U.S. rejects UN migration forum declaration

U.S. rejects UN migration forum declaration
U.S. rejects UN migration move

The U.S. says it stays out of the International Migration Review Forum and does not back the May 8 declaration adopted there. The move extends Washington's opposition to UN migration frameworks and reinforces the Trump administration's stated preference for remigration over migration management.

Highlights

  • The U.S. State Department announced on May 8 it will not participate in or support the International Migration Review Forum's 'progress' declaration.
  • The administration rejects UN-backed migration policies, citing concerns over national sovereignty and referencing the 2017 withdrawal from the Global Compact on Migration.
  • Secretary Rubio links mass migration to border disorder, elevated city emergency spending, and argues for a policy shift toward promoting remigration over multilateral management.

State Department sets out policy stance

As reported by the U.S. Department of State, Washington says it does not participate in the International Migration Review Forum and will not support the May 8 "progress" declaration. The statement presents the decision as part of a broader rejection of UN-backed migration policies that the administration says undermine national sovereignty.

The department says the U.S. has long objected to what it describes as United Nations efforts to promote migration into the U.S. and other Western countries. It points to President Trump's 2017 rejection of the Global Compact on Migration and says subsequent years validate that position.

Domestic and international implications

The statement cites Secretary Rubio as saying that mass migration threatens social cohesion and the future of national communities. It argues that recent migration pressures have contributed to border disorder, emergency conditions in major cities and higher public spending on migrant support, including lodging, travel and other assistance.

Washington also says it will not support any international process that, in its view, imposes standards or commitments limiting the country's sovereign decision-making. Instead of managing migration flows within multilateral frameworks, the administration says its objective is to promote remigration.

Our earlier article covered a House Oversight inquiry into whether activist pressure is influencing international standard-setting through the ISO, with a focus on NIST’s role in representing U.S. interests. Lawmakers warned that initiatives such as integrating Greenhouse Gas Protocol frameworks and past ISO actions like a separate merchant code for gun-store purchases could create compliance uncertainty and regulatory spillover for American companies.

This material may contain third-party opinions, none of the data and information on this webpage constitutes investment advice according to our Disclaimer. While we adhere to strict Editorial Integrity, this post may contain references to products from our partners.
Weekly Top Bonuses
up to $2,500
deposit bonus for all clients
CLAIM BONUS
Your capital is at risk.