The Trump administration has issued a sweeping new directive that could lead to the arrest and detention of tens of thousands of refugees who are legally living in the United States but have not yet obtained permanent residency, reversing years of immigration safeguards and prompting swift legal and political backlash.
A Department of Homeland Security memo filed Wednesday ahead of a federal court hearing in Minnesota says refugees applying for green cards must return to federal custody one year after their admission to the United States so their applications can be reviewed.
Under the policy, DHS "may maintain custody for the duration of the inspection and examination process," the memo states.
Advocacy and refugee resettlement groups warned the order could sow fear and confusion among refugees who entered the U.S. lawfully and have been living and working in communities across the country. Nearly 200,000 refugees were admitted during former Democratic President Joe Biden's administration.
The order, first reported by The Washington Post, marks the latest in a series of immigration actions by the Trump administration that have upended longstanding refugee policies. Those actions include sharply reducing refugee admissions and suspending green card approvals for many refugees who arrived during the previous administration.
A memo obtained by The Associated Press late last year said the administration was planning a broad review of refugees admitted under Biden and immediately halted green card processing for those individuals.
Administration officials have cited national security and economic concerns to justify the changes. Immigration experts and refugee advocates say refugees are already among the most thoroughly vetted groups allowed into the country, undergoing years of background checks and screenings by multiple U.S. agencies before resettlement.
The DHS filing came just hours before U.S. District Judge John Tunheim was scheduled to hear arguments Thursday on whether to extend a temporary order protecting refugees in Minnesota from arrest and deportation.
Tunheim's order, which currently applies only in Minnesota, blocks the government from detaining refugees who are lawfully in the U.S. but have not yet received green cards. Without further action, the temporary restraining order is set to expire February 25.
The judge issued the order last month after concluding the plaintiffs were likely to succeed in their claims that the government's policy and enforcement actions were unlawful.
Immigration advocates quickly condemned the policy, calling it a dramatic escalation that could lead to mass detention of people who followed U.S. law.
HIAS, an international Jewish nonprofit that serves refugees and asylum‑seekers, said the order amounted to an effort to detain and deport people the U.S. government had already welcomed.
"They were promised safety and the chance to rebuild their lives," said Beth Oppenheim, the group's CEO. "Instead, DHS is now threatening them with arrest and indefinite detention."
Resettlement agencies warned the policy could destabilize families, disrupt employment and overwhelm detention facilities, while creating uncertainty for refugees who believed they were on a lawful path to permanent residency.
In his January ruling, Tunheim rejected the government's claim that it had authority to detain refugees who had not obtained green cards within one year of entering the U.S.
"Mandating detention would lead to an illogical result,"
the judge wrote, noting that refugees are not eligible to apply for permanent residency until they have been in the country for a full year.
Under the government's interpretation, Tunheim said, nearly all refugees would face detention unless immigration officials conducted their review at precisely the one‑year mark -- a scenario he described as "nonsensical."
Refugee rights groups sued the federal government in January after DHS and U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services launched Operation PARRIS -- short for Post‑Admission Refugee Reverification and Integrity Strengthening -- in mid‑December.
The operation was described by the government as a "sweeping initiative" to reexamine the cases of 5,600 refugees in Minnesota who had not yet received green cards. Federal officials cited concerns about fraud in Minnesota public assistance programs as justification for the review.
Plaintiffs argue the operation was used to justify widespread arrests without warrants or individualized findings of wrongdoing.
Operation PARRIS was part of a broader immigration crackdown that heavily targeted Minnesota, including a surge of thousands of federal officers into the state. Homeland Security officials described it as the largest immigration enforcement operation ever conducted there.
The operation sparked mass protests and public outrage after federal agents shot and killed Renee Good and Alex Pretti during enforcement activity. White House border czar Tom Homan said last week the surge was ending, though a limited federal presence would remain.
In his rulings, Tunheim emphasized that refugees undergo extensive vetting by multiple federal agencies before being admitted to the United States.
He wrote that none of the refugees arrested under Operation PARRIS had been deemed a danger to the community or a flight risk, nor had they been charged with crimes that would make them deportable.
The lawsuit alleges that Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) officers went door-to-door arresting refugees and transferring them to detention centers in Texas without access to attorneys. Some were later released without resources and left to find their own way back to Minnesota.
Tunheim cited several plaintiffs by initials, including a man identified as U.H.A., a refugee with no criminal history who was admitted to the U.S. in 2024.
According to the judge, U.H.A. was arrested by ICE on January 18 while driving to work.
"He was pulled over, ordered out of his car, handcuffed, and detained, without a warrant or apparent justification,"
Tunheim wrote.
Tunheim barred further arrests under Operation PARRIS and ordered that any refugees still detained be released and returned to Minnesota.
He stressed that the refugees covered by his order were admitted because they faced persecution in their home countries and had a legal right to be in the United States.
"They are not committing crimes on our streets, nor did they illegally cross the border,"
Tunheim wrote. "Refugees have a legal right to be in the United States; a right to work; a right to live peacefully -- and importantly, a right not to be subjected to the terror of being arrested and detained without warrants or cause."
In a follow‑up ruling issued February 9, Tunheim rejected a government request to lift the temporary restraining order, setting the stage for a broader legal fight over the Trump administration's refugee policies.