The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) recently launched Operation PARRIS (Post-Admission Refugee Reverification and Integrity Strengthening) in Minnesota to target fraudulent refugee applications.
For now, the focus is on the 5,600 refugees who have not yet received permanent residence (green cards) – i.e., relative newcomers. Under U.S. immigration law, resettled refugees are required to apply for a green card one year after arrival to the United States (though it may take some time for the application to be processed).
The U.S. has resettled more than 100,000 Somali refugees. Most were resettled in Minnesota.
Operation PARRIS is being led by USCIS’s newly established vetting center, with “adjudicators conducting thorough background checks, reinterviews, and merit reviews of refugee claims.” Cases of fraud and other crimes are being referred to Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) for prosecution and/or removal.
The PARRIS initiative is in line with the Trump administration’s reassessment of cases of refugees resettled under the Biden-Harris administration given the scale of admissions and the extent of programmatic changes in the refugee resettlement program implemented during the Biden years.
One of those changes relates to the launch of the “Welcome Corps” private sponsorship program within the U.S. Refugee Admissions Program (USRAP) that opened the door to preferential treatment and biases. Under the Welcome Corps, U.S. residents (including even newly arrived refugees) could pick those who get to follow them here. By its nature, the program favored the subjective, personalized selection of individuals to be resettled here and allowed for the preferential selection of “refugees” by their friends or family already here.
Actually, one of the top ten states for private sponsorship was Minnesota. The state was celebrated as a “national leader”, with over 23,000 private individuals signing up to sponsor over 15,000 refugees.
Most Somalis who came to Minnesota in the early 1990s (following the beginning of a long civil war and clan violence), including U.S. Rep. Ilhan Omar, were admitted legally as refugees. According to the now-archived U.S. Refugee Processing Center portal, the United States resettled more than 100,000 Somali refugees from fiscal year 2001 through 2020. Most were resettled in Minnesota. The Somali community in Minnesota is estimated at 75,000 or more. In more recent years (FY 2021 through FY 2025), an additional 2,518 Somalis were resettled in Minnesota.
The reassessment of refugees admitted under the Biden-Harris administration could be useful. It is true that the resettlement adjudication process – from the referral to USRAP, to assistance and pre-screening by Resettlement Support Centers (RSCs), through multilayered security vetting, adjudication by a USCIS refugee officer, and ultimately admission to the United States – was far from flawless, particularly under the prior administration. Each stage contained vulnerabilities and discretionary gaps that merit careful reassessment.
But an additional cautionary layer could also be deemed necessary. Years ago, I suggested why not 2-year conditional green cards for refugees? I reiterated this suggestion last year with the fall of the Assad regime in Syria. Instead of giving resettled refugees permanent residence, why not give them two-year Conditional Permanent Residence, as is the case currently with those seeking permanent residence through marriage? USCIS explains the conditional process:
A conditional permanent resident receives a green card valid for 2 years. In order to remain a permanent resident, a conditional permanent resident must file a petition to remove the condition during the 90 days before the card expires. The conditional card cannot be renewed. The conditions must be removed or you will lose your permanent resident status.
The two-year period allows for a reevaluation of cases after which either permanent residency status is granted or an order for removal issued.
In refugee cases, reevaluating individuals some years (maybe two, maybe more) after resettlement in the United States could be beneficial on multiple levels. Such reviews would provide an additional layer of vetting, help uncover fraudulent persecution claims that initially went undetected, and identify early signs of radicalization. They could also help reveal real motivations (including opportunistic stands) and assess whether meaningful integration is under way. Moreover, when fraud is established, conditional green cards are far easier to revoke than permanent ones.