Overview:
Palau’s Senate has acted swiftly to block the transfer of third-country nationals deported from the United States, approving sweeping immigration amendments amid concerns over humanitarian treatment, legal safeguards and national preparedness. The move halts implementation of a recently signed U.S.–Palau memorandum of understanding and sets the stage for a national referendum on the issue.
By: Eoghan Olkeriil Ngirudelsang
NGERULMUD, Palau (Jan. 19, 2026) — Palau’s Senate has moved rapidly to block the transfer of third-country nationals deported from the United States, approving sweeping amendments to the country’s immigration laws amid concerns over humanitarian impacts, legal safeguards and national preparedness.
In a rare three-day legislative sprint, senators advanced and passed Senate Bill No. 12-53 SD1 during the opening week of the Fifth Regular Session. The measure effectively halts implementation of a memorandum of understanding (MOU) President Surangel Whipps Jr. signed with Washington, which would allow the United States to send certain deportees to Palau.
The amendments prohibit the entry, residence, employment or long-term stay of individuals who have been ordered removed by foreign governments. The provisions directly affect people subject to U.S. deportation orders and apply broadly to individuals deported, removed or relocated by any country.
During three days of floor debate, lawmakers focused on provisions barring entry to non-Palauans who have received removal orders under U.S. law; have been identified for removal by U.S. immigration authorities; have been designated for relocation or resettlement due to non-refoulement or other legal constraints; or have been deported or relocated by any foreign government. The bill also closes the door to admission for humanitarian resettlement, refugee protection or relocation based on an inability to return to another country.
Supporters said the legislation was necessary to prevent the Dec. 24 MOU—transmitted to the U.S. Congress on Dec. 31—from taking effect without adequate legal and humanitarian protections in place.
Sen. Siegfried Nakamura, a leading supporter, read directly from the MOU during debate and described the arrangement as “very inhumane.” He highlighted language stating that deportees would receive information about Palau after boarding flights from the United States, with Palauan officials permitted to accompany them only after boarding.
“Nowhere in the MOU does it say these people freely choose to work in Palau,” Nakamura said. “They would learn they are being flown to Palau only after boarding. Put yourself in their shoes.”
Nakamura also pointed to timelines in the agreement that provide Palau with 14 days’ notice before transfers and just 10 days to select which individuals it would accept. He cited a funding clause stating that implementation is “subject to the availability of funds” and applicable laws, arguing the agreement does not guarantee Palau would receive the $7.5 million referenced by U.S. officials.
“These amendments clarify our immigration laws so there is no confusion or misinterpretation,” Nakamura said.
Opponents raised concerns about the bill’s framing. Sen. Mason Whipps argued the legislation unfairly singled out the United States, noting that some sections explicitly reference U.S. authorities while others apply to all foreign governments.
“Why are we specifically naming the United States?” Whipps asked, urging consistency in the language.
Sens. Inabo, Eldebechel and Whipps voted against the bill, while Sen. Sungino abstained. The remaining senators supported its intent.
Several lawmakers emphasized the measure as a temporary stop rather than a permanent rejection. Sen. Brian Melairei said senators lacked complete information about the agreement.
“This bill only intends to stop the agreement while leadership fully reviews the pact with the U.S.,” Melairei said.
Sen. Lencter Basilius called for rescinding the MOU outright before Palau considers laws governing asylum seekers or deportees.
“Palau does not currently have laws for asylum seekers or deportees,” Basilius said. “We should rescind the agreement and develop those laws first.”
Sen. Salvador Tellames echoed those concerns, noting Palau is not a party to the 1951 U.N. Refugee Convention and lacks a comprehensive legal framework to manage such cases. Sen. Stevenson Kuartei questioned whether the arrangement could conflict with the Compact of Free Association, suggesting that public opinion should ultimately guide the decision.
Opposing the bill, Sen. Eldebechel warned that once enacted, the law could foreclose future discussion on accepting deportees or asylum seekers. He suggested waiting for the outcome of a proposed national referendum.
Sen. Mariur defended the rapid passage, saying lawmakers learned only after receiving the MOU that preparations for transfers were already underway.
“We were informed that arrangements were ongoing and that people could arrive at any time,” Mariur said, adding that both Palau’s National Congress and the Council of Chiefs had voiced opposition.
The bill passed its third and final reading by a 12–3 vote. Sens. Basilius, Melairei, Nakamura, Pedro, Remengesau, Rudimch, Tabelual, Tellames, Mariur, Kuartei and Baules voted in favor. Sens. Inabo, Eldebechel and Whipps voted against it, and Sen. Sungino abstained.
Despite sharp divisions over Senate Bill 12-53, senators unanimously approved Senate Bill No. 12-54, which calls for a national referendum on the same issue—underscoring broad agreement that Palau’s citizens should have the final say on the MOU.