The Volokh Conspiracy
Mostly law professors | Sometimes contrarian | Often libertarian | Always independent
Biden Foolishly Decides Not to Extend Legal Status for Migrants Who Entered the US Under the CHNV Private Sponsorship Program
The decision is simultaneously cruel and counterproductive.

Yesterday, the Biden Administration decided not to extend the parole term for participants in the CHNV private sponsorship parole program for migrants from Cuba, Nicaragua, Haiti, and Venezuela:
The Biden administration will not be extending the legal status of hundreds of thousands of migrants who were allowed to fly to the U.S. under a sponsorship program designed to reduce illegal border crossings, the Department of Homeland Security announced Friday.
Instead, migrants who have come to the U.S. under the policy will be directed to try to obtain legal status through other immigration programs, leave the country or face deportation proceedings.
The administration first launched the sponsorship program in October 2022 to discourage Venezuelans from traveling to the U.S.-Mexico border by offering them a legal way to enter the country if American-based individuals agreed to sponsor them. It was then expanded in January 2023 to include migrants from Cuba, Haiti and Nicaragua, whose citizens were also crossing the U.S. southern border in record numbers at the time.
As of the end of August, 530,000 migrants from these four countries had flown into the U.S. under the policy, known as the CHNV program, government figures show. They were granted permission to live and work in the U.S. legally for two years under an immigration law known as parole, which presidents can use to welcome foreigners on humanitarian or public interest grounds.
Roughly 214,000 Haitians, 117,000 Venezuelans, 111,000 Cubans and 96,000 Nicaraguans have come to the U.S. so far under the policy, according to government data. The first group set to start losing their parole status this month are Venezuelans, who began coming to the U.S. through the CHNV program in October 2022. The parole periods of Cubans, Haitians and Nicaraguans will not start to expire until early next year.
This decision is simultaneously cruel and counterproductive. It's cruel because the horrific conditions that justified the creation of the program in the first place are highly unlikely to end in the next year or two. Cuba, Venezuela, and Nicaragua will likely still be ruled by brutal socialist dictatorships. And Haiti will likely still suffer from endemic violence. The statute that empowers the president to grant parole states it can be given "for urgent humanitarian reasons or significant public benefit." The "urgent humanitarian reasons" justifying it in this case are highly unlikely to end anytime soon. The same goes for the "significant public benefit" of reducing disorder at the border. CHNV reduces illegal migration by making the legal alternative easier and more widely available. Instead of curtailing the program, Biden should expand it.
The Biden administration did (rightly) extend the parole period for Afghan and Ukrainian participants in similar parole programs. The case for CHNV participants is equally compelling.
Moreover, the predictable consequence of this decision - unless it is reversed - will be to create a larger population of illegal migrants. Migrants from Cuba, Nicaragua, and Venezuela can't be deported, because those countries won't accept US deportees. And most are unlikely to leave on their own, because even living in the US illegally is less bad than returning to the terrible conditions their home countries. Haiti does accept US deportations, but many Haitians are likely to remain illegally, nonetheless.
Losing legal status will obviously be bad for the migrants themselves. But it's also bad for the US economy and society. Migrants with legal status can work at a wider range of jobs, and become more fully integrated into our society. That makes them more productive, increasing their economic and fiscal contributions. The Congressional Budget Office estimates increased migration since 2021 will reduce the federal budget deficit by almost $1 trillion over the next decade. CHNV migrants contribute to that, and can contribute more if we extend their legal status.
Some CHNV migrants are likely to be able to get temporary or permanent legal status by other means; for example, Haitians and Venezuelans who entered the US before before June 4, 2024, and July 31, 2023, respectively, are eligible for Temporary Protected Status (TPS). But may are likely to be left out in the cold, either because they don't fit the relevant categories or because they lack the skills necessary to navigate the labyrinthine immigration bureaucracy.
The administration recently temporarily shut down CHNV, citing largely bogus concerns about fraud. It then restarted it, with a few additional rules.
The program has also been challenged in court by various GOP states. The legal challenges are based on badly flawed arguments. Earlier this year, a conservative district judge ruled the states lacked standing to bring the case, which is now on appeal).
In sum, the net effect of Biden's decision will likely be to harm migrants fleeing violence and oppression, damage the US economy, and create more disorder. Great job, Mr. President!
Of course the real motive for this step may be political, trying to give Kamala Harris a boost in the upcoming election. If so, I doubt it will succeed. Swing voters are generally ignorant of policy details - even more so than committed partisans, and few are likely to even be aware of this decision, much less change their votes because of it. The kinds of intensely nativist voters who do know about the shift and support it are highly unlikely to vote for Harris, regardless.
Admittedly, I have not seen any good polling data on this particular issue. And it's important to guard against the temptation to think that one's own policy preferences are necessarily popular (I know all too well that many of mine are not). Perhaps new surveys will prove me wrong about the political effects of this step, though I doubt it.
Since the beginning of the Uniting for Ukraine program, on which CHNV is based, I have argued that Congress should give participants in these programs permanent legal status. They should pass a modified version of the Venezuelan Adjustment Act (sponsored by GOP Rep. Maria Elvira Salazar), and similar legislation to cover the Ukrainians, Afghans, and others. The fate of these people should not be left up to the whims of whoever occupies the Oval Office. Sadly, however, such legislation is highly unlikely to pass before the November election.
If Trump wins, it will almost certainly not pass afterwards, either. There was a time when the Republican Party would have (rightly) pilloried Biden for this betrayal of refugees from socialist oppression. Today's GOP, sadly, prioritizes nativism over anticommunism. Many also favor nationalist economic policies that resemble socialist ones.
If Kamala Harris prevails, I hope she might reverse Biden's misguided decision on parole extension, and promote adjustment acts that will resolve the issue permanently.
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
It's just politics, Ilya.
The administration first launched the sponsorship program in October 2022 to discourage Venezuelans from traveling to the U.S.-Mexico border by offering them a legal way to enter the country if American-based individuals agreed to sponsor them.
What if we discouraged invasion by simply buying the invaders plane tickets? Genius!!!
If we're willing to buy plane tickets, the way to discourage illegal immigration is obvious: Every caught border crosser gets a plane ticket home. Demand will dry up in a hurry if they know they're going right back home.
So what you're saying is that once they're here, illegals and legal immigrants are identical in your eyes?
I'm not for open borders myself, but the arguments that show up in Somin threads are just the worst.
They are not legal immigrants. They are just migrants who received a TPS card. They have to go back when it expires.
I mean, I'm not talking to you - you're antimigrant generally, including naturalized citizens. So you're just ignorant and bad at being American. You should hang out on a different forum and take that the open racist with you. You can talk about how the Jews ensured Hitler got a raw deal in places more sympathetic to your kind.
But for the not you's around here, I do wonder if there's an inherent difference in the merits that TextFirst sees. He seems to go on that assumption in his comment.
They're not legal immigrants whether you're talking to the guy who says so or not.
And if you're not going to talk to people, you shouldn't talk to them.
1. Tone policing me for how I talk to Roger S, one of the more morally loathsome and antiemetic assholes on here? Just makes you look like a contrarian scold.
2. They are here legally, and they immigrated here.
3. Quit playing stupid semantic games so you can hate on a minority subgroup.
4. You're the baddies.
lol. Nothing you say is correct. Nice try though.
"They’re not legal immigrants...."
Twelve, how MAGA of you.
They are immigrants. They came pursuant to law. They are not illegal immigrants.
You might have lost all of your integrity if you deny objective reality in favor of what you think should be the case because you like that better.
Take it up with the CIS:
Read what you said and read that NOVA said.
Not having immigration status means not visa is specified,
Your ignorance of the Alien and Naturalization Act is not an excuse to make shit up.
Exactly! Send them home -- at gunpoint if necessary.
No one has any problem with scouring the Earth for the Jan 6th people, I suggest we do likewise here.
Anyone who committed crimes should be apprehended to face the legal consequences. People who are here legally and who have committed no crimes should not be persecuted by the likes of Dr. Ed 2.
If they don't want to go back, we can just shoot them.
These are immigrants who were arbitrarily diverted from the illegal immigrant pipeline.
A reprieve does not grant them perpetual legal status.
They do not even have immigrant status. An immigrant is someone on a legal path to become a permanent citizen. They are not on such a path.
No, that's not an immigrant.
People here on temporary visas, including exchange visas that require a return to their home country, are called immigrants.
Then why do they call such visas nonimmigrant visas?
I know them as Exchange Visas but yes, people not on the path to residency are still considered migrants.
You are confusing statutory terms with common parlance.
I actually deal with this stuff,for my job.
You don’t know what you are talking about, and Google is not a course in the INA.
You're the self proclaimed bad lawyer that got hired by the federal government.
No one talked about permanent legal status - that's 'residents' not 'immigrants.'
Largely the same thing. People here temporarily, on student visas, tourist visas, etc, are not immigrants.
No, you are just bullshitting. People here in J1 and the like are immigrants.
Mute him.
Let's go back to the Volokh.com days. And you were "Sacastro" with that photo of Fidel making that funny face.
We don’t buy their plane tickets, that’s not how this program works. (Please don’t take my correcting widespread falsehoods as expression of support for the program.)
That aside, the answer to your suggestion is it isn’t as easy as just putting them on a plane back to where they came from. We have laws about what we can and can’t do under different circumstances and there’s another sovereign entity that gets a say in the matter (i.e. the nation they would be returning to.)
As Judge Tipton (for those unfamiliar with the name, he was a Trump appointee and I don’t think he could be considered a fan of the Biden Administration at least in so far as immigration policy goes) wrote in his decision, finding that plaintiffs lacked standing, when Texas and other states sued over this program (citations omitted):
“4. Agreement with Mexico
30. Prior to the Program, when a CHNV national was detained for illegally entering the United States, DHS faced significant challenges in returning the alien back to their home country.
31. For example, Venezuela currently does not allow repatriations via charter flights, which significantly restricts DHS’s ability to remove Venezuelan nationals. Nicaragua currently allows only one charter removal flight every 15 days, equivalent to two percent of Nicaraguan encounters in 2022. And while DHS has recently restarted removal flights to Cuba, conducting a flight on April 24, 2023, and another on May 10, 2023, following a pause in operations since February 2020 as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic, the cadence and volume at which DHS can facilitate such removals does not keep pace with the number of Cuban nationals DHS has encountered at times. While DHS can operate removal flights to Haiti, the precarious security situation on the ground there, including the security situation at the airport, has at times raised operational challenges in doing so.
32. As a result, DHS claims that 96 percent of CHNV nationals detained while attempting entry in 2022 could not be removed by DHS under the Title 42 public health order. Instead, they were generally excepted from the order and processed pursuant to
Title 8. And under Title 8 processing, the alien generally wound up being conditionally released into the country.
33. To ameliorate these issues, the Program was conditioned on an agreement with Mexico. Specifically, because the Program would require CHNV nationals to enter the United States via an interior port of entry—as opposed to traveling through Mexico to reach the Southwest border—the Government of Mexico agreed to accept returns or removals of CHNV nationals encountered at the Southwest border while the Program was in effect.
34. The Government of Mexico has indicated that its willingness to accept returns of CHNV nationals to Mexico is contingent on the continued availability of lawful processes for nationals from those countries to come directly to the United States.”
https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.txsd.1903141/gov.uscourts.txsd.1903141.305.0_1.pdf
Judge Tipton found that plaintiffs lacked standing because Texas couldn’t demonstrate that it had suffered injury because:
“87. In conclusion, the Parties agree, and the record reflects, that the number of CHNV nationals entering the United States has dramatically declined from the date the Program commenced through the last date for which data was received by the Court.”
As I suggested, I’m not a supporter of the program. But when it comes to illegal immigration it’s often not as simple as ‘just send them back where they came from.’ We have laws we should either change or else at least pretend to comply with. And removals depend in part on the willingness of other sovereign nations.
And, importantly, we don’t have the COVID emergency to justify the legally-dubious Title 42 work around that was used at the end of the Trump Administration and beginning of the Biden Administration to ameliorate the growing problem. Even if the Supreme Court (or the circuit court) had been inclined to ultimately reverse the lower court ruling and uphold that Title 42 work around, the necessary conditions for its use are no longer present. As Justice Gorsuch said when he dissented from the Court’s staying of the lower court order:
“Even if at the end of it all we find that the States are permitted to intervene, and even if the States manage on remand to demonstrate that the Title 42 orders were lawfully adopted, the emergency on which those orders were premised has long since lapsed.”
So that magic pill is no longer available and we’re back to where we were in 2019 before it was found: surging (or, as now, elevated) illegal immigration on the southern border and no good way to address it without congressional action.
We can abruptly cut off all aid and trade with any country that does not permit repatriation. We can tax private funds transferred to that country. That should get their attention.
"We have laws." Hahahahahah
Cuba, fine, but most of the "migrants" from Nicaragua, Venezuela, and Haiti are human garbage. At best, they're moochers. At worst, they're violent gang members and criminals.
Why don't you ever support uncontrolled immigration of downtrodden white people from Eastern Europe? Why is it only unassimilable, low IQ non-whites that you want to import?
Somin is one of those from E. Europe. You call him assimilated? Nearly every post is anti-American. He wants to bring in people that will make the USA more like the rest of the world.
That’s a weird thing to say. Racist obviously, but weird in another way too.
MAGA is trying as hard as it can to make America more like the rest of the world. I thought that was the explicit goal actually. They’ve disavowed the “American exceptionalist” neocons and advocate for a return to isolationism. The thing that sets America apart is our sole superpower status. Take that away, which is what tariffs and isolationism are designed to do, and we’re just like everyone else. No more superpowers (until China or Europe or someone steps in to fill the void).
I don’t see how you can be pro-Trump if you’re concerned about America becoming more like the rest of the world.
Bullshyte.
The NeoCons don't believe in American exceptionalism and I'm damn sure that Ilya doesn't. We have no need for hordes of third world losers from countries that can't even feed themselves to turn this country into a mirror image of their hellholes.
And the problem with calling everyone a racist is that the word itself stops having any meaning. Ever hear about the little boy who cried "wolf"?
That is literally a core neoconservative belief.
We've got enough home grown losers like Dr. Ed, who is a janitor who blames women for his failure to get an academic job.
Wow - stooping to personal attacks now.
And “janitor” is sexist (don’t ask me how), you have to call them “maintainers” now. And they get overtime — I don’t…
Narrator: you do not, in fact, have to call them maintainers.
Dr. Ed has repeatedly — including in this very thread — called for mass murder of civilians. He has earned every insult directed his way.
The MAGAmites don't need help because they are trying hard to turn this country into a mirror image of their rural hellholes.
By analogy with the boy who cried wolf, we can expect anyone who points out racists to be murdered by racists? Probably driving snowplows.
You are right that Maga is not eager to use American power to rule the world. Maga wants to make America better for Americans.
By contrast, Somin argues based on conditions in Haiti. As he delicately says, Haiti has suffered endemic violence since 1791, and it is unlikely to end in the next year or two. Perhaps the neocons think that we can invade Haiti and fix it, but the Maga people will be skeptical.
Yes, let's deport Somin. Make America Greater Without Him!
He's the exception. Most immigrants I've met from Russia, Poland, Romania, Hungary and so far are ardent conservatives, and most don't buy the left's lies on races, the lies being that race doesn't matter and that we're all equal.
I don't want them from Cuba, either.
The only Cubans left there are Commies.
Some of the Americans of Cuban Ancestry don't want them either -- they know them personally as having been Commies.
If Biden continues the program, Trump and Vance will claim he's allowing Communists/Marxists into the country, a crazy and perverse lie, but most of the media will just repeat it and not correct it.
When the people who fled Cuba say that they personally know some of the "refugees" coming in now, and that these same people personally harmed them under color of Castro, I'm inclined to believe them.
Looks like your boy lied again, Ilya.
Somin seems shocked to discover that public policy hews a bit closer to the electorate's preferences right before elections. (I'm assuming he's aware his own views are not widely shared.)
Relax, as soon as the election is past they'll give the voters an upraised finger again. This is just for a few weeks, then the border gets thrown wide open again.
Ever give pause at the kind of out-and-out bigots that join you on these 'Some is bad' emptyposts?
'Not racist but number 1 with racists' is not the best position to be in, all things being equal.
He will renew their status around November 6.
If the problem will continue the "next year or two," the executive policy can be tweaked. It will turn on the election, as you say.
As noted, like throughout history, migrants benefit our economy and nation as a whole. We are a nation of immigrants, who regularly came to this country escaping from troubled communities.
It is questioned how much this will matter as an "election move" but the article -- showing it is being reported -- notes strong criticism from Republicans.
Anyway, many people benefited from the policy. I have some trust in the judgment calls of the Biden Administration. And, as noted, many people here will have other routes.
I appreciate the consistent approach of the OP but am less upset at the whole thing overall.
Now that Kamala Harris is promising to enforce the border, I am wondering why anyone would vote for her. Those who want border enforcement will view her as a total failure, no matter what she promises. Those who want open borders would have to hope that she is just lying to get elected, or that she is too incompetent to do anything.
Republicans agreed to a border enforcement deal (that gave Republicans most of what they wanted) and then Trump ordered them to back out of it. Because he wants the problem to get worse as long as Biden is President. Have you forgotten? It wasn’t that long ago.
A few RINOS agreed to a sellout and Trump called them on it.
I say good for Trump.
You want BiPartisan -- OK, lets have an all-Republican committee with two token Democrats (named by the GOP) investigate the FEMA Fuckup in the Carolinas. I'm sure it will be objective (heck, an *objective* committee would lynch them.) How about criminal negligence charges for Coma Joe and Heels Up?
Not what happened. A deal was struck, with the Speaker on board, and about to be signed into law.
Damn that Representative Democracy!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
So what if a few RINOs struck a deal most of the party didn't like?
Deals are only possible where there is trust. And there is no basis for trust when it comes to border enforcement.
Southwest Border Encounters
See how illegal immigration shot up as soon as Biden took office? And the started dropping abruptly as this year'election approached, and illegal immigration was hurting him in the polls?
It didn't shoot up when he took office for external reasons. It shot up because he WANTED it up. And as soon as he wanted it down again he proved he could have shut off the flow whenever he wanted.
What is the point of deals, new laws, with people who don't KEEP deals, don't ENFORCE laws? You can't bargain with people who will take you concessions, and violate their own.
You've really got to stop pretending that the American Nazi Party are True Republicans and everyone else is just a "RINO." James Lankford is one of the most conservative members of Congress. If he's a "RINO," then there are no Republicans.
A couple of Republicans agreed to a deal to let in 5000 illegal aliens per day. Most Republicans were against it. Not just Trump.
The Trump Republicans want to stop all the illegal aliens, not increase it to 5000 per day.
I think you should get yourself checked out for moronism. The bill in no way allowed 5000 illegal immigrants per day. On the contrary, it enabled the President to suspend assylum! A significant power.
After Trump scuttled the bill, Biden pretended to have the power anyway, but the courts are gonna strike that down and point out that under current law, we’re required to entertain assylum requests.
Anyway, almost nobody is in favor of illegal immigration. That should be obvious, but you’ve allowed MAGA to turn your brain to mush.
No one? Biden and Harris ran on promises to open up the borders, and not deport any illegals. It is their most consistent and outspoken policy position, except maybe abortion.
They ran on anti-cruelty, not open borders.
We’d prefer that these people weren’t coming. But we don’t think they deserve starvation and torture at the hands of America, even as a deterrent to others.
Better, for example, to just say “no” as Biden is now (illegally) doing, than to say “yes but hand over your first born and then get into this cage” as Trump was doing.
Trump is the one who was building a wall, to keep illegals out. Biden-Harris stopped it, to let illegals in. Biden-Harris even started flying them in from Haiti and other countries, because it was too much trouble to cross the border illegally. Biden even bragged that he would not deport an illegal with a felony DUI conviction. Millions of illegals came in under Biden-Harris.
Wrong again. Biden has deported waaaaaay more people than Trump did. Obama did too.
Look — why doesn’t Biden just order Trump shot and killed? He’s absolutely immune from prosecution, under the recent Supreme Court ruling.
Maybe Biden already has -- there have been two close calls already.
More seriously, I don't think Biden is running the White House, and would not be able to give such an order.
Damn, it, I was gonna say that.
Why do you hate White people?
Because he wants "45" to beat Cums-a-lot
Other than having morals, Biden likely worries the SCOTUS umpire staff will be as arbitrary with their calls as MLB was last night.
Because he's NOT absolutely immune from prosecution, under the recent Supreme court ruling.
You say that the people should receive all kinds of benefits in the US because their countries are dictatorships or are "endemically violent".
I'm sorry, but a huge fraction of the world is in turmoil, violent, or ruled by dictators. There's no way the US any afford allowing anyone and everyone from one of those dumpster fire countries to just come in and start drawing welfare.
I do love your pathetic excuse that the flights will "reduce disorder at the border". Yes, and letting people into bank vaults will reduce the disorder of bank robberies …
Next, you say that we can't deport people to Cuba, Nicaragua, or Venezuela because "they won't accept them". Say what? Dump them in a boat a quarter mile offshore, or tell the governments that you're going to fly them back on a certain day and time and if the plane gets intercepted there will be hell to pay. We can't be dictated to by spineless lawyers and pissant dictators, that way lies madness.
It's not complex. We have immigration laws. Send them back and let them enter legally or not.
Send. Them. Back.
w.
With apologies to the great Meir Kahane, '
They must go.
The word "benefits" does not appear in the post.
Returning them to Cuba would be especially easy. Take them to Guantanamo Bay, open the gate and push them out.
So when you’re posting post like this, do you think of yourself as a good person?
Or someone who is up on private sponsorships for refugees?
Because this just looks like you've decided to hate some people you know little about.