Why We Investigated This Story
A Guardian article reported that the Biden administration reversed a previous humanitarian parole revocation by the Trump administration, granting legal status to a four-year-old girl receiving life-saving treatment in the U.S. The emotional nature of the story sparked widespread concern. Many DBUNK users asked: Has this kind of case happened before? Did either administration systematically revoke medical relief programs like this? Here’s what we found after investigating the facts.
Historical Context Behind Medical Humanitarian Parole
Humanitarian parole is a provision under U.S. immigration law allowing individuals to enter the U.S. temporarily for urgent medical or humanitarian reasons. This tool has historically been used sparingly and on a case-by-case basis. However, in 2019, the Trump administration made significant headlines for abruptly ending programs that allowed children with life-threatening conditions to seek life-saving care. Public backlash at the time led to legal pressure and policy backtracking.
Fact-Check of Key Claims
Claim #1: The Trump administration ordered humanitarian parole revoked for a child receiving life-saving care in 2025.
This claim is supported by documented evidence. According to reporting by multiple outlets including The Los Angeles Times, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) terminated the humanitarian parole status of a family seeking treatment for their daughter, Sofia, in early 2025. The decision was reversed after public and political pressure. Official correspondence from DHS, cited in the Guardian article, confirms that humanitarian parole was reinstated for one year starting June 2, 2025. Therefore, this specific claim is accurate and verifiable.
Claim #2: The Trump administration has previously terminated a similar humanitarian parole program for children receiving medical care.
This claim is also accurate. In 2019, the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) under the Trump administration announced it would no longer consider most deferred action requests, a form of humanitarian relief, including medical deferred action. That decision directly impacted families of children receiving critical care and was heavily criticized by medical professionals, lawmakers, and the public. The administration reversed that move weeks later due to outcry. Sources such as NPR, The New York Times, and CNN reported extensively on this instance. The pattern underscores that the recent 2025 case is not isolated.
Claim #3: These medical humanitarian parole terminations have happened frequently in the last five years.
There is insufficient evidence to claim this has happened frequently in the past five years. The 2019 termination and the 2025 Vargas case are two confirmed and widely reported episodes of revocation. However, there is no data showing a consistent or broad trend of frequent revocations involving children receiving critical health care. While immigration advocates argue policies around humanitarian parole lack transparency, current government databases do not consistently publish figures breaking down medical vs. other humanitarian reasons. Therefore, generalizing beyond these known cases would be speculative.
Final Verdict on Article Accuracy
The Guardian article accurately recounts a recent humanitarian parole reinstatement for a child in critical medical need and appropriately connects it to past similar cases from 2019. The reporting stays within verifiable limits and does not exaggerate the frequency of such cases in recent years. It contextualizes the issue with quotes from lawmakers and public officials without inserting editorial bias. While emotionally compelling, the article’s central facts hold up under scrutiny. However, readers should know the number of these cases remains small, and not part of a mass policy.
Help Us Combat Misinformation
Stories like this show how complex and sensitive immigration and medical decisions can be—especially when emotions run high. At DBUNK, we help you get the full picture behind the headlines. If you see a claim that seems misleading, questionable, or incomplete, submit it through the free DBUNK app. Join the growing community of truth-seekers determined to cut through misinformation together.
Read the Original Story
Click here to read the full article on The Guardian
