
We're Suing the Trump Administration Over Its Refugee Double Standard
In May, the Trump administration admitted dozens of white Afrikaners into the United States as refugees. In just over three months, the administration created a new program, completed processing, and welcomed this group to the United States. The speed and ease of the admission of these Afrikaners—arriving via chartered plane, no less—was unprecedented. But, more remarkably, it happened at a time when the administration is fighting tooth and nail to close the door to all other populations seeking humanitarian protection, including by stripping protections for 500,000 Cubans, Haitians, Nicaraguans, and Venezuelans already in the United States, a move endorsed by the Supreme Court via its shadow docket on May 30.
This administration launched its attack on humanitarian protection in its very first hours. On January 20, President Donald Trump signed an executive order suspending the refugee admissions program and barring the entry of refugees from all over the world, including more than 12,000 people who were booked for travel shortly after Inauguration Day. Approximately 600,000 refugees had their applications frozen in place, and 130,000 of them had already been approved to resettle. As a result, families were left in dangerous limbo, in refugee camps, in hiding, separated from their loved ones.
These actions blatantly violate the Refugee Act of 1980, passed with bipartisan support in Congress to create a consistent, predictable system for assisting displaced people based on humanitarian need, not political or ideological concerns. That system can be painfully slow, but it is a lifeline for those fleeing war and persecution. On behalf of eight individual refugees, several refugee resettlement organizations, and an American citizen preparing to sponsor and welcome refugees into her community, my colleagues and I at the International Refugee Assistance Project filed Pacito v. Trump, a class-action suit, in federal court. We're seeking to restore the system Congress built and to give our clients and thousands of others a fair chance to seek safety in the United States.
Over the past few months, we have secured a series of court victories; decisions from federal judges in the Western District of Washington and the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals have required the administration to process and provide resettlement support to refugees who were approved and had travel scheduled before the suspension. But as a result of the administration's foot-dragging, very few have been able to enter, and those who have were successful only after enormous effort.
DULLES, VIRGINIA - MAY 12: Newly arrived white South Africans, also called Afrikaners, are welcomed by U.S. Deputy Secretary of State Christopher Landau in a hangar at Atlantic Aviation Dulles near Washington Dulles International Airport...
DULLES, VIRGINIA - MAY 12: Newly arrived white South Africans, also called Afrikaners, are welcomed by U.S. Deputy Secretary of State Christopher Landau in a hangar at Atlantic Aviation Dulles near Washington Dulles International Airport on May 12, 2025 in Dulles, Virginia. MoreTake our client Josephine, who fled civil war in Congo. Her mother, a refugee living in Idaho, had petitioned to reunite with Josephine eight years ago. Josephine was finally approved to travel in late January 2025. She, too, was living in South Africa while waiting for approval. "Imagine being kept apart from your family for years," she told me. "Then one day a door opens, only to shut again in your face. I wasn't sure if I was ever going to see my mom again." Josephine was joyfully reunited with her mother in March, but unlike her white Afrikaner neighbors, she needed a federal court order to resettle here.
Our lead plaintiff, Pacito, also a refugee fleeing civil war in Congo, has not been so lucky. After years of processing, he, along with his wife and toddler daughter, was scheduled for travel on January 22. They sold their belongings and gave up their housing, ready for a new life in Tennessee, only to be told on January 21 that they'd been barred from travel. It's impossible not to see the disparity between the smooth processing of white Afrikaners and the lengthy waits and abrupt halts to which the United States has subjected all other refugees.
President Trump has said race was not the motivation for this disparate treatment; he claims he'd admit this group even if they were Black. And yet, his administration's actions have blocked tens of thousands of approved refugees from all over the world, including Black Africans, persecuted Yazidi minorities in Iraq, and Afghan allies in hiding from the Taliban. Congress' refugee program has saved millions of lives over decades. The administration's swift and unlawful attempt to destroy it draws a stark contrast with the equally swift creation of a shadow replacement of it. The arrival of the Afrikaners lays bare the truth: this administration wants to end refugee resettlement for all but a select group.
The United States has a mixed record of living up to its promise as a place of refuge. Trump is not the first president to turn away displaced people and to target nonwhite immigrants. But this administration's weaponization of the immigration system to benefit groups it favors and punish those it does not is novel in its scope and rashness. The chaos and cruelty unleashed over the last four months should remind courts, legislatures, and everyday people that the ideals of American refuge and fairness are worth fighting for.
Melissa Keaney is a Senior Supervising Attorney, U.S. Litigation, at the International Refugee Assistance Project. She represents individual and organizational plaintiffs in federal litigation challenging President Trump's refugee ban.
The views expressed in this article are the writer's own.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


New York Times
5 minutes ago
- New York Times
Trump travel ban sparks World Cup questions – and more soccer issues
On Wednesday night, U.S. President Donald Trump signed a travel ban against twelve countries in a move he described as 'protecting the national security and national interest of the United States and its people'. The ban goes into effect on Monday, June 9, and it entails a ban against travel into the United States by citizens of Afghanistan, Burma, Chad, Republic of the Congo, Equatorial Guinea, Eritrea, Haiti, Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, and Yemen. This ban relates to the entry of both immigrants and non-immigrants. Advertisement President Trump also imposed partial restrictions and limits on the entry of nationals from Burundi, Cuba, Laos, Sierra Leone, Togo, Turkmenistan, and Venezuela. From a soccer perspective, the news is particularly significant because FIFA are hosting two tournaments in the United States over the next thirteen months – first the FIFA Club World Cup, which will begin on June 14 and then the World Cup in 2026, which will be shared with Canada and Mexico. Iran has already qualified for the tournament, while several countries facing travel bans are in contention to qualify. Additionally, Concacaf is hosting the Gold Cup this summer in the United States, with Haiti one of the competing teams. There are also players from Sudan, Venezuela and Iran due to compete in the Club World Cup. The Athletic breaks down the instant questions that are raised by President Trump's travel ban. What will the impact be for national teams visiting the United States for the World Cup in 2026? The good news for FIFA is that the executive order contains an exemption for 'any athlete or member of an athletic team, including coaches, persons performing a necessary support role, and immediate relatives, traveling for the World Cup, Olympics, or other major sporting event as determined by the Secretary of State.' This would appear to suggest, therefore, that Iran, whose qualification has already been assured for the World Cup in 2026, will be able to send a team and support staff to compete at the tournament. However, players will not be able to bring friends and family who are Iranian nationals beyond 'immediate relatives.' Trump's executive order describes Iran as a' state sponsor of terrorism', adding that the state 'regularly fails to cooperate with the United States Government in identifying security risks'. Among the nations with full travel bans, Haiti is currently the best-placed team to qualify for the 2026 World Cup, having won its first two games in the second round of Concacaf's qualification process to sit second in its five-team group. The top two from each of the six groups of five progress into the third round – where 12 teams remain – and three nations are guaranteed access to the World Cup with an additional two Concacaf teams to enter into the inter-continental playoffs. Advertisement In Africa, Libya has an outside chance of making the World Cup, currently placed third in a group of six after six matches. The four-best runners-up from the ten African groups will enter into a play-off tournament to stand a chance of qualifying for the World Cup. Both Haiti and Libya would be in the same position as Iran, should they qualify, whereby they are permitted to attend as teams – but there does not appear to be an exception for nationals of those teams who might wish to travel to the tournament to support their country during the competition. Among the nations with partial travel bans, Venezuela is currently placed 7th in the South America qualification table, which would enter them into an inter-continental play-off. Cuba lies third in its five-team Concacaf group, with a game in hand on second-placed Bermuda after two games played. Sierra Leone is also third in group play in the CAF qualification phase to remain in with a chance of qualification. Will any teams be impacted at the Concacaf Gold Cup in the summer of 2025? The Gold Cup begins on June 14 and ends on July 6 this summer, with all matches except one due to be played in the United States. The only competing nation impacted by the travel ban is Haiti, an opponent of the USMNT in the group stage of the competition. Saudi Arabia and Trinidad and Tobago make up the four-team group. The exemption listed by President Trump's executive order refers to athletes and teams being allowed to 'travel for the World Cup, Olympics, or other major sporting event as determined by the Secretary of State.' The Gold Cup is not specified and therefore it must be determined by the Secretary of State Marco Rubio. The Athletic has contacted both Concacaf and the Department of State to seek clarity on the matter and to ask whether Haiti will be granted entry. President Trump's executive order cited overstay percentages on visas by Haitian citizens within the U.S. and claimed 'hundreds of thousands of illegal Haitian aliens flooded into the United States during the Biden Administration.' The order claimed that this 'harms American communities by creating acute risks of increased overstay rates, establishment of criminal networks, and other national security threats.' Advertisement What will the impact be for supporters who wish to watch these teams compete in the United States during the next year? While exemptions appear to have been made for athletes, teams and immediate relatives, further-reaching exemptions for supporters do not appear to be present in the executive order. Exemptions are made for nationals of designated countries who are traveling on government business, or NATO business, or those who are lawful permanent residents of the United States, as well as those who are dual citizens and traveling with a passport from the non-designated country. There will also be entry granted to Iranians on immigrant visas owing to ethnic or religious persecution in their home country. These exemptions aside, however, it appears that entry will be limited for nationals from those countries who face partial and full travel bans. Both Venezuela and Cuba for example have had temporary tourist visa access forbidden. It also appears that Haitians will be forbidden from entering the U.S. to support their team at the Gold Cup this summer or if they qualify for the World Cup next summer. What does this mean for the FIFA Club World Cup this summer? The 32 teams who will be competing in FIFA's revamped club competition this summer are not from any of the countries impacted by the travel ban. There are, however, some players who are potentially at risk of being affected. The exemption in the executive order, as explained above, states that allowances will be made for athletes and immediate relatives coming for the World Cup or 'other major sporting events', as determined by the Secretary of State. The Club World Cup is not specified in the document. The Athletic has reached out to both the Department of State and FIFA to ask whether anything has been formally communicated to designate the Club World Cup as a 'major event.' A quick browse of the squads offers up potential challenges. At the Abu Dhabi club Al-Ain, for example, is the Sudanese player Mohamed Awadalla and his country has seen all visas blocked – meaning he may require an exemption – while the Inter Milan Iranian forward Mehdi Taremi may also be in the same position. The Venezuelan trio of Matias Lacava, Salomon Rondon and Jefferson Savarino – at Ulsan, Pachuca and Botafogo respectively – may not require exemptions because the partial travel ban inflicted upon Venezuelan nationals does not extend to those seeking to come to the U.S. on the P-1 visa. This is used when an athlete seeks to come to the U.S. are part of a team at an internationally recognized level of performance. On Wednesday, as part of our report tracking FIFA's difficulties in filling stadiums for the Club World Cup, FIFA told The Athletic that supporters from more than 130 different countries had acquired tickets for this summer's tournament. We have now approached FIFA to ask whether any nationals from countries impacted by the travel ban have acquired tickets for the tournament, as well as if any exemptions will be made to enable them to enter the country, or if these supporters can otherwise expect refunds. Advertisement What have FIFA and the White House said previously about teams and fans being able to attend the World Cup? Back in 2017, before the U.S. secured the World Cup a year later, the FIFA President Gianni Infantino told reporters: 'It's obvious when it comes to FIFA competitions, any team, including the supporters and officials of that team, who qualify for a World Cup need to have access to the country, otherwise there is no World Cup.' Additionally, as part of the U.S.'s joint bid with Canada and Mexico to host the World Cup – dated May 2, 2018 – President Trump wrote to Infantino and said he was confident that 'all eligible athletes, officials and fans from all countries around the world would be able to enter the United States without discrimination.' The Athletic has approached the White House for comment. Earlier this year, Infantino said: 'America will welcome the world. Everyone who wants to come here to enjoy, to have fun and to celebrate the game, will be able to do that.' Infantino also claimed that the two FIFA tournaments over the next year would generate almost $50 billion in economic output for the U.S. The question, however, is whether repeated news cycles about a more stringent approach to entering the U.S. may dissuade global travelers from attending both the tournament this summer and next year's World Cup, leaving FIFA more reliant on a domestic audience and host cities at risk of falling short of their economic impact, as tourists are likelier to spend more money. Speaking about the World Cup, Vice President J.D. Vance last month said during a meeting of the White House's World Cup task force: 'Of course everyone is welcome to come and see this wonderful event. We want them to come, we want them to celebrate, we want them to watch the games. 'But when the time is up we want them to go home, otherwise they will have to talk to Secretary Noem,' he said, referring to Kristi Noem, the Secretary of Homeland Security.

6 minutes ago
Election of Mexico's first Indigenous Supreme Court justice in 170 years raises hope and skepticism
MEXICO CITY -- In his campaign for Mexico's Supreme Court, Hugo Aguilar sent a simple message: He would be the one to finally give Indigenous Mexicans a voice at one of the highest levels of government. 'It's our turn as Indigenous people ... to make decisions in this country,' he said in the lead up to Sunday's first judicial elections in Mexican history. Now, the 52-year-old Aguilar, a lawyer from the Mixtec people in Mexico's southern Oaxaca state, will be the first Indigenous Supreme Court justice in nearly 170 years in the Latin American nation, according to Mexican President Claudia Sheinbaum. He could lead the high court. The last Indigenous justice to do so was Mexican hero and former President Benito Juárez, who ran the court from 1857 to 1858. For some, Aguilar has become a symbol of hope for 23 million Indigenous people long on the forgotten fringes of Mexican society. But others fiercely criticize his past, and worry that instead of representing them, he will instead stand with the ruling party, Morena, that ushered him onto the court. Supporters cite Aguilar's long history of working on Indigenous rights, while critics say that more recently he's helped push the governing party's agenda, including former President Andrés Manuel López Obrador's massive infrastructure projects, at the expense of Indigenous communities. Aguilar's team said he would not comment until after official results were confirmed. 'He's not an Indigenous candidate,' said Francisco López Bárcenas, a distinguished Mixtec lawyer from the same region as Aguilar who once worked with him decades ago. He applauded the election of an Indigenous justice, but said 'He's an Indigenous man who became a candidate.' Aguilar was elected in Mexico's first judicial election, a process that's been criticized as weakening Mexico's system of checks and balances. López Obrador and his party overhauled the judicial system the populist leader was long at odds with. Instead of appointing judges through experience, voters elected judges to 2,600 federal, state and local positions. But the vote was marked by a very low voter turnout, about 13%. López Obrador and his successor and protege President Claudia Sheinbaum claimed the election would cut corruption in the courts. Judges, watchdogs and political opposition called it a blatant attempt to use the party's political popularity to stack courts in their favor, and gain control of all three branches of Mexico's government. While votes are still being counted in many races, the tally of results for nine Supreme Court justices came in first. The vast majority of the justices hold strong ties to the ruling party, handing Morena potential control over the high court. Aguilar's name was among those that appeared on pamphlets suggesting which candidates to vote for, which electoral authorities are investigating. Aguilar scooped up more than 6 million votes, more than any other candidate, including three who currently serve on the Supreme Court. The victory opened the possibility of Aguilar not just serving on the court, but leading it. Critics attributed his win to Mexico's highly popular president repeatedly saying she wanted an Indigenous judge on the Supreme Court in the lead up to the election. On Wednesday she said she was thrilled he was on the court. 'He is a very good lawyer,' she said. 'I have the privilege of knowing his work not just on Indigenous issues, but in general. He has wide knowledge and is a modest and simple man.' The Supreme Court has handed down decisions that, for example, establish the right of Indigenous people to be assisted by interpreters who speak their native language and defense attorneys in any legal process. But there remain significant outstanding issues like territorial disputes in cases of mega-projects. Aguilar began his career in Oaxaca's capital, working for SERmixe, an organization advocating for Indigenous rights as a law student in his mid-20s. Sofía Robles, a member of the organization remembers young Aguilar being passionate, choosing to be a lawyer to advocate for Indigenous communities often living in poverty and out of reach of the law. 'He had this conviction, and there were many things he wouldn't conform with,' 63-year-old Robles said. 'From the very beginning, he knew where he came from.' Despite coming from a humble working-class family, he would work for the organization for free after his law classes. He later worked there as a lawyer on agrarian issues for 13 years. After the Zapatista uprising in 1994, a guerrilla movement fighting for Indigenous rights in southern Mexico, Aguilar worked to carry out constitutional reforms recognizing the basic rights of Mexico's Indigenous people. Robles said she believes he will bring that fight she saw in him to the Supreme Court. 'He gives us hope,' she said. 'Aguilar is going to be an example for future generations.' But others like Romel González Díaz, a member of the Xpujil Indigenous Council in a Mayan community in southern Mexico, cast doubt on if Aguilar would truly act as a voice for their community. Aguilar's work came under fire when he joined the government's National Institute of Indigenous Peoples at the beginning of López Obrador's administration in 2018. It was then that he began to work on a mega-project known as the Maya Train fiercely criticized by environmentalists, Indigenous communities and even the United Nations. The train, which runs in a rough loop around the Yucatan peninsula, has deforested large swathes of jungle and irreversibly damaged an ancient cave system sacred to Indigenous populations there. Aguilar was tasked with investigating the potential impacts of the train, hearing the concerns of local Indigenous communities and informing them of the consequences. That was when González Díaz met Aguilar, who arrived with a handful of government officials, who sat down for just a few hours with his small community in Xpujil, and provided sparse details about the negative parts of the project. González Díaz's organization was among many to take legal action against the government in an attempt to block train construction for not properly studying the project's impacts. The environmental destruction left in the project's wake is something that continues to fuel his distrust for Aguilar. 'The concern with Hugo is: Who is he going to represent?' González Díaz said. 'Is he going to represent the (Morena) party or is he going to represent the Indigenous people?'


Fox News
6 minutes ago
- Fox News
Trump orders Attorney General to investigate Biden's autopen use amid cognitive decline concerns
Print Close By Greg Wehner Published June 05, 2025 President Donald Trump called on Attorney General Pam Bondi to lead an investigation into whether certain individuals working for former President Joe Biden conspired to deceive the public about his mental state while also exercising his presidential responsibilities by using an autopen. In a memo on Wednesday, Trump said the president of the U.S. has a tremendous amount of power and responsibility through the signature. Not only can the signature turn words into laws of the land, but it also appoints individuals to some of the highest positions in government, creates or eliminates national policies and allows prisoners to go free. "In recent months, it has become increasingly apparent that former President Biden's aides abused the power of Presidential signatures through the use of an autopen to conceal Biden's cognitive decline and assert Article II authority," Trump wrote. "This conspiracy marks one of the most dangerous and concerning scandals in American history. The American public was purposefully shielded from discovering who wielded the executive power, all while Biden's signature was deployed across thousands of documents to effect radical policy shifts." He continued, saying Biden had suffered from "serious cognitive decline" for years, and the Department of Justice (DOJ) recently concluded that Biden should not stand trial, despite clear evidence he broke the law, because of his mental state. EXCLUSIVE: COMER HAILS DOJ'S BIDEN PROBE AS HOUSE INVESTIGATION HEATS UP "Biden's cognitive issues and apparent mental decline during his presidency were even 'worse' in private, and those closest to him 'tried to hide it' from the public," Trump said. "To do so, Biden's advisors during his years in office severely restricted his news conferences and media appearances, and they scripted his conversations with lawmakers, government officials, and donors, all to cover up his inability to discharge his duties." Still, during the Biden presidency, the White House issued over 1,200 Presidential documents, appointed 235 judges to the federal bench and issued more pardons and commutations than any administration in U.S. history, Trump said. The president wrote about Biden's decision just two days before Christmas 2024, to commute the sentences of 37 of the 40 most dangerous criminals on federal death row, including mass murderers and child killers. TRUMP SAYS BIDEN DIDN'T FAVOR HIS ADMIN'S LAX BORDER SECURITY POLICY, SUGGESTS AUTOPEN PLAYED A ROLE "Although the authority to take these executive actions, along with many others, is constitutionally committed to the President, there are serious doubts as to the decision-making process and even the degree of Biden's awareness of these actions being taken in his name," Trump wrote. "The vast majority of Biden's executive actions were signed using a mechanical signature pen, often called an autopen, as opposed to Biden's own hand. This was especially true of actions taken during the second half of his Presidency, when his cognitive decline had apparently become even more clear to those working most closely with him. "Given clear indications that President Biden lacked the capacity to exercise his Presidential authority, if his advisors secretly used the mechanical signature pen to conceal this incapacity, while taking radical executive actions all in his name, that would constitute an unconstitutional wielding of the power of the Presidency, a circumstance that would have implications for the legality and validity of numerous executive actions undertaken in Biden's name," he added. TRUMP HAS NOT DIRECTED ADMIN TO DECLASSIFY BIDEN DOCS ON HEALTH 'COVER-UP' The memo goes on to call for an investigation that addresses if certain individuals, who are not named in the document, conspired to deceive the American public about the former president's mental state and "unconstitutionally" exercised the president's authority and responsibilities. Specifically, Trump called on the attorney general's investigation to look at any activity that purposefully shielded the public from information about Biden's mental and physical health; any agreements between his aides to falsely deem recorded videos of Biden's cognitive ability as fake; and any agreements between Biden's aides to require false, public statements that elevated the president's capabilities. The investigation will also look at which policy documents the autopen was used for, including clemency grants, executive orders, and presidential memoranda, as well as who directed Biden's signature to be affixed to those documents. CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP Trump said last week that he thinks Biden did not really agree with many of his administration's lax border security policies, instead suggesting that those surrounding the former president took advantage of his declining faculties and utilized the autopen to pass radical directives pertaining to the border. House Republicans, led by Oversight Committee Chairman James Comer, launched an investigation earlier last month aimed at determining whether Biden, who was in declining health during the final months of his presidency, was mentally fit to authorize the use of the autopen. Comer said last week he was "open" to dragging Biden before the House to answer questions about the matter if necessary. Fox News Digital's Alec Schemmel contributed to this report. Print Close URL