By JUAN A. LOZANO (Associated Press)
The Biden administration can continue a program that permits a limited number of migrants from four countries to come to the U.S. for humanitarian reasons, as a federal judge on Friday rejected a challenge from Republican-led states.
U.S. District Judge Drew B. Tipton stated that Texas and 20 other states failed to prove they had suffered financial harm due to the humanitarian parole program, which enables up to 30,000 asylum-seekers from Cuba, Haiti, Nicaragua, and Venezuela to enter the U.S. each month. The legal standing to bring the lawsuit required the states to demonstrate this financial harm.
Tipton wrote that the Court's conclusion did not address the legality of the program.
Getting rid of the program would undermine a broader policy aimed at encouraging migrants to use the preferred entryways into the U.S. established by the Biden administration, or else face strict consequences.
Texas and other states argued that the program is compelling them to spend millions on healthcare, education, and public safety for the migrants. An attorney with the Texas attorney general’s office involved in the legal challenge claimed that the program has essentially created a parallel immigration system.
Advocates for the federal government argued that migrants admitted through the policy have helped address a shortage of farm labor in the U.S.
The Texas Attorney General’s Office, the U.S. Justice Department, and the U.S. Department of Homeland Security, all of which defended the program, did not immediately respond to requests for comment.
It seemed likely that Texas and the other states would file an appeal.
Since the program began in fall 2022, over 357,000 people from Cuba, Haiti, Nicaragua, and Venezuela have been granted parole and allowed to enter the country up to January. Haitians have been the largest group to utilize the program, with 138,000 people from that country arriving, followed by 86,000 Venezuelans, 74,000 Cubans, and 58,000 Nicaraguans.
Migrants need to apply online, arrive at an airport, and have a financial sponsor in the U.S. If approved, they can stay for two years and obtain a work permit.
President Joe Biden has extensively used his parole authority, which has been in place since 1952 and permits presidents to admit people for urgent humanitarian reasons or significant public benefit.
Esther Sung, an attorney for Justice Action Center, which represented seven individuals sponsoring migrants as part of the program, stated that she was eager to inform her clients of the court’s decision.
She mentioned, “It’s a popular program. People want to welcome others to this country.”
During a trial in August in Victoria, Texas, Tipton refused to issue a temporary order to stop the parole program nationwide. Tipton, who was appointed by former President Donald Trump, had ruled against the Biden administration in 2022 on an order related to prioritizing deportations.
Some states have stated that the program has been advantageous for them. For instance, a Nicaraguan migrant admitted through the process took a job at a farm in Washington state that was struggling to find workers.
Tipton wondered why Texas was saying it lost money when data indicated that the parole program actually decreased the number of migrants entering the U.S.
“The Court is considering a case where the Plaintiffs argue that they have been hurt by a program that has actually decreased their out-of-pocket costs,” Tipton said in Friday’s ruling.
When the policy started, the Biden administration was getting ready to end a pandemic-era policy at the border called Title 42. This policy prevented migrants from seeking asylum at entry points and immediately expelled many who came in unlawfully.
Supporters of the policy also faced questioning from Tipton, who asked if being in poverty was enough for migrants to qualify. Elissa Fudim, a lawyer with the U.S. Department of Justice, replied: “Probably not.”
Attorneys for the federal government and immigrant rights groups said that in numerous cases, Cubans, Haitians, Nicaraguans, and Venezuelans were running away from oppressive regimes, escalating violence, and worsening political conditions that threatened their lives.
The lawsuit did not contest the use of humanitarian parole for tens of thousands of Ukrainians who arrived after Russia’s invasion. It is one of several legal challenges the Biden administration has faced regarding its immigration policies.
Supporters of the program said each case is reviewed individually, and some people who had reached the final approval stage after coming to the U.S. have been turned down, although 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.
___
