The Volokh Conspiracy
Mostly law professors | Sometimes contrarian | Often libertarian | Always independent
Biden's Cruel Resumption of Deportation Flights for Migrants Fleeing Venezuela's Socialist Dictatorship
The policy is simultaneously unjust and at odds with other administration policies on Venezuelan migration.

Although it has been overshadowed by other recent news, last week the Biden Administration resumed deportation flights for Venezuelan migrants detained at the border:
The U.S. is resuming direct repatriation flights for Venezuelans who unlawfully cross the border and "do not establish a legal basis to remain" in the country, the Biden administration announced Thursday.
The Venezuelan government has agreed to take back deported migrants, a senior administration official said.
The effect of this policy is to forcibly return migrants back to the control of a brutal socialist dictatorship whose oppressive policies and human rights violations have resulted in the largest refugee crisis in the history of the Western Hemisphere, with some 7 million people fleeing since 2015.
That isn't just my evaluation of the situation in Venezuela. The Biden Administration itself recognized these realities when it recently expanded Temporary Protected Status (TPS) for Venezuelans who arrived in the US prior to July 31, 2023. TPS status is based on the presence of terrible conditions in the migrants' countries of origin. In January, the administration also allowed up to 30,000 migrants per month from four Latin American countries (including Venezuela) to enter the United States under the CNVH parole program, so long as they have US-resident sponsors. The parole program is also based, in part on Venezuelan migrants' "urgent humanitarian reasons" for needing refuge.
In this respect, there is no meaningful distinction between Venezuelans who arrived before July 31, and those who arrived since then. The Venezuelan government hasn't suddenly changed. The excuse that the migrants in question "don't have a legal basis to remain" also won't fly. The legality of their status depends in large part on the Administration's own actions in using (or not using) its parole and TPS powers. If the White House wanted to, it could easily expand parole, TPS, or both to encompass additional Venezuelan victims of socialist tyranny.
While the US government isn't responsible for the awful conditions in Venezuela, it is morally responsible for its own actions in forcibly preventing refugees from escaping those conditions. It is unjust to use coercion to consign people to a lifetime of poverty and oppression merely because they were born in the wrong place, to the wrong parents.
In a better world, Republicans would be up in arms about the administration's abusive actions towards migrants fleeing socialism. GOP leaders - including those behind an ill-conceived lawsuit challenging the legality of the CNVH program - well know the nature of the Venezuelan regime. As Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis said last year, Venezuela's socialist president Nicolas Maduro is a "murderous tyrant" who "is responsible for countless atrocities and has driven Venezuela into the ground." But in the Trump era-Republican Party, nativism usually takes precedence over fighting socialism, whenever the two conflict. Still, Republican hypocrisy on this point doesn't justify Biden's own.
The likely motive for Biden's new policy is political: trying to reduce negative publicity from illegal migration and disorder at the border. But that disorder is itself largely caused by the near-impossibility of legal entry for most of the migrants in question. The combination of horrific poverty and oppression in their home countries and labor shortages in the US understandably lead people seeking opportunity and freedom to enter illegally if there is no other way to do so.
It's the same dynamic by which alcohol prohibition led people to resort to smuggling, and to getting booze from the likes of Al Capone. Barring legal markets in goods or services millions of people seek access to predictably creates vast black markets. When Prohibition was abolished, alcohol smuggling and the role of organized crime in the industry greatly diminished. Making legal migration easier has similar effects on the black market in immigration.
For months, the CNVH program greatly reduced illegal entry by migrants from the four countries involved, a finding confirmed by both government data and a study by the conservative Manhattan Institute. More recently, that effect has diminished because the 30,000 per month cap has predictably led to a massive backlog. Desperate Venezuelans with little or no hope of legal entry once again have little choice but to try the other kind.
The Biden Administration could mitigate the problem by abolishing or at least greatly increasing the cap. They and Congress could also make legal entry easier in a variety of other ways. Doing so would simultaneously help migrants fleeing oppression, benefit the US economy (thereby increasing economic freedom, wealth, and opportunity for native-born Americans), and reduce pressure on the southern border. Instead, the White House has chosen the cruel and unjust path of unjust deportation.
Overall, Biden's immigration policies are still a vast improvement on those of his predecessor, and in some crucial respects even on those of pre-Trump administrations. Even in the specific case of Venezuelan migration, Biden remains much better than Trump. But that doesn't mean he deserves a pass when he does wrong in this area.
Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
Biden doesn’t want Venezuelans because they’re now anti-communists. Those are bad votes to import for Democrats.
I hate to tell you this, but the Biden administration is not pro-Communist and has nothing to fear from the votes of Venezuelans fleeing a socialist dictatorship. Furthermore, it will be at least five years before Venezuelans entering the US as refugees will become US citizens, so even if there were a small effect on the tilt of the electorate, it would not affect the upcoming election.
Doesn't matter, they're not "Brown" enough.
Bill Poser 1 hour ago
Flag Comment Mute User
I hate to tell you this, but the Biden administration is not pro-Communist "
Thats what they said about FDR - yet FDR facilitated the russian take over of eastern europe starting as early as the fall of 1941.
There probably are more than a few members of the Biden admin who are unironically and consciously proCommunist. More than Republican and past Dem Admins anyway.
This election? Nah, the long game. But Republicans were making headway there, too, until something happened and they got stupid.
That's incredibly naive of you.
I assume he's not naive but lying for the cause. Evil people tend to do that for their leftist ideology.
"While the US government isn't responsible for the awful conditions in Venezuela, it is morally responsible for its own actions in forcibly preventing refugees from escaping those conditions."
In much the same way as you're morally responsible for every homeless person in your city. You've got a home, don't you? Why don't you invite them in?
The simple answer is that Ilya is a hypocrite, just like so many of those politicians and residents who trumpeted their sanctuary cities until they started having to deal with the flood of illegal aliens.
Worse than even that, Ilya is creating support for things like the use of Napalm to enforce our borders.
Ilya wants to see "cruel" -- OK, let's break out the Napalm and show what true cruelty looks like.
The comparison to Prohibition is asinine because the Volstead Act banned ALL alcohol, while our immigration laws only prohibit ILLEGAL aliens from working.
But if Ilya really wishes to worship at the altar of cheap labor, why should we require lawyers to spend 3 expensive years in law school? Let ANYONE practice law, and folk like Ilya will be unemployed....
No one short of deranged psychopaths like you even pretends to support that, and the number of Venezuelan refugees we deport isn’t going to move the needle on that.
I think Prof. Somin is pretty clear he doesn’t want to “see ‘cruel’”?
The Volstead Act did not, in fact, ban ALL alcohol.
Prof. Somin is not a practicing lawyer, does not depend on a bar license for his professional position, and regularly advocates against licensing requirements for attorneys, including on this very blog.
Other than that, great comment!
Ilya is a hypocrite.
The right-wing fans of this white, male blog tend to be obsolete bigots.
The other Volokh Conspirators are disaffected, bigot-hugging culture war casualties.
Where is the hope for America?
Kirkland, you aren't one to lecture anyone on bigotry.
Very true.
Kirkland appears to be full of hatred based on stereotypes that it is somewhat comical to hear him rant about bigotry.
He also talks about using reason while being consistently unreasonable.
It is amusing hearing him talk about a “white male blog” as if the race of the people participating was overwhelmingly important then complain about bigotry. It is like, what about Kirkland’s own stereotypes?
Anyway, I have a hypothesis that this guy is trying to make progressives look bad. He even takes the title “Reverend” indicating the nature of his shtick. As many have mentioned, this guy likely does not actually believe what he types. That is, he is a likely troll.
He might not be a troll, but there is a good chance he is.
I recognize that fans of a bigot-hugging right-wing blog dislike any mention of the remarkably white, odds-defyingly male roster of the Volokh Conspiracy -- or of the reasons for that obsolete circumstance.
Tough.
Kirkland,
You are definitely a bigot. You engage in closed-minded thinking and you label people based on superficial characteristics such as race. You also think that “conservative” and “bigotry” are sort of synonyms based on massive overgeneralization, stereotypes, and lack of critical thinking.
You criticize religious folks, but are annoyingly self-righteous. You also lack self-awareness.
Hypocrite? Somin is much worse than that. He is anti-American at every opportunity. Remember, he was born in Russia.
As a law professor, he ought to have a better argument than saying that legalizing alcohol meant that alcohol was no longer a crime. Sure, legalize murder and murder will not be a crime anymore.
Why are right wing loons unable to understand the difference between private property and the commons? Ilya's home is his property. He can invite someone into it or not. What he can't do is tell you that you can't invite someone into your home.
Nieporent:
I agree with you that there is a difference between your own home and the commons. Appeals that people who want more immigrants should house them in their own home isn’t a reasonable argument.
That said, as the situation in New York City illustrates, unless you want a huge increase in homelessness, then immigrants have to live somewhere.
Furthermore, I do not believe that policies such as those in California which are very NIMBY in orientation but which also claim to welcome immigrants are fully logical. If you are going to welcome immigrants, you have to accommodate them living decent lives somewhere.
In practice, California does things like this with low rent accommodations.
https://abc7news.com/san-francisco-tech-founders-sleeping-pods-city-code-investigation-artificial-intelligence/13835223/
In fact, Somin is much more entitled to invite homeless people into his home, than the government is entitled to invite an endless tide of illegal immigrants into the country.
He has no law requiring him to do otherwise, that's violated by doing it.
The cost is entirely to him, and not others.
There's no agent/principal conflict, he IS the principal in regards to his home, whereas the government is only the agent when it comes to the country.
In every way, he is more entitled to do it than the government.
If you're talking about "moral responsibility" and using the analogy of countries and individuals.....
Then Brett's analogy makes perfect sense.
You're an idiot if you think this is a legitimate argument.
It's bizarre that you don't recognise the city, as a political entity, as being responsible for the homeless people in it.
Well at least they’re going back to a Brutal Socialist Dictatorship that speaks their native tongue, instead of our Gringo Brutal Socialist Dictatorship. Seriously? am I the only one who remembers another Brutal Socialist Dictator with a fondness for German Shepherds??
re: "migrants fleeing [a] socialist dictatorship"
Yes, but:
https://reason.com/volokh/2023/01/25/twenty-red-states-file-badly-flawed-lawsuit-seeking-to-terminate-private-sponsorship-program-for-people-fleeing-socialism-and-oppression-in-four-latin-american-nations/?comments=true#comment-9896025
Sorry Ilya,
You got to prioritize. The immigration queues are full. The cities are full up, until a period of acclimation occurs. The blue cities are screaming bloody murder on their budgets and that they can't take anymore immigrants.
When you let "everyone" in...those who are most deserving are squeezed out.
I am not going to comment on who is most deserving. But I do concur on the necessity for limits.
Somin probably recognizes the need for limits as well, but he perhaps just thinks they are much higher than is conventionally thought.
Ilya doesn't believe in limits. He's an open borders proponent.
Yeah, somewhere around 3-5 billion, maybe?
I thought that Venezuela was the Socialist Utopia that Liberals wanted the US to emulate. You know like Sean Penn, the Los Angelis Teachers Union, the Chicago Teachers Union, Hilary Clinton ....
Isn't it more cruel to have hundreds of thousands of Venezuelans here on the streets without shelter?
I am very sympathetic toward people fleeing socialist oppression, but it makes more sense for them to flee to neighboring countries. South America has twice the land area the United States has, and Spanish is more widely spoken. Plus how is anything going to improve in Venezuela if all the good people leave?
I sympathize with Venezuelans fleeing the Maduro dictatorship. However, the assumption that the have nowhere to go except the United States is not accurate.
The United States has a huge number of immigrants, with over 50 million foreign born persons residing in this country.
Somin has never acknowledged the legitimacy of limits. His view seems to be that any and all limits are unjustified. But I believe that the country needs to regulate immigration in order to “digest” them and assimilate them to American culture and values and also avoid the creation of a perpetual disadvantaged underclass.
Bring back imlerialism. Invade and turn a chunk of that country into a territory. No change to The People, just get rid of endemic corruption.
People are free. Economy improves through lack or corruption.
Hell, have a vote there and see what happens. Voluntary imperialism!
Welfare OR mass immigration. Can't have both. These folks are stealing from Americans by stealing the welfare. Why is stealing welfare morally right???
The purpose of accepting them is to bolster social security by bringing in more working-age patsies, as SS is struggling with the problems that made Ponzi schemes illegal. All was good, both parties agreed, until Trump.
Except the uniparty was lying to you. Sorry you were to gullible to notice.
Given the conditions here in El Paso, I would like Mr. Somin to explain, exactly, where are we supposed to put these people?
There is a reason that an 81% Hispanic city in a 2-to-1 Democrat-voting county has a city council that is chartering buses to take migrants elsewhere.
It's easy to be pro-immigrant. Until they hit your doorstep in overwhelming numbers.
Then suddenly, it's an issue. If you're rich and exclusive enough, you just round them up fly them off to a military base elsewhere.
where are we supposed to put these people?
Well, certainly not in the so-called "sanctuary cities", as we've recently learned.
"While the US government isn’t responsible for the awful conditions in Venezuela"
Yes, it is.
Sure it is,in the same way it is the cause of everything that is wrong in the world.
We tracked Venezuela's fall, as they took on one golf club after another from the Tyrant's golf bag of tyrant tools.
Seize industries because The People.
Arrest opposition reporters.
Shut down opposition papers. Some True Believers here even bought the line they were engaged in overthrow, so it was ok to do!
Finally, taking the "emergency" power to pass laws by decree, the "dictate" part of dictator.
A sadly well-trod path, and they aren't even the latest to trod it!
My interest in this story parallels my interest in the undocumented munitions and foot-voting migrants recently un-repatriated by Israel: obviously no nation should regulate its borders, particularly when those desiring entry are known to harbor ill-will or criminal intent. Just ask Poland about the Germans it turned away... or Estonia about the Soviets it turned away -- as the Professor suggests, capitulation is obviously the best solution, as capitulation avoids needless conflict.
As of just March we were over 900% above all of 2022 for Chinese nationals crossing into Texas, and most of them were single men of military age.
South Texas sees surge of Chinese migrants crossing border illegally, chief says
It may be that China is using our porous border with Mexico to prepare for war. That's always a possibility when you throw away your control over your border and don't have good relations with an aggressive state.
I never thought Ilya had a simpleton intellect, but here we are. First, you are assuming the reason for the migrant reasons for coming to the US. You are assuming that there is no other nation to escape to in South and Central America and that every nation in South and Central America is as bad as Venezuela. From the information I have looked at, many are working age males and not families. There is at least an equal possibility that Maduro is sending the migrants to wage economic warfare on the US. Ilya is imputing his own bias into his analysis, which isn't very intellectual. It is rather shocking at the weakness of his analysis, but I guess this academia nowadays, bias and bigotry over critical thinking.
A new personal best for Ilya.
I stopped after the first three words in the headline.
One of these days Ilya should dedicate a post to how refugees and the typical low-skilled illegal immigrants present unparalleled economic benefits yet no other country in the western hemisphere besides the USA or Canada seems to want to take them in and blue cities don't want them either.
And just a few years ago, Venezuela was the exemplar of how Socialism could work for the benefit of all the people (said Progressives). Strange that there were never airplanes full of Liberals heading for Venezuela to share in the freedom and equality of the Bolivarian Revolution.
Strange that there were never airplanes full of Liberals heading for Venezuela
There were a few, but they were all round-trips made for photo-ops and bolstering their useful idiot creds.
When migration harms native residents it's never called "cruel".
The "Migrants Fleeing Venezuela's Socialist Dictatorship" found "refuge" when they reached Mexico. There was no need to cross the national border farther north.
Agreed-I thought one had to seek asylum in the first country you reached that would take you.You don't get to pick and choose.
The first step in stopping the flood of illegal migrants at the southern border is to demonstrate that arriving at the border will not get them in. Not just Venezuelans but all groups.