Parole is a discretionary power exercised by USCIS officials that allows foreign nationals to remain in the US temporarily under government supervision while they seek more permanent immigration status. The new policy makes the relief available on a case-by-case basis to foreign nationals who were lawfully married to US citizens as of June 17, have been in the US for 10 years or more and pass a criminal background check.
The executive branch has exercised parole power for over a century, and that power has been codified in law since the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952. By law, parole is available to anyone who “applies for admission to the United States.” Initially, only people arriving in the United States at a port of entry (such as a border crossing or airport) were eligible. However, in 1996, Congress overhauled immigration law to state that anyone “who is in the United States but not formally admitted” is considered an “applicant for admission” and may be eligible for parole. Individuals who apply for parole from within the United States are referred to as “parolees.”
For decades, administrations of both parties, including every president from Bill Clinton to Joe Biden, have routinely exercised statutory discretion to grant parole to categories of eligible foreign nationals. For example, under President Barack Obama, the Department of Homeland Security enacted a widely praised policy making foreign nationals who are immediate family members of U.S. military personnel and veterans eligible for parole. When reports emerged in 2019 that the policy might be rescinded, a bipartisan group of lawmakers urged the executive branch to reconsider. Then, in 2020, Congress passed legislation explicitly reaffirming the executive branch’s parole authority and supporting parole for military family members.
Biden’s policy is modeled on that same parole policy and is carefully designed to comply with the requirements of the Immigration and Nationality Act. For example, that law only allows immigration officials to grant parole “temporarily” and “case-by-case.” Thus, the policy only extends parole by one year at a time. And it does not guarantee parole; eligible people simply submit applications that are reviewed on a case-by-case basis by the Department of Homeland Security.
Providing relief in these circumstances would also meet Congress’s purpose in granting parole. Parole is granted only when there are “urgent humanitarian reasons or significant public interest.” This policy easily meets both grounds. The roughly 500,000 people the White House estimates would qualify for protection have been in the United States for an average of 23 years, and most of them have U.S. citizen children. These people are pillars of our communities, friends, colleagues, followers, and caregivers, but they live in constant fear that they will be deported or separated from their families. Parole would reduce the immediate stress and anxiety caused by the threat of deportation. Parole would allow them to apply for work authorization, providing further stability for themselves, their families, and the businesses that employ them, further contributing to the $13.5 billion they already contribute to the U.S. economy. This policy would also promote safe, lawful, and orderly migration and improve vetting for national security and public safety by shifting undocumented immigrants into existing immigration pathways.
Critics have denounced the policy as an illegal amnesty program. They are wrong. The policy provides temporary relief on a case-by-case basis. Granted, receiving parole may make it easier for some recipients who meet the requirements for lawful permanent residence to adjust their immigration status. But that is by congressional design. Congress determined that those granted parole after careful review should be able to apply for lawful permanent residence from within the United States, rather than leaving the country for years and separating themselves from their U.S. citizen families while they wait to apply for reentry. Helping valued members of our community secure a permanent right to live with their spouses and children is an added benefit of the policy.
I have worked on our nation’s immigration policy for more than 40 years — as Chief of Counsel under President Ronald Reagan, as Attorney General under President George W. Bush, and as a private lawyer who defended against efforts to end Deferred Action for Removal for young immigrants. These experiences have strengthened my belief that our immigration policy should respect the rule of law while treating immigrants humanely and taking into account their contributions to their families, communities, and our country. Biden’s new parole policy will advance both of these objectives.
This is a laudable and legitimate policy, and I am happy to support it.
