With the death toll from COVID-19 surpassing 150,000 in the United States, a Manhattan federal judge on Wednesday blocked the Trump administration from enforcing its controversial "public charge" rule until the worst of the pandemic is over.

The ruling, from U.S. District Judge George B. Daniels of the Southern District of New York, granted New York Attorney General Letitia James' request to temporarily block nationwide enforcement the rule, which would make it easier for the federal government to deny legal status to immigrants who might apply for public assistance. Connecticut Attorney General General William Tong led along with James in making the request.

Related: New 'public charge' rule will affect health insurance purchasers

The U.S. Supreme Court on Jan. 27 lifted Daniel's previous injunction preventing the rule from going into effect, while a Manhattan-based federal appeals court mulled an appeal in the case. Under the high court's stay, the public charge rule was allowed to take effect Feb. 24.

In a 31-page ruling, Daniels said "much has significantly changed" since the Supreme Court weighed in earlier this year, and actions taken by the federal government were not enough to ensure that immigrants, wary of federal immigration actions, would not be dissuaded from seeking medical care.

"The world is in the throes of a devastating pandemic," with "staggering" infection and death numbers continuing to climb "on a daily basis," Daniels wrote

"Thousands continue to die indiscriminately," the judge said. "Attempting to effectively combat this plague has immediately come in conflict with the government's new 'public charge' policy, a policy which is intended to discourage immigrants from utilizing government benefits and penalizes them for receipt of financial and medical assistance."

In his decision, Daniels said his temporary nationwide injunction was not in conflict with the Supreme Court's earlier ruling, and asserted that it was within his "equitable discretion" to grant the relief based on dramatic public health developments that had made an such a ruling "nothing short of critical."

"What were previously theoretical harms have proven to be true," Daniels said. "We no longer need to imagine the worst-case scenario; we are experiencing its dramatic effects in very real time."

It was not clear from Daniels' ruling how long the temporary injunction would remain in effect.

Read more: 

• Leave health insurers out of immigrant eligibility, AHIP says
• Fewer taxpayers claim ACA subsidy, but those who do claimed more
• Caregivers (and patients) on the losing end of Trump immigration policy