Court Order Puts Biden’s ‘Keeping Families Together’ Initiative on Hold
President Biden’s immigration relief measures, particularly the “Keeping Families Together” program, has been temporarily halted by a federal judge in Texas. This program was designed to provide undocumented immigrants married to U.S. citizens a pathway to legal residency without leaving the United States. However, the recent legal challenge by 16 Republican-led states has put these efforts on hold, leading to significant implications for immigrants hoping to benefit from these changes.
Overview of the “Keeping Families Together” Program
The “Keeping Families Together” initiative sought to allow undocumented spouses and children of U.S. citizens who have lived in the country for over 10 years to apply for lawful permanent residence (green card status) without leaving the U.S. Typically, such individuals would need to leave the country and apply through “consular processing”, a step that often triggers a 10-year bar on re-entry. The new process aimed to prevent family separations and provide a more humane solution for those who have established deep ties in the U.S.
Legal Challenge and Stay Order
The program faced immediate opposition from 16 states, led by Texas, which filed a lawsuit arguing that the program overstepped the bounds of executive authority and violated existing immigration laws. These states claimed that the program incentivized illegal immigration and imposed undue financial burdens on the states.
On August 26, 2024, U.S. District Judge J. Campbell Barker issued a temporary restraining order (TRO) halting the implementation of the “Keeping Families Together” program. The judge cited the need for a more thorough examination of the legal arguments presented by the states and the potential consequences of allowing the program to proceed. The TRO prevents the government from granting any new parole under the program, although it does not stop the receipt such of applications.
Impact on Immigrants
The stay order has several immediate and long-term implications for immigrants:
- Uncertainty and Delayed Relief:
- Immigrants who were on the verge of applying or had already submitted applications are now left in a state of uncertainty. While they can still submit applications, these will not be processed until the stay is lifted.
- Immigrants who were on the verge of applying or had already submitted applications are now left in a state of uncertainty. While they can still submit applications, these will not be processed until the stay is lifted.
- Risk of Family Separation:
- The original intent of the program was to prevent the separation of families by allowing undocumented spouses to adjust their status within the U.S. The stay order revives the risk of separation, as these individuals may now face deportation or be forced to leave the country to apply for a green card,such deportation would trigger the 10-year re-entry bar for “unlawful presence”.
- The original intent of the program was to prevent the separation of families by allowing undocumented spouses to adjust their status within the U.S. The stay order revives the risk of separation, as these individuals may now face deportation or be forced to leave the country to apply for a green card,such deportation would trigger the 10-year re-entry bar for “unlawful presence”.
- Legal and Financial Strain:
- Many families have invested time and resources into preparing their applications under the new program. The sudden halt imposes additional legal and financial burdens as they must now navigate a protracted legal battle, with no guarantee of a favorable outcome.
- Many families have invested time and resources into preparing their applications under the new program. The sudden halt imposes additional legal and financial burdens as they must now navigate a protracted legal battle, with no guarantee of a favorable outcome.
- Broader Implications for Immigration Policy:
- The stay also has broader implications for immigration policy in the U.S. It highlights the ongoing tug-of-war between federal and state authorities over immigration control, with significant consequences for individuals caught in the middle. The outcome of this legal battle could set a precedent for future executive actions on immigration and their susceptibility to state-led challenges.
We will continue to monitor developments and provide updates as more information becomes available.