Immigrants and U.S. Citizens Take Legal Action Over End of Parole Programs

Key Takeaways

• On March 1, 2025, immigrants filed a lawsuit to restore terminated humanitarian parole programs affecting approximately 875,000 migrants.
• A February 2025 DHS memo paused programs for migrants from Haiti, Cuba, Venezuela, Afghanistan, Ukraine, and Nicaragua.
• The lawsuit alleges racial discrimination, APA violations, and challenges the legality of categorical parole program terminations.

On March 1, 2025, a group of immigrants and U.S. citizens, supported by the advocacy organization Haitian Bridge Alliance, filed a lawsuit against the Trump administration over its decision to terminate several humanitarian parole programs. This lawsuit, lodged in the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts, aims to restore these programs, which have allowed around 875,000 migrants from countries such as Haiti 🇭🇹, Ukraine 🇺🇦, Venezuela 🇻🇪, Cuba 🇨🇺, Nicaragua 🇳🇮, and Afghanistan 🇦🇫 to temporarily live in the United States. Immigrants who entered the country using these programs, their U.S. sponsors, and advocacy groups like Haitian Bridge Alliance argue that the government’s actions are not lawful and harmfully affect both the migrants and their American sponsors.

Background to Recent Changes in Parole Programs

Humanitarian parole programs, as referenced in this lawsuit, represent a vital option in U.S. immigration policy. These programs allow certain migrants to enter the U.S. temporarily for urgent humanitarian reasons or in the public interest. For decades, they have been used by administrations from both major political parties to address crises or special circumstances. However, the Trump administration recently moved to terminate several of these programs.

On January 20, 2025, President Trump signed an executive order entitled “Securing Our Borders,” which called for the end of categorical parole programs. Categorical parole allows groups of people (rather than individuals) to qualify under broad eligibility requirements. Following this order, Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Acting Secretary Benjamine Huffman issued a memorandum on February 6, 2025, pausing or terminating programs tied to Cuban, Haitian, Venezuelan, Nicaraguan, Afghan, and Ukrainian immigrants. Just weeks later, on February 27, the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) temporarily suspended acceptance of Form I-134A, the online form through which U.S.-based supporters could financially sponsor immigrants.

These actions have left many immigrants and their sponsors in precarious circumstances, prompting advocacy groups like Haitian Bridge Alliance to take legal steps to challenge the administration’s decisions.

Details and Legal Basis of the Lawsuit

The lawsuit against the administration brings several critical legal arguments. According to the plaintiff’s legal team, including organizations like Justice Action Center and Human Rights First, the government’s termination of these parole programs is “legally baseless” and unnecessarily harsh. Among the points in their argument:

1. Established History of Humanitarian Parole: For over 70 years, administrations from both major political parties have utilized humanitarian parole broadly to address humanitarian crises. Opponents of the administration’s actions argue that abruptly ending this long-standing practice overlooks its benefits and legality.

2. Unfounded Legal Justification: The Trump administration reportedly plans to curtail categorical parole based on the assumption that this mechanism is “always unlawful.” The plaintiffs contest both the logic and precedent for such reasoning.

3. Claims of Discrimination: The lawsuit alleges that the administration’s changes disproportionately affect people from specific populations, including Haitian, Venezuelan, and other majority-nonwhite demographics. This, they argue, amounts to racial or ethnic discrimination and violates protections enshrined in the Fifth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.

4. Breach of Administrative Procedures: Administrative Procedure Act (APA) violations are another focal point of the lawsuit. Plaintiffs claim the administration failed to follow proper procedures, such as conducting necessary public consultations, before canceling these programs.

Plaintiffs are seeking various legal remedies, like declaring that previously-granted designations for Temporary Protected Status (TPS) under earlier plans by DHS Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas are still valid. Additionally, they aim to block DHS enforcement under current Secretary Kristi Noem of changes that effectively terminate TPS designations from 2021 and 2023 for Haitians and Venezuelans.

How the Termination Affects Migrants and Sponsors

The suspension and cancellation of programs have disrupted the lives of many migrants while creating challenges for their sponsors. The legal uncertainty for immigrants who came to the U.S. through these programs is profound. Nearly 875,000 migrants, who are protected only until their current parole expiration dates, face unanswered questions about their ability to stay long term. In practical terms:

• USCIS has stopped processing critical applications for visas and asylum tied to these immigrants—a move that could prevent many from successfully changing their immigration status.
• U.S. citizen sponsors, who play a key role in financially supporting parolees, may lose beneficiaries who’ve integrated into their households and communities. They have also collectively invested significant time and effort into helping migrants find their footing in the U.S.
• Communities relying on immigrant labor could experience ripple effects. Many areas, including those with labor shortages, could lose valuable contributors to sectors like healthcare, agriculture, or manufacturing. As reported by VisaVerge.com, immigrants have historically played an essential role in meeting labor demands where U.S. citizens may not fill certain jobs.

The Haitian Bridge Alliance, a prominent advocacy organization involved in the lawsuit, has argued that the administration’s decisions will not just harm individuals but weaken communities that have greatly benefited from newcomers.

Related Terminations and Broader Context

What’s happening with the termination of humanitarian parole programs is part of a broader shift in U.S. immigration policy under the Trump administration. Recent actions suggest the administration is re-evaluating or rolling back a range of protections previously given to immigrants:

1. On February 3, 2025, current DHS Secretary Kristi Noem nullified a previously established extension of TPS for Venezuelan nationals. As of April 7, 2025, protections under the 2023 TPS designation for about 348,000 Venezuelans are set to end. Additional questions remain about another 300,000 migrants tied to earlier TPS designations.

2. Federal judges have stepped in to block other aggressive measures, such as redefining eligibility for citizenship through birthright.

3. Lawsuits from immigrant advocacy groups and government entities, such as the Las Americas Immigrant Advocacy Center and multiple states’ attorneys general, have mounted against Trump administration directives.

The legal and policy landscape is growing increasingly complex, with mixed outcomes shaping the lives of millions of current and future immigrants.

Broader Implications of Humanitarian Policy Changes

Although humanitarian parole programs were created to handle extraordinary circumstances, their absence will likely have a broader, long-term effect beyond the immediate individuals impacted:

• Regions like South Florida, where immigrants from nations like Haiti and Cuba constitute significant populations, could lose vital community members.
• The end of these programs risks undermining the U.S.’s longstanding reputation as a country willing to accept humanitarian arrivals during heightened crises. Policy experts have noted that U.S. immigration traditions have long served as a model for other nations during refugee movements or regional political instability.
• Revoking programs in groups further complicates foreign relations. For instance, bilateral relations with countries like Venezuela 🇻🇪 and Haiti 🇭🇹—already fraught with political concerns—stand to face even greater tension.

Looking Ahead

The lawsuit stemming from the program’s cancellation will serve as a critical legal showdown symbolizing a clash of ideologies about immigration governance. Until court proceedings formally conclude, immigrants who entered on humanitarian paroles or through other TPS frameworks wait in limbo for new policy updates. Advocates hope legal stays could reverse some of the damage done by recent changes.

For official details on Humanitarian Parole requirements and eligibility, visit USCIS’s official Humanitarian Page. The ongoing case remains a lightning rod for debate reflecting larger questions in America’s commitment to asylum, compassion-based admissions, and fairness in global migration policies.

From a broader perspective, the case also underscores upstream challenges shaping immigrant reception: balancing border security without losing focus on humanitarian commitments. Whether driven by justice concerns or practical economic imperatives, the decisions made over the coming months will carry profound effects across communities—and help reshape America’s identity for years ahead.

Learn Today

Humanitarian Parole → A U.S. policy allowing temporary entry for urgent humanitarian reasons or significant public interest.
Categorical Parole → Immigration process granting entry to groups, not individuals, based on broad eligibility rather than specific cases.
Temporary Protected Status (TPS) → A U.S. designation allowing individuals from crisis-affected countries to live and work temporarily in the U.S.
Administrative Procedure Act (APA) → U.S. law requiring agencies to follow standard processes, including public consultation, for rulemaking and policy changes.
Sponsor → A U.S.-based individual or group providing financial and other support to immigrants to meet entry requirements.

This Article in a Nutshell

On March 1, 2025, immigrants and advocates sued the Trump administration to restore canceled humanitarian parole programs. These programs helped 875,000 migrants, including Haitians and Ukrainians, temporarily settle in the U.S. The lawsuit argues the terminations are unlawful, harm communities, and challenge America’s humanitarian commitments, spotlighting the evolving clash over immigration policies.
— By VisaVerge.com

Read more:

• USCIS Memo Halts Immigration Applications for Many Parolees
• Trump Halts Immigration Applications for Humanitarian Parole Migrants
• USCIS Stops Accepting Form I-134A for Humanitarian Parole
• Trump Ends CHNV Parole Program for Migrants
• USCIS Updates International Entrepreneur Parole Requirements