For many years, the most vulnerable people in Massachusetts had to prove to the state they not only earned very little income, but also owned essentially nothing of financial value in order to qualify for a cash aid program meant as a last resort.

The requirement for the Emergency Aid to the Elderly, Disabled, and Children program posed a major barrier, caseworkers and legal aid experts said, keeping assistance out of reach for reasons that in some cases seemed illogical.

Deborah Harris, an attorney at the Massachusetts Law Reform Institute, once represented a client who was homeless and living in a broken-down car. She said the state wanted him to submit paperwork showing that the value of the car did not render him ineligible for the program.

In another case described by the legal aid organization, the state said a refugee couple who came to Massachusetts to escape persecution in the North Caucasus region of Russia did not qualify because the home they still owned, in a country they fled in fear, counted as a financial asset.

That all changed in 2021. After years of advocacy from attorneys who contended the asset limit erected unnecessary obstacles, the Legislature eliminated it.

But now, Gov. Maura Healey wants to revisit the idea.

Healey’s fiscal year 2027 state budget bill would reintroduce an asset test for EAEDC, barring anyone whose accounts or property total more than $2,000 in value from accessing the cash assistance.

Administration officials say the change would align with the program’s intended purpose as temporary assistance for people with few resources. The $2,000 asset limit would also match requirements for the state’s Medicaid program, MassHealth, as well as those for a federally funded aid stream known as Supplemental Security Income.

Advocates, however, warn that the requirement could close the door to one source of financial support for Bay Staters with the greatest needs.

“We fear it’s going to harm the most vulnerable clients who have the most difficulty getting hold of these types of verifications and result in them losing benefits that they urgently, urgently need,” said Naomi Meyer, lead attorney at Greater Boston Legal Services.

Healey’s push to reinstitute an asset limit for the program is a policy rider attached to her vast annual state budget bill, a $63.4 billion spending plan that attempts to navigate sharply increasing health care pressures and the prospect of federal funding cuts.

When fiscal times get tight, governors regularly comb through the massive architecture of state government looking for savings, proposing a tweak here and a cut there to get the math to work. And those changes invariably provoke blowback from groups arguing that they’ll have dire consequences.

In a statement responding to questions about the governor’s safety-net recommendations, Healey spokesperson Karissa Hand said the budget “is a smart, fiscally responsible proposal that protects taxpayer dollars in the face of significant cuts from President Trump, while preserving services that our most vulnerable residents depend on.”

Social safety-net advocates say reimposing an asset test for the emergency aid program would chip away at those services.