The piece estimates the administration used INA 212(d)(5)(A) to parole approximately 2.86 million inadmissible migrants, far beyond historically narrow uses like medical emergencies or court appearances. It ties the surge to programs for Afghans and Ukrainians and to border‑management policies later constrained by federal court orders.
— Quantifying parole at this scale reframes immigration totals and tests the boundary between lawful pathways and statutory limits on executive discretion.
2026.01.05
75% relevant
Warby emphasizes that the scale of immigration materially changes assimilation outcomes and labour‑market effects; that connects to the existing idea’s quantification of massive parole use under the administration (≈2.86M), which is exactly the kind of scale that Borjas and Warby argue conditions economic and social impacts.
2026.01.04
82% relevant
Mason’s piece alleges large‑scale use of executive parole‑style mechanisms to admit thousands of Afghans—parallel to the existing concern about mass parole numbers—highlighting how executive discretion can reshape migration totals and evade parliamentary scrutiny (actor: UK government exercising emergency entry pathways).
2025.10.07
100% relevant
Arthur’s updated estimate (≈2.86 million) and citations to Parole+ATD/“Parole with Conditions” shutdowns by a federal judge.
2024.10.24
95% relevant
The committee factsheet reiterates and expands the same claim: hundreds of thousands (CBP One ~852,000 since Jan 2023; CHNV ~530,000) have been paroled into the U.S., and it frames these programs as producing millions of paroles/arrivals since FY2021 — directly matching and providing corroborating official‑count material for the existing idea about massive parole use.