Their family spent years opposing Venezuela’s socialist system, then moved to the United States after obtaining refugee status. In Minnesota, the Trump administration has detained and questioned refugees already admitted to the country, setting off legal challenges and raising new fears among people who say they were told their status was under review despite having been approved.
In Minnesota, attorneys and advocates say immigration authorities have overturned settled expectations for refugees by revisiting initial admission decisions and detaining people while they are under review. One priority for the renewed scrutiny, according to the reporting, involves refugees admitted under former President Joe Biden who have not yet become permanent residents—an arrangement advocates say makes them especially vulnerable.
Last month, a group of masked officers arrived outside a St. Paul apartment complex and handcuffed a Venezuelan woman and her mother, telling them their legal status was under review, the woman said. The woman, who asked for anonymity for fear of retaliation, said the encounter represented a sudden reversal for families who had already spent years fleeing danger and then building new lives after being granted refugee status.
A federal judge in January ordered a temporary halt to the arrest and detention of refugees in Minnesota while a lawsuit challenging the “revetting” policy continues. The judge ordered the immediate release of all refugees detained in Minnesota, and those taken to Texas, and then extended the order on Friday, according to the report, citing a view that the Trump administration’s policy turns “the American Dream into a dystopian nightmare.”
MSI previously reported that Judge extends order protecting Minnesota refugees from arrest and deportation here, as legal challenges expanded beyond Minnesota. On Friday, refugees in other states filed a separate lawsuit seeking to block new Department of Homeland Security policies they said could lead to detention of tens of thousands of refugees who are lawfully in the U.S. but have not yet received permanent residency.
Advocates and attorneys argue the administration’s actions go beyond ordinary steps in the immigration system. They point to the Refugee Act of 1980, which made refugee applications heavily scrutinized, and they describe revisiting refugee status that has already been granted as a major break from legal tradition. HIAS CEO Beth Oppenheim said refugees were approved through a process that included vetting, telling the Associated Press, “They’ve been heavily vetted and were admitted by the government with approval.”
Oppenheim said that after a refugee is admitted through the resettlement program, the only way to strip someone of status is to prove they should never have been admitted. She said the administration is interviewing people again because it is effectively challenging those earlier admission decisions.
U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services spokesman Matthew Tragesser defended the policy in a written statement. He said refugees “are REQUIRED to be subject to a full inspection after a year within the United States,” adding that it is “not novel or discretionary” and is “a clear requirement in law.” The reporting notes that U.S. policy does require refugees to apply for green cards one year after admission, but it says the administration is nonetheless departing from decades of practice by revisiting initial refugee decisions and then detaining people while those reviews proceed.
Smita Dazzo, deputy director of U.S. programs at HIAS, said, “Arresting, detaining, and rescreening refugees are all new changes which will inflict grave harm on vulnerable populations.” Dazzo’s statement reflects the position advanced by advocates: that the renewed scrutiny and detention impose additional burdens on people who, by their account, were told they had already received protection.
The report describes cases in which refugees allege they were taken for questioning well after their admission decisions. In one account involving Venezuelan refugees, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement took the mother and daughter to Houston, according to the daughter’s description, and she said they were isolated in a cold room without food, water, or warm items. She said she refused to sign documents without an attorney present, and she recalled being told, “Your status is worthless. You’re illegal.”
The women were released after federal habeas corpus petitions, the report said, part of a wave of last-ditch efforts tied to a Trump policy that denied bond hearings in immigration court. Friends of their attorney drove them back to Minnesota at their own expense, and the report says the younger woman has been afraid to return to work.
The Associated Press also reported on a 46-year-old ethnic Karen man in St. Paul, Saw Ba Mya James, who fled persecution in Myanmar and obtained refugee status with help from a local church. The report said James received a letter on Feb. 2 ordering a “post-admissions refugee reverification” at a U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services St. Paul field office, and that an interview there lasted several hours. James told the AP he was advised to stay home for weeks while his case was under review, saying, “I was told to stay at home, so I listened, and I prayed to God with my family.”
The report said James received a second letter within two weeks asking that he and his family provide fingerprints, which his attorney described as a positive sign, but James remained wary of possible detention. He carried a letter from his church sponsors asking that he and other immigrants be “treated humanely as fellow image-bearers of God.”
Another account described a Congolese woman who arrived in the Twin Cities area in November 2024 with refugee status and worked in hospitality while her husband and children depended on her income. The report said she was approached by an immigration officer when she arrived for work at 7 a.m. on Jan. 14 in St. Paul and was handcuffed after the officer told her he knew she was a refugee. The woman, who spoke on condition of anonymity because she feared reprisals, said she showed work authorization documents and identification before she was taken.
The report said she was flown to Houston for questioning and released on Jan. 18 without identification documents, and that a company manager drove her back to Minneapolis after getting her transported for the long trip. The woman said, “If I told you I’m feeling OK, I’d be lying to you.”
At the center of the legal conflict is how the administration is applying scrutiny to refugees after admission. For refugees in Minnesota and beyond, the reporting says a combination of interviews, detentions, and court fights has reshaped daily life—leaving people who believed they were protected to live with uncertainty about what comes next.