The phenomenon of almost instantaneous illegality has occurred repeatedly over the last several months, with the suspension of Temporary Protected Status (TPS) and the revocation of humanitarian parole for many groups of migrants. My experience with migration goes back many decades. In searching through my files, I found a policy analysis paper from 1988 that I co-authored with my colleague at the time, Demetrios Papademetriou, who passed away in January 2022.
Our paper was entitled, “Toward a New Statutory Standard for Those Who Flee Crises: Humanitarian and Political Responses.” This analysis eventually reached the halls of Congress and was included in the 1990 Immigration Act, which allows the Secretary of Homeland Security (then known as the director of Immigration and Naturalization Services) to grant temporary status to migrants fleeing natural disasters, political upheaval, and other dangerous conditions.
The blanket designation applied to all undocumented nationals from the affected countries in the United States at the time of declaration. The first application of the designation was to migrants coming to the U.S. from El Salvador, a country experiencing civil war at the time.
Until recently, that legislation was hailed as a humanitarian program that fit the reputation of the United States throughout the world. However, recently, the new isolationism that has overtaken our country has prompted the Trump administration to cancel this protected status, as well as the work visas that accompany it. For more than a dozen countries designated for TPS, such as Afghanistan, Haiti, Somalia, South Sudan, Venezuela, and others, return is still not possible.
The recent surge of Venezuelan migrants has shifted the perception of this program from a humanitarian gesture to a public burden, leading some to question its value. There is little evidence, however, that the initial assistance given to these temporary migrants has caused irreparable damage to our economy. In fact, TPS helps the economy, as recipients can work and contribute their fair share of taxes and production.
They also send remittances back to their home countries, helping them to stabilize. One of the criticisms of the program is that temporary has become almost always permanent, meaning that many of these temporary migrants find permanent solutions to their migration problems by obtaining other immigration benefits through marriage or family relationships. The program is also criticized by immigration opponents as not temporary because it is usually extended to some countries indefinitely. Unfortunately, the world situation remains unstable.
Perhaps understanding the initial reasons for its institution may give us pause to consider that this refugee-like status has continued making the United States a beacon of hope throughout the world. Recent events in Venezuela, perhaps, are the best example. The Venezuelan influx caused many to question the program, as even President Donald Trump himself said after the arrest of Maduro that perhaps some Venezuelans might want to stay, and others return. This is exactly what most of the holders of TPS desire. Some do return when situations become better, and some legally remain. However, revoking the TPS status makes the holders targets for the massive deportation program underway.
It is certainly true that most of the countries these people come from have not seen improvements that allow them to return.
For example, many of the Afghan holders of TPS were collaborators with the U.S. in the transformation of that country until our withdrawal. They would now face persecution from the Taliban if they returned. Haiti is a failed state, where return is impossible. The situation in Venezuela is hardly stable enough for those who have left to return at the moment. The war in Ukraine is not over yet, and the intensity of danger to civilians blocks a safe return.
The reasons for temporary protected status are as valid now as they were in 1988, when a simple policy analysis made the case for enhancing the history of immigration to America as a place held out as a beacon of freedom, refuge, and liberty.
We must fight to preserve it.
Bishop Nicholas DiMarzio, who served as the seventh bishop of the Diocese of Brooklyn, is continuing his research on undocumented migration in the United States.