President Donald Trump announced that the number of refugees admitted into the country will be drastically reduced to just 7,500 people for fiscal year 2026, the lowest level since 1980. The previous cap, set by former President Joe Biden, was 125,000. The problem is that this seeks a type of ethnic cleansing within the refugee program so that, legally, the majority of those admitted would be white.
Institutional Racism?
The White House stated that, if refugees are admitted, they will prioritize applications from white South Africans (Afrikaners). According to conservative commentators, they are persecuted by Black people.
President Trump claimed there is a “genocide” against white people. But the numbers tell a different story. Violent crime in South Africa is on the rise, but experts affirm that the vast majority of victims are Black and poor. On multiple occasions, the South African government has rejected these accusations, stating there is no credible evidence to support them.
If Trump is truly concerned about victims of genocide, why not prioritize victims in Sudan (over 60,000 dead) or Gaza (more than 68,000 dead)?
According to the International Society for Civil Liberties and Rule of Law, in Nigeria, Islamist militants killed more than 7,000 Christians and kidnapped at least 7,800 this year. The report also notes that jihadists have destroyed more than 19,000 churches, displaced over 1,100 communities, and killed 125,000 Christians since 2009. Why not offer refuge to Nigerian Christians?
“The announcement to prioritize white South Africans while shutting the door to refugees of other races is a historic and moral setback for the United States,” said Nicole Melaku, executive director of the National Partnership for New Americans (NPNA).
A Radical Shift in Refugee Policy
In addition to the new limit, the Trump administration announced a mandatory English requirement for accepted refugees. Activists described this measure as an “obstacle”, because it excludes those who do not speak the language, even if they are fleeing violence or persecution.
“Each number is not just policy — it is a life-or-death decision for families fleeing war or persecution. Limiting the number to 7,500 is a betrayal of the United States’ humanitarian commitment,” said Fatima Saidi, director of We Are All America and an Afghan refugee.
Calls for Congressional Action
Human rights organizations are demanding that Congress exercise its oversight authority. The White House changed the rules for receiving refugees without the mandatory consultation with Congress, as required by the Refugee Act.
“This is not leadership; it is an act of institutional discrimination,” Melaku added.
Experts warn that this new cap restricts asylum even more than the policies before 1980, when the U.S. only received about 50,000 refugees from certain European countries and blocked people from Africa, Asia, and Latin America.
Historically, the refugee program has allowed figures like Albert Einstein, Sergey Brin (co-founder of Google), writer Isabel Allende, actress Mila Kunis, and singer Gloria Estefan to live in the United States and enrich our nation.
Congress must act. The president is here to execute the law, not to change it unilaterally and certainly not to impose blatantly racist guidelines.
Find this article in Spanish here.