Legislative Bulletin

 

 

Howdy, 

Welcome to the National Immigration Forum's weekly bulletin. Every Friday, our policy team rounds up key developments around immigration policy in Washington, D.C., and across the country. The bulletin includes items on the legislative, executive, and judicial branches, as well as some coverage at the state and local levels. With Congress currently in recess, this week’s bulletin is shorter than usual! 

You can find the online version of the bulletin here: [link removed] [link removed]  

With hope, 

Nicci 

***

LEGISLATIVE BULLETIN — Friday, April 18, 2025

**DEVELOPMENTS IN IMMIGRATION POLICY THIS WEEK** Here, we summarize some of the most important recent developments in immigration policy on the federal, legal, state, and local levels.  

**Federal**

******Kilmar Abrego Garcia’s Deportation Draws National Attention and Legal Scrutiny**** ** The case of Kilmar Abrego Garcia, a Maryland resident deported to El Salvador due to what the administration first called an "administrative error," remains at the center of both legal and political turmoil this week. Democratic lawmakers have held up Abrego Garcia’s case as emblematic [link removed] of the consequences of the administration’s hardline immigration policies, especially given that a 2019 judge previously determined [link removed] his life would be at risk if returned to El Salvador. Many observers, however, focus less on Abrego Garcia’s personal circumstances and more on defending due process [link removed].  

On April 14, Salvadoran President Nayib Bukele and President Trump met in the Oval Office [link removed], and each maintained that they were powerless to secure Abrego Garcia’s return to the U.S. The following day, U.S. District Judge Paula Xinis ordered [link removed] the Trump administration to produce detailed records and sworn statements about its efforts to facilitate Abrego Garcia’s return, warning of potential contempt proceedings for noncompliance. On April 17, Senator Chris Van Hollen (D-MD) traveled to El Salvador to visit Abrego Garcia at CECOT [link removed], the infamous maximum-security prison where he is being held. After initially being denied [link removed] access, Van Hollen was ultimately allowed [link removed] to meet with him, but Abrego Garcia remains unable to return home to Maryland. 

While the administration continues to cite allegations of criminal and gang affiliation to justify Abrego Garcia’s deportation, a growing number [link removed] of conservative legal experts, commentators, and some media figures are criticizing the White House’s apparent disregard for Supreme Court and lower court directives. Judge Xinis’s pronouncement [link removed] that she has "no tolerance for gamesmanship" underscores mounting judicial frustration, and a recent opinion by Reagan appointee Judge J. Harvie Wilkinson III described [link removed] the government’s position as "shocking not only to judges, but to the intuitive sense of liberty that Americans far removed from courthouses still hold dear." The administration, meanwhile, insists [link removed] that Abrego Garcia is a "terrorist" and "MS-13 gang member," asserting that his deportation was lawful and that it has no obligation to facilitate his return. 

******Trump Defends Self-Deportation Policy and Proposes Financial Incentives for Voluntary Departure**** ** The Trump administration has expanded efforts to encourage undocumented immigrants to "self-deport" as a means of increasing removal figures [link removed]. Earlier this year, the administration had launched a multi-million-dollar advertising campaign [link removed] urging individuals to depart voluntarily or face enhanced enforcement, and, on April 15, President Trump announced plans for a forthcoming "self-deportation program [link removed]." The president claimed the program would provide both a stipend and an airline ticket to immigrants who choose to leave the country on their own. 

This approach combines financial incentives for voluntary departure with new penalties for remaining in the country without authorization. Under current policy, immigrants who stay unlawfully are now subject to fines of up to $998 per day [link removed], while those using the CBP Home app [link removed] to self-deport may be eligible for administrative benefits. According to Fox News, more than 5,000 people [link removed] have utilized the CBP Home app to self-deport in the past month, though comprehensive data is not yet available. 

President Trump has stated that individuals who leave voluntarily "could potentially have the opportunity to return legally at some point in the future," but specific details on such pathways have not been provided. The president has also suggested [link removed] a future program that would allow "great people" who self-deport and have an employer sponsor to return legally to the United States. Reports indicate that stricter enforcement has led many undocumented immigrants to consider self-deportation [link removed] due to increased uncertainty and declining quality of life [link removed]. Administration officials maintain that these initiatives are intended to support immigration law compliance while offering an opportunity for voluntary departure. 

******DHS Announces Termination of TPS for Afghans and Cameroonians**** ** On April 11, it was reported [link removed] that the Secretary of Homeland Security, Kirsti Noem, had made a determination to end Temporary Protected Status [link removed] (TPS) for Afghanistan and Cameroon. The decision affects over 9,000 Afghans and 3,000 Cameroonians who have been living in the United States legally with TPS, which allows recipients to work and protects them from return to countries facing armed conflict or humanitarian disaster, placing them at risk of deportation beginning in May and June. Many affected Afghans arrived in the United States after the 2021 U.S. withdrawal from Kabul and would now face return to a country under Taliban rule [link removed]. Immigration experts and advocates warn [link removed] that revoking TPS for Afghans, including women, girls, and former U.S. allies, could place them at severe risk of persecution, gender-based violence, and even death.  

The Biden administration had extended TPS for Afghanistan in 2023, and the Trump administration’s has sought to aggressively curtail humanitarian protections extended during the Biden administration, including parole [link removed] and other forms of temporary status. Attorneys and advocates are closely reviewing whether DHS’s decision meets the statutory requirements for ending TPS and have called for alternative legal pathways, such as the Afghan Adjustment Act [link removed], to be enacted by Congress. Without protection, most Afghan and Cameroonian TPS holders would have to seek relief in the already backlogged asylum system, voluntarily depart, or face deportation to the country they were forced to flee.  

**Legal**

******Federal Judge Temporarily Blocks Termination of CHNV Parole Program**** ** On April 14, 2025, U.S. District Judge Indira Talwani issued an emergency order temporarily blocking [link removed] the Trump administration’s plan to terminate the CHNV humanitarian parole program, which allowed over 530,000 migrants from Cuba, Haiti, Nicaragua, and Venezuela to enter, live, and work legally in the United States. DHS had announced [link removed] on March 25 that the program would end on April 24, abruptly putting hundreds of thousands at risk of losing their legal status and work authorization. In her order, Judge Talwani enjoined DHS from terminating legal status for all CHNV parolees through a blanket Federal Register notice. Instead, she required [link removed] that parole and work authorization must remain valid until each individual's original expiration date unless reviewed on a case-by-case basis. The order thus put a hold all CHNV revocation notices [link removed] issued since March 25, though new parole applications remain paused.  

Judge Talwani wrote [link removed] in her decision that the administration was forcing legal migrants to choose between "two injurious options."  She explained, "[i]f their parole status is allowed to lapse, Plaintiffs will be faced with two unfavorable options: continue following the law and leave the country on their own, or await removal proceedings. The first option will expose Plaintiffs to dangers in their native countries. The second option will put Plaintiffs at risk of arrest and detention and, because Plaintiffs will be in the United States without legal status, undermine Plaintiff’s chances of receiving other forms of immigration relief in the future – potentially permanently." She also emphasized that while the Secretary’s discretion over parole is broad, it is "incorrect" to assume that it is "wholly shielded from judicial review." Judge Talwani stated, "The immediate impact of the shortening of their grant of parole is to cause their lawful status in the United States to lapse early — in less than two weeks." In a separate ruling, she also certified a class [link removed] of all individuals in the U.S. currently granted parole under the "Termination of Parole Processes for Cubans, Haitians, Nicaraguans, and Venezuelans" notice, unless they opt out to seek separate relief. 

Many CHNV program participants are considered "model immigrants" by advocates and officials alike. All CHNV parolees must have complied with all requirements for legal entry, secure U.S. sponsors, and passed a background check. Immigration advocates have called Judge Talwani’s decision a "sigh of relief [link removed]" for affected families, sponsors, and communities, but they caution that appeals are expected, and uncertainty remains about the program’s long-term future.   

******Justice Department Directs Immigration Judges to Swiftly Deny Asylum Cases**** ** The Department of Justice (DOJ) issued new guidance [link removed], which took effect on April 11, directing immigration judges to swiftly reject certain claims for asylum. The policy allows judges to pretermit (deny) asylum cases without a hearing if they are determined by the judge to be "legally deficient." This action would circumvent the typical asylum hearing process, where individuals have an opportunity to present their case to an immigration judge during what are known as merits hearings. 

The policy guidance was sent to staff members at the Executive Office for Immigration Review (EOIR), which oversees immigration courts. The guidance states that immigration judges should take "all appropriate action to immediately resolve cases on their dockets that do not have viable legal paths for relief or protection from removal." Those cases would terminated by the judges, resulting in a removal order. The immigration court backlog is at 3.6 million cases [link removed]' as of March 2025, of which 2 million are pending asylum cases. There are currently about 700 immigration judges, each of whom may handle between 500 to 700 cases a year. 

******Federal Judge Finds Probable Cause for Contempt Over Administration’s Deportation Flights to El Salvador**** ** On April 16, U.S. District Judge James Boasberg found probable cause [link removed] to hold the Trump administration in criminal contempt [link removed] for failing to comply with his court order that temporarily blocked mass deportation flights of Venezuelan migrants to El Salvador under the Alien Enemies Act [link removed]. In a detailed 48-page order [link removed], Judge Boasberg concluded that administration officials had shown "willful disregard" for his March 15 directive, which required all planes carrying migrants to El Salvador to be returned. Despite the order, at least 261 migrants, including more than 100 Venezuelan nationals, were deported [link removed] that same day, many directly to a maximum-security prison in El Salvador [link removed]. Judge Boasberg wrote that the government "deliberately flouted" the court’s instructions, noting that officials provided no satisfactory explanation for their actions or for their continued withholding of information about the deportation flights and who authorized them. The Department of Justice (DOJ) has continued to maintain that the administration did not violate the order, arguing that they interpreted the written order, which was docketed after the planes had departed, rather than Boasberg’s earlier verbal instructions. 

Although the Trump administration has consistently maintained [link removed] that it did not, in fact, violate, his initial order, Boasberg offered the administration an opportunity to avoid contempt by either asserting custody over the deported migrants so they could seek legal relief or by demonstrating their compliance in detailed court filings due April 23. Failing that, the judge indicated he would begin contempt proceedings, which could include identifying individual officials responsible for the violation of his order and potentially recommending prosecution. The DOJ has objected [link removed] and is seeking appellate relief, arguing such a move would "infringe core executive prerogatives" and escalate constitutional tensions between the executive and judiciary. The case marks a rare and significant confrontation between the courts and the executive branch, as criminal contempt findings against federal officials are extremely uncommon. In his April 16 order, Judge Boasberg emphasized [link removed] that the government "had ample opportunity to rectify or explain their actions" but failed to do so. 

******State & Local******

******U.S. Citizen and Boston Immigration Attorney Wrongly Ordered to Self-Deport**** ** U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) has sent email [link removed] notices to a range of individuals, including U.S. citizens and immigration attorneys, instructing them to "self-deport" following the revocation of parole status. The emails direct recipients to leave the country "immediately" or warn that "the federal government will find you." While these notices appear to have targeted former participants in the CBP One program, reports confirm that some U.S. citizens [link removed], including legal professionals, have received them in error. CBP officials have acknowledged [link removed] the mistake, while immigration attorneys argue [link removed] that the blanket email directive is not only alarming but also unlawful, as all immigrants are entitled to due process and cannot have their parole revoked without a hearing before an immigration judge. As attorney Emmanuel Olawale explained, "It is illegal...You still have a right to due process under the 14th Amendment, which covers citizens and noncitizens if on U.S. soil." The mistaken emails have caused significant confusion and fear, particularly against the backdrop of recent enforcement actions, including the mass revocation of student visas [link removed], the detention of student activists such as Mohsen Mahdawi [link removed], and the cancellation [link removed] of thousands of immigrants’ Social Security numbers through the use of the "death master file." 

****BILLS INTRODUCED AND CONSIDERED** ** It is hard to keep up with the constant deluge of proposed legislation in the 119th Congress. So, every week, we round up federal legislative proposals that have recently been introduced and that are relevant to immigration policy.*

**H.R.2924** [link removed]

**** 

**To authorize the Secretary of State to discontinue granting visas to nationals of countries failing to meet their North Atlantic Treaty Organization obligations to spend at least 2 percent of its gross domestic product on national defense, and for other purposes.** 

Sponsored by Rep. Andy Barr (R-KY-6) (0 cosponsors) 

04/17/2025 Introduced in House by Rep. Barr 

04/17/2025 Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary

****LEGISLATIVE FLOOR CALENDAR** ** The U.S. Senate and House of Representatives have been in recess since Monday, April 14, and will reconvene on Monday, April 28.

****SPOTLIGHT ON NATIONAL IMMIGRATION FORUM RESOURCES** ** The Forum is constantly publishing new policy-focused resources that engage with some of the most topical issues around immigration today. Here are a few that are particularly relevant this week: 

**Birthright Citizenship Act of 2025: Bill Summary** [link removed]  The Birthright Citizenship Act of 2025, introduced by Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-South Carolina) in the Senate (S. 304) and Rep. Brian Babin (R-Texas) in the House (H.R. 569), aims to end the long-standing, constitutional practice of granting United States citizenship to U.S.-born children, independent of the immigration status of their parents. This summary provides an overview of the bill and its potential impact. 

**"Invasion" & "Influx" in a Time of Falling Border Encounters** [link removed]

** **  Border apprehensions are at their lowest levels since 2000, yet recent policies invoke "invasion" and "influx" rhetoric to justify extraordinary enforcement actions. This explainer examines the administration’s invocation of these terms and their implications for U.S. immigration policy.  

**Temporary Protected Status (TPS): Fact Sheet** [link removed] Our updated resource provides relevant information on TPS, a government protection granted by the Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) to eligible foreign-born individuals who are unable to return home safely due to conditions or circumstances preventing their country from adequately handling their return.

*As of publication (4/18/25 at 4PM ET) 

**This Bulletin is not intended to be comprehensive. Please contact Nicci Mattey, Senior Policy & Advocacy Associate at the National Immigration Forum, with questions, comments, and suggestions for additional items to be included. Nicci can be reached at****[email protected]** mailto:[email protected]

**. Thank you.** 

 

DONATE [link removed]

 

**Follow Us**

 

[link removed] [link removed] [link removed] [link removed]

National Immigration Forum

10 G Street NE, Suite 500

Washington, DC 20002

www.immigrationforum.org [link removed]

 

Unsubscribe from the Legislative Bulletin [link removed]
or opt-out from all Forum emails. [link removed]

 

 
_________________

Sent to: [email protected]

Unsubscribe:
[link removed]

National Immigration Forum, 10 G St NE Suite 500, Washington, D.C. 20002, United States