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
Trump Amplifies Immigration Policies and Celebrates Sharp Decline in Border Crossings in Fifth Joint Address to Congress
In his joint address to Congress on March 4, President Trump emphasized his administration’s efforts to secure the U.S. border and increase deportation numbers. Trump’s address celebrated the sharp decline in border crossings at the U.S.-Mexico border, with February 2025 reportedly seeing the lowest number of apprehensions since at least 2000, when the monthly data started to be collected. Trump attributed this sharp decline this to his administration’s aggressive immigration policies, including limits to asylum at the border, deploying military troops, and enhanced enforcement measures in the interior. During the speech, Trump said the U.S. did not need legislation to secure the border, referencing the bipartisan bill introduced by Sen. James Lankford (R-OK) in 2024, adding that it, “turned out that all we really needed was a new president.” A number of the administration’s policies face legal challenges.
Trump also referenced “Operation Wetback” in his speech, a 1954 major deportation effort under President Eisenhower, stating that the Trump administration will “complete the largest deportation operation in American history. Larger even than current record holder President Dwight D. Eisenhower.” Trump also criticized the Biden administration’s immigration policies, accusing the administration of secretly flying migrants into the U.S. through the humanitarian parole program for nationals from Cuba, Haiti, Nicaragua, and Venezuela (CHNV).
House Oversight Committee Holds Hearing on “Sanctuary City” Policies
On March 5, the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee called the Democratic mayors of four major cities for a hearing on their so-called “sanctuary” policies. Sanctuary policies differ across cities but generally refer to laws that restrict the extent to which the city or state government will share information or cooperate with federal immigration law officers. Mayors Mike Johnston of Denver, Michelle Wu of Boston, Brandon Johnson of Chicago, and Eric Adams of New York testified at the hearing, which was framed as an “investigation” into the jurisdictions’ use of “sanctuary city” policies.
The hearing, which lasted about 6 hours, was contentious at times. Republican lawmakers – particularly Committee Chairman James Comer (R-KY-1) and Rep. Lauren Boebert (R-CO-4) – relied on “yes or no” questions without allowing witnesses an opportunity to fully explain local policies. For the most part, the mayors argued that policies placing some limits on local enforcement of federal immigration laws were instrumental in building trust between immigrant communities and local law enforcement and, as a result, contributed to public safety.
Each of the four mayors pointed to falling crime rates in their cities and emphasized that they often communicate and collaborate with Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), particularly following a federal warrant.
Trump Administration Consider Travel Ban for Afghanistan and Pakistan, Likely Barring Afghan Allies
The Trump administration is reportedly planning to implement a new travel ban that could bar individuals from Afghanistan and Pakistan from entering the U.S. The policy would likely bar tens of thousands of Afghan allies who have been cleared for resettlement in the U.S. While some Afghan allies remain in Afghanistan, others have moved to Pakistan to escape Taliban retribution and to accommodate processing for admission into the U.S. as refugees or on a Special Immigrant Visa (SIV). The ban could go into effect as soon as next week.
The move is similar to an effort in the first Trump administration to bar travelers from seven majority-Muslim nations. That ban went through several modifications before it was upheld by the U.S. Supreme Court in 2018. A report following Trump’s first-term travel ban concluded that such bans strain relationships and weaken our national security, calling it a “ flawed experiment.”
Media Reports That Trump Administration Will Revoke Legal Status for 240,000 Ukrainians Fleeing War Denied by White House
The Trump administration reportedly considered this week revoking Temporary Protected Status (TPS) and parole protections for some 240,000 Ukrainians in the U.S. as early as April. The reports came amid a contentious meeting in the Oval Office between President Trump and Ukrainian President Zelensky about the future of Ukraine’s defense. However, on March 6, the White House denied reports that they have decided to revoke protections for Ukrainians, indicating that the administration has not made a decision yet. The Trump administration has already moved to end TPS protections for some Venezuelans and rescinded a TPS extension for Haitians while allowing immigration officers to revoke parole status for individuals allowed to enter the U.S. with parole.
Legal
Justice Department Cuts Staffing at EOIR, Moves to Tighten Control Over Immigration Judges
At least 28 employees within the Executive Office for Immigration Review (EOIR) have been removed by the Trump administration in recent weeks, according to the International Federation of Professional and Technical Engineers (IFPTE), the union that represents immigration judges and other employees within the Department of Justice (DOJ). Reportedly, employees removed by the administration include 13 newly appointed judges and several court managers as part of its broader effort to reduce the federal workforce. There are approximately 700 immigration judges across the country’s 71 immigration courts. This move comes despite the administration’s stated goal of accelerating deportations and addressing the massive backlog of over 3.7 million immigration cases.
Additionally, the Justice Department issued a memo indicating that immigration judges may no longer be protected by civil service rules that protect career professionals in the government from arbitrary removal. Critics of the memo fear this could lead to the dismissal of judges who do not consistently rule against migrants in deportation and asylum cases. Matt Biggs, president of the IFPTE, warned that this move could “facilitate the dismissal of judges without valid reasons” and potentially pressure remaining judges to rule against migrants or face termination.
Trump Declares English the Official Language, Revoking Federal Language Access Mandate
On March 1, President Trump signed an executive order declaring English the official language of the United States, revoking a prior executive order signed by President Bill Clinton in 2000 that required federal agencies to provide language services for individuals with limited English proficiency. While the order does not prohibit agencies from offering multilingual services, it leaves such decisions to agency heads, sparking concerns that it could discourage access to government programs for non-English speakers. Immigrant rights groups and lawmakers, including the Congressional Hispanic Caucus and the Congressional Asian Pacific American Caucus, have criticized the move as a “thinly veiled” attempt to discriminate against immigrants.
Critics argue that the executive order is largely symbolic but carries significant implications for immigrant communities. Although existing laws like Title VI of the Civil Rights Act and Section 1557 of the Affordable Care Act still require language access to prevent discrimination based on national origin, advocates warn that the order could send a message that non-English speakers are unwelcome. Supporters of the order, including proponents of the English-only movement, argue that it reinforces national unity and streamlines communication. However, legal experts note that the United States has never had an official language and point to its linguistic diversity, with more than 350 languages spoken nationwide. Critics of the executive order emphasize that embracing multilingualism strengthens communities and fosters inclusion, while measures to limit it risk stigmatizing immigrants and eroding trust in public institutions.
State and Local
States Move to Mandate Local Agencies Join ICE’s 287(g) Program
The Trump administration continues to intensify immigration enforcement efforts by leveraging partnerships with state and local law enforcement agencies. In North Carolina, a proposed Senate bill (SB153) aims to mandate state agencies to sign 287(g) agreements with Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), allowing local officers to perform federal immigration functions. In Virginia, Gov. Glenn Youngkin signed an executive order that directs state public safety agencies to enter into 287(g) agreements. This initiative aligns with broader strategies to support President Trump’s mass deportation agenda by expanding the role of local law enforcement in immigration enforcement.
Other states are taking a different approach. In Illinois, state officials argue that the federal government cannot compel states to enforce federal immigration laws, citing constitutional rights to set their own policies. Meanwhile, in Iowa, a bill requiring local police to assist ICE was withdrawn due to concerns about federalizing local law enforcement and impacting public safety. Despite this, Iowa lawmakers are considering alternative legislation that would penalize officers for not complying with ICE detainer requests. The expansion of immigration enforcement through local partnerships has sparked widespread apprehension about civil rights and public safety.
BILLS INTRODUCED AND CONSIDERED
It’s challenging to keep up with the 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.1958
A bill to amend the Immigration and Nationality Act to clarify that aliens who have been convicted of defrauding the United States Government or the unlawful receipt of public benefits are inadmissible and deportable.
Sponsored by Rep. David Taylor (R-OH-2) (12 Cosponsors)
03/06/2025 Introduced by Rep. Taylor
03/06/2025 Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary
H.R.1953
A bill to prohibit foreign assistance to countries that deny or delay accepting aliens as described in section 243 of the Immigration and Nationality Act.
Sponsored by Rep. Chip Roy (R-TX-21) (13 Cosponsors)
03/06/2025 Introduced by Rep. Roy
03/06/2025 Referred to the House Committee on Foreign Affairs
H.R.1935
A bill to amend the Immigration and Nationality Act to provide that aliens who have been convicted of or who have committed an offense related to entering military, naval, or coast guard property, are inadmissible and deportable.
Sponsored by Rep. Morgan Luttrell (R-TX-8) (0 Cosponsors)
03/06/2025 Introduced by Rep. Luttrell
03/06/2025 Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary
H.R.1928
A bill to authorize private enforcement of immigration laws, and for other purposes.
Sponsored by Rep. Darrell Issa (R-CA-48) (5 Cosponsors)
03/06/2025 Introduced by Rep. Issa
03/06/2025 Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary
H.R.1927
A bill to provide for enhanced Federal, State, and local assistance in the enforcement of the immigration laws, to amend the Immigration and Nationality Act, and to authorize appropriations to carry out the State Criminal Alien Assistance Program.
Sponsored by Rep. Darrell Issa (R-CA-48) (4 Cosponsors)
03/06/2025 Introduced by Rep. Issa
03/06/2025 Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary
H.R.1913
A bill to amend title 23, United States Code, to limit certain Federal funding to States that do not have a process to notify the Secretary of Homeland Security of the release from custody or detainment of certain aliens under certain circumstances, and for other purposes.
Sponsored by Rep. Jeff Crank (R-CO-5) (0 Cosponsors)
03/06/2025 Introduced by Rep. Crank
03/06/2025 Referred to the House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure
H.R.1837
A bill to require aliens seeking admission to the United States as nonimmigrants to pay a bond or cash payment and to impose penalties on such aliens who fail to timely depart the United States, and for other purposes.
Sponsored by Rep. Robert Onder (R-MO-3) (6 Cosponsors)
03/04/2025 Introduced by Rep. Onder
03/04/2025 Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary
H.R.1821
A bill to deny Federal funding to any State or political subdivision of a State that has in effect any law, policy, or procedure that prevents or impedes a State or local law enforcement official from maintaining custody of an alien pursuant to an immigration detainer issued by the Secretary of Homeland Security, and for other purposes.
Sponsored by Rep. Ken Calvert (R-CA-41) (0 Cosponsors)
03/04/2025 Introduced by Rep. Calvert
03/04/2025 Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary
H.R.1820
A bill to address public safety issues and environmental destruction on Federal lands along the southern border, enhance border security through the construction of navigable roads on Federal lands along the southern border, provide U.S. Customs and Border Protection access to Federal lands to improve the safety and effectiveness of enforcement activities, allow States to place temporary barriers on Federal land to secure the southern border, reduce the massive trash accumulations and environmental degradation along the southern border, reduce the cultivation of illegal cannabis on Federal lands, mitigate wildland fires caused by illegal immigration, and prohibit migrant housing on Federal lands.
Sponsored by Rep. Juan Ciscomani (R-AZ-6) (11 Cosponsors)
03/04/2025 Introduced by Rep. Ciscomani
03/05/2025 Referred to the Subcommittee on Federal Lands
LEGISLATIVE FLOOR CALENDAR
The U.S. Senate will be in session from Monday, March 10, through Friday, March 14. The U.S. House of Representatives will be in session from Monday, March 10, through Wednesday, March 12.
UPCOMING HEARINGS AND MARKUPS
Here, we round up congressional hearings and markups happening in the field or in Washington relevant to immigration policy.
Eliminating Waste, Fraud, and Abuse at the Department of Homeland Security: Addressing the Biden-Harris Administration’s Failures
Date: Tuesday, March 11, 2025, at 2:00 PM ET (House Homeland Security Subcommittee on Oversight, Investigations, and Accountability)
Location: 310 Cannon House Office Building, Washington, D.C.
Witnesses: TBA*
Enhancing Federal, State, and Local Coordination in the Fight Against Criminal Illegal Aliens
Date: Tuesday, March 11, 2025, at 2:00 PM ET (House Oversight Subcommittee on Federal Law Enforcement)
Location: 2247 Rayburn House Office Building, Washington, D.C.
Witnesses: TBA*
GOVERNMENT REPORTS
Reports by bodies such as the U.S. Government Accountability Office, the Congressional Research Service, and the Department of Homeland Security’s Office of Inspector General provide invaluable information on immigration policy and practice. Here, we give brief summaries of new immigration-related reports, with links to the resources themselves in case you want to learn more.
Congressional Research Service (CRS); “Sanctuary” Jurisdictions: Policy Overview; Publicly Released March 4, 2025
This report provides an overview of sanctuary jurisdictions, outlining the arguments for and against sanctuary policies, legal issues, relevant executive orders passed during the Biden and Trump administrations, and recent Congressional proposals regarding sanctuary jurisdictions.
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:
This new resource explains why sanctuary jurisdictions have the constitutional right to limit their cooperation with federal immigration enforcement under the anti-commandeering doctrine. It also examines the legal challenges surrounding federal attempts to impose funding conditions on sanctuary jurisdictions.
New Surveys on Border, Immigration: Americans Want Cooperation and Solutions
Two surveys released last week reinforce the broad support among Americans for a combination of immigration and border solutions this year. “Americans are beyond ready for Democrats and Republicans to work together on solutions that reaffirm our security, compassion, and moral leadership in the world,” said Jennie Murray, President and CEO of the National Immigration Forum.
Forum Analysis:
President Trump’s Executive Actions on Border Security
President Trump’s Executive Order on the U.S. Refugee Program
President Trump’s Executive Actions Relating to Immigration Enforcement and Mass Deportation
*As of publication (3/7/25 at 5PM EST)
This Bulletin is not intended to be comprehensive. Please contact Nicci Mattey, Senior Policy & Advocacy Associate at the National Immigration Forum, with comments and suggestions for additional items to be included. Nicci can be reached at nmattey@immigrationforum.org. Thank you.