A combined lawsuit led by Texas and America First Legal challenges a new immigration policy under President Joe Biden's administration.
In a notable move, sixteen Republican states are pushing back against a new policy that allows certain undocumented immigrants married to U.S. citizens to apply for permanent residency without having to leave the country, Fox News reported.
The Department of Homeland Security announced the ‘parole in place’ rule in June 2024. This rule proposes a smoother pathway for illegal immigrants, who are spouses of U.S. citizens, to gain permanent residency.
A significant concern among the plaintiff states is that the parole rule stretches the legal intent of "parole," traditionally meant for urgent humanitarian reasons or significant public benefit.
As articulated by the Department of Homeland Security, the initiative covers noncitizen spouses residing in the U.S. for a decade as of June 2024, provided they neither pose a threat to public safety nor national security. This new ruling could potentially impact about 500,000 illegal immigrants.
According to Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton, this initiative is an extension of what he views as the current administration’s negligent border management strategies. Paxton, alongside former President Donald Trump at a trial in New York on April 30, 2024, has been vocal about his stance on immigration policies. The America First Legal has echoed Paxton’s concerns, labeling the parole expansion as excessively broad and undermining the integrity of U.S. borders.
Critics argue that this program might invite over 1.3 million unauthorized immigrants to sidestep established immigration procedures, potentially increasing the risk of marriage fraud.
However, the Department of Homeland Security maintains that the initiative is legally valid and emphasizes prioritizing family unity and fair immigration practices. They argue this adjustment aligns closely with core American principles of keeping families together.
The assertion of legality and moral duty was echoed by White House Spokesperson Angelo Fernández Hernández. Hernández intensely criticized the lawsuit for opposing foundational U.S. values by propagating fear among well-integrated families.
Stephen Miller, reflecting a stringent stance on this issue, commented on the perceived implications of the new rule:
This executive amnesty grants more than a million illegals not just legal stature but also work permits and pathways to eventual citizenship. Such measures are flagrantly unlawful, propelling the destructive border crisis even further. Our actions to halt this will be resolute.
In the backdrop, other Biden administration policies concerning immigration have also stirred controversy, particularly the halting of the CHNV program last month, after notable fraud issues were identified in its operation.
Interestingly, this legal push comes alongside a report of decreased illegal encounters at U.S. borders following a slew of new executive measures taken by the Biden administration in early 2024. Moreover, last month’s cessation of the CHNV program follows its identification as a fraud conduit, adding layers to the ongoing national discourse on the efficacy and integrity of U.S. immigration policies.
To sum up, the ongoing lawsuit encapsulates deep-seated disagreements over immigration strategy and the execution of executive power. While the Biden administration upholds its strategies as just and legally sound, opposition from several states suggests a fraught path ahead for any unilateral adjustments to immigration regulations. Consequently, both sides stand firm, exemplifying the increasing polarization over national immigration issues.
