SALT LAKE CITY — Some Venezuelans in Utah, thanks to a humanitarian parole program launched under President Joe Biden, have already known their days were likely numbered.

As such, the Trump administration’s announcement on Thursday that it is immediately revoking their work authorization and permission to be in the country may not have come as such a shock. Patricia Quiñonez of Utahzolanos, a digital media outlet that caters to the Venezuelan community, said some who received preliminary notices on the matter last April have already left on their own, as sought by the Trump administration.

“They had their passports, they bought their tickets and they left,” said Quiñonez, with some returning to Venezuela and others going to places like Colombia or Spain. “At first, they were worried they’d be deported, and they couldn’t control the decision. That’s why they decided to go on their own before becoming deportable.”

At the same time, South Jordan immigration attorney Christopher Vizcardo said since the U.S. Department of Homeland Security’s initial notice last March ending the parole program for Cubans, Haitians, Nicaraguans and Venezuelans, many have investigated other options allowing them to remain.

“I’ve had a lot of consultations lately of people trying to find other options. Some people, for example, married a U.S. citizen and have the possibility of getting a green card through that,” he said, referencing the informal name of the U.S. identity card granted to those with legal permanent residency. “Some people are seeking asylum, which is definitely also a valid option.”

Read more:

President Donald Trump has made the detention and deportation of immigrants in the country illegally a priority. At the same time, he has dismantled immigration programs launched under Biden — including the humanitarian parole program for Cubans, Haitians, Nicaraguans and Venezuelans — to push immigrants out. The program benefits around 532,000 people around the country, and in Utah, most beneficiaries come from Venezuela, according to Vizcardo.

“Ending the CHNV parole programs, as well as the paroles of those who exploited it, will be a necessary return to common-sense policies, a return to public safety and a return to America first,” Tricia McLaughlin, assistant secretary of homeland security, said in a statement Thursday. McLaughlin charged that those benefitting from the humanitarian program were “poorly vetted” and that their presence “undercut American workers.”

Since Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem last March first announced the program for Cubans, Haitians, Nicaraguans and Venezuelans would be ended, it’s been the focus of a court challenge by immigrant advocates trying to keep it intact. The U.S. Supreme Court on May 30, however, ruled that the Trump administration may revoke the temporary legal status even as the court challenge continues, precipitating Thursday’s announcement.

The Department of Homeland Security said in its statement that it had started sending “termination notices” to those paroled into the country under the program.

“The messages informed the illegal aliens both their parole is terminated, and their parole-based employment authorization is revoked — effective immediately,” reads the statement. The department, it continues, “is now notifying parole recipients if they have not obtained lawful status to remain in the U.S., they must leave immediately.”

As the issue has already been the focus of public debate, neither Quiñonez nor Vizcardo reported an immediate outcry from impacted immigrants. “I’m sure it’s just a matter of time before we start getting phone calls about that,” Vizcardo said.

At this stage, Vizcardo said most of those impacted have opted to seek asylum as a means of remaining. Given conditions in Venezuela, governed by President Nicolás Maduro, a socialist who critics say has persecuted political foes, they have valid claims and a “legitimate fear of return.”

Like Quiñonez, though, Vizcardo said some have also voluntarily left the country, an option the Department of Homeland Security endorses. Figuring in decisions to self-deport have been concerns of being forcibly deported by immigration authorities to a third country, like El Salvador, and the threat of being separated from family.

Those she knows who voluntarily left “couldn’t live under the cloud of fear,” Quiñonez said.

Spain is a consideration, she said, because it’s easier for Venezuelans to legally enter the country.

“It’s easy compared to the United States to get a work permit. You arrive and ask for asylum and they give you a work permit six months later and two years later, you can get residency,” she said.

BILLINGS, Mont. (AP) — More than 2 million acres of federal lands would be sold to states or other entities under a budget proposal from Utah Republican Sen. Mike Lee, reviving a longtime ambition of Western conservatives to cede lands to local control after a similar proposal failed in the House.

Lee, who chairs the Energy and Natural Resources Committee, included a mandate for the sales in a draft provision of the GOP’s sweeping tax cut package released Wednesday.

Sharp disagreement over such sales has laid bare a split among Republicans who support wholesale transfers of federal property to spur development and generate revenue, and other lawmakers who are staunchly opposed.

Land in 11 Western states from Alaska to New Mexico would be eligible for sale. Montana was carved out of the proposal after lawmakers there objected.

A spokesperson for Montana Sen. Steve Daines said Thursday that he is “against the sale of public lands but glad to see Montana exempted.”

Sen. Martin Heinrich, the ranking Democrat on the energy committee, said the proposal would exclude people from places where they fish, hunt and camp.

“I don’t think it’s clear that we would even get substantial housing as a result of this,” Heinrich said. “What I know would happen is people would lose access to places they know and care about and that drive our Western economies.”

Most public lands are in Western states. In some, such as Utah and Nevada, the government controls the vast majority of lands, protecting them from potential exploitation but hindering growth.

Lee’s proposal does not specify what properties would be sold. It directs the secretaries of interior and agriculture to sell or transfer at least 0.5% and up to 0.75% of U.S. Forest Service and Bureau of Land Management holdings. That equals at least 2.1 million acres (868,000 hectares) and up to 3.2 million acres (1.3 million hectares).

The Republican said in a video released by his office that the sales would not include national parks, national monuments or wilderness. They would instead target “isolated parcels” that could be used for housing or infrastructure, he said.

“Washington has proven time and again it can’t manage this land. This bill puts it in better hands,” Lee said.

Montana Rep. Ryan Zinke, who served as interior secretary in President Donald Trump’s first term and led the effort to strip land sales out of the House version, said he remained a “hard no” on any legislation that includes large-scale sales.

States or other entities would nominate potential parcels. Before carrying out sales, federal officials would have to consult with governors, local officials and any impacted Native American tribes.

Conservation groups reacted with outrage, saying it would set a precedent to fast-track the handover of cherished lands to developers.

“Shoving the sale of public lands back into the budget reconciliation bill, all to fund tax cuts for the wealthy, is a betrayal of future generations and folks on both sides of the aisle,” said Michael Carroll with The Wilderness Society.

Housing advocates have cautioned that federal land is not universally suitable for affordable housing. Some of the parcels up for sale in Utah and Nevada under the House proposal were far from developed areas.

Last year Republican officials in Utah filed a lawsuit seeking to take over huge swaths of federal land in the state, but they were rejected by the U.S. Supreme Court. Twelve other states backed Utah’s bid.

BILLINGS, Mont. — More than 2 million acres of federal lands would be sold or transferred to states or other entities under a budget proposal from Utah Republican Sen. Mike Lee, reviving a longtime ambition of Western conservatives to cede lands to local control after a similar proposal failed in the House.

Lee, who chairs the Energy and Natural Resources Committee, included a mandate for the sales in a draft provision of the GOP’s sweeping tax cut package released Wednesday.

Sharp disagreement over such sales has laid bare a split among Republicans who support wholesale transfers of federal property to spur development and generate revenue, and other lawmakers who are staunchly opposed.

A spokesperson for Montana Sen. Steve Daines said Thursday that he opposes public land sales and was reviewing the proposal.

Montana Rep. Ryan Zinke, who served as interior secretary in President Trump’s first term and led the effort to strip land sales out of the House version, said he remained a “hard no” on any legislation that includes large-scale sales.

Most public lands are in Western states. In some such as Utah and Nevada, the government controls the vast majority of lands, protecting them from potential exploitation but hindering growth.

Lee’s proposal does not specify what properties would be sold. It directs the secretaries of interior and agriculture to sell or transfer at least 0.5% and up to 0.75% of U.S. Forest Service and Bureau of Land Management holdings. That equals at least 2.2 million acres and up to 3.3 million acres.

The Republican said in a video released by his office that the sales would not include national parks, national monuments or wilderness. They would instead target “isolated parcels” that could be used for housing or infrastructure, he said.

“Washington has proven time and again it can’t manage this land. This bill puts it in better hands,” Lee said.

Conservation groups reacted with outrage, saying it would set a precedent to fast-track the handover of cherished lands to developers.

“Shoving the sale of public lands back into the budget reconciliation bill, all to fund tax cuts for the wealthy, is a betrayal of future generations and folks on both sides of the aisle,” said Michael Carroll with The Wilderness Society.

Housing advocates have cautioned that federal land is not universally suitable for affordable housing. Some of the parcels up for sale in Utah and Nevada under the House proposal were far from developed areas.

Republican officials in Utah last year filed a lawsuit seeking to take over huge swaths of federal land in the state, but they were rejected by the U.S. Supreme Court. Twelve other states backed Utah’s bid.

Brown writes for the Associated Press.