WASHINGTON — The Trump administration issued a fresh policy Thursday that could lead to the arrest of tens of thousands of refugees lawfully present in the United States, reversing decades of established immigration practice. A Department of Homeland Security (DHS) memo, filed ahead of a federal court hearing in Minnesota, stipulates that refugees applying for permanent residency, or green cards, must return to federal custody one year after their initial admission to the U.S. For a review of their applications.
The memo states that DHS “may maintain custody for the duration of the inspection and examination process.” The policy immediately drew condemnation from refugee advocacy groups, who warned it would likely face legal challenges and create widespread fear among the nearly 200,000 refugees admitted to the U.S. During the Biden administration.
The move represents the latest in a series of restrictive immigration measures enacted by the Trump administration, which has significantly curtailed refugee admissions and upended longstanding policies. According to an Associated Press report from late last year, the administration had already initiated a review of all refugees admitted during the Biden years, suspending green card approvals for those arrivals. The administration has justified these changes by citing national security and economic concerns, assertions disputed by experts who point out that refugees undergo extensive vetting before being allowed into the country.
The new policy emerged just hours before U.S. District Judge John Tunheim heard arguments in Minnesota regarding a request to extend a temporary order protecting refugees in the state from arrest, and deportation. While the existing order applies only within Minnesota, the national implications of the new DHS policy were central to the court discussion. The number of individuals potentially affected by the new order remains unclear.
During Thursday’s hearing, Justice Department attorney Brantley Mayers asserted the government’s right to detain refugees one year after their entry, but indicated that such detentions would not be automatic. “That’s a discretion call for DHS to make,” Mayers stated, a comment met with skepticism from attorneys representing the Minnesota refugees.
Judge Tunheim did not issue a ruling Thursday, stating he would deliver a written decision on whether to extend the temporary order. Following the hearing, Senator Tina Smith (D-MN) criticized the government’s arguments as lacking a legal or factual basis, vowing to continue the legal fight. Representative Ilhan Omar (D-MN) also joined Smith in expressing opposition to the policy.
HIAS, an international Jewish nonprofit organization assisting refugees and asylum seekers, denounced the policy as “a transparent effort to detain and potentially deport thousands of people who are legally present in this country, people the U.S. Government itself welcomed.” Beth Oppenheim, HIAS’s CEO, stated, “They were promised safety and the chance to rebuild their lives. Instead, DHS is now threatening them with arrest and indefinite detention.”
Judge Tunheim had previously blocked the government from targeting Minnesota refugees last month, finding that the plaintiffs were likely to succeed in their claim that the policy and any resulting arrests would be unlawful. His temporary restraining order, issued January 28, is set to expire February 25 unless a preliminary injunction is granted. The judge previously rejected the government’s argument that it had the legal authority to detain refugees who had not obtained green cards within one year of arrival, noting the logistical impossibility of such a requirement given the timeline for green card applications.
The lawsuit challenging the policy stems from the launch of “Operation PARRIS” (Post-Admission Refugee Reverification and Integrity Strengthening) by the federal government in January. The operation, initially focused on 5,600 Minnesota refugees who had not yet received green cards, was presented as an initiative to address alleged fraud in public programs. The operation was part of a broader immigration enforcement surge in Minnesota, described by Homeland Security as the largest in U.S. History. This surge sparked protests after federal agents fatally shot two U.S. Citizens, and was recently scaled back, though a limited federal presence remains.
The lawsuit alleges that ICE officers conducted door-to-door arrests of refugees under Operation PARRIS, detaining them in Texas without access to legal counsel. Some detainees were later released in Texas and left to arrange their own return to Minnesota. Judge Tunheim emphasized in his order that refugees undergo extensive vetting before being resettled in the U.S., and that those arrested under Operation PARRIS had not been deemed a danger to the community, a flight risk, or charged with any crimes that would justify deportation. He reiterated that refugees admitted to the U.S. Have a legal right to remain, to work, and to live peacefully.
