Mansha Mirza and Rohin Shah
The United States has a long and complex history of refugee resettlement, marked by shifting foreign policy priorities across presidential administrations. However, the past 12 years have demonstrated the U.S. Refugee Admissions Program’s existential vulnerability to federal election cycles. This article summarizes changes in the U.S. Refugee Admissions Program under the past three federal administrations.
Overview of Refugee Admissions and Resettlement in the United States
The United States has a long history of resettling refugees from around the world dating back to 1950 when the U.S. Congress enacted the first refugee legislation for admitting Europeans displaced by World War II (1). Subsequent laws enacted between 1950 and 1975 permitted the admission of refugees fleeing communist regimes (1). These early waves of refugees were mostly welcomed by private faith-based and ethnic organizations, laying the groundwork for public-private partnerships that would subsequently define the country’s refugee resettlement program (1).
However, it was after the fall of Vietnam (then Saigon) in 1975 that a systematic process was established for refugee admissions and resettlement in collaboration with the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (1). As a signatory to the 1951 Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees and its 1967 Protocol, the United States demonstrated global leadership in this arena
(2) as one of the leading countries for refugee resettlement (3). Between 1975 and 2024, nearly 3.7 million refugees were admitted into the country (4). However, this global leadership has come into question since January 2025.
The legal basis of the US refugee admissions and resettlement program is the Refugee Act of 1980, which was signed by President Carter after bipartisan support in the House and Senate (5). Numbers of admitted refugees and their countries of origin have varied over the years in response to unfolding humanitarian crises and US foreign policy (3). Prior to January 2025, the admissions ceiling was determined by the President after consulting with members of the US Congress (4).
In addition to regulating refugee admissions, the 1980 Refugee Act also enabled the development of a robust refugee resettlement infrastructure. This infrastructure included the federal Office of Refugee Resettlement working in conjunction with nine, and later 10, national resettlement agencies (most of them faith-based) and their local affiliates to provide reception and placement services for up to three months, and longer-term support for up to three years for refugees with more complex needs (2, 6). Long-term provisions comprised services such as mental health, English language classes, employment support, and immigration advice to secure legal permanent residency and eventual citizenship (6).
Over the past 50 years, the U.S. refugee admissions and resettlement program not only cemented the U.S.’ standing as a global leader in humanitarian aid for refugees, but it also benefited the US economy. Evidence suggests that refugees make significant economic contributions by paying taxes, engaging in entrepreneurship, filling labor shortages in specific industries, and revitalizing cities and towns in decline (7, 8). According to one study spanning a 15-year period from 2005 through 2019, refugees contributed approximately $124 billion to the US economy beyond what the federal, state, and local governments spent on refugee programs
(9).
Changes in the Refugee Admissions and Resettlement Program, 2017-2020
President Trump’s administration introduced significant changes to the refugee
assistance and resettlement program, resulting in a drastic reduction in refugee admissions. President Obama’s outgoing administration admitted 84,994 refugees in his last year in office compared with 11,814 refugees admitted during President Trump’s
first year in office (10). A decline this steep had not been recorded since the immediate aftermath of the terrorist attacks on September 11, 2001 (4,6).
Some of this decline could be attributed to the Trump administration reinstating additional overseas vetting procedures that were originally established following terrorist attacks on U.S. soil on September 11, 2001. No justification was provided for adding more complexity to the pre-admission vetting of overseas refugees, a process deemed adequately secure and robust in its standard form[1][2] (6). Refugee admissions ceilings were also lowered during President Trump’s first tenure solely based on presidential determination and without consulting congressional members as mandated by the 1980 Refugee Act. In addition, a presidential executive order imposed a travel ban from seven Muslim-majority countries (6), six of which, at the time, were afflicted with a refugee crisis consequent to civil war and/or political instability. This executive order was legally challenged and revised three times, with the U.S. Supreme Court upholding its third iteration (6). Another executive order permitted individual states to veto resettlement in local jurisdictions. This would have required local resettlement organizations to get written consent from state officials, creating bureaucracy and delaying the resettlement process (2). This executive order was also challenged in a lawsuit filed by the ten national resettlement agencies that succeeded in securing a preliminary injunction against the order (2).
Despite some legal wins, the cumulative effect of these changes was an 86% reduction in refugee admissions from 2016 to 2020[3], which is believed to have contributed to a 50% decline in worldwide availability of resettlement options for refugees (2). The dramatic reduction in refugee admissions also resulted in a significant weakening of the national infrastructure for refugee resettlement. Local refugee resettlement organizations that provide initial reception and placement services for refugees receive federal funds on a per capita basis i.e., a one-time fixed amount for each refugee they support (11). Therefore, with fewer resettled refugees, organizational budgets contracted, triggering mass layoffs of expert staff and, in some cases, complete insolvency and closure (6). This situation was made worse by the federal government’s refusal to authorize local offices serving fewer than 100 refugees (2). Relationships with local stakeholders, necessary for securing housing, healthcare, and employment for resettled refugees, were also disrupted (2).
To tide over this precarity, national organizations banded together to mount successful legal challenges to presidential executive orders. Volunteers and interns were recruited to fill gaps at local resettlement organizations. A few resettlement organizations survived the 2017-20 period by diversifying funding streams and the populations they served (2).
Changes in the Refugee Admissions and Resettlement Program, 2021-2024
The downward trend in refugee admissions started to reverse during the Biden administration. More refugees were resettled during President Biden’s last year in office than during President Trump’s four years in office (10). Upon taking office, President Biden revoked Trump-era restrictions on refugee admissions, including the travel bans that had suspended entry of nationals from specific countries into the United States (12). The annual ceiling for refugee admissions was also increased, as was funding for the Office of Refugee Resettlement (4). Steps were also taken to make the process of resettlement applications more efficient by hiring more officers, digitizing case processing, and implementing video conference interviews for vetting overseas applicants (4). As a result of these changes, refugee admissions gradually increased under the Biden administration reaching a 20-year high by the end of President Biden’s last year in office (4).
Other notable actions taken by the Biden administration include (4, 10):
- The Welcome Corps initiative modeled after a Canadian program allowing private individuals and groups to sponsor refugees to resettle in the United States
- The Safe Mobility Initiative, which established offices in Colombia, Costa Rica, Ecuador, and Guatemala, to disincentivize irregular migration by supporting migrants with finding lawful pathways to the United States and other countries
- The CHNV (Cuba, Haiti, Nicaragua, and Venezuela) humanitarian parole program which was established to provide a legal pathway into the United States for individuals fleeing these countries due to political unrest
- The Enduring Welcome Program, which was established after the withdrawal of US troops from Afghanistan to streamline the relocation of Afghan nationals under three eligibility categories: family reunification applicants, i.e., family members of U.S. citizens and legal permanent residents, special immigrant visa (SIV) applicants, and those qualifying under the refugee admissions program (13)
Altogether, changes implemented by the Biden administration allowed a rebound in refugee admissions to the United States and a gradual rebuilding of the resettlement infrastructure (4).
Changes in the Refugee Admissions and Resettlement Program, January 2025-May 2025
The second Trump administration was inaugurated on January 20, 2025, and began implementing changes in the U.S. refugee admissions program almost immediately. On inauguration day itself, President Trump issued an Executive Order suspending the U.S. Refugee Admissions Program (USRAP) starting January 27, 2025 (14). Pursuant to this order, processing of ongoing refugee applications was paused, federal funding for refugee resettlement organizations was suspended, and “stop work” orders were issued for these organizations (15). These changes are preventing resettlement organizations from performing their function of receiving new refugees and supporting refugees already in the U.S. From here on, refugee admissions into the US will be considered a case-by-case procedure led by the Secretary of State and the Secretary of Homeland Security (14).
These changes have also affected the Afghan Special Immigrant Visa (SIV) program, which was established in 2006 to resettle Afghan nationals who assisted U.S. forces in Afghanistan and who were forced to flee a political crisis engendered by U.S. military intervention and subsequent withdrawal (16). While the program has not been officially suspended, several Afghan SIV applicants and holders have been left stranded in transit countries such as Pakistan due to travel restrictions, flight cancellations, and lack of resettlement funds as a result of recent executive orders (16).
These abrupt changes have not only stranded overseas refugees already vetted for resettlement but have also disrupted services for refugees already resettled in the United
States (17). Once again, refugee resettlement agencies are facing funding uncertainties, are downsizing staff, and have had to resort to private fundraising to finance operations and services (15). The suspension of refugee admissions has been legally challenged for violating congressional authority in a lawsuit filed on behalf of three national resettlement agencies and nine affected individuals (18). While a final determination on the case is pending, a federal judge has granted a preliminary injunction to restore the refugee admissions program with subsequent motions by the federal government to stay the preliminary injunction (18).
At the time of this writing, refugees from most countries are barred from admission into the United States, with notable exceptions. The Trump administration has launched an initiative titled ‘Mission South Africa” for resettling white Afrikaners claiming oppression and persecution in South Africa (19). Emergency refugee centers are being established in South Africa for processing these cases while refugees from war-torn countries such as Afghanistan, Syria, and the Democratic Republic of Congo who were already approved for U.S. resettlement before January 2025 remain stranded (19). Experts believe the Afrikaner resettlement initiative is motivated by racism and a desire to settle political scores with South Africa rather than a commitment to protect refugees with the greatest humanitarian need (20, 21).
Reflections and Implications
The above account of changes in refugee admissions and resettlement over the past 8-9 years represents a departure from the program’s history of bipartisan support and relative stability (see, for example, 22). These changes clearly demonstrate the program’s vulnerability to recent partisan whims. Legal scholar Jonathan Masur has coined the term ‘regulatory oscillations’ to describe a similar trend of doing, undoing, and redoing related to environmental regulations across the Obama, Biden, and Trump
administrations (23). Masur attributes the risk of this type of oscillation to federal agencies having the freedom to interpret statutory language. He argues that wild fluctuation in the enactment of environmental regulations in the United States is particularly damaging given the international nature of the problem and the urgency of climate change, where every year of deferred enactment could contribute to further avoidable, yet potentially irreversible, damage (23).
A similar argument could be made about fluctuations in the U.S. refugee admissions and resettlement program. Like the climate change crisis that Masur (23) focuses on, the refugee crisis is also international in scale and worsening due to widespread conflict, political unrest, and human rights violations. Consequenly, millions of refugees are experiencing food and housing insecurity and lack of healthcare living in precarious temporary conditions. In all, facing an unknown future. As unpredictable changes occur between and within U.S. administrations the refugee crisis continues to growth to unprecedented levels.
Globally, the number of forcibly displaced persons has steadily increased over the past decade and is currently the highest on record (24) and refugee resettlement requires long-standing cooperation between the United States and the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees. Moreover, given the United States’ historical standing as a leader in refugee resettlement, when the U.S. Government backtracks from refugee resettlement, this has a cascading effect on the availability of resettlement opportunities internationally, and signals to other resettlement countries to take a similar restrictive stance.
Masur also attributes ‘regulatory oscillations’ to hyper partisanship and a polarized electorate (23). However, unlike environmental regulations, refugee resettlement has historically garnered bipartisan congressional support with consistent evidence of cost-benefit advantage, as previously stated in this report. In addition, fluctuations in the U.S. refugee admissions and resettlement program, summarized in previous sections, cannot be explained as variations in regulatory interpretation or repeal of previous regulations. Rather, they represent sweeping changes instituted by the Executive branch without congressional approval and in contravention of the Refugee Act of 1980. While the Judiciary has provided some reprieve in the past, changes on the ground are only possible insofar as court orders are followed. Therefore, it could be argued that the recent oscillations in refugee admissions are not regulatory; rather, they are ‘programmatic oscillations’ driven by partisan whims of the Executive branch of government.
Currently, the U.S. refugee admissions and resettlement program stands at a precipice and can only be salvaged by reinforcing the checks and balances between the three branches of government that are the cornerstone of any functioning democracy. Resettlement organizations need to coalesce around legal challenges to changes in the U.S. refugee admissions program. There is also a need for sustained advocacy efforts by civil society organizations in the form of targeted outreach to congressional representatives and members of the lay public to highlight this unfolding humanitarian crisis on U.S. soil.
Acknowledgements
Many thanks to Mustafa Rfat and Yolanda Suarez-Balcazar for reviewing this paper and for offering their valuable feedback and comments.
Reference List
1.History [Internet]. Office of Refugee Resettlement. Administration for Children and Families; 2024 Nov [cited 2025 Apr 5]. Available from: https://acf.gov/orr/about/history
2.Mathema S, Carratala S. Rebuilding the U.S. refugee program for the 21st century [Internet]. Center for American Progress. 2020 Oct [cited 2025 Mar 30]. Available from: https://www.americanprogress.org/article/rebuilding-u-s-refugee-program-21st-century/
3.Krogstad JM. Key facts about refugees to the U.S. [Internet]. Pew Research Center. 2019 Oct [cited 2025 Mar 30]. Available from: https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2019/10/07/key-facts-about-refugees-to-the-u-s/
4.Bush-Joseph K. How the rebuilt U.S. system resettled the most refugees in 30 years [Internet]. Migration Policy Institute. 2024 Oct [cited 2025 Mar 30]. Available from: https://www.migrationpolicy.org/article/rebuilt-us-refugee-resettlement-biden
5.National Archives Foundation. Refugee Act of 1980 [Internet]. National Archives Foundation. [date unknown] [cited 2025 Mar 30]. Available from: https://archivesfoundation.org/documents/refugee-act-1980/
6. Roy D, Klobucista C, McBride J. How does the U.S. refugee system work? [Internet]. Council on Foreign Relations. 2025 May [cited 2025 May 22]. Available from: https://www.cfr.org/backgrounder/how-does-us-refugee-system-work-trump-biden-afghanistan
7.American Immigration Council. New report reveals refugees’ profound economic contributions and integration in the United States [Internet]. American Immigration Council. American Immigration Council; 2023 Jun [cited 2025 Apr 2]. Available from: https://www.americanimmigrationcouncil.org/news/new-report-reveals-refugees-profound-economic-contributions-and-integration-united-states
8.New American Economy. From struggle to resilience: the economic impact of refugees in America [Internet]. New American Economy. 2017 Jun [cited 2025 Apr 2]. Available from: https://research.newamericaneconomy.org/report/from-struggle-to-resilience-the-economic-impact-of-refugees-in-america/
9.Marcos RD. Refugees in U.S. Have Contributed Nearly $124B to U.S. Government Budget, New HHS Study Reveals [Internet]. Administration for Children and Families; 2024 Feb [cited 2025 Apr 2]. Available from: https://acf.gov/archive/blog/2024/02/refugees-us-have-contributed-nearly-124b-us-government-budget-new-hhs-study
10.Center for Migration Studies. The US refugee admissions program: what’s at stake in the election [Internet]. The Center for Migration Studies of New York (CMS). 2024 Oct [cited 2025 Apr 19]. Available from: https://cmsny.org/us-refugee-admissions-program-whats-at-stake-in-election-appleby-103024/
11.Darrow J. The (re)construction of the U.S. Department of State’s Reception and Placement Program by refugee resettlement agencies. Journal of the Society for Social Work and Research. 2015 Mar;6(1):91–119.
12.Ending discriminatory bans on entry to the United States [Internet]. Federal Register. 2021 Jan [cited 2025 Apr 19]. Available from: https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2021/01/25/2021-01749/ending-discriminatory-bans-on-entry-to-the-united-states
13.Alvarez P. Biden administration pivoting to long-term strategy to assist Afghans [Internet]. CNN. 2022 Sep [cited 2025 Apr 19]. Available from: https://www.cnn.com/2022/09/01/politics/afghan-resettlement/index.html
14. The White House. Realigning the United States refugee admissions program [Internet]. The White House. 2025 Jan 20 [cited 2025 May 22]. Available from:
15. Stanley T, Smith P. Refugee resettlement agencies scramble after Trump orders them to halt their federally funded work [Internet]. News 10. 2025 Jan 29 [cited 2025 May 22]. Available from: https://www.news10.com/news/national/ap-refugee-resettlement-agencies-scramble-after-trump-orders-them-to-halt-their-federally-funded-work/
16.Kime P. Advocates push Trump administration to help Afghan allies in face of potential travel ban [Internet]. Military.com. 2025 Mar [cited 2025 Apr 19]. Available from: https://www.military.com/daily-news/2025/03/18/advocates-push-trump-administration-help-afghan-allies-face-of-potential-travel-ban.html
17. Rfat M, Cureton A, Mirza M, Trani J-F. The devastating effect of abrupt US refugee policy shifts. Lancet. 2025 Apr; 405(10486): P1225.
18.Pacito v. Trump: Challenging Trump’s suspension of USRAP [Internet]. International Refugee Assistance Project; 2025 [cited 2025 Apr 6]. Available from: https://refugeerights.org/news-resources/pacito-v-trump-challenging-trumps-suspension-of-usrap
19.Zolan Kanno-Youngs, Hamed Aleaziz. “Mission South Africa”: how Trump is offering White Afrikaners refugee status. The New York Times [Internet]. 2025 Mar 30 [cited 2025 Apr 6]; Available from: https://www.nytimes.com/2025/03/30/us/politics/trump-south-africa-white-afrikaners-refugee.html
20. Nawaz Amna, Kopelev Sonia, Okay Daniel. White South Africans arrive in U.S. after receiving refugee status from Trump. PBS News [Internet]. 2025 May 12 [cited 2025 May 31]. Available from: https://www.pbs.org/newshour/show/white-south-africans-arrive-in-u-s-after-receiving-refugee-status-from-trump
21. Serino, Kenichi. Trump suspended the refugee program. Why is he inviting white South Africans to find a new home in the U.S.?. PBS News [Internet]. 2025 May 12 [cited 2025 May 31]. Available from: https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/trump-suspended-the-refugee-program-why-is-he-inviting-white-south-africans-to-find-a-new-home-in-the-u-s
22. Christ J. Where Do We Go From Here? Examining Twenty Years of Refugee Policy and Admissions Numbers. Refugee Educational Advancement Lab (REAL). 2022 Feb [cited 2025 Jun 17]. Available from: https://blogs.gwu.edu/gsehd-real/2022/02/23/where-do-we-go-from-here-examining-twenty-years-of-refugee-policy-and-admissions-numbers/
23. Masur JS. Regulatory oscillation [Internet]. Yale Journal on Regulation. 2022 Nov [cited 2025 Apr 20]. Available from: https://www.yalejreg.com/print/regulatory-oscillation/
24. United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees. Mid-year trends. Key displacement and solutions trends in the first half of 2024. UNHCR. 2024 Jun [cited 2025 May 31]. Available from: https://www.unhcr.org/us/mid-year-trends
Footnotes
[1] None of the individuals implicated in the attacks of September 11, 2001 had a history of being admitted to the United States as refugees (6).
[2] The standard pre-admissions vetting process takes 18 months to two years to complete and involves background checks, security clearances, biometric screenings, and cross checks against multiple national intelligence databases (6).
[3] Low refugee admissions in fiscal year 2020 are also partially attributable to the COVID-19 pandemic.