District Court Temporarily Halts Parole Approvals Under New PIP Program
The Eastern District Court of Texas has issued a 14-day administrative stay of parole in place (PIP) approvals under the Biden Administration’s new “Keeping Families Together” program, following a lawsuit filed last week by 16 U.S. states challenging the program. While the administrative stay is in place, PIP applicants can continue to submit Form I-131F parole in place applications to U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS); however, the agency will be prohibited from approving the applications during the stay period.
The administrative stay is renewable, and the court noted that it expects that good cause may exist to extend the stay for additional periods through mid-October, while litigation continues. The case is Texas et. al. vs. DHS et. al., Case No. 6:24-cv-00306 (E.D. Tex.).
The purpose of the administrative stay is to pause approvals under the PIP program while the district court considers the legality of the program. The court has set an expedited litigation schedule, which could result in a district court decision on the merits in the fall of 2024. However, appeals are likely, regardless of which party prevails at the district court level.
Background
Since August 19, undocumented spouses and stepchildren of U.S. citizens who qualify for the new PIP program have been permitted to submit Form I-131F applications to USCIS. If approved for PIP, the spouse or stepchild will be granted a period of up to three years to apply for permanent residence (a green card) within the United States through the adjustment of status process, instead of needing to depart and apply abroad at a U.S. consulate. Grantees will also be protected from removal and eligible to apply for parole-based work authorization for the duration of their PIP validity.
On August 23, Texas and 15 other U.S. states filed a lawsuit against the Department of Homeland Security, seeking to block the new PIP program. The Plaintiffs claim that the program is unlawful under the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) as arbitrary and capricious and exceeding statutory authority, among other grounds. The U.S. states asked the court to temporarily restrain, preliminarily enjoin, or stay implementation of the PIP program immediately, as well as to fully vacate and permanently enjoin the program. Yesterday’s administrative stay order temporarily halts approvals under the PIP program while the court determines whether the program should be permanently enjoined as unlawful.