Day 1 opened with introductions and a presentation from USCRI’s policy analysts, who provided updates on current resettlement issues and answered questions from the field. From there, partners engaged in dialogue to identify challenges and co-create next steps for the months ahead.

In the afternoon, we heard from two key speakers—The CATO Institute and The Penn Hill Group. Both offered timely insights into effective advocacy, bipartisan messaging, and relationship-building across political lines. These sessions highlighted the importance of shared values and strategic communication in advancing refugee protection in today’s climate.

Day 2 began with internal, small-group discussions on communications and programming. Agencies collaborated on shared messaging, alignment, and new ways to move forward as a unified national network.

Later in the morning, Christine Herrmann, USCRI’s Director of Development, led a session focused on fundraising strategy. Partners exchanged ideas on strengthening development efforts and expanding collective impact through innovation and collaboration.

We closed the retreat with an inspiring presentation from Zara Marselian of La Maestra Community Health Centers. She shared the story of her organization’s background and the evolution of the La Maestra Circle of Care®, a holistic approach to meeting the needs of diverse, underserved communities.

The retreat left us energized, aligned, and recommitted to our mission.

In times of uncertainty, collaboration is our greatest strength.

The post USCRI Partner Agency Retreat: Strengthening Strategy, Solidarity, and Shared Purpose appeared first on USCRI.

This year’s theme, “Human trafficking is Organized Crime—End the Exploitation,” underscores the need for a robust criminal justice response that includes proactive investigations, strengthened cross-border cooperation, and the strategic targeting of traffickers’ finances and networks. Dismantling trafficking networks, however, requires more than just enforcement; it requires centering survivors in how we prevent trafficking and pursue justice.

During Human Trafficking Prevention Month earlier this year, USCRI highlighted the importance of enhanced data collection and cross-sector collaboration to improve identification and response. Today, we build on that conversation by focusing on how comprehensive services and legal protections for survivors are not just acts of goodwill but are essential tools to both prevention and prosecution.

Organized Crime Preys on Vulnerability. Services Disrupt Exploitation Pathways

Human trafficking does not happen in isolation. It thrives in vulnerable and underserved communities, on the margins of society, and in the gaps between systems. Organized criminal groups, whether loosely affiliated or tightly structured, use poverty, displacement, legal precarity, and lack of support to recruit and control their victims. That means preventing trafficking requires investing in supportive services and reducing the conditions that make people vulnerable in the first place.

As Jean Bruggeman, Executive Director of Freedom Network USA, emphasized during USCRI’s Human Trafficking Prevention Month roundtable:

“What is missing from our response is a focus on primary prevention. And I think that’s been missing from the start. We cannot prosecute our way out of this crime.

We’ve talked about the vulnerabilities that make people easy to exploit. Those vulnerabilities are created by our legal system. It is our immigration system that puts immigrants in harm’s way and invites traffickers to take advantage. It is our refusal to provide affordable housing to people across this country that puts people, children, and parents in positions of vulnerability where they are so desperate to do anything they can in order to pay rent.

…It is our refusal to change these systemic barriers, forms of discrimination, and exploitation that allow trafficking to continue to thrive. And as technology advances and changes, it’s going to just keep changing to keep up with it until we start really, truly investing in prevention, in primary prevention.”

Access to trauma-informed care, legal representation, stable housing, and economic opportunity makes communities safer and reduces exploitation, victimization, and revictimization. These services also help disrupt the pathways traffickers use to exploit vulnerable individuals, undermining a key strategy used by traffickers. Despite this, funding for long-term services remains static, and protections are inconsistently applied, allowing many survivors to fall through the cracks.

Survivor-Centered Approaches Make Prosecution Possible

Without protections, many survivors are understandably hesitant to engage with law enforcement. Fear of retaliation, deportation, or even prosecution keeps survivors from testifying, reporting, or cooperating in investigations. In turn, traffickers evade justice and continue to operate with impunity.

Tools like Continued Presence, T and U visas, state-level vacatur laws, and case management services were designed to enable survivors to safely participate in investigations and rebuild their lives. Yet they are often underutilized or delayed. As protections for immigrants weaken, survivors may wait years for immigration relief, be deported, or face arrest for offenses they were coerced into committing. These failures weaken cases and undermine trust in the justice system.

A truly victim-centered approach not only ensures survivors’ safety, but it also improves outcomes in the courtroom. Survivors who feel secure, supported, and respected are more likely to engage with law enforcement. Prosecutors and investigators must be trained in trauma-informed practices and equipped to work in collaboration with service providers, rather than treating survivors as evidence.

Survivor Leadership Makes Justice Smarter

Survivors are not just recipients of services or witnesses to crimes; they are experts. Their insights help law enforcement understand recruitment tactics, identify trafficking routes, and recognize warning signs across labor sectors and industries. Survivor-led organizations and task forces have long advocated for smarter laws, better data, and more equitable systems. Integrating their perspectives improves both prevention strategies and legal outcomes.

As traffickers adapt with technology, encrypted communications, and transnational tactics, our responses must also evolve. That evolution, however, cannot be led by law enforcement alone. The criminal justice system must be paired with survivor-informed solutions and community-based programs that address the root causes that traffickers exploit.

Disrupting Organized Crime Starts with Dignity and Justice

To truly end human trafficking and the organized exploitation it fuels, we must address every link in the chain, not only the traffickers but also the systems that allow them to operate unchecked. Survivors themselves have consistently called for these changes, emphasizing that protection and prevention require systemic reform. That means:

• Funding long-term, survivor-centered services including housing, legal aid, case management services, and mental health support.
• Prioritizing immigration protections like Continued Presence, T and U visas, and vacatur laws to enable survivor participation in legal processes.
• Training law enforcement and prosecutors in trauma-informed, culturally competent approaches.
• Strengthening cross-border and interagency cooperation, with survivors’ safety and autonomy at the center.
• Combating criminal impunity by focusing on financial investigations and network-level prosecutions, and not just individual actors.

This World Day Against Trafficking in Persons is a call to action. Organized crime relies on silence, fear, and neglect. Survivors break that silence. A justice system that supports and listens to them can break the cycle of exploitation.

To end human trafficking, we must protect survivors, prosecute traffickers, and build systems rooted in justice and dignity, not just enforcement. Because when we center survivors, we not only hold perpetrators accountable, but we also prevent exploitation from ever taking root.

USCRI, founded in 1911, is a non-governmental, not-for-profit international organization committed to working on behalf of refugees and immigrants and their transition to a dignified life.

The post Centering Survivors: The Key to Preventing Human Trafficking and Holding Perpetrators Accountable appeared first on USCRI.

USCRI is equally troubled by the violence yesterday in Kakuma Refugee Camp and Kalobeyei Settlement, where clashes between demonstrators and police over these ruinous cuts to food rations left multiple refugees injured, unconfirmed fatalities, and a fire at a World Food Programme (WFP) facility.

Desperate cries for food and survival must not be met with silence or with force.

The slashing of humanitarian aid by the United States has left hundreds of thousands of refugees in Kenya severely malnourished and devastated by man-made starvation. In recent weeks, reports have emerged of children and their families in Kakuma and Dadaab refugee camps and Kalobeyei Settlement wasting away, going days without food following the aid cuts.

Despite unprecedented cuts to food rations in June, WFP’s urgent appeal for funding to restore full rations and cash assistance went unanswered. This week, the agency was forced to roll out a new three-month food rationing plan that provides only minimal support to those deemed the most vulnerable, leaving thousands of refugees without any food assistance at all.

Prolonged displacement in inhumane conditions, coupled with drastic aid cuts, has forced refugees into a daily struggle for survival, where hunger and fear are constant. This crisis is not accidental—it reflects the consequences of reduced funding by major donors, including the U.S. Government, whose leadership has long been vital in responding to humanitarian emergencies.

The United States and the international community have the power and responsibility to prevent starvation at this scale. We must act immediately to reverse these deadly funding gaps.

USCRI, founded in 1911, is a non-governmental, not-for-profit international organization committed to working on behalf of refugees and immigrants and their transition to a dignified life.

For press inquiries, please contact: media@refugees.org

The post USCRI Calls for Immediate Action as Refugees Face Man-Made Starvation Crisis in Kenya appeared first on USCRI.

The WHO’s first-ever global report on drowning prevention, released at the end of 2024, similarly omits findings on migrant drownings, citing methodological limitations. Recognizing the limits of available data should not prevent us from highlighting the reality of many people on the move who are impacted by drowning.

Migrants, refugees, and asylum seekers often drown while in search of safety, often in treacherous waters and under desperate circumstances. Their deaths are not anomalies; they are preventable and often ignored. Their voices and experiences deserve to be acknowledged and included in the discussion for World Drowning Prevention Day.

Pushbacks and Externalization

The WHO’s global report on drowning prevention recognizes that migration and refugee-seeking at sea, especially through irregular channels and across dangerous conditions, are associated with heightened risks of drowning. It also notes that many migrants and asylum seekers travel in overcrowded, unsafe vessels that lack proper safety equipment and are often operated by untrained personnel. Adding to these risks is the inability of migrants and asylum seekers to access the territory and the subsequent asylum procedures of the countries they are attempting to reach.

States increasingly rely on externalization policies, such as interdiction and pushbacks, to prevent migrants from reaching their shores. Migrants intercepted in international waters have been denied access to asylum processes and repatriated to their country of origin or returned to their country of departure. Since there is no internationally agreed-upon definition, pushbacks can take several forms.[1]

Pushbacks often include excessive use of force and degrading and inhumane treatment of migrants and asylum seekers. There have been instances where State authorities have rerouted and disabled vessels, stranding migrants in extra-territorial waters. Other reports reveal that officials have prevented rafts carrying people from reaching land and have towed them back to sea, abandoning them without the means of propulsion, sometimes with deadly consequences. Pushbacks, other externalization practices, and a lack of safe migration pathways have left thousands of migrants and asylum seekers dead.

Figures from Around the World

The Missing Migrants Project, led by the International Organization for Migration (IOM), has recorded the deaths of 75,544 people who have lost their lives during migration journeys since 2014. Of these deaths, nearly 60 percent (43,519) are attributed to drowning. IOM’s data reflect only confirmed cases and are widely understood to be minimum estimates, as many migration-related deaths go undocumented. As a result, the figures presented in this report underestimate the true number of migrants who have drowned during migration journeys.

The Americas

Migration in the Americas is complex, dynamic, and includes mixed flows of people moving for a variety of reasons, including individuals fleeing violence, poverty, political instability, climate-related disasters, and those seeking refuge and asylum. Popular migration routes in the Americas include movement from Andean countries to Chile, Argentina, and Brazil; crossing the infamous and treacherous Darién from South and Central America; riding atop freight trains like La Bestia, or otherwise traveling through Mexico; and using irregular maritime routes across the Caribbean Sea, the Pacific, and surrounding waters.

Externalization practices, such as physical barriers and policies like the Migrant Protection Protocols (MPP), also known as “Remain in Mexico,” have pushed people toward dangerous alternatives, including irregular maritime routes via the Pacific Ocean and other nearby bodies of water. These practices have also likely contributed to a rise in drownings among asylum seekers and migrants attempting to reach the United States. A study analyzing the relationship between increased border barrier heights and migrant fatalities found that drownings have increased among those attempting to swim, float, or cross the border using small boats or personal watercraft.

According to the Missing Migrants Project, more than 11,000 migrants have been recorded dead or missing in the Americas, with nearly 4,000 deaths due to drowning since 2014. Of those, nearly 800 occurred while crossing the Caribbean en route to the United States.

The Mediterranean Migration Route

The Mediterranean migration route refers to the dangerous sea journey undertaken by migrants, refugees, and asylum seekers across the Mediterranean Sea to reach Europe, often fleeing conflict, poverty, or persecution. Smugglers frequently facilitate these crossings, transporting people from Sub-Saharan Africa, North Africa, the Horn of Africa, the Middle East, and parts of Asia in overcrowded, unseaworthy boats. Those attempting the journey face high risks of drowning or interception. Thousands have died attempting the crossing each year, making it one of the deadliest migration routes in the world.

Despite landmark rulings affirming the obligation of States to protect the lives of migrants at sea, accountability remains elusive. On June 12, 2025, the European Court of Human Rights ruled that it lacked jurisdiction to assess whether Italy was complicit in the deaths of at least 20 migrants who drowned while crossing the Mediterranean on a rubber dinghy from Libya. Although Italy’s Maritime Rescue Coordination Centre received the distress call, it deferred responsibility to the Libyan Joint Rescue Coordination Centre. The Court found that providing material support did not amount to effective control or authority over the rescue operation, and therefore, Italian officials could not be held legally accountable for failing to assist migrants in distress. The continued shirking of responsibility for migrants at sea puts lives at risk and contributes to preventable drowning.

According to the Missing Migrants Project, more than 32,000 migrants have been recorded dead or missing in the Mediterranean since 2014. In 2024 alone, more than 2,500 deaths or disappearances were documented in the region. In 2025, that number has already reached 863, including 42 children.

The Bay of Bengal and the Andaman Sea

Migration in Asia is complex, driven by economic inequality, conflict, and environmental degradation. Limited safe and legal pathways, however, have forced many to rely on irregular and dangerous sea routes.

The Bay of Bengal and Andaman Sea form one of the deadliest migration corridors in the world, where stateless Rohingya and Bangladeshi migrants risk their lives on perilous sea journeys. The worsening humanitarian crisis in Myanmar, combined with the protracted refugee situation and unlivable camp conditions in Bangladesh, has driven more people to undertake these dangerous crossings in search of safety.

According to the United Nations Refugee Agency (UNHCR), more than 7,800 Rohingya attempted to flee Myanmar by boat in 2024, an 80 percent increase from the previous year. Over 650 were recorded dead or missing.

Earlier this year, UNHCR reported on two boat tragedies off the coast of Myanmar where an estimated 427 Rohingya refugees died. Over half were said to have left from refugee camps in Cox’s Bazar, Bangladesh, while the remainder departed from Rakhine State in Myanmar. In 2025, more than 3,000 Rohingya have already embarked on this perilous journey, with 457 reported dead or missing.

“No one should lose their life in pursuit of safety or a better future. Every life lost on migration routes in Asia, or anywhere else, is a stark reminder of the urgent need for safe and regular migration pathways—these are preventable tragedies.”

• Iori Kato, Regional Director for Asia and the Pacific, IOM

At the end of April 2025, there were 122.1 million forcibly displaced people worldwide, marking a decade of steady growth in the number of refugees and others forced to flee their homes. Rising anti-immigrant sentiment, xenophobia, and nationalism have placed growing pressure on policymakers to tighten borders. With more people displaced and fewer safe, regular pathways, dangerous irregular migration is likely to increase.

The WHO affirms that every drowning is preventable and that solutions exist. For asylum seekers and migrants, those solutions look like safe, legal pathways and access to protections without the need to risk dangerous conditions. A true commitment to drowning prevention must include a commitment to protecting the most vulnerable.

World Drowning Prevention Day is an opportunity to widen the lens. Let us ensure that those seeking refuge and opportunity, from sea to shining sea, are not left out of the conversation.

The post No Safe Pathway: Migrant Deaths by Drowning appeared first on USCRI.

Since ancient times, banishment—citizenship stripping—has been used as a form of punishment, targeting not just criminals but political dissidents and minority groups. With no nationality, those stripped of their citizenship enter a kind of purgatory, exiled from their families and communities, deprived of a government to protect them. The experience was infamously captured in Shakespeare’s Romeo and Juliet. Romeo, told he would not be sentenced to death for murder, but instead would be exiled from Verona, bemoans that exile is a worse fate than death.

The drama of Romeo and Juliet captures the truth of the pain of denationalization. The state is the primary institution that guarantees a person’s fundamental rights, and banishment strips people of this protection. Unless they have an alternative form of active citizenship, citizenship stripping leaves people stateless and unprotected. Stateless people live on the margins of society—they are unable to vote, are often denied access to life-saving services, and are vulnerable to serious human rights abuses, such as torture and genocide. Without proof of citizenship, it is hard to open a bank account, travel to a foreign country, or obtain employment.

Accordingly, stripping citizenship became unpopular in the second half of the 20th century. The United States has historically condemned denationalization as a form of “cruel and unusual punishment,” and thus something that is prohibited by constitutional protections in the 8th Amendment. Former U.S. Supreme Court Justice Earl Warren described the practice as “the total destruction of the individual’s status in organized society” and as such is a “form of punishment more primitive than torture.”

Article 15 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights states that “everyone has the right to a nationality” and that “no one shall be arbitrarily deprived of his nationality.” The inclusion of this clause reflected a desire to respond to atrocities committed during World War II—specifically the violent exile of populations deemed “undesirable” by the Nazi regime. Writing in the aftermath of the Holocaust, Hannah Arendt called citizenship “the right to have rights.” By virtue of being alive, a person has fundamental human rights. Without citizenship, they will find themselves unable to claim those rights. Legal scholar Audrey Macklin calls citizenship stripping ‘political death’.

The practice of denationalization has resurged in the 21st century, particularly in the United Kingdom, where it became a means to punish people suspected or convicted of terrorism. Those denationalized during this measure were dual nationals and thus were not left stateless. Scholars who study forced migration, however, expressed concern over the lack of due process afforded to those stripped of their citizenship. The arbitrary nature of the decisions could create a precedent for exiling vulnerable populations, such as religious minorities like the Rohingya, who have been expelled and denationalized by the Myanmar government.

Citizenship stripping is a conduit for forced displacement. Without citizenship, residents of a country have no rights, leaving them vulnerable to abuse, from torture to land dispossession. As a result, many of those who lose their citizenship flee their homelands, seeking safety across borders.

USCRI, founded in 1911, is a non-governmental, not-for-profit international organization committed to working on behalf of refugees and immigrants and their transition to a dignified life.

The post ‘Political Death’: What is Citizenship Stripping? appeared first on USCRI.

For earthquake survivors and for individuals unable to return home for fear of being killed, TPS has become more than just a policy; it is a lifeline. It gives individuals from Myanmar protection from deportation, prevents them from being detained, allows them to work legally, support their families, contribute to this nation, and begin rebuilding their lives safely in the United States.

Why TPS Must Be Extended for the People of Myanmar

The situation in Myanmar is terrible. Approximately 3.5 million people are displaced internally, and nearly 20 million people are in need of humanitarian assistance. The military junta continues to bomb civilian areas, block humanitarian aid, and target ethnic minority communities. In Chin, Kachin, Karen, Shan, and Arakan States, villages were burned to ashes. Ethnic minorities in these states, like the Rohingya,[1] are still facing genocide and are denied basic rights. This crisis is ongoing with no foreseeable quick resolution.

The uncertainty around TPS has left those living with its protection in great fear of being deported. Returning people to Myanmar under these conditions would be dangerous and inhumane. Many fled with only what they could carry, having faced persecution, loss, or threats to their lives. For many, the idea of returning to Myanmar is not even a possibility. Many are not welcome in Myanmar, the country that stripped them of their basic rights and denied them citizenship. The United States must act to extend and redesignate TPS for Myanmar and uphold its humanitarian obligations to prevent individuals from being returned to harm’s way.

“I left Myanmar to escape genocide. I didn’t just come to the United States to survive. I came here to rebuild my life. With TPS, I’ve been able to contribute to this country, support my family, and volunteer in my community. TPS gave me the right to exist again. Please don’t take it away.”

-Anonymous TPS beneficiary

The Role of TPS and the Need for Extension

TPS is designed for precisely this type of crisis. It provides temporary immigration relief to individuals from countries facing ongoing armed conflict, persecution, or environmental disasters that make return unsafe. The people of Myanmar continue to qualify under all of these criteria.

The United States has historically played a leadership role in refugee protection and human rights, and extending and redesignating TPS for Myanmar nationals is consistent with these values. It is also consistent with democratic values, religious freedom, and current foreign policy goals. It is important to continue the TPS designation and expand pathways for permanent legal status for the people of Myanmar, as they cannot return home.

The United States has a legal mechanism to protect these individuals, and it must use it. Extending and redesignating TPS for Myanmar is lawful and humane.

By: Yasin, refugee advocate and nonprofit expert 

This blog was written by a refugee from Myanmar and includes a quote from a current Temporary Protected Status (TPS) beneficiary. USCRI provided editorial support and input to help shape and amplify the voices and experiences shared.

The post Why TPS Matters: Voices from Burma (Myanmar) in the United States appeared first on USCRI.

Humanitarian funding can be provided by governments, organizations, and individuals. While many different organizations deliver humanitarian aid, the United Nations (UN) often takes the lead on coordinating emergency responses.

Some of the first UN relief responses provided humanitarian aid to refugees. Even before the UN was officially established, countries funded post-war relief operations, including the United Nations Relief and Rehabilitation Administration (UNRRA). From 1943, UNRRA provided food, healthcare, and cash assistance to refugees displaced due to World War II. It also assisted with safe repatriation and family reunification. When it was dissolved in 1948, many of its functions were transferred to the International Refugee Organization, the predecessor to the UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR).

Five UN entities have a primary responsibility for delivering humanitarian aid. UNHCR is tasked with the protection of refugees, but it works with other UN entities to ensure comprehensive responses.

The United States is the highest contributor to UNHCR. In 2024, U.S. Government contributions totaled $2.056 billion. The second-highest contributor was Germany, who contributed about 16 percent of what the United States contributed, which totaled $332.7 million.

To date, U.S. Government contributions in 2025 have so far only reached $391.9 million, which is projected to be about 80 percent less than 2024 levels. Against a historic funding shortfall, the UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA) launched a “survival appeal” of $29 million to meet urgent global needs.

Chart: Contribution Trend of the United States of America

Source: UNHCR

Funding shortfalls lead directly to human suffering. UNHCR and partners have started to prioritize core life-saving activities (food, primary health care, protection, emergency shelter, and water, sanitation, and hygiene (WASH)), deferring other less time-critical activities. Despite this hyper-prioritization strategy, the World Food Programme (WFP) is forced to cut food rations down to 28 percent of the minimum food basket in Kenya’s refugee camps. WFP already expects it will need to cut food rations further if it does not get immediate funding. Refugees will starve, not because of a lack of will to deliver humanitarian aid but simply because of a lack of funds.

In the context of Ukraine, that means that UNHCR has had to reduce its projected impact of aid from 2.1 million to 1.5 million refugees (out of over 5.6 million total refugees). It also means cuts to cash assistance—an effective form of aid that gives directly impacted people the power to decide their life-sustaining needs.

U.S. Humanitarian Funding

The United States funds humanitarian aid because of the nation’s longstanding role as a humanitarian leader. Providing relief to refugees also promotes safe and dignified migration, global health, and regional stability. American foreign policy is often driven by a “3D” approach—defense, diplomacy, and development. “Development” serves a larger foreign policy strategy, and it can also prevent the need to spend on defense and diplomacy.

Every year, Congress appropriates funds for humanitarian aid, and those funds are managed by numerous agencies and appropriation accounts. In this fiscal year, the U.S. Department of State (DOS) funds aid through three main humanitarian assistance accounts: Migration and Refugee Assistance (MRA), Emergency Refugee and Migration Assistance (ERMA), and International Disaster Assistance (IDA). Congress also appropriated funds for U.S. contributions to UN aid agencies, such as the World Health Organization (WHO), through the Contributions to International Organizations (CIO) account.

The ERMA account is an emergency fund that allows the U.S. Government to support unexpected refugee needs to provide shelter, nutrition, water and sanitation, health, and mental health. ERMA recently helped fund the U.S. response to the crisis in Afghanistan. In 2023,* Congress appropriated $100,000 to the ERMA account.

The MRA account is the primary account of the Bureau of Population, Refugees, and Migration (PRM), a humanitarian arm of the DOS. The account supports life-sustaining assistance to refugees, victims of conflict, internally displaced persons (IDPs), stateless persons, and vulnerable migrants. The MRA account also funds contributions to UNHCR. In 2023, Congress appropriated $4.4 billion, plus an additional $1.5 billion for emergencies.

On May 28, the White House sent a rescission package to Congress, asking for cuts to funds already appropriated. In total, the rescissions package proposes a $8.3 billion cut in foreign assistance funds, jeopardizing aid targeting malnutrition, malaria, and AIDS/HIV.

Furthermore, DOS is seeking to close humanitarian assistance accounts. Congressional appropriations has earmarked funds for UNHCR and aid to refugees since the Migration and Refugee Assistance Act of 1962. Since then, Congress has funded the MRA account to support U.S. commitment to humanitarian principles by providing aid to victims of persecution and armed conflict. Yet, on June 2, DOS proposed to close MRA and IDA in the next fiscal year. Instead, it plans to create a new International Humanitarian Assistance account that would be responsible for funding nearly all U.S. foreign assistance and refugee resettlement. Losing longstanding, historic accounts that specifically provide aid to refugees would risk the nation’s ability to maintain global leadership in refugee response and resettlement.

H.R. 4, the “Rescissions Act of 2025” narrowly passed the House, was amended by the Senate, and is currently in the House to vote on the amended version. If a simple majority passes the bill, it will result in significant cuts to humanitarian aid for refugees.

*FY 2023 enacted levels. For FY 2024 and FY 2025, Congress passed continuing resolutions to fund the U.S. Government, and base funding levels were the same, save some exceptions.

The post How Humanitarian Funding Impacts Refugees appeared first on USCRI.

The 1951 Convention relating to the Status of Refugees, amended by the 1967 Protocol (together, the “Refugee Convention”) defines a “refugee” as any person who “owing to well-founded fear of being persecuted for reasons of race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group, or political opinion, is outside the country of his nationality and is unable or, owing to such fear, is unwilling to avail himself of the protection of that country.”

Climate change and events will increasingly force people to leave their homes. At the end of 2024, 9.8 million people were internally displaced due to ecological disasters. The World Bank predicts that climate change will cause 216 million people to be internally displaced by 2050. Data for climate-induced migration across borders is lacking, but the Institute for Economics & Peace (IEP) states that 2 billion people will live in countries facing “high or very high levels of ecological threat” by 2050.

Climate can both directly and indirectly cause forcible displacement. In 2019, Cyclone Idai uprooted 87,000 people from their homes in Mozambique, Malawi, and Zimbabwe. Indirectly, climate change and events can be a “push” factor for migrants. In 1816, a volcanic eruption in Indonesia caused crop failures in Germany, which pushed migrants to North America. Climate change can also lead to political instability and a lack of governmental protection—researchers have studied the role of drought in the latest conflict in Syria.

People who are forcibly displaced due to climate often struggle to meet the refugee definition in the Refugee Convention. “Climate refugees” is a term that has been used in international discourse, but it is not yet tied to any legal benefit or obligation. Yet, experts see the increasing need for a protection framework for climate-induced forcible displacement.

The Path to Protection Thus Far

In 2012, the Nansen Initiative was founded by Switzerland and Norway in recognition that climate-induced migrants do not have any assurance of international refugee protection. The Nansen Conference on Climate Change and Displacement in the 21st Century drew 230 delegates representing national governments and civil society to discuss climate-induced displacement and potential solutions. Some advocates have pushed for the revival of “Nansen passports” for climate-induced migrants. Such a document would provide climate-induced migrants with a travel document, but the utility of a Nansen passport requires the participation of other nations to accept them.

In 2018, the UN General Assembly endorsed the Global Compact for Safe, Orderly and Regular Migration (“Global Compact”), a human rights framework for migrants who do not meet the refugee definition. It reaffirmed the need to protect the human rights of all migrants. While it commits to strengthening adaptation strategies to prevent forcible displacement, it also commits to strengthening protection solutions and frameworks. The Global Compact also recognizes the linkages between climate change and poor governance.

Climate-induced migration has also been addressed at international climate change conferences. The Paris Agreement, adopted by 195 countries at COP21, urges nations to consider their human rights obligations to migrants in the face of climate change. Migration has been a discussion topic at many of the UN Climate Change Conferences, but most of the high-level dialogue has been centered on adaptation and cost-sharing responsibilities.

Other Frameworks

Even in the absence of international frameworks, adjudicators have extended protections to climate-induced migrants. Some of these decisions focus on the humanitarian responsibility to protect individuals who would face serious harm if forced to return to a climate-affected area. In Colombia, the Constitutional Court ruled that a lack of specific protection provisions for victims of climate change should not be a barrier to protecting climate-induced internally displaced people.

In Italy, the Supreme Court (Corte Suprema di Cassazione) ordered that a refugee adjudicator cannot ignore claims of instability due to environmental degradation and climate change. The refugee in this case presented evidence of dangerous conditions in the Niger Delta area stemming from unsustainable resource extraction, which allowed the rise of paramilitary groups. The court ruled that the increase of violence caused by environmental degradation, climate change, and resource extraction should have been considered in the analysis of granting humanitarian protection.

In 2019, the UN Human Rights Committee delivered a landmark decision in the case of a refugee applicant from Kiribati. Ioane Teitiota sought refugee status in New Zealand because he feared returning to Kiribati, a Pacific island that is becoming uninhabitable due to rising sea levels. The Committee affirmed that New Zealand had an obligation under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) not to deport or remove an individual to a country where their right to life is at risk (principle of non-refoulement). The Committee also noted that “environmental degradation, climate change and unsustainable development constitute some of the most pressing and serious threats” to the right to life. While the Committee ultimately did not provide relief to Teitiota, the decision makes clear that countries are bound to follow non-refoulement obligations under the ICCPR when the right to life is endangered due to climate change.

In July 2025, the Inter-American Court of Human Rights issued an advisory opinion on the human rights obligation of countries with respect to climate emergencies. The Court stated that countries must maintain regulatory and policy instruments to address forced displacement caused by climate. Countries should prioritize the right to adequate housing and resettlement, as well as the rights of indigenous people to have access to lands of equal quality. The Court also stressed that international, national, and local collaboration are crucial to effective protection of human rights in forced displacement contexts.

Takeaways

Even without an explicit framework providing protection to climate-induced migrants, countries should uphold their legal commitments to the principle of non-refoulement to prevent deportations or forced returns to an environment that risks the right to life. Furthermore, countries should consider strengthening general humanitarian principles by providing protection to climate-induced migrants.

The post The 1951 Refugee Convention: Displacement Caused by Climate Change appeared first on USCRI.

USCRI Erie has worked with the Refugee Agriculture Partnership Program (RAPP) since 2019, helping recently resettled refugees gain farming skills to improve their livelihoods and become economically self-sufficient. Through RAPP, participants receive training and support in areas like soil health, crop selection, food safety, and community-supported agriculture.

After this training, participants are provided with land plots where they can practice newly learned skills. Additionally, participants receive business-related training, including working with farmers’ markets and restaurants, conducting market research, creating business structures and plans, and financial literacy.

Program activities leverage the expertise of local agricultural experts, farmers, and agricultural entrepreneurs and include a comprehensive agricultural and food systems curriculum covering a wide variety of relevant subject matter. USCRI Erie collaborates with the Erie Redevelopment Authority, the Food Policy Advisory Council, the Sisters of St. Joseph Neighborhood Network, and other partners to administer robust agricultural programming that holistically improves the lives of refugees while providing healthier, more diverse food options for all Erie residents.

The post Local Soil, Global Flavors: Refugee Farmers Enrich Erie’s Harvest appeared first on USCRI.

The terminations threaten to tear apart families, destabilize communities, and force people—many of whom fled natural disasters and humanitarian crises—to return to countries still grappling with insecurity, violence, and limited infrastructure.

“Repeated TPS terminations by the Administration, including for Honduras and Nicaragua, reflect a disturbing trend of dismantling critical protections for those who need it most,” said President and CEO of the U.S. Committee for Refugees and Immigrants (USCRI) Eskinder Negash. “This is not just a policy shift—it is a withdrawal of stability, security, and dignity for families who strengthen our communities in countless ways. We should be expanding pathways to humanitarian protection, not forcing people deeper into uncertainty and fear.”

Honduras has the highest homicide and femicide rates in Central America, and, as of June 2025, 1.6 million people were experiencing urgent humanitarian needs. In Nicaragua, widespread human rights violations and political repression have fueled a humanitarian crisis. In February 2025, UN experts detailed the “persecution, forced exile, and economic retaliation” that civilians in Nicaragua face.

TPS was created to protect people who cannot safely return to their countries of origin due to ongoing armed conflict, environmental disaster, or other extraordinary and temporary conditions. The Administration’s stance that the passage of time justifies revoking TPS is both disingenuous and harmful. This decision ignores the ongoing instability in both Nicaragua and Honduras, and it will come at a human cost.

USCRI urges the Administration to reverse the terminations and uphold the United States’ longstanding commitment to humanitarian protection and family unity. We stand in solidarity with TPS holders and their families and will continue to advocate for fair, humane, and sustainable solutions that reflect this nation’s responsibility to protect.

USCRI, founded in 1911, is a non-governmental, not-for-profit international organization committed to working on behalf of refugees and immigrants and their transition to a dignified life.

For press inquiries, please contact: media@refugees.org

The post TPS Terminations Threaten Stability and Safety for Honduran and Nicaraguan Communities appeared first on USCRI.