Preventing the Abuse of Immigration Parole Act
Summary
What This Bill Does
The Preventing the Abuse of Immigration Parole Act tightens Immigration and Nationality Act parole authority. It restates that DHS may parole an applicant for admission into the United States only temporarily, case by case, for urgent humanitarian reasons or significant public benefit, and that parole is not admission. When the purpose of parole has been served, the person must return or be returned to custody and continue to be treated like any other applicant for admission. DHS may not parole a national of a country of concern unless the Secretary of State issues a waiver. Beginning in fiscal year 2029, DHS may grant parole to no more than 3,000 people per fiscal year under the general parole authority. State attorneys general or other authorized state officers may sue the DHS Secretary in federal district court for injunctive relief if they allege a violation of the case-by-case and urgent-humanitarian-or-public-benefit limits that harms the state or residents. Courts must expedite those cases, and harm includes financial harm over $100.
Who Benefits and How
Immigration restriction advocates benefit from a tighter statutory parole cap and case-by-case standard. State attorneys general benefit from explicit standing to challenge alleged DHS parole violations. States with parole-related costs benefit from an injunctive-relief path when alleged harm exceeds $100. Congressional immigration overseers benefit from a hard 3,000-person annual cap beginning in fiscal year 2029.
Who Bears the Burden and How
DHS parole officers must apply stricter case-by-case, urgent-humanitarian, and significant-public-benefit limits. Nationals of countries of concern face a parole bar unless the State Department issues a waiver. The Secretary of State must review waiver requests for country-of-concern nationals. Federal courts must advance and expedite state lawsuits challenging parole decisions. Humanitarian parole applicants may lose access if annual parole grants reach the 3,000 cap.
Key Provisions
- Requires immigration parole to be case by case and based only on urgent humanitarian reasons or significant public benefit.
- Bars parole for nationals of countries of concern without a State Department waiver.
- Caps general parole grants at 3,000 per fiscal year beginning in fiscal year 2029.
- Authorizes state attorneys general and officers to sue DHS for injunctive relief.
- Requires courts to expedite state parole lawsuits and defines harm to include financial harm over $100.
Evidence Chain:
This summary is generated from the full bill text using AI analysis. Expand "Detailed Analysis" below for identified beneficiaries/burden bearers with clause-level evidence links.
At a Glance
What This Bill Does
Rewrites immigration parole authority to require case-by-case parole only for urgent humanitarian reasons or significant public benefit, bars parole for nationals of countries of concern without a State Department waiver, caps parole grants at 3,000 per fiscal year beginning in fiscal year 2029, and gives state attorneys general or authorized state officers standing to sue DHS for injunctive relief when parole violations harm states or residents by more than $100.
Key Policy Areas
Immigration, Homeland Security, State Litigation
Primary Purpose
Rewrites immigration parole authority to require case-by-case parole only for urgent humanitarian reasons or significant public benefit, bars parole for nationals of countries of concern without a State Department waiver, caps parole grants at 3,000 per fiscal year beginning in fiscal year 2029, and gives state attorneys general or authorized state officers standing to sue DHS for injunctive relief when parole violations harm states or residents by more than $100.
Policy Domains
Resolution provisions
Identified Gains
- Immigration restriction advocates
- State attorneys general
- States with parole costs
- Congressional immigration overseers
Identified Costs
- DHS parole officers
- Country-of-concern nationals
- Secretary of State
- Federal courts
- Humanitarian parole applicants
Sponsors
Legislative Progress
In CommitteeMr. McDowell (for himself, Mr. Weber of Texas, Mr. Moore …
Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
Introduced in House
Stakeholder Effects
cui bono?How this legislation distributes effects. Mention counts reflect frequency, not effect magnitude.
Country-of-concern nationals, Humanitarian parole applicants, Immigration restriction advocates
Positive-direction: Immigration restriction advocates
Negative-direction: Country-of-concern nationals, Humanitarian parole applicants
Bill Structure & Actor Mappings
Who is "The Secretary" in each section?
We use a combination of our own taxonomy and classification in addition to large language models to assess meaning and potential beneficiaries. High confidence means strong textual evidence. Always verify with the original bill text.
Learn more about our methodology