2025年底，美國針對下一年度的難民接收政策引發國內外廣泛關注。白宮公布的計劃顯示，2026財政年度美國將只接收7500名難民，創下歷史新低，並且在分配上顯現出明顯傾向——優先接收來自南非的白人難民。此舉立即在政治圈和社會輿論中引發熱議。白宮甚至曾公開呼籲其他國家效仿這一策略，引起國際關注與批評。

對此，民主黨內部以及多數人權組織表達強烈反對意見，指出該政策“不道德、非法且無效”。民主黨人士認為，政策以種族和地區作為分配標準，不僅違背美國一貫的人道主義立場，也有違國際難民法的精神。此外，限制接收人數將直接導致更多難民無法獲得庇護，使全球難民危機進一步惡化。

與此同時，共和黨主導下的政府強化對非法移民的大規模驅逐政策。其政策目標主要包括維護國內安全、控制人口流動以及減少公共資源負擔。共和黨認為，限制合法難民接收數量並強力驅逐非法移民，有助於減輕社會福利、醫療、教育等公共系統的壓力，同時也被視作回應部分選民對移民問題的關切。

然而，這一系列政策在社會上引發激烈爭議。批評者指出，政策背後存在種族偏好與政治考量，並可能對美國國際形象造成負面影響。此外，嚴苛的驅逐行動也引發了對家庭分離、人道救助以及基本人權保障的擔憂。專家認為，過度依賴驅逐和數字限制的手段，無法解決移民問題的根本原因，反而可能刺激非法移民隱蔽流動和地下經濟活動。

總體而言，美國將難民接收人數降至歷史低位並偏向特定群體，以及大力推行非法移民驅逐，反映了共和黨在移民政策上的保守與選民導向策略，同時也凸顯當前美國社會在移民、種族、公平與人道主義之間的深刻分歧。這些政策未來在國內選舉與國際關係中可能持續引發爭議與辯論。

At the end of 2025, the United States’ refugee resettlement policy for the following year drew widespread attention domestically and internationally. The White House announced that for fiscal year 2026, the U.S. would accept only 7,500 refugees, marking a historic low. Furthermore, the allocation showed a notable preference for white refugees from South Africa. The administration even publicly encouraged other countries to adopt similar strategies, sparking criticism from global observers.

Democrats and human rights organizations strongly opposed the plan, arguing that it was “immoral, illegal, and ineffective.” Critics noted that prioritizing refugees based on race and region violated the U.S.’s longstanding humanitarian principles and ran counter to the spirit of international refugee law. Limiting the number of refugees would leave many without protection and exacerbate the global refugee crisis.

At the same time, the Republican-led government has intensified efforts to deport undocumented immigrants. The stated goals of these policies include maintaining domestic security, controlling population flows, and reducing the strain on public resources. Republicans argue that restricting refugee admissions while rigorously deporting illegal immigrants helps alleviate pressure on social welfare, healthcare, and education systems, while also responding to voter concerns over immigration.

However, these measures have provoked intense controversy. Critics point to the racial and political motivations underlying the policies, warning that they could harm the United States’ international reputation. Aggressive deportation campaigns also raise concerns about family separations, humanitarian protections, and basic human rights. Experts argue that relying heavily on deportations and numerical caps does not address the root causes of migration and may drive undocumented populations into hidden or underground economies.

Overall, the U.S.’s decision to reduce refugee admissions to a historic low with a bias toward certain groups, alongside the aggressive deportation of undocumented immigrants, reflects the Republican Party’s conservative, voter-driven approach to immigration policy. At the same time, it underscores the deep divisions in American society regarding immigration, race, fairness, and humanitarian responsibility. These policies are likely to remain a point of contention in domestic elections and international relations.