The Milei administration tightened migration legislation via a decree issued on Wednesday, which human rights organizations have said takes away foreigners’ rights in Argentina. 

The decree, numbered 366/25, makes deportations easier, restricts migrants’ access to health and education, and adds more requirements for foreigners obtaining Argentine citizenship or permanent residency.

Among the reasons it given for the policy change, the new legislation mentions the mass deportations set by U.S. President Donald Trump as a cause of a “new risk” for Argentina.

The decree says that 1.25 million immigrants have been expelled from the U.S. and that, since that number will grow, it is “likely that an important proportion of those deportees will settle or try to settle in [Argentina].” According to the decree, Argentina made it easy for foreigners to enter the country and use “free of charge health and education services.” That “would generate an impact in the economy and the essential services of the population,” according to the decree.

Free healthcare and higher education have been a staple of Argentine society since the mid-20th century. 

Milei, an ally of the U.S. president, has copied many of the right-wing policies carried out by the Trump administration. Presidential spokesman and then-Buenos Aires city lawmaker candidate Manuel Adorni had anticipated the government’s measures two weeks ago. 

The decree changes the criteria over which foreigners can apply for Argentine citizenship, as it is no longer enough to reside in the country for two years.

Now, the only ones who can apply are those who have continued legal residence in Argentina for two years or those who prove “to have made a relevant investment in the country,” regardless of how long they lived there.

The text also adds the requirement of proving people have “sufficient financial means to subsist in the country” to obtain a permanent residence. In the meantime, they may be granted a temporary residency (called “precaria”), but from now on, it will last 90 days instead of the former 180 and will no longer serve as proof of roots to obtain citizenship or permanent residency.

Furthermore, migrants with irregular migratory status are no longer entitled to study at tertiary institutions or universities. Now, foreigners can only access initial, primary, and secondary education. Access to the public health system is also restricted, and only people with permanent residence or in emergency cases can access it free of charge. In other cases, it is required to present medical insurance or pay for the service.

“These two decisions are completely illegal and go against the Constitution and treaties to which the country has adhered,” said a communiqué by the Center for Legal and Social Studies (CELS, by its Spanish acronym). “Moreover, mandatory health insurance is required as a condition to enter the country. This measure may be restrictive for people without resources or visiting relatives,” the statement by the human rights group added.

The new regime expands the grounds for preventing entry or canceling residency for criminal matters, even in cases without a final conviction or of minor offenses, or even when there are “well-founded suspicions of crimes.” The Migrations Directorate must now be notified by the Judiciary every time a foreigner is prosecuted or convicted.

“The guarantees for those who have already entered the country are also reduced, as they may now be expelled when the immigration authority decides to do so without having to give prior notice to regularize the situation for which the expulsion is decided,” the CELS communiqué said. “Expulsion may entail a reentry ban of 5 to 15 years.”

The CELS also said that the Migrations Directorate can now carry out operations in public and private spaces and can request foreigners’ records in places of work. 

“These practices allow for a more intense and widespread form of surveillance, and generate an environment of harassment for migrants, including those in a regular situation but with papers in process or not carrying documentation at the time of control,” the CELS added.

The organization also criticized the fact that the government modified the law by decree, arguing it should be used as “an instrument foreseen for situations of urgency and necessity, which do not apply in this case.”