‘Pros’ and ‘cons’ of the humanitarian parole to three countries

The media, social networks, web platforms and other spaces have seen a high traffic of messages that carry implicit information about the presidential order through which a sponsor in the US, under specific conditions, is key to obtaining the desired parole of admission to the country, with which, by the way, the White House it seeks to stop the migratory flow through the southern border and the sea.

The measure stipulates that people of these three nationalities, as has been the case with Venezuelans and Ukrainians for several months, can request an advance authorization to travel to the United States and be considered, on a case-by-case basis, for a temporary permit of up to two years, which includes work permit.

The process

There are many and varied questions that arise in the context of the norm, but the factor associated with the economic support that the migrant who aspires to travel to the United States must receive is decisive and, ultimately, what guarantees that the process yields a positive result.

The United States Citizenship and Immigration Service (USCIS) published on its website the list of requirements necessary to qualify for the new immigration benefit.

According to USCIS, the sponsor must file Form I-134A (Affidavit of Financial Support) at the email address You must provide an email address of the beneficiary.

Explain that the process is free and that neither the support person residing in the United States nor the beneficiary are required to pay a fee to the Government to submit the form and be considered for a two-year travel authorization or residence permit.

The federal agency warns to be “beware of any scam or potential exploitation by anyone requesting money associated with participation in this process.”

Beneficiaries must be outside the United States and lack entry documents to be considered on a case-by-case basis for travel authorization and a period of temporary stay of up to two years for urgent humanitarian reasons.

The sponsor must demonstrate that the family income is equal to or greater than 125% above the federal poverty level ($22,800).

Similarly, whoever assumes the responsibility of financially supporting a migrant or several from the three countries must pass a background and security check, including aspects of public safety, national security, human trafficking, and exploitation.

In addition, you must meet the beneficiary upon arrival in the United States and transport him to the initial accommodation and ensure that the beneficiary has safe and adequate housing.

Another requirement is to help the beneficiary complete necessary paperwork, such as employment authorization, Social Security card, and services for which they may be eligible.

Regarding the health part, the sponsor has to satisfy the medical and health care needs of the beneficiary during the duration of their stay in the US.

An additional commitment states that it must help the beneficiary access education, learn English, secure employment and enroll children in school.

Specific aspects

DIARIO LAS AMÉRICAS spoke with Immigration lawyer Santiago Alpízar, in order to find out his interpretations regarding the new humanitarian visa program for the US.

The lawyer clarified that there are not 30,000 monthly visas for each of the nationalities included, “as was said at the beginning”, what would correspond is 30,000 monthly distributed among the three nationalities, that is, an average of 7,500 travel admissions for each one. of the countries.

He added that anyone with “legal status” in the US can be a sponsor. “A person who has refugee status, someone who is a resident or who is a citizen. He can also have a DACA, if he is a Nicaraguan, ”she commented.

He emphasized that Cubans, Nicaraguans or Haitians will not be able to access this benefit if they have dual nationality. Nor if they are permanent residents or have refugee status in another nation, “unless dual citizenship is shared between two of the program nations.”

Likewise, Alpízar recommended those who apply as sponsors “to make their own accounts with the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) and obtain the transcripts of the last available year. They can also do it through their accountants”.

Regarding the age of potential migrants who intend to take advantage of the program, the lawyer indicated that, although “there is not enough clarity because we do not know specific situations”, in the case of minors who cannot travel without a company “that can be remedied with due power.”

“Favourable measure”

As a “favorable” measure, with some “objections” that the federal government must take into account, the lawyer Kristy Figueroa-Contreras described the new regulation should lead to a “more orderly and safe migration.”

The expert on immigration issues emphasized the risks that a person runs in their attempt to enter the US through the border area with Mexico, or also by sea, as happens with Cubans and Haitians.

In the opinion of Figueroa-Contreras, an “inconvenience” that may arise in the context of the legal procedure would be “getting a sponsor”, although he stressed that in the case of Venezuelans who have recently benefited from a similar regulation “everything has been quick and relatively easy ”.

“It is favorable that the sponsorship does not have to be from a family member, and can be from a relative who is a resident or citizen, who has the necessary economic conditions,” he explained.

Biden clarified that those who insist on entering the country illegally will be deported to Mexico under the Title 42 measure, a health provision enacted during the COVID-19 pandemic, which empowers the Border Patrol to expel these immigrants.

Mexico, for its part, agreed to receive migrants who do not comply with the regulations, who would be deported if they do not process the formal request.

The lawyer affirmed that the measure “is a sure blow for the organizations that are dedicated to human trafficking.” In general, people who intend to enter the United States “contract the services of a coyote and many of these are associated with criminal gangs,” she said. “This is a very lucrative business.”

In making his announcement, President Biden stated that “my message is this: if you are trying to get out of Cuba, Nicaragua or Haiti (…) stay where you are and legally request [su ingreso] from there”.


For his part, Ángel Leal, a lawyer specializing in Immigration, outlined some objections related to the measure and advised Cubans, Nicaraguans and Haitians “who dream of coming to live in the US” to “do not jump in, try to find a sponsor and request a parole”.

Leal was “disappointed and concerned” after President Biden’s order, since “the US has certain commitments based on the 1951 Refugee Convention”, in whose legal framework it is stipulated that a refugee should not be returned to a country where you face major threats to your life or liberty.

“Implementing these measures is endangering the lives of vulnerable populations. We are talking specifically about Cuba, Venezuela, Nicaragua and Haiti, ”she pointed out.

The lawyer considers that the US law itself recognizes that they are vulnerable populations and that is why the Cuban Adjustment Act of 1966 exists, the TPS, in the case of Venezuelans; the Nacara law or Adjustment Law for Nicaragua and support for Central America, “approved in the 1990s”, and a similar law, called HRIFA or Haitian Refugee Immigration Fairness Law.

“They are an acknowledgment that these people come from a system of systematic persecution and oppression, of violation of civil and human rights,” he said.

The lawyer affirmed that the United States, by implementing these types of restrictions, begins to lose its “essence as a country.”

In this regard, he said, “if the US does not give those refugees the opportunity to request asylum and refuge, as it has done historically, we are entering a territory in which we lose the essence of what this country really means.”

*This article summarizes contents addressed in interviews by journalists Darcy Borrero Batista and César Menéndez

‘Pros’ and ‘cons’ of the humanitarian parole to three countries