U.S. President Donald Trump’s administration is considering withdrawing the United States from the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR), the primary UN agency overseeing refugee-related matters.
According to a July 20 Reuters report, the administration “has in recent weeks weighed cutting ties with the U.N. refugee agency, prompting a campaign by diplomats and U.N. officials to persuade the United States to maintain support.” The report noted that “a decision had been expected last week, but no announcement was made, suggesting that the lobbying effort may have helped delay or avert a move.”
The potential withdrawal appears triggered by the UNHCR’s appointment of Tressa Rae Finerty, a U.S. diplomat who served as chargé d’affaires for the U.S. Mission to the United Nations and Other International Organizations in Geneva, as its deputy high commissioner. The Trump administration had supported an alternative candidate more aligned with its agenda.
U.N. Secretary-General António Guterres and U.N. High Commissioner for Refugees Barham Salih selected Finerty over Simon Hankinson, a U.S.-backed former foreign service officer who has accused the UNHCR of pursuing “a mass migration agenda.” Hankinson told Reuters: “If they wanted reform, a return to UNHCR’s original mission of helping actual refugees, and a careful inspection of budgets and spending, I was the guy,” calling Finerty a “business as usual” candidate.
Andrew Veprek, Assistant Secretary of State in the Bureau of Population, Refugees and Migration—a figure known for espousing anti-migration views—was involved in backing Hankinson’s candidacy, though the U.S. State Department declined to comment on his role.
A U.S. withdrawal from the UNHCR would deliver a massive blow to the agency. In 2024, the United States contributed over $2 billion to the UNHCR, representing more than half of its total government funding. The agency faces financial distress following reductions in support from Washington and other donors in 2025.
The Trump administration has previously sidelined the UNHCR from U.S. refugee-admissions processes, set the refugee-admission cap to the lowest level since the Refugee Act of 1980 was enacted, and formally rejected a UN review of the Global Compact on Migration.
Migration experts warn that beyond exiting the UNHCR, the United States must also withdraw from the 1967 Protocol Relating to the Status of Refugees—a treaty that obligates compliance with the 1951 UN Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees (a convention the U.S. had not previously ratified), while simultaneously expanding its scope.
Todd Bensman, a journalist and former Department of Homeland Security official, noted: “Article 31 of the Convention obliged the United States to adopt as a human ‘right’ the ability of migrants who reach U.S. soil to claim asylum on five main grounds: race, religion, nationality, membership in a particular social group, or political opinion… With dramatic reductions in transportation and communication costs, the world’s ineligible poor discovered they could use asylum to secure permanent stays inside the United States—becoming the immigration speedway for ineligible millions since the 1990s.” He added that “permanently ending this cycle of abuse must start with withdrawing from the treaty.”
It remains unclear whether the U.S. will ultimately withdraw from the UNHCR or the 1967 treaty. A State Department spokesperson confirmed no changes to Washington’s engagement with the UNHCR, stating: “As with many other international organizations, we work with and through UNHCR when doing so is useful to advance U.S. foreign policy interests or save lives.” The spokesperson also noted that the U.S. would “continue to evaluate the United States’ role in international organizations,” referencing a February 2025 Executive Order to review participation and funding.
Regardless of future actions, the administration’s stance toward the UNHCR demonstrates an excessive focus on attempting to “reform” it. Instead of pursuing a return to the agency’s original mission—as Hankinson described—the United States should withdraw from this globalist body—and the entire UN system—completely. Additionally, the administration’s opposition to appointing Finerty for not aligning with its immigration agenda highlights a persistent “Deep State” within federal bureaucracies, including the U.S. Foreign Service, that consistently advocates for globalist policies.
Legislation in Congress, specifically the DEFUND Act (H.R. 1498 and S. 669), would fully withdraw the United States from the UN, including the UNHCR and relevant conventions. U.S. representatives and senators are encouraged to co-sponsor and pass this bill.
