Asylum Ban
The administration has taken an aggressive approach to legal immigration and existing humanitarian pathways to the United States. The initial Executive Orders (EO) on "Protecting the American People Against Invasion," and "Securing our Border" ended access to the U.S. asylum process at ports of entry on the U.S.-Mexico border. This is consistent with a decades-long practice of U.S. administrations enacting what is referred to as "prevention through deterrence:" enacting hostile policies towards those seeking asylum at the Southern border as an effort to deter or discourage people from coming to the United States.
The EO also violates U.S. law which requires that any noncitizen "who is physically present in the United States or who arrives in the United States (whether or not at a designated port of arrival . . . ), irrespective of such [noncitizen]'s status, may apply for asylum." 11 people and 2 organizations filed suit challenging the EO, and litigation is ongoing.
People are still crossing the U.S. southern border, albeit in much smaller numbers. The EO mentioned above allows the administration to deport anyone apprehended while crossing the border. According to the American Immigration Council, "the DHS statistics show that southwest border 'encounters' have remained under 15,000 a month since February 2025--down from a December 2023 peak of over 300,000." These new policies also had a direct impact on people who were already at the Southern border waiting to seek asylum, including:
30,000 canceled appointments for asylum claims; and
270,000 people stranded in Mexico waiting for asylum.
(Source: American Immigration Council)
Refugee Ban
The U.S. Refugee Admissions Program, a program that facilitates a legal pathway to resettlement for those fleeing violence and persecution, is a separate legal mechanism, different from the asylum process. (Remember: A person is granted refugee status overseas, whereas a person applies for asylum upon arrival in the U.S. Here's a brief overview of the difference). The United States has historically been a leader in refugee resettlement, with the President setting the annual determination number each year.
As of January 20, 2025 there were approximately 100,000 refugees in the U.S. Refugee Admissions Program (USRAP) pipeline, most of them referred by the office of the UN High Commissioner on Refugees, including 12,000 who had made it through years-long vetting process and already booked travel to the United States (source: American Immigration Council).
The administration has allowed one notable exception to the refugee ban. On February 7, 2025, the president signed an Executive Order entitled "Addressing Egregious Actions of The Republic of South Africa" directing the administration to resettle white South Africans who claimed they were victims of racial persecution from the country's Black majority. Quixote Center is aligned with the National Immigration Council's analysis of this: "The one exception to the refugee ban...shows how flimsy the administration's pretext for gutting the refugee program really is. While two years of vetting is apparently insufficient for most refugees, a group of white farmers claiming persecution at the hands of a majority-Black country is presumed by this administration to "be assimilated easily" into the U.S. after scarcely any vetting at all."
Travel Ban
The administration has also forged ahead with new barriers to legal immigration, including a new system of country-wide "travel bans" that bars entry for anyone from the following 12 countries: Afghanistan, Chad, Republic of the Congo, Equatorial Guinea, Eritrea, Haiti, Iran, Libya, Myanmar, Somalia, Sudan, Yemen. There are also 7 countries under a partial travel ban, and additional countries under consideration.
Tightened Scrutiny & Revocation of Legal Pathways
All visa applications for studying, working, and traveling to the United States (legal pathways) will now undergo higher levels of scrutiny. The U.S. Department of State and the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (the two federal agencies who issue and adjudicate visas) have issued new policies for "aggressive ideological screening of applicants." Students and other visa applicants are required to now have their social media profiles set to "public" so their posts can be reviewed by administration officials - a clear threat to free speech and first amendment rights.
The administration has attempted to revoke legal, protective, and humanitarian statuses from various populations. As Quixote Center has highlighted in the past, these types of temporary and protective immigration statuses can be granted or revoked based on the ebb and flow of political administrations. The Cuban, Haitian, Nicaraguan, and Venezuelan (CHNV), Temporary Protective Status (TPS), as well as the parole programs for Afghanistan and Ukraine are all temporary protections that leave migrants without a permanent status to fall back on, and we are now seeing the human implications when those statuses are revoked or challenged.
With the passage of the budget reconciliation, or the so-called One Big Beautiful Bill (OBBA), the administration has also implemented major fee increases on legal immigration pathways. The chart below from the American Immigration Council highlights the major fee increases in the bill. For a full accounting of the fee increases, please navigate to USCIS's website.