The campaign that propelled Donald Trump to his second term in 2024 focused on two key areas: the fight for common sense (against gender ideology, for instance) and putting an end to the years of uncontrolled migration within the country — a crisis exacerbated by the Biden administration’s open-door policies.

Regarding this second issue, Trump succeeded in sealing the border and, for the first time in five decades, achieved a negative net migration rate. Furthermore, he tightened controls to prevent individuals from breaking the law and subsequently benefiting from legal status within the country.

Last week, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) continued along this path. It announced that, in order to reduce the need to locate and remove those who choose to remain illegally in the country after being denied residency, any foreign national wishing to obtain Permanent Residency (or a Green Card) “must return to their country of origin to apply for it, except in extraordinary circumstances.”

Measures such as this are useful for curbing fraud. However, the very real and sustained abuse of terms like “refugee” or “asylum” should not lead to extremes; for, in truth, there are individuals who genuinely fall into these categories.

“Extraordinary circumstances” must be taken into account — particularly in the cases of those who, having followed the law, possess no history of being a public charge, face an inability to return to their country of origin due to proven political persecution, and possess a cultural background conducive to assimilation into American society, yet remain awaiting a response from the authorities.

Such is the case of an exiled journalist I know — whom I shall refer to as “A.”

She entered U.S. territory legally with her family in 2022. She applied for political asylum (submitting extensive evidence of persecution and meeting all the requisite criteria) and, within a few months, obtained her work permit.

Upon completing one year and one day of residence in this great country, she applied under the Cuban Adjustment Act (CAA) — enacted in 1966 to regularize the status of political exiles lacking permanent immigration status. The CAA was born against the backdrop of the global confrontation between the United States and the Soviet Union, of a civil war on the island between patriotic forces and Castroist forces backed by the Eastern Bloc, and of property seizures, political assassinations, and the complete collapse of the rule of law in Cuba. This legislation, profoundly political in nature, defines its beneficiaries as “Cuban Refugees” — refugees fleeing socialist totalitarianism.

Many of us who have suffered persecution for our ideas within a closed system like that of Havana have sought refuge under the CAA. Yet, it is equally true that the act has been abused by economic migrants (known within the Cuban exile community as “Pan con Bistec” — literally, “Bread with Steak”) and even by malign actors infiltrated by the Castro regime itself.

In 2023, then-Senator Marco Rubio raised pointed questions regarding “refuge” applicants who would travel back to the island the moment they obtained their Permanent Residency. “If you are fleeing persecution, how is it possible that a year later you are spending your summers in Cuba?” — the man who is now Secretary of State rightly criticized. “How can it be that you are traveling to Cuba six to eight times a year? Shouldn’t you, at the very least, lose your refugee status?”

A genuine refugee does not do that. Neither “A,” nor other colleagues who endured persecution, nor I, can do so — under penalty of imprisonment. We spent years without seeing our mothers, flying to third countries (at considerable financial cost) just to spend a few days with the family members who remained on the island and had nowhere else to go.

Such fraud strips words like “refugee” of their meaning — much in the same way as “woke” fabrications like “climate refugees.” Yet, the fact that some individuals mimic the pain of genuine exile in order to secure immigration status does not mean that the category itself does not exist. The fact that they impersonate me does not mean that I do not exist.

The dictionary of the Royal Spanish Academy defines a “refugee” as someone who, “as a consequence of wars, revolutions, or political persecution, is compelled to seek refuge outside their own country.” For USCIS, a refugee is someone who demonstrates a history of persecution — or a well-founded fear of being persecuted — “on account of race, religion, nationality, political opinion, or membership in a particular social group.”

Journalist “A” qualifies under both definitions; yet, after nearly three years, A remains waiting for Permanent Residence — even though other family members have already received theirs.

The irresponsible surge of millions of migrants under the previous administration overwhelmed the immigration system’s processing capacity, and A’s legitimate case became buried beneath the files of — who knows how many — individuals seeking to escape poverty in their home countries, drawn here by this nation’s welfare system.

A, conversely, has not accepted a single food stamp; she volunteers at her church and within her community, is learning English, and is integrating into the customs of this country. She completed her paperwork on time and respected due process. Yet, while she waits, her driver’s license has expired — meaning she cannot drive — and her work permit has expired as well — meaning she cannot work.

Her husband covers all these needs, but with a significantly heavier burden resting on his shoulders.

The Cuban who — like A — suffers persecution on the island for their political views is, generally speaking, someone opposed to totalitarianism. As statistics demonstrate, this constitutes the only Hispanic demographic bloc that consistently votes overwhelmingly for the Republican Party, standing in contrast to a Democratic Party that increasingly leans toward leftist radicalism. Alongside other cultures with ties to the West, their process of assimilation is far more straightforward.

While cases like A’s are distressing, it makes one’s blood boil to learn that individuals who entered this country illegally — who committed immigration fraud, or who are even Cubans who supported or actively worked on behalf of socialism — are currently enjoying an undeserved immigration status. The list — which I exposed in a 2023 investigation — includes police chiefs, informants, regime spokespersons, and judicial officials, among others.

I will return to this specific matter later on. However, it is clear to me that — as Vice President J.D. Vance stated a few months ago — if errors have been made, they must be rectified; furthermore, “extraordinary circumstances” cannot remain mere talking points confined to press releases, but must instead be genuinely taken into account in the realm of practical policymaking.