By JUAN A. LOZANO (Associated Press)
HOUSTON (AP) — A federal judge on Friday dismissed a challenge from Republican-led states, allowing the Biden administration to continue a program that permits a limited number of migrants from four countries to enter the U.S. on humanitarian grounds.
U.S. District Judge Drew B. Tipton stated that Texas and 20 other states failed to demonstrate financial harm as a result of the humanitarian parole program, which allows up to 30,000 asylum-seekers from Cuba, Haiti, Nicaragua, and Venezuela combined to enter the U.S. each month. This was a requirement for the states to have legal standing to bring the lawsuit.
Tipton clarified that the court's decision did not address the legality of the program.
Ending the program would undermine a broader policy aimed at encouraging migrants to use the Biden administration's preferred entry routes into the U.S. or face severe consequences.
The states, led by Texas, claimed that the program compelled them to spend millions on health care, education, and public safety for the migrants. An attorney with the Texas attorney general’s office involved in the legal challenge stated that the program “created a shadow immigration system.”
Supporters of the federal government argued that migrants admitted through the policy assisted in addressing a labor shortage in U.S. farms.
The Texas Attorney General’s Office, the U.S. Justice Department, and the U.S. Department of Homeland Security, which defended the program, did not immediately respond to requests for comment.
An appeal from Texas and other states appeared probable.
Since its launch in fall 2022, over 357,000 people from Cuba, Haiti, Nicaragua, and Venezuela have been granted parole and permitted to enter the country up to January. Haitians have been the largest group using the program, with 138,000 arrivals, followed by 86,000 Venezuelans, 74,000 Cubans, and 58,000 Nicaraguans.
Migrants must submit applications online, arrive at an airport, and have a financial sponsor in the U.S. If approved, they can remain for two years and obtain a work permit.
President Joe Biden has extensively utilized parole authority, in effect since 1952, allowing presidents to admit people for “urgent humanitarian reasons or significant public benefit.”
Esther Sung, an attorney for Justice Action Center, which represented seven people sponsoring migrants as part of the program, expressed her anticipation of informing her clients about the court’s decision.
“It’s a popular program. People want to welcome others to this country,” she said.
During an August trial in Victoria, Texas, Tipton declined to issue any temporary order to halt the parole program nationwide. Tipton, appointed by former President Donald Trump, had ruled against the Biden administration in 2022 on an order determining deportation priorities.
Some states mentioned that the initiative has been advantageous. For instance, a Nicaraguan migrant admitted into the country through the process filled a position at a struggling farm in Washington state.
Tipton wondered how Texas could say they lost money if data showed that the parole program actually reduced the number of migrants coming into the U.S.
“The Court has before it a case in which Plaintiffs claim that they have been injured by a program that has actually lowered their out-of-pocket costs,” Tipton said in Friday’s ruling.
When the policy began, the Biden administration had been getting ready to end a pandemic-era policy at the border called Title 42 that prevented migrants from seeking asylum at ports of entry and immediately expelled many who entered illegally.
Supporters of the policy also faced questioning from Tipton, who wondered if being in poverty was sufficient for migrants to qualify. Elissa Fudim, a lawyer with the U.S. Department of Justice, replied: “I think probably not.”
Government attorneys and immigrant rights groups said that in many cases, Cubans, Haitians, Nicaraguans and Venezuelans are also fleeing oppressive regimes, increasing violence and deteriorating political conditions that have put their lives in danger.
The lawsuit did not challenge the use of humanitarian parole for tens of thousands of Ukrainians who came after Russia’s invasion. It is among several legal challenges the Biden administration has faced over its immigration policies.
The program’s advocates said each case is individually reviewed and some people who had made it to the final approval step after arriving in the U.S. have been rejected, though they did not provide the number of rejections that have occurred.
Friday’s decision “is a clear win and affirmation of humanitarian immigration parole being an indispensable, necessary and model program of the type of smart solutions we should be focusing on to relieve pressure on the border and modernize our failed immigration system,” said Todd Schulte, president of immigration advocacy organization FWD.us.
___
