NEW YORK, New York – At least 20 attorneys general have action to defend the US Refugee Admissions Programme (USRAP) from what they have described as President Donald Trump’s “unlawful attempt” to shut it down.
Letita James (File Photo)In an amicus brief filed in Pacito v. Trump, New York Attorney General, Letita James and the coalition of attorneys general have urged the Ninth Circuit Court to uphold a lower court’s decision blocking the president’s executive order, which attempts to indefinitely suspend the admission of refugees to the United States, and to terminate federal funding and cooperation with refugee resettlement agencies.
The attorneys general argue that the sweeping ban is “unlawful, unjustified, and would cause severe harm if allowed to take effect.
“Our country was founded by people fleeing persecution or in search of a better life. Now, this administration is attempting to slam that door shut, abandoning our values and putting countless lives at risk,” said ,” said James. .
“States like New York are prepared and proud to welcome refugees into our communities, and we are urging the court to uphold the foundational values of our nation and protect this critical program,” she added.
The executive order, issued on Trump's first day in office, aims to unilaterally suspend all refugee admissions and terminate federal support for organizations that provide newly arrived refugees with housing, food, and medical care.
According to James, under federal law, the President may only suspend the entry of a specific group if he finds that their entry would harm the national interest.
In attempting to justify the ban, she said the administration pointed to requests for federal assistance from New York and Massachusetts in response to a recent influx of asylum seekers lacking work authorization and in need of shelter.
However, James and the coalition contend that this justification is fundamentally flawed, as it conflates two entirely separate groups of migrants: asylum seekers and refugees.
The coalition said refugees admitted through USRAP fall into their own distinct legal category and are subject to years of vetting, authorized to work upon arrival, and integrated into communities in consultation with state and local governments.
The attorneys general argue that New York and Massachusetts’ requests had zero connection to USARP legal refugees and, therefore, the requests in no way justify a refugee ban – making the ban unlawful on its face.
They say that refugees admitted through USRAP are a distinct legal category, selected and placed based on community capacity, with support services already in place and accordingly, the administration entirely fails to provide any evidence that USARP refugees are a detriment to the nation.
To the contrary, the attorneys general emphasize that refugees are a benefit to their states, contributing contribute billions of dollars in tax revenue, start businesses, and fill essential roles in the workforce.
The attorneys general say nearly half of all refugees resettled in the US in 2024 were welcomed by New York and the other coalition states.
“By cutting off funding for refugee organizations and suddenly ending longstanding cooperation agreements with resettlement agencies, the federal government has deprived newly arrived families of essential services like housing, food, medical care, and employment support/”
The attorneys general say that the federal government’s abrupt and unjustified disruption has created widespread hardship, particularly in states that have long partnered with these agencies to support refugee integration.
They are urging the court to uphold the district court’s injunction blocking the executive order, preserving a system that has long reflected America’s humanitarian values and preventing further harm to refugees and the communities prepared to welcome them.
The attorneys general’s amicus brief comes as immigration advocates and legislators in the US express profound outrage over the US Supreme Court’s stripping of the legal status and work permits for nearly 500,000 Haitians, Cubans, Nicaraguans and Venezuelans who came to the US through a humanitarian parole process, known as CHNV, under the previous Biden administration.
Last Friday, the US Supreme Court allowed the Trump administration to circumvent a district court’s ruling in stripping the lawful immigration status for the migrants. The highest court in the US granted the Trump administration’s request to stay a district court order in Svitlana Doe v. Noem.
The Trump administration had asked the Supreme Court to take extraordinary action in blocking the district court’s preliminary injunction even before the First Circuit heard the case on appeal.
