Justice maintains the program allowing 30,000 migrants from four countries, including Haiti, to enter the United States each month.
Management of the humanitarian speech program that allows a limited number of migrants from four countries to enter the United States is being handled by the Biden administration after a federal judge last Friday rejected a state challenge led by Republicans.
U.S. District Judge Drew B. Tipton said Texas and 20 other states have not shown they suffered financial harm from the humanitarian parole program that allows up to 30,000 asylum seekers of the combined countries of Cuba, Haiti, Nicaragua and Venezuela to enter the United States each month. This was something states had to prove to have standing to sue.
“In reaching this conclusion, the court is not ruling on the legality of the program,” Tipton wrote.
Eliminating the program would weaken a broader policy that aims to encourage migrants to use the Biden administration’s preferred routes to enter the United States or face harsh consequences.
The states, led by Texas, had argued that the program required them to spend millions of dollars on health care, education and public safety for migrants. A lawyer working with the Texas attorney general’s office on the legal challenge said the program “created a parallel immigration system.”
Federal advocates have countered that migrants admitted through the policy have helped alleviate a shortage of agricultural labor in the United States.
The Texas Attorney General’s Office, the U.S. Department of Justice and the U.S. Department of Homeland Security, which have defended the program, did not immediately respond to messages seeking comment.
An appeal from Texas and other states seemed likely.
Since the program launched in fall 2022, more than 357,000 people from Cuba, Haiti, Nicaragua and Venezuela have been granted parole and allowed to enter the country through January. Haitians were by far the largest group to use the program, with 138,000 people from that country, followed by 86,000 Venezuelans, 74,000 Cubans and 58,000 Nicaraguans.
Migrants must apply online, arrive at an airport and have a financial sponsor in the United States. If approved, they can stay for two years and obtain a work permit.
President Joe Biden has made unprecedented use of the power of speech, which has been in effect since 1952 and allows presidents to let in people for “urgent humanitarian reasons or significant public benefit.”
Esther Sung, an attorney for the Justice Action Center, which represented seven people who sponsored migrants through the program, said she looked forward to calling her clients to tell them of the court’s decision.
“It’s a popular program. People want to welcome other people into this country,” she said.
At an August trial in Victoria, Texas, Tipton refused to issue a temporary order that would have suspended the speaking program nationwide. Tipton is a nominee of former President Donald Trump who ruled against the Biden administration in 2022 on a determining order that should be prioritized for deportation.
Some states claimed the initiative benefited them. One Nicaraguan migrant admitted to the country through the process took a position on a farm in Washington state that had difficulty finding workers.
Tipton questioned how Texas could claim financial losses if data showed the parole program had actually reduced the number of migrants entering the United States.
“The court has before it a case in which plaintiffs claim they were harmed by a program that actually reduced their direct costs,” Tipton said in Friday’s ruling.
When the policy took effect, the Biden administration was preparing to end a pandemic-era policy at the border known as Title 42, which barred migrants from seeking asylum at border ports. entry and immediately expelled many of those who entered illegally.
Supporters of the policy were also criticized by Tipton, who questioned whether living in poverty was enough for migrants to qualify. Elissa Fudim, an attorney at the U.S. Department of Justice, responded, “I think probably not.”
Federal government lawyers and immigrant rights groups have said that in many cases Cubans, Haitians, Nicaraguans and Venezuelans are also fleeing oppressive regimes, increasing violence and deteriorating political conditions. and put their lives in danger.
The trial did not challenge the use of humanitarian speech for tens of thousands of Ukrainians who arrived after Russia’s invasion. It is one of several legal challenges the Biden administration has faced over its immigration policies.
Supporters of the program said each case is reviewed individually and that some people who had reached the final stage of approval after arriving in the United States were rejected, although they did not provide the number of rejections that occurred.
Friday’s decision “is a clear victory and an affirmation of the word of humanitarian immigration as a much-needed, necessary program and exemplary of the type of smart solutions we should be focusing on to relieve pressure at the border and modernize our immigration system.” “failing immigration,” said Todd Schulte, president of the immigration advocacy organization FWD.us.
