WASHINGTON — Secretary of State Marco Rubio’s State Department is sharply rejecting a United Nations-backed migration framework, accusing global organizations of promoting mass migration policies that undermine national sovereignty and strain Western societies. (reuters.com)

The State Department announced Monday that the United States refused to support a “progress declaration” tied to the International Migration Review Forum held at U.N. headquarters in New York earlier this month. (reuters.com)

The forum is connected to the U.N.’s Global Compact for Safe, Orderly and Regular Migration — an international framework originally opposed by President Donald Trump during his first administration in 2017. (foxnews.com)

In its statement, the State Department accused the U.N. process of encouraging what officials described as “replacement immigration” policies across the United States and Western nations.

“Opening our doors to mass migration was a grave mistake that threatens the cohesion of our societies and the future of our peoples,” Rubio said in remarks released alongside the announcement. (miragenews.com)

The administration argued migration policy should remain under the control of sovereign nations rather than international organizations or multinational agreements.

The move signals a major escalation in the Trump administration’s broader crackdown on illegal immigration, asylum abuse, and international migration systems viewed by conservatives as encouraging mass population movement into Western countries.

The State Department has also increasingly embraced what administration officials describe as “remigration” policies — encouraging migrants who entered illegally or overstayed visas to voluntarily return to their home countries. (axios.com)

According to internal restructuring proposals first reported earlier this year, the State Department is considering creation of an “Office of Remigration” focused on deportation coordination and voluntary repatriation programs. (axios.com)

Rubio has repeatedly argued the federal government should stop policies that “facilitate or encourage mass migration” and instead prioritize border enforcement, national security, and domestic stability. (rttnews.com)

Supporters of the administration praised the move as a long-overdue rejection of global migration policies they believe weaken borders and national identity.

Critics, however, accused the administration of using inflammatory rhetoric and abandoning humanitarian responsibilities toward refugees and migrants fleeing violence, persecution, and economic collapse.

Immigration advocacy groups warned the administration’s language surrounding “replacement migration” mirrors rhetoric increasingly associated with nationalist movements in Europe and could further inflame tensions surrounding immigration policy. (axios.com)

The United States did not participate in the latest migration forum and formally rejected the declaration produced by the event.