Since taking office, President Trump has issued hundreds of executive orders, memoranda, and proclamations, many of which pertain directly to immigration, asylum, and refugee resettlement. These actions, along with additional executive orders and legislation expected in the weeks and months ahead, are poised to reshape United States policy in a significant way.
In response, HIAS has launched a series summarizing important developments and explaining what they mean. These recap posts, along with relevant articles, statements, and resources, can be found at a page we’ve built to track the new administration’s effect on displaced people.
This week, we review how actions taken during Trump’s sixth week in office impact refugees and other displaced people.
Federal Court Ruling Blocks Suspension of Refugee Program
What happened: On February 25, a federal court in Seattle temporarily blocked the Trump administration’s suspension of the U.S. Refugee Admissions Program (USRAP), a significant victory in restoring the moral imperative of welcoming refugees into the United States. In his decision, Judge Jamal Whitehead ruled that the suspension amounted to an “effective nullification of congressional will” and that the president’s authority to suspend refugee resettlement was “not limitless.” The ruling was part of the lawsuit, Pacito vs. Trump, filed on February 10 by HIAS and 11 additional plaintiffs.
What it means: The court’s ruling is the first step in what is likely to be a long process in fully restoring refugee rights in the United States. But it is nonetheless a major milestone. “We challenged President Trump’s unlawful suspension of USRAP because it not only hurts refugees — it hurts our country,” said Mark Hetfield, HIAS’ president. “Refugees are a blessing to our country, not a burden.”
U.S. Supreme Court Pauses Enforcement of Temporary Injunction of Foreign Aid Suspension
What Happened: Following an emergency hearing on February 25, a federal court in Washington, D.C., ordered the Trump administration to unfreeze billions of dollars in foreign assistance by midnight on February 26. The decision, part of Global Health Council v. Trump, a lawsuit that HIAS filed with eight additional plaintiffs, enforced a temporary restraining order (TRO) issued on February 13 to which the U.S. government had not complied.
Shortly before midnight on February 26, Chief Justice John Roberts of the U.S. Supreme Court granted the government’s last-minute request to temporarily pause the federal court’s February 25 order. The February 13 TRO remains in effect, however, and requires the government to lift the suspension of foreign aid funding.
What it means: The stop-work orders and suspension of foreign assistance have had a devastating impact on HIAS’ work and that of the entire humanitarian sector. “In countries around the world, HIAS has been forced to end most of our programs for 450,000 forcibly displaced people, including programs to protect displaced women, girls, and at-risk children from trafficking and violence,” said Hetfield.
Refugees are a blessing to our country, not a burden.Mark Hetfield, HIAS President
House of Representatives Passes Harmful, Misguided Budget Resolution
What happened: On February 25, the House of Representatives passed a budget resolution greatly increasing funding for mass deportation, immigration detention, border militarization, and family separation. The resolution will add $90 billion for Homeland Security to fund interior enforcement and border security — more than three times the amount allocated to ICE and CBP last year by the Republican-led House Appropriations Committee.
What it means: These spending priorities are misguided, harmful and misinformed. Research shows that crime declines when the immigrant share of the population grows, as non-citizens are significantly less likely to commit drug, property, and violent felonies than U.S. citizens. The proposed budget resolution also relies on the false rhetoric of an “invasion” to fund ineffective border policies that jeopardize lives.
Federal Court’s Ruling Blocks ICE from Select Houses of Worship
What happened: On February 24, a federal court in Maryland temporarily blocked ICE from conducting enforcement actions in select places of worship of Quakers, Cooperative Baptists, and Sikhs. These groups filed a lawsuit on January 27 challenging efforts by the Trump administration to allow ICE to enter “sensitive areas” including schools, hospitals, and houses of worship. Judge Theodore Chuang found that the threat of ICE would deter immigrants from attending religious ceremonies and undermine the “heightened feeling of communal worship.”
What it means: The ruling does not apply to houses of worship for all denominations around the country. Yet it represents a significant rebuke of the Trump administration’s mass deportation efforts in protected locations that provide healthcare, education, and solace to immigrant communities. The ruling also affirms that houses of worship have an important right to express their religious beliefs and provide critical social services for immigrants free of government intervention.
The proposed budget resolution also relies on the false rhetoric of an “invasion” to fund ineffective border policies that jeopardize lives.
Trump Administration Prepares to Invoke Alien Enemies Act
What happened: CNN reported on February 26 that the Trump administration is preparing to invoke the Alien Enemies Act, a little-known 18th century law that empowers the U.S. president to bypass certain legal and due process protections for immigrants to expedite their detention and deportation. According to sources, the invocation of the act would target members of Tren de Aragua, a criminal gang from Venezuela that Trump blamed during the 2024 presidential campaign for “invading” and “conquering” Aurora, Colorado. In response, the mayor of Aurora affirmed that Tren de Aragua “has not ‘taken over’ the city.”
What it means: Since 1798, the Alien Enemies Act has only been invoked three times: during the War of 1812, World War I, and World War II. It was used by President Roosevelt to justify the internment of over 120,000 people of Japanese ancestry. The U.S. president can only invoke the Act when there is a “declared war” or “invasion” against the United States, and so the Trump administration’s reliance on the act as a pretext for the mass deportation of immigrants and asylum-seekers raises serious constitutional and legal concerns.
Migrants Describe Horrific Conditions in Guantanamo Bay
What happened: The Washington Post reported on February 25 that Venezuelan migrants detained in a U.S. military prison in Guantanamo had experienced inhumane prison conditions, including prolonged solitary confinement and invasive strip searches. This shortly follows the U.S. government’s claim in federal court that the prison camp had been emptied out on February 20. Very little is publicly known about the U.S. military’s unprecedented use of the facility to detain immigrants apprehended in the country.
What it means: First opened in 2002 to detain enemy combatants, the U.S. military’s use of Guantanamo Bay has a long history of reported human rights violations. The recent detention of 178 Venezuelan immigrants was no exception. While in custody, they were deprived of access to legal assistance or communication with family. The Trump administration’s use of Guantanamo was an effort to expand detention when overcrowded ICE facilities in the United State had exceeded maximum capacity to hold more than 39,000 detainees.
