Washington, D.C. (December 16, 2025) - Were refugees resettled under the Biden-Harris administration properly vetted? A new analysis from the Center for Immigration Studies undertakes a close examination of the refugee resettlement process and finds that each step contained vulnerabilities and gaps that have serious implications for public safety and national security.
As the Trump administration reportedly prepares to reinterview refugees resettled during the Biden-Harris years and considers halting refugee green card approvals, scrutiny of recent resettlement practices has intensified. The urgency of such scrutiny is underscored by the recent attack on National Guard soldiers by an Afghan national brought to the United States during the Biden years. Although he did not enter through the U.S. Refugee Admissions Program (USRAP), the case highlights broader concerns about screening, follow-up, and accountability across various humanitarian pathways.
The analysis is a detailed look at where the refugee vetting process may have fallen short. Under Biden, more than 233,000 refugees were resettled through USRAP at a time of rapid expansion of the program, structural changes, and new discretionary pathways designed to speed admissions and broaden eligibility. According to the report, these shifts weakened long-standing safeguards and introduced vulnerabilities at nearly every stage of adjudication.
“Given the scale of admissions and the extent of programmatic changes implemented during the Biden years, some refugees admitted under the prior administration could well pose a risk to public safety or national security,” said Nayla Rush, a senior researcher at the Center and author of the report.
Key findings include:
- Expanded discretion, reduced guardrails: Refugee determinations are entirely discretionary under law, with USCIS empowered to approve, revoke, or deny status with limited avenues for appeal.
- New referral pathways increased risk: NGO referrals and the Welcome Corps private sponsorship program allowed applicants for resettlement to be nominated outside traditional UNHCR vulnerability-based assessment.
- Non-refugees admitted as refugees: Individuals without formal UN refugee status could be sponsored, claim persecution, and be approved after a single interview.
- Documented fraud risks: Prior GAO reviews found major deficiencies with Resettlement Support Center case preparation, including staff fraud and insufficient oversight. These shortcomings are especially concerning given the central role RSCs play in vetting potential refugees.
- Speed over scrutiny: Concurrent processing, digitization, and compressed timelines replaced historically years-long reviews with decisions made in weeks or months.
|
