Stand up for the facts!

Our only agenda is to publish the truth so you can be an informed participant in democracy.
We need your help.

More Info

I would like to contribute

Ted Cruz
stated on February 2, 2016 in a town hall event in Windham, N.H.:
The 2013 immigration bill "expanded President Obama’s ability to bring Syrian refugees to this country without mandating any meaningful background checks."
true false
Joshua Gillin
By Joshua Gillin February 3, 2016
Jon Greenberg
By Jon Greenberg February 3, 2016

Cruz repeats False attack about immigration bill letting Syrians in U.S. without background checks

Fresh from his victory in Iowa, Ted Cruz faced his first group of New Hampshire voters at the Crossing Life Church in Windham, N.H. They asked him about many things, from protecting the rights of the disabled to the 2013 immigration bill, once backed by GOP rival Sen. Marco Rubio of Florida.

An audience member asked Cruz to clarify his immigration position.

Cruz has taken heat for introducing an amendment to the bill to provide legal status to undocumented immigrants. Cruz defended that move as parliamentary maneuver to help defeat bad legislation; Rubio said it showed Cruz's actual postion. (S. 744 passed the Senate, with Cruz voting no, but wasn’t taken up in the House.)

But in criticizing the original bill, Cruz noted a failing that would have special resonance today.

"The bill expanded President Obama’s ability to bring Syrian refugees to this country without mandating any meaningful background checks," Cruz said.

We checked a very similar assertion Cruz made in December during a GOP debate in Las Vegas. His case was thin then and remains so today.

The Cruz campaign did not respond for a request for comment.

In December, Cruz was a bit more absolute. He said the bill gave Obama "blanket authority" without "mandating any background checks whatsoever."  In Windham, he said it expanded the president’s authority without "mandating any meaningful" background checks. The most recent version is more nuanced, but still inaccurate.

The heart of the assertion is that the immigration bill would have given the Obama administration power to define who is considered stateless. That designation would identify people who had no country to which the United States could send them. If refugees fleeing Syria were called stateless, the argument was that they could be admitted without vetting.

David Bier, the director of immigration policy at the libertarian Niskanen Center, told us in December that the immigration bill specifically stated that all refugees would still be subject to background checks. The average screening time for refugees from across the globe is between a year to a year and a half, involving background checks, interviews and confirmation from several federal agencies.

Featured Fact-check

The "stateless" classification wouldn’t have been for refugees aiming to get into the United States, said Joanne Kelsey, the assistant director for advocacy at the Lutheran Immigration and Refugee Service, which helps resettle refugees. She explained that only people who are already in the country would face this situation.

Another part of the bill about specially designating certain groups of refugees, Section 3403, is an attempt to codify something called the Lautenberg Amendment, an immigration provision that has been in effect since 1989 and must be renewed each year. The amendment has traditionally been aimed at certain religious minorities.

By law, refugees seeking asylum in the United States must prove they have a "well founded fear of persecution." Our expert sources said Section 3403 would have allowed the president to designate a group of interest to the United States as being persecuted as a whole. Think Christians in Syria or Yazidis in Iraq targeted by the Islamic State.

Basically, it allows potential refugees to get in line faster. But instead of making individuals prove they are in danger, the threat would already be associated with their group, moving the rest of the screening process along.

The bill’s aim was to streamline the vetting process for refugees, not get rid of it.

"It doesn’t create refugees or allow more refugees to come to the United States," Bier said. "They would still be subject to the normal refugee limit. It would create no additional numbers, but would increase, perhaps, the eligible pool of applicants."

The experts we reached all agreed that the immigration bill required background checks for refugees and to the extent that it gave the administration more flexibility, that leeway applied to people already in the country, not those seeking to get in.

Our ruling

Cruz said the failed immigration bill "expanded President Obama’s ability to bring Syrian refugees to this country without mandating any meaningful background checks."

The key flaw with that assertion is the bill still required background checks for refugees. While there can be some debate over what constitutes a "meaningful" background check, the experts we reached said nothing would have directly changed the quality of the vetting performed on people attempting to enter the country.

We rate this claim False.

Our Sources

Ted Cruz, CNN Republican presidential primary debate, Dec. 15, 2015

William and Mary Law Review, "Rejecting Refugees: Homeland Security’s Administration of the One-Year Bar to Asylum," Nov. 3, 2010

PolitiFact, "Sen. Marco Rubio says immigration bill is not amnesty," April 14, 2013

Tampa Bay Times, "Senators release immigration plan details," April 15, 2013

Huffington Post, "Senator Lautenberg: An Appreciation of His Lifesaving Work With Refugees," June 7, 2013

U.S. Senate, S. 744 roll call vote, June 27, 2013

Politico, "Conservatives revolt on immigration," April 30, 2014

Politico, "The death of immigration reform," June 27, 2014

Congressional Research Service, "Refugee Admissions and Resettlement Policy," Feb. 18, 2015

PolitiFact, "Ted Cruz: most GOP candidates 'have supported amnesty'," Aug. 7, 2015

PunditFact, "Fact-checking Sean Hannity's claim on the U.S. accepting 250,000 refugees," Oct. 26, 2015

PolitiFact Florida, "PAC supporting Ted Cruz says when Marco Rubio tried to 'push amnesty,' Cruz stopped him," Nov. 6, 2015

PolitiFact, "Jeb Bush: 'It takes almost a year for a refugee to be processed in the United States'," Nov. 15, 2015

Conservative Review, "Rubio’s Bill Would Have Opened Floodgates to Islamic Refugees," Nov. 15, 2015

PolitiFact Texas, "Marco Rubio says Ted Cruz supports legal status and work permits for 'illegal' immigrants," Nov. 18, 2015

PolitiFact, "PolitiFact Sheet: 5 questions about Syrian refugees," Nov. 19, 2015

PolitiFact, "Ben Carson: 'There is currently no ability to vet' Syrian refugees," Nov. 19, 2015, "Cruz Attacks Rubio on Refugees," Dec. 10, 2015, "S.744 — Border Security, Economic Opportunity, and Immigration Modernization Act," accessed Dec. 16, 2015

U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, "Asylum," accessed Dec. 17, 2015

Interview with Joe Pounder, Rubio spokesman, Dec. 16, 2015

Interview with David Bier, Niskanen Center immigration policy director, Dec. 16, 2015

Interview with Joanne Kelsey, Lutheran Immigration and Refugee Service assistant director for advocacy, Dec. 16, 2015

Interview with Mark Hetfield, HIAS president, Dec. 16, 2015

Interview with Steven Camarota, Center for Immigration Studies research director, Dec. 16-17, 2015

Interview with Daniel Horowitz, Conservative Review senior editor, Dec. 18, 2015

Browse the Truth-O-Meter

More by Joshua Gillin

Cruz repeats False attack about immigration bill letting Syrians in U.S. without background checks

Support independent fact-checking.
Become a member!

In a world of wild talk and fake news, help us stand up for the facts.

Sign me up