

Detailed fact-check analysis of: Trump administration denied disaster mitigation funding to seven states this spring.

Jun 28, 2025
Read more →
Fact Check: We have 50 years of
data that tells us what
corporations do with tax cuts.
This has been one of the most
studied things by universities
around the world for the last
50 years. And in the last 50
years across 18 of the
wealthiest nations in the world
not one has corporate tax cuts
equated to higher job growth.
00:35
Not once. Or we can just look
at the Trump tax cuts passed in
twenty 17. Donald Trump created
40, 000 less jobs a month than
Barack Obama did. And oh by the
way that's leaving out COVID.
That's leaving out all the job
losses from the pandemic. There
is one thing that happens when
you give corporations big tax
breaks. This right here. 50
years of data. You see that red
line on top? That's the rich
getting richer. You see those
two lines on the bottom? That's
the bottom 905percent? No In
01:06
twenty 18 corporations spent
over a trillion dollars on
stock buybacks and created less
jobs than they did in twenty
fourteen, 15, 16, and
seventeen. You see the rich can
afford to pump all of this
misinformation into your brain.
And that's why you believe it.
There's not a single case in
history of tax cuts for the
rich helping an economy in any
way shape or form.
Partially True

Fact Check: We have 50 years of data that tells us what corporations do with tax cuts. This has been one of the most studied things by universities around the world for the last 50 years. And in the last 50 years across 18 of the wealthiest nations in the world not one has corporate tax cuts equated to higher job growth. 00:35 Not once. Or we can just look at the Trump tax cuts passed in twenty 17. Donald Trump created 40, 000 less jobs a month than Barack Obama did. And oh by the way that's leaving out COVID. That's leaving out all the job losses from the pandemic. There is one thing that happens when you give corporations big tax breaks. This right here. 50 years of data. You see that red line on top? That's the rich getting richer. You see those two lines on the bottom? That's the bottom 905percent? No In 01:06 twenty 18 corporations spent over a trillion dollars on stock buybacks and created less jobs than they did in twenty fourteen, 15, 16, and seventeen. You see the rich can afford to pump all of this misinformation into your brain. And that's why you believe it. There's not a single case in history of tax cuts for the rich helping an economy in any way shape or form.

Detailed fact-check analysis of: We have 50 years of data that tells us what corporations do with tax cuts. This has been one of the most studied things by universities around the world for the last 50 years. And in the last 50 years across 18 of the wealthiest nations in the world not one has corporate tax cuts equated to higher job growth. 00:35 Not once. Or we can just look at the Trump tax cuts passed in twenty 17. Donald Trump created 40, 000 less jobs a month than Barack Obama did. And oh by the way that's leaving out COVID. That's leaving out all the job losses from the pandemic. There is one thing that happens when you give corporations big tax breaks. This right here. 50 years of data. You see that red line on top? That's the rich getting richer. You see those two lines on the bottom? That's the bottom 905percent? No In 01:06 twenty 18 corporations spent over a trillion dollars on stock buybacks and created less jobs than they did in twenty fourteen, 15, 16, and seventeen. You see the rich can afford to pump all of this misinformation into your brain. And that's why you believe it. There's not a single case in history of tax cuts for the rich helping an economy in any way shape or form.

Jul 30, 2025
Read more →