Yesterday, the administration announced a new set of measures in anticipation of the termination of Title 42, a pandemic-era policy that restricts access to asylum and expels migrants at the Southern border. Though it is promising to see the administration focusing on addressing the needs of refugees within the Western Hemisphere — increasing resettlement, expanding family reunification opportunities, and establishing new regional processing centers in Colombia, Guatemala and other countries — such improvements should not come at the expense of meaningful access to asylum along our southern border.

Tahirih’s policy work is rooted in our core values and in our promise theory of change. We work to advance policies and laws that enable immigrant survivors of gender-based violence to purse legal immigration status, live in safety, and fore their own paths.

The Tahirih Justice Center is prioritizing the following policy goals to immediately improve protections for immigrant survivors with simultaneously seeking long-term, systemic change.

Senior Litigation Counsel at the Tahirih Justice Center, Rachel Sheridan, explains why the CBP One App is problematic for survivors of violence seeking asylum.

The Tahirih Justice Center welcomes the introduction of the Refugee Protection Act (RPA). This bill not only ensures our doors remain open to refugees and asylum seekers but also reasserts long-held legal precedent.  

Rachel Sheridan, Tahirih’s Litigation Counsel spoke with City Limits reporter Daniel Parra and El Diario NY report Jesus Garcia about two recent SCOTUS decisions that will negatively impact immigrants seeking legal status in the U.S.

 Tahirih’s Senior Litigation Counsel, Richard Caldarone, spoke to La Opinion reporter Jesus Garcia, about two recent SCOTUS decisions that could devastatingly impact the clients we serve. 

Texas Governor Greg Abbott issued an executive order that unlawfully seeks to arrest people seeking asylum, and other people without status in the United States, and return them to the border at a port of entry. The order is flatly illegal. It seeks to enforce purported violations of federal immigration law, something the Supreme Court has expressly held states cannot do. The order itself also violates federal immigration law, which makes clear that people have a legal right to seek asylum in the United States even if they enter the country without authorization. And if it is implemented, the order will force survivors of gender-based violence, and other vulnerable people pursuing that right to seek protection, out of their communities and into danger.