Which immigration laws or executive actions did Biden reverse or preserve from the previous administration?
This fact-check may be outdated. Consider refreshing it to get the most current information.
Executive summary
President Biden used early executive actions to reverse core Trump-era moves — halting the border wall, ending the “Muslim bans,” and preserving DACA — while later administrations and courts caused partial reversals or restorations (for example, “Remain in Mexico” was ended then partly reinstated) [1] [2]. Sources show Biden also expanded humanitarian tools (parole programs, Deferred Enforced Departure) but many initiatives faced legal challenges and were later modified or rescinded under subsequent administrations [3] [4].
1. Early reversals: the swift undoing of visible Trump-era policies
On Day One and in his first months, Biden halted major Trump projects and orders: he stopped construction of the U.S.–Mexico border wall and revoked the travel bans on several majority-Muslim countries — moves the administration framed as restoring long-standing U.S. immigration norms [1]. He also directed agencies to preserve DACA after the Trump administration’s earlier attempts to terminate it, making DACA one of the signature program‑preservation actions of the early Biden years [2].
2. Parole, DED and humanitarian expansions — policy by administrative tools
Biden leaned on parole and deferred-enforcement protections to extend relief where Congressional reform was stalled. The administration instituted Deferred Enforced Departure (DED) for Hong Kong residents in 2021 and again in 2025, and created large parole programs intended to let hundreds of thousands apply for status without leaving the U.S. — moves advocates called expansive humanitarian relief [3] [4] [5].
3. “Remain in Mexico”: an example of reversal, litigation, and partial restoration
Biden initially ended the Trump-era Migration Protection Protocols (“Remain in Mexico”), but rising border encounters and litigation prompted a partial reinstatement and court-ordered processing shifts; Pew and other reporting trace a back-and-forth where the policy’s closure, legal challenges, and eventual limited resumption created a volatile policy environment [2].
4. Enforcement and tightening even while expanding protections
Despite humanitarian steps, Biden’s record includes renewed enforcement elements: some reporting and agency data indicate deportations rose to highs not seen since the early 2010s in later years, and administration directives tightened asylum pathways, reflecting a twin-track approach of selective protections coupled with stricter enforcement at the border [3] [1].
5. The big programmatic promise: spouses, parole-in-place, and potential scope
The administration announced a program letting certain spouses of U.S. citizens without lawful status apply for permanent residency without leaving the United States — an initiative officials estimated could help roughly 500,000 spouses and tens of thousands of children — but observers flagged likely legal challenges and implementation hurdles [6] [5].
6. Limits and litigation: courts and later administrations reshaped outcomes
Many Biden-era actions relied on executive power and agency rulemaking; as a result they were especially vulnerable to litigation and later executive reversals. Sources document lawsuits, state challenges, and that later administrations rescinded or paused some Biden-era measures — for example, later rulemaking and executive orders in 2025 altered or rolled back TPS decisions and parole practices set during Biden’s term [7] [8].
7. Where reporting disagrees or leaves gaps
Coverage differs on scale and consequences: some sources emphasize that Biden expanded humanitarian admissions (parole, DED), while others underline rising deportation numbers and a tougher asylum posture — both claims are present in the reporting and are not mutually exclusive [3] [1]. Available sources do not mention a comprehensive legislative overhaul enacted by Congress during Biden’s term; reform remained largely executive-driven (not found in current reporting).
8. Why executive actions mattered — and why they were fragile
Biden’s choices show the power and limits of the presidency: executive orders and agency memoranda allowed immediate reversals of visible Trump-era actions (travel bans, wall construction, DACA preservation), and created new humanitarian programs, but courts and successor administrations could, and did, undo or limit many of those policies. The sources indicate a transactional policy environment where litigation, political shifts, and administrative rule‑writing determined long-term impact [1] [7].
Limitations: this summary uses the provided sources only and does not claim to catalog every Biden action or subsequent reversal; for items not addressed in these sources I note they are “not found in current reporting” as indicated above.