Christina Lords, Idaho Capital Sun

The email deciding the fate of Amouna’s extended family is all of three paragraphs long.

The website for Welcome Corps, a new program established in 2023 that connects Americans with refugees across the globe who need resettlement assistance in the United States, offers even less information.

“In accordance with the executive order, ‘ Realigning the United States Refugee Admissions Program,’ refugee travel to the United States and all U.S. Refugee Admissions Program refugee case processing activities are suspended until further notice,” a yellow warning on the website reads. “This includes intake of new applications for the Welcome Corps, as well as processing of all active or previously submitted applications.”

Those “active or previously submitted applications” include Amouna’s brother, sister-in-law, nephew and mother, who, before President Donald Trump assumed office on Jan. 20, had plans to relocate from Syria, by way of Egypt, and reconnect with Amouna’s family at the Boise Airport next week.

They had plane tickets. A flight number. An arrival time. Amouna’s 24-year-old son, Abdullah, had saved money from his job as a semi-truck driver to secure an apartment for the extended family members and paid for their security deposit and several months rent.

They had a light of hope that their time apart – nearly five years – was finally coming to an end.

President Donald Trump holds up an executive order after signing it during an indoor inauguration parade at the Capital One Arena on Jan. 20, 2025, in Washington, D.C. (Photo by Anna Moneymaker/Getty Images)

But the executive order, signed by Trump on his first day in office, suspends the U.S. Refugee Admissions Program “until such time as the further entry into the United States of refugees aligns with the interests of the United States” – leaving families like Amouna’s in painful limbo.

Amouna and Abdullah asked me to use only their first names in this column to protect their family’s privacy and to try to ensure their immigration case isn’t negatively affected.

Since Welcome Corps started in 2023, 87 private sponsor groups applied to be a part of the program in Idaho, and 30 refugees have resettled in the Gem State through Welcome Corps sponsors. There are 16 refugees that have been matched with sponsor groups to resettle here that are impacted by the executive order’s pause in refugee resettlement.

“Basically, they were shocked,” Abdullah told me in their cozy Boise apartment on Monday. “That’s the short word for it. It’s sad for them, because they were planning. I would be so sad if I were them because I did get the opportunity to come here. … But then it was just canceled one day. They’re miserable now.”

Abdullah said because his extended family was so close to flying to the United States, they had already ended their lease with their landlord in Egypt and sold most of their belongings. Their furniture. Their car. Their material life as they knew it.

Now, they’re scrambling to secure housing there as they await word on when they can get new plane tickets, new flight numbers, new arrival times. Now they’re stuck waiting for the federal government to have a new outlook on how refugees — who were already promised a new life here — “align with the interests of the United States.”

The United States should live up to its prior commitments to its newest Idaho residents

Trump’s executive order may be re-examined in 90 days after the secretary of Homeland Security, in consultation with the secretary of State, submits a report. But in the meantime, it has upended the lives of Amouna and Abdullah, and it has also upended the lives of other refugees across Idaho.

Idaho welcomes about 800 refugees each year, in close partnership with resettlement agencies in Boise and Twin Falls as well as businesses, churches, local governments and other community networks, according to the Idaho Office for Refugees, the nonprofit that administers resettlement programs in the state. Most recently, refugees coming to Idaho are primarily from the Democratic Republic of Congo, which has experienced years of humanitarian crises; Ukraine, where Russia’s invasion has displaced millions of people and destroyed homes and lives; and Afghanistan, including many allies who worked alongside U.S. soldiers, a Jan. 22 news release from the office says.

“Idaho families who have been waiting for years to reunite with their relatives – some in the final stages of resettlement – will now have to wait even longer, with their loved ones facing dangerous situations in third countries,” Idaho Office for Refugees Director Tara Wolfson said in the release.

As a nation built by the hands of immigrants, we must all ask ourselves one question: Why?

Why does this order not let families like Amouna’s and Abdullah’s – who already have financial sponsorship support and have been deeply vetted in accordance with federal law – be reunited? Why not put a pause on any new applications through the Welcome Corps program instead of a full ban of everyone already working their way through an already complicated system? Why not allow those with plane tickets already in hand to be welcomed home?

When has legal immigration – let’s be absolutely clear that this is what this is – ever failed to align with the interests of the United States?

According to the Idaho Office for Refugees, polls show that the majority of Americans across the political spectrum do support welcoming refugees. Christian organizations from across the country have signed a statement urging the president to sustain the resettlement program. Additionally, nearly 500 bipartisan state and local officials from all 50 states signed a letter in September expressing strong support for welcoming and resettling refugees in the United States.

And while refugee resettlement is often thought of as a humanitarian endeavor, it also has real impacts on the U.S. economy.

According to the federal Office of the Assistant Secretary for Planning and Evaluation, the net fiscal impact of refugees and asylees was positive over a 15-year period between 2005 and 2019, at $123.8 billion. It found that refugees and asylees contributed an estimated $581 billion in revenue to federal, state and local governments. They contributed an estimated $363 billion to the federal government through payroll, income, and excise taxes, and $218 billion to state and local governments, through income, sales, and property taxes in that time.

“This means that refugees and asylees contributed more revenue than they cost in expenditures to the government,” the office found in a February 2024 report. “The net fiscal benefit to the federal government was estimated at $31.5 billion, and the net fiscal benefit to state and local governments was estimated at $92.3 billion.”

The most heartbreaking thing, to me, isn’t even that this family will continue to be separated for at least several months – an unfair horror that is simply compassionless.

It’s the lack of public response on these issues from Trump’s fellow Republicans in our congressional delegation – the people we elect on behalf of all Idahoans, including Amouna and Abdullah, to represent our interests in Congress as a check and balance to an overreaching executive branch.

Amouna said she has reached out to our elected officials on the federal level, and as of Monday afternoon, had not heard back. The Idaho Office of Refugees itself is connected with the delegation for further guidance on how to administer this executive order and how to support the refugees already in the pipeline to come to America who are now left wondering when they’ll be reunited with their families.

Our delegation should be forward facing, highly visible and unflinching in their support for fairness and compassion for these future Idahoans who hope to make their homes here. We should never forget that there are real human beings that were full of joy and hope — and now sadness and uncertainty — that must grapple with the true and agonizing effects of these immigration policies.

There is a light of hope outlined in subsection D of the executive order – one that the delegation could affect directly.

“The Secretary of Homeland Security, in consultation with the Attorney General, shall examine existing law to determine the extent to which, consistent with applicable law, State and local jurisdictions may have greater involvement in the process of determining the placement or resettlement of refugees in their jurisdictions, and shall devise a proposal to lawfully promote such involvement,” the order states.

We should honor our country’s prior commitments to families who were promised – by their federal government through Welcome Corps and other resettlement programs – the opportunity to reunite in Idaho as immediately as they are able.

I asked Abdullah what Idahoans should know about the executive order’s impact on families like his.

“Just imagine your family are separated from you for a couple weeks like this,” Abdullah said. “What could you do? What could you feel about it? For us, it’s been years. We’ve tried to help, but then some orders come through with a sign: Stop everything. It’s hard because we’ve been through a lot of stuff like war, bombing, you know, scary stuff. No food; no electricity. Just us just trying to see a light in a tunnel that they just turned off.”

It’s time we do everything in our power to join together to turn the light of hope back on.

Arizona’s top Republican legislators have joined Idaho Attorney General Raúl Labrador – along with attorneys general and other officials from 20 U.S. states – in accusing the American Academy of Pediatrics of possible “violations of state consumer protection statutes” over its standards and recommendations for gender dysphoria care for children.

In a letter sent by Labrador on Tuesday, Senate President Warren Petersen and House Speaker Ben Toma and the attorneys general requested information detailing the academy’s evidence for its current recommendations for puberty blockers for gender dysphoria-diagnosed youth.

“Most concerning, AAP claims that the use of puberty blockers on children is safe and reversible,” Labrador’s office said in a press release. “This assertion is not grounded in evidence and therefore may run afoul of consumer protection laws in most states.”

Children with gender dysphoria “need and deserve love, support, and medical care rooted in biological reality,” Labrador said in the release.

“It is shameful the most basic tenet of medicine – do no harm – has been abandoned by professional associations when politically pressured,” Labrador said. “These organizations are sacrificing the health and well-being of children with medically unproven treatments that leave a wake of permanent damage.”

The American Academy of Pediatrics, an organization made up of 67,000 primary care pediatricians, voted in August to reaffirm its 2018 policy statement on gender-affirming care and authorized development of an expanded set of guidance for pediatricians.

The organization could not immediately be reached for comment. But at the organization’s August 2024 leadership conference in Itasca, Illinois, American Academy of Pediatrics CEO and Executive Vice President Mark Del Monte emphasized that the organization is confident that the principles presented in the original policy statement, “Ensuring Comprehensive Care and Support for Transgender and Gender-Diverse Children and Adolescents,” remain in the best interest of children, according to an Aug. 4 press release from the academy.

The decision to authorize a systematic review reflects the academy’s board’s concerns about restrictions to access to health care with bans on gender-affirming care in more than 20 states, according to the Aug. 4 release.

In 2022, Arizona enacted a law barring trans youth from obtaining gender reassignment surgery. Republican Gov. Doug Ducey touted the law as protecting trans minors from irreversible procedures that could affect their future ability to have children. Proponents of the law framed it as a reiteration of international standards of care for transgender kids, while critics said it codified old standards — which changed later that year and are adjusted periodically — and forces doctors to choose between following the law and providing best medical care practices for their patients.

What is in the American Academy of Pediatrics guidelines for gender-affirming care?

As outlined in its policy statement, the academy encourages pediatricians to use a gender-affirmative care model when treating young patients. The model encourages pediatricians to recognize that:

• transgender identities and diverse gender expressions do not constitute a mental disorder;
• variations in gender identity and expression are normal aspects of human diversity, and binary definitions of gender do not always reflect emerging gender identities;
• gender identity evolves as an interplay of biology, development, socialization, and culture; and
• if a mental health issue exists, it most often stems from stigma and negative experiences rather than being intrinsic to the child.

“Many medical interventions can be offered to youth who identify as (transgender and gender diverse) and their families,” the academy notes in its policy statement. “The decision of whether and when to initiate gender-affirmative treatment is personal and involves careful consideration of risks, benefits, and other factors unique to each patient and family.”

However, Labrador said treatments that suppress hormones or use puberty blockers may have adverse health effects to the patient, including interfering with neurocognitive development, compromising bone density and interfering with normal puberty experiences. He said the treatments may cause “harm particularly egregious” to children who “grow out” of the condition by the time they are adults.

But the American Academy of Pediatrics in its policy statement says that research shows that children who assert their transgender identity before puberty and who “know their gender as clearly and as consistently” as their cisgender peers benefit from the same level of social acceptance as those peers.

“More robust and current research suggests that, rather than focusing on who a child will become, valuing them for who they are, even at a young age, fosters secure attachment and resilience, not only for the child but also for the whole family,” the academy wrote in its policy statement.

But Labrador and the other state officials say they want more information on how the academy has come to those conclusions, especially when it comes to puberty blockers.

“The letter requests detailed information from the AAP regarding its communications and practices related to youth gender dysphoria and substantiation of the academy’s claims regarding the safety and reversibility of puberty blockers,” the attorney general’s press release says.

Other states joining Idaho and Arizona in sending the letter to the academy include officials from Alabama, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Iowa, Kansas, Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, North Dakota, Ohio, South Carolina, South Dakota, Texas, Utah, Virginia and West Virginia.

A version of this story was originally published by the Idaho Capital Sun, a sister publication of the Arizona Mirror and a member of the States Newsroom network of local news outlets.

Arizona Mirror is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Arizona Mirror maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Jim Small for questions: info@azmirror.com. Follow Arizona Mirror on Facebook and X.