Judge blocks Trump from withholding funds from 16 'sanctuary' cities, counties

April 24 (Reuters) - A federal judge in San Francisco on Thursday blocked Donald Trump's administration from withholding federal funding from several so-called sanctuary jurisdictions that have declined to cooperate with the Republican president's hardline immigration crackdown. U.S. District Judge William Orrick issued the injunction at the request of 16 cities and counties nationally led by San Francisco that in a lawsuit filed in February argued that the administration was unlawfully trying to force local officials to cooperate with federal immigration arrests. Those jurisdictions include the cities of Minneapolis, New Haven, Portland, St. Paul, Santa Fe and Seattle. They argue that the administration is seeking to punish them for exercising their rights to limit the use of their resources for federal civil immigration enforcement. More: Trump administration will investigate state and local officials who hinder immigration crackdown The lawsuit challenged an executive order Trump signed that threatened to cut off federal funding to sanctuary jurisdictions that limit or refuse to cooperate with federal immigration law enforcement, including Immigration and Customs Enforcement. The localities sued a day after the U.S. Department of Justice sued the state of Illinois and the city of Chicago, seeking a court order blocking so-called sanctuary laws that the Democratic-led jurisdictions adopted that it said were interfering with Trump's agenda. WASHINGTON, DC - APRIL 24: U.S. President Donald Trump waits for the arrival of Norway's Prime Minister Jonas Gahr Store to the White House on April 24, 2025 in Washington, DC. The leaders are expected to discuss security, trade, NATO and the war in Ukraine. Sanctuary laws prevent state and local law enforcement from assisting federal civil immigration officers. The Justice Department has since then also filed a lawsuit challenging a New York law that bars the Democratic-led state from sharing vehicle and address information with federal immigration authorities.

3 ways Trump's immigration crackdown could hit U.S. citizens

Trump administration officials are suggesting their immigration crackdown could expand to include deporting convicted U.S. citizens and charging anyone — not just immigrants — who criticizes Trump's policies. Why it matters: Such moves — described by officials in recent days — would show how U.S. citizens could be impacted by the growing number of tactics President Trump is using to, in his view, improve national security. They'd also be certain to ignite new legal battles over how far Trump's team can go in fighting illegal immigration and responding to dissenters. Zoom in: Here are three tactics the administration has teased that legal analysts say would challenge Americans' rights: 1. Sending convicted U.S. citizens to prisons abroad. This has been floated as a spinoff of Trump's deal with El Salvador, where a high-security prison is holding about 300 U.S. immigration detainees that the administration says are suspected criminals and gang members. "Homegrowns are next," Trump said during an Oval Office meeting with Salvadoran President Nayib Bukele last week, referring to sending Americans convicted of crimes to serve time in foreign prisons. "We always have to obey the laws," Trump said, "but we also have homegrown criminals that push people into subways, that hit elderly ladies over the head ... I'd like to include them in the group of people to get them out of the country." Trump's suggestion — echoing a similar proposal Bukele made to Secretary of State Marco Rubio in February — drew a storm of criticism from legal advocates, who called it unconstitutional. 2. Putting critics of the administration's policies in jeopardy. Some officials say U.S. citizens who criticize administration policies could be charged with crimes, based on the notion that they're aiding terrorists and criminals. "You have to ask yourself, are they technically aiding and abetting them, because aiding and abetting criminals and terrorists is a crime," White House senior director for counterterrorism Seb Gorka said in an interview with Newsmax. Trump's team also has questioned the legality of civic groups providing immigrants with "know your rights" trainings on how to respond to federal agents. Border czar Tom Homan suggested that such seminars help people evade law enforcement. "They're trying to use terrorism laws to attack people for their speech and for their political activism, and that's an authoritarian effort," said Kerri Talbot, co-executive director of the Immigration Hub, an immigration advocacy group. 3. Questioning the authority of court orders. The administration's resistance to returning Kilmar Abrego Garcia — who was legally in the U.S. with an order not to be deported back to El Salvador, but deported to the prison there anyway — has raised questions about how far Trump's team can go in trying to skirt court orders. The White House says the decision to return Abrego Garcia rests with El Salvador because the U.S. Supreme Court told the administration only to "facilitate" his return, not "effectuate" it. Advocates worry the resulting confusion has laid the groundwork for Trump's team to send a U.S. citizen to a foreign prison, then claim that person couldn't be returned. A federal judge raised this concern in Abrego Garcia's case. "If today the Executive claims the right to deport without due process and in disregard of court orders, what assurance will there be tomorrow that it will not deport American citizens and then disclaim responsibility to bring them home?" wrote Judge Harvie Wilkinson III. "And what assurance shall there be that the Executive will not train its broad discretionary powers upon its political enemies?" What they're saying: Michelle Brané, former executive director of the Biden administration's Family Reunification Task Force, echoed Wilkinson. "If they can send a noncitizen to a prison in El Salvador without due process ... why would a U.S. citizen be safer?" The White House didn't respond to a request for comment. But officials have argued that they have an electoral mandate for stricter immigration enforcement, and that opposition to their policies is against the will of voters. Trump's handling of immigration polls well in public surveys. But sending immigrants to El Salvador's prison without criminal convictions or due process does not — about 60% were opposed in a recent YouGov survey. Between the lines: U.S. citizens have been mistakenly detained by Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) before, including cases this month in Arizona and Florida. "People are realizing that this is going to impact all communities," Talbot said, "and that if one citizen can be picked up, then any of us can be picked up and put into proceedings, or labeled a terrorist, or removed to a foreign prison."

The IRS-ICE agreement: Trump shoots US economy in the foot

Washington, DC – Below is a column by Maribel Hastings from America’s Voice en Español translated to English from Spanish. It ran in several Spanish-language media outlets earlier this week: This Tax Week, the negative consequences of the agreement between the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) and ICE, to share information about undocumented taxpayers, carries special urgency, both in matters of privacy as well as the loss of billions of dollars in federal, state, and local tax payments if people without documents stop paying taxes or are deported. Last week, the Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy (ITEP) presented an analysis that concludes that “every 10-percentage point drop in the income tax compliance rate of undocumented immigrants would lower federal tax revenue by $8.6 billion per year, and state and local tax collections by $900 million per year.” That’s a combined reduction of $9.5 billion annually. A thirty percentage point drop in the tax compliance rate would lead to a $25.9 billion annual reduction in payments to the federal government and $2.6 billion to state and local governments. These figures should alarm the Trump administration, which has proposed not only an anti-immigrant policy but one that is, in many cases, illegal and unconstitutional, in its obsessive crusade against immigrants of color. The IRS-ICE agreement allows the agency charged with collecting taxes to share data, which until now has been kept secret, with the immigration agency — data about the contributors who fill out their tax declarations using Individual Taxpayer Identification Numbers (ITINs), which the IRS gives out to some categories of noncitizens who cannot obtain a Social Security number. The idea is to locate them and deport them. Various high-level IRS officials, including the acting IRS Commissioner, Melanie Krause, resigned because the agreement clearly violates federal laws that protect the privacy of taxpayers’ information, independent of their immigration status. Only Congress can request that the information be revealed under special circumstances, but not for immigration matters. The agreement should also worry citizens and authorized residents because no one knows to what end the federal government wants to access tax information. Ignoring these developments, and arguing that they will only affect undocumented people, is playing with fire. This contributes to eroding protections and individual rights, especially before a Trump administration that neither respects due process, nor what the courts rule, including the highest court in the land. This has been proven in Trump’s reluctance to bring back a legal Maryland resident, Salvadoran Kilmar Ábrego García, who was deported “by mistake” to the infamous CECOT prison in El Salvador, even though the nation’s Supreme Court ruled that the administration should “facilitate” the return of the young man who is married to a U.S. citizen and the father of three U.S. citizen children. But to analyze the possible effects of the IRS-ICE agreement on government coffers in just dollars and cents, we do not have to go very far. These days, stories abound in the media of accountants saying that their undocumented clients are asking if it would be safe to file their taxes, in the face of fear that they will be detained and deported. Or experts warning about the loss of revenue at all levels. According to the American Immigration Council, “in 2023, households led by undocumented immigrants paid $89.8B in total taxes. This includes $33.9B in state and local taxes and $55.8B in federal taxes.” In 2022, combined taxes totaled almost $100B, according to ITEP. Also in 2022, “undocumented immigrants paid $25.7 billion in Social Security taxes, $6.4 billion in Medicare taxes, and $1.8 billion in unemployment insurance taxes,” ITEP reported. These are benefits to which they are not entitled. With the IRS-ICE agreement and mass deportations, Trump, once again, shoots the US economy in the foot.

Trump measures make life more difficult for immigrants — not just undocumented

The Trump administration is waging a concerted pressure campaign against undocumented immigrants — as well as hundreds of thousands here legally whose status it is trying to revoke. The measures threaten to make daily life more untenable for millions as President Donald Trump aims to carry out the immigrant purging he promised during his campaign. Trump has escalated his clampdown on immigrants beyond what was done during his first presidential term, which included separating children from their parents at the border, working to build a border wall between the United States and Mexico and curbing legal immigration through fewer visas and refugee admissions. This time around, on top of immigration raids and arrests, the administration is inflicting hardship on immigrants by pulling multiple levers of government to undercut their day-to-day lives. The administration is threatening criminal charges against immigrants without legal status who do not register with the government. It has given Immigration and Customs Enforcement access to previously confidential taxpayer information to locate immigrants and canceled Social Security numbers of thousands of immigrants by marking “illegal immigrants” as being dead. Officials have canceled parole that the Biden administration granted to some groups. A federal judge has blocked the revocations temporarily. “What we are seeing now is this full-court press by the government on immigration,” said Michael Lukens, executive director of the Amica Center for Immigrant Rights, a nonprofit immigrant rights advocacy organization whose funding to provide legal help to unaccompanied immigrant children Trump cut. The many actions are all parts of the administration’s strategy to subtract as many immigrants from the United States as possible without having to go through more cumbersome deportation processes. The Trump actions build on an “attrition through enforcement” strategy tried in 2010 with state anti-immigration laws, a strategy pushed by Kris Kobach, a former attorney general of Kansas who has championed conservative causes. Data obtained by NBC News shows that the Trump administration’s deportations are running slightly behind deportations under President Joe Biden at the same time last year, even though Trump has made mass deportations one of his main priorities since he assumed office. Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem made it clear recently what level of departures the administration wants to see. At a recent Cabinet meeting, she said, “We got 20, 21 million people that need to go home." Republicans and conservatives have long used about 20 million as the number of undocumented people in the country, though longtime analyses have pegged the number at closer to 11 million to 12 million. As is evident in the case of Kilmar Abrego Garcia — a Maryland man who a Justice Department official said was mistakenly deported to a prison in El Salvador — the administration is willing to push the edge of the legal envelope to meet its mass deportation goal. At a contentious hearing Tuesday, a U.S. district judge ordered the administration to provide evidence of any steps it has taken to facilitate Abrego Garcia's return. "Over 77 million people delivered a resounding Election Day mandate in November to secure our borders, mass deport criminal illegal migrants, and enforce our immigration laws," White House spokesman Kush Desai told NBC News in a statement. "The Trump administration is aligned on a whole-of-government approach to deliver on this mandate to once again put Americans and America First.” He did not respond to questions about criticism of the administration's actions or about any spillover effects on U.S. citizens. 'Taking people's legal status away' White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt announced Tuesday that Trump would sign an order preventing undocumented immigrants from getting Social Security benefits. But undocumented immigrants, and many people legally working, are already prohibited from receiving Social Security payouts or Medicare, said Marielena Hincapié, a distinguished immigration fellow and visiting scholar at Cornell Law School. She said Trump's latest order is "continued fearmongering and disinformation because, in fact, undocumented immigrants pay into Social Security but are never eligible to get those benefits." "On the one hand, the rhetoric of Trump has been about focusing on the undocumented immigrants and the worst 'criminals,' etc., but what we've actually seen from a policymaking perspective is they are actually taking people's legal status away," Hincapié said. There are immigrants in the United States with different forms of legal status, such as Temporary Protected Status or work authorization that was granted while they were awaiting asylum claim outcomes, which makes them eligible to apply for Social Security numbers. But getting Social Security numbers does not mean they are eligible for benefits, Hincapié said. Recommended Latino Family files first lawsuit over deadly roof collapse in Dominican Republic nightclub "There are separate laws dating all the way to the 1996 welfare reform law that indicate who is eligible for what program, and for most people, you have to have been a legal permanent resident — a green card holder — for at least five years to be a qualified legal immigrant that is eligible for certain benefits," she said. The administration has threatened penalties against undocumented immigrants 14 and older who fail to register with the government and carry proof they registered with them. To register, they must fill out a form that asks them not only about any crimes they may have been arrested for or charged with, but also any they committed but for which they were not prosecuted, said Bill Hing, founder of the Immigrant Legal Resource Center. The law to register has existed for decades but had not previously been enforced. Hing questioned how Trump would enforce the required registration, because, he said, trying to get someone indicted for not carrying registration papers would complicate and lengthen a deportation process. He acknowledged that the administration might try to make an example of a case or two. But the requirement "is a mechanism to induce people, to coerce people, into exposing themselves," he said. In addition, Hing said, if he were representing people arrested for failing to register, he would argue they have a Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination, since they are asked to admit to crimes when they fill out the forms. "I don't know about you, but I've jaywalked. I've sped," he said. "I think someone being prosecuted has a very good Fifth Amendment argument not to register." While the immigration crackdown actions are aimed at immigrants, they are affecting citizens, too. In early April, Housing and Urban Development Secretary Scott Turner posted on social media that he had directed HUD offices to ensure HUD programs do not benefit undocumented immigrants. People here illegally cannot get federal subsidized housing. But an estimated 25,000 families in public housing include at least one U.S. citizen and at least one person without legal immigration status, according to the National Housing Law Project, a nonprofit legal advocacy organization. The citizen would be eligible for the housing. Marie Claire Tran-Leung, an attorney for the National Housing Law Project, said Trump and Turner are trying to deploy HUD "to scare immigrant families into self-evicting." Whether the administration's measures will force out enough immigrants to satisfy Trump and his base is unknown. But Hincapié said that with the administration moving “so rapidly” and in a “chaotic way,” some U.S. citizens may get caught in the immigration dragnet. For instance, some could end up wrongly classified as dead and their Social Security numbers put in the agency's death file, she said. "Are they going to do the same thing they are doing with Kilmar [Abrego Garcia] of saying, 'Oops, sorry, we made a mistake and we can't do anything about it now'?" For more information, visit us at https://www.beverlyhillsimmigrationlaw.com/.

Judge gives Trump administration 24 hours to provide evidence of Mahmoud Khalil's removability

An immigration judge has given lawyers representing the Department of Homeland Security a little over 24 hours to provide Mahmoud Khalil's legal team with evidence that he is removable from the U.S. under the allegations lobbed against him. Khalil, a legal permanent resident with a green card, was arrested by Immigration and Customs Enforcement officers at his Columbia University housing in New York last month. Khalil, a leader of the encampment protests at Columbia last spring, was detained on March 8, then taken to an immigration detention facility in Elizabeth, New Jersey, before ending up in a Louisiana detention center, his attorneys said. Amid Farahi/AFP via Getty Images, FILE Signs in support of detained graduate student Mahmoud Khalil, are readied during the nationwide "Hands Off!" protest against President Donald Trump and his advisor, Tesla CEO Elon Musk, in Washington, DC, on April 5, 2025. Amid Farahi/AFP via Getty Images, FILE At an immigration hearing in Jena, Louisiana, on Tuesday, Judge Jamee Comans set another hearing for Friday to give Khalil's team time to review the evidence and respond to it. Comans said she will then make a determination whether he is removable or order him to be released. In a statement released several hours after the hearing, Khalil's lawyer, Marc Van Der Hout criticized the timeline, arguing the government hasn't produced "a single shred of evidence" to support its allegations. "Yet the Immigration judge today stated she intends to rule Friday on the merits of this outlandish charge with no realistic opportunity for Mahmoud and his lawyers to contest this baseless charge," Van Der Hout said in a statement. "If this turns out to be what happens Friday, it would be an uncalled for rush to judgement that would completely deprive Mahmoud of any due process, which is a foundation of our legal system.” The court hearing earlier Tuesday grew tense at times, with the judge at one point saying there were nearly 600 people waiting to attend the virtual hearing that was reserved for legal parties only, saying this was highly unusual. MORE: Judge rejects government's request to move Mahmoud Khalil's case to Louisiana Noting the public interest in the case, Van Der Hout asked the judge to consider making future hearings accessible to the public, but she refused and said she was considering making all future hearings "in-person only" so all of his lawyers would need to attend in person. Khalil was seated wearing a blue jumpsuit. He only said a handful of words throughout the hearing. At one point he asked the judge if his wife, Noor Abdalla, could also be allowed to have access to the video feed. "Your honor, I would appreciate if you could let my wife in," he asked. When she was let in, Abdalla was shown on the big screen. Khalil turned to look at her and then returned his gaze to the front of the room. Khalil's wife is due to give birth within "a couple of weeks," according to Van Der Hout. During the last hearing, Khalil's lawyers were granted continuance to give additional time to review the allegations raised against him in the Notice to Appear filed by DHS. David Dee Delgado/Reuters, FILE Muslim protesters pray outside the main campus of Columbia University during a demonstration to denounce the immigration arrest of Mahmoud Khalil, a pro-Palestinian activist who helped lead protests against Israel at the university, in New York City, March 14, 2025. David Dee Delgado/Reuters, FILE Comans again grew agitated when Van Der Hout asked for continuance a second time and claimed lawyers representing DHS had not provided evidence to back up the allegations against his client. "We have not received a single document from them," he said. He urged the judge to allow him more time, saying "we can not plead" until they knew the evidence they had against Khalil. But Comans denied his request and ordered Van Der Hout to enter Khalil's plea for over 12 allegations on the spot. The allegations ranged from procedural, such as "You are a native of Syria and a citizen of Algeria," to accusations that he withheld information from DHS about his alleged membership in the Columbia University Apartheid Divest group. MORE: Trump administration claims Palestinian activist Mahmoud Khalil misrepresented information on green card application He was also asked to respond to the DHS claim that Secretary of State Marco Rubio had found Khalil's "presence or activities in the United States would have serious adverse foreign policy consequences for the United States." Van Der Hout responded "deny" for each allegation. Comans conveyed a sense of urgency to get these issues resolved, noting Khalil had already spent several weeks in detention. She told both parties she was "not going to keep him detained" while they argued over his removability. The court room was packed with reporters and a handful of supporters. One of them was told she needed to take off her keffiyeh before she walked into the courtroom. As the hearing was adjourned, Khalil turned back to wave and smile at the group of supporters and press that were trickling out of room. He smiled and waved a peace sign at one of his supporters. For more information, visit us at https://www.beverlyhillsimmigrationlaw.com/.

Judge orders US to bring Kilmar Abrego Garcia back from El Salvador prison

GREENBELT, Md. ― In a blow to the Trump administration, a federal judge ruled Friday the U.S. government acted illegally when it mistakenly deported a Maryland father to El Salvador and ordered that he must be returned to the United States. “This was an illegal act,” U.S. District Judge Paula Xinis of Maryland said of the deportation of Kilmar Abrego Garcia. Xinis gave the administration until 11:59 p.m. Monday to remove Abrego Garcia from the violent El Salvador prison where he is being held and return him to U.S. soil. Abrego Garcia, 29, was among the hundreds of alleged members of crime gangs MS-13 and Venezuela’s Tren de Aragua the government expelled from the U.S. to El Salvador last month. Abrego Garcia, who had fled El Salvador as a teenager to escape gang violence, was pulled over by federal immigration agents near his home in Beltsville, Maryland, on March 12 and arrested. Three days later, he was expelled and sent back to El Salvador even though he had won a court order six years earlier barring his removal. The Trump administration acknowledged in court records earlier this week that his deportation was a mistake, which it attributed to an “administrative error.” But the U.S. government says it has no jurisdiction to order his return because he is in a foreign country. 'Devastated and confused': A Maryland dad was sent to El Salvador prison by mistake. Can his community get him back? Abrego Garcia’s wife, Jennifer Vasquez Sura, and their 5-year-old son, who are both U.S. citizens, sued the government demanding his return. During a hearing on Friday, Xinis ripped into Justice Department lawyers over Abrego Garcia's arrest and questioned the government's claim it could not get him back. If federal authorities were able to strike terms and conditions for his placement in El Salvador, "then certainly they have the functional control to unwind the decision – the wrong decision," she said. Get the Daily Briefing newsletter in your inbox. The day's top stories, from sports to movies to politics to world events. Delivery: Daily Your Email Erez Reuveni, the Justice Department’s attorney, conceded under questioning from Xinis that Abrego Garcia should not have been expelled and said he also had questioned why the government could not bring him back to the U.S. "My answer to a lot of these questions is going to be frustrating, and I am frustrated,” Reuveni said. A wife struggles: Trump banished her husband to El Salvador. Work and worry are all she has left. Xinis also questioned the government's claim that Abrego Garcia is a member of MS-13. “In a court of law, when someone is accused in such a violent and predatory organization, it comes in the form of an indictment, complaint, a criminal proceeding that has then a robust process so that we can assess the facts," she said. "I haven’t heard that from the government." While the judge sparred with the government's lawyers, Vasquez Sura sat at a table with her family's attorneys, a box of tissues next to her. Afterward, she left the courthouse to applause from supporters who rallied outside to call for her husband's return. “We will continue this fight to get my husband back,” Vasquez Sura said in brief remarks in Spanish following the judge's decision. Lawyers for the federal government have appealed the case to the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Virginia. White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt suggested Xinis should contact El Salvador President Nayib Bukele "because we are unaware of the judge having jurisdiction or authority over the country of El Salvador." Immigration rights groups condemn deportation Kilmar Abrego Garcia, 29, was detained by federal immigration agents while his son, pictured here, was in the backseat. The Trump administration has said his deportation to a notorious prison in El Salvador was a clerical error. Abrego Garcia's deportation was complicated by the fact that a court order issued in a separate case six years ago had barred his expulsion. In March 2019, he was arrested outside a Home Depot in Hyattsville, Maryland, where he was looking for work, after a confidential informant testified that he was an active member of the MS-13 gang, according to government lawyers. His attorneys say he was not a member of MS-13, and the government offered scant evidence to back up its claim. 'A plain abuse of power": ICE detains grandmother who hid in churches during first Trump administration A court ordered him deported to El Salvador, but Abrego Garcia applied for asylum, asking for protection under the United Nations Convention Against Torture. In court filings, he said he had come to the United States because the Barrio 18 gang, which is rivals with MS-13, was extorting and threatening him and his family for their pupusa business in their San Salvador neighborhood and pressuring him to join the gang. A U.S. immigration judge found he was deportable but issued an order in October 2019 that protected him from removal. Abrego Garcia’s arrest and deportation to El Salvador has been condemned by immigrant rights advocates and others. Minutes before Friday's hearing, chants led by people in pink vests – reading “Rapid Response Choir” –could be heard from the rally gathered outside the federal courthouse in suburban Maryland. A few police officers stood to the side. The chants, calling for Abrego Garcia's release, continued after the hearing began. A man identified by Jennifer Vasquez Sura as her husband, Kilmar Abrego Garcia, is led by force by guards through the Terrorism Confinement Center in Tecoluca, El Salvador. Attorney Simon Sandoval-Moshenberg, who represented the family during the hearing, said they’ve had no contact Abrego Garcia, nor have attorneys the family hired in El Salvador. Sandoval-Moshenberg urged the government to comply with the order to bring Abrego Garcia back. He also said it’d be unlikely Abrego Garcia would get sent to another country, given there’s a court order blocking the administration from deporting people to countries they’re not from. But Sandoval-Moshenberg said he wouldn’t declare victory until Abrego Garcia is back in the U.S. Abrego Garcia's supporters, however, celebrated the judge's ruling. “This government tried to disappear Kilmar Abrego Garcia,” said the Rev. Michael Vanacore of Pilgrim United Church of Christ in nearby Wheaton, Maryland. “It was very important to hear his name read aloud in positive judgment by the court, saying that he should be returned.” 'Uncertainty and even fear': Trump's expanded ICE raids are causing big problems for some schools At the rally, Vanacore recited a phrase familiar to other Latinos whose loved ones are gone: Saying “presente” after the missing person’s name. “Kilmar Abrego Garcia, presente,” he said in Spanish, pleading to God for his safe return. Immigration lawyers call ruling significant Abrego Garcia's case was one example of the fits and starts the Trump administration has gone through in strengthening immigration enforcement. A federal judge in the District of Columbia has temporarily blocked the deportation of alleged members of Venezuela's crime gang Tren de Aragua until they have a chance to deny their membership. Three judges in different states have blocked Trump's order denying citizenship to the children of immigrants who have no legal authorization to be in the country. Ben Johnson, executive director of the group American Immigration Lawyers Association, said Friday's ruling will show whether the administration or the courts will correct mistakes in the Trump administration’s policy aiming for mass deportations. “This is a very big deal because it’s going to tell us whether either the administration is going to follow judicial orders or whether any of the mistakes that the administration makes are irreparable,” Johnson said. “Because the administration is doing so much of this in secret, it’s very hard to know what the remedies are for getting this wrong.” Linda Dakin-Grimm, an immigration lawyer in Los Angeles, said the case is significant because the administration is resisting it. “Other administrations might have just returned the guy and killed the issue,” Dakin-Grimm said. Another significant aspect of the Maryland case is how quickly swiftly the judge reached a decision – in days rather than months or years, she said. “What strikes me is how quickly this happened,” Dakin-Grimm said. For more information, visit us at https://www.beverlyhillsimmigrationlaw.com/.

USCIS Forms Update Notice

Good afternoon, We recently updated the following USCIS form(s): Form I-129F, Petition for Alien Fiancé(e) 01/20/2025 10:37 AM EST Edition Date: 01/20/25. Starting May 1, 2025, we will accept only the 01/20/25 edition. Until then, you can also use the 04/01/24 edition. You can find the edition date at the bottom of the page on the form and instructions. Form I-131A, Application for Carrier Documentation 01/20/2025 09:26 AM EST Edition Date: 01/20/25. Starting May 1, 2025, we will accept only the 01/20/25 edition. Until then, you can also use the 04/01/24 edition. You can find the edition date at the bottom of the page on the form and instructions. Form I-212, Application for Permission to Reapply for Admission into the United States After Deportation or Removal 01/20/2025 08:59 AM EST Edition Date: 01/20/25. Starting May 1, 2025, we will accept only the 01/20/25 edition. Until then, you can also use the 04/01/24 edition. You can find the edition date at the bottom of the page on the form and instructions. Form I-602, Application by Refugee for Waiver of Inadmissibility Grounds 01/20/2025 08:47 AM EST Edition Date: 01/20/25. Starting May 1, 2025, we will accept only the 01/20/25 edition. Until then, you can also use the 04/01/24 edition. You can find the edition date at the bottom of the page on the form and instructions. For more information, please visit our Forms Updates page.

USCIS Updates Policy to Recognize Two Biological Sexes

WASHINGTON— U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services is updating the USCIS Policy Manual to clarify that it only recognizes two biological sexes, male and female. Consistent with the Jan. 20, 2025, executive order, Defending Women From Gender Ideology Extremism and Restoring Biological Truth to the Federal Government, USCIS is returning to its historical policy of recognizing two biological sexes. “There are only two sexes — male and female,” said DHS Assistant Secretary for Public Affairs Tricia McLaughlin. “President Trump promised the American people a revolution of common sense, and that includes making sure that the policy of the U.S. government agrees with simple biological reality. Proper management of our immigration system is a matter of national security, not a place to promote and coddle an ideology that permanently harms children and robs real women of their dignity, safety, and well-being.” Under this guidance, USCIS considers a person’s sex as that which is generally evidenced on the birth certificate issued at or nearest to the time of birth. If the birth certificate issued at or nearest to the time of birth indicates a sex other than male or female, USCIS will base the determination of sex on secondary evidence. See Volume 1, General Policies and Procedures, Part E, Adjudications, Chapter 6, Evidence, Section B, Primary and Secondary Evidence [1 USCIS-PM E.6(B)]. USCIS will not deny benefits solely because the benefit requestor did not properly indicate his or her sex. However, USCIS does not issue documents with a blank sex field, and does not issue documents with a sex different than the sex as generally evidenced on a birth certificate issued at the time of birth (or issued nearest to the time of birth). Therefore, if a benefit requestor does not indicate his or her sex or indicates a sex different from the sex on his or her birth certificate issued at the time of birth (or issued nearest to the time of birth), there may be delays in adjudication. USCIS may provide notice to benefit requestors if it issues a USCIS document reflecting a sex different than that indicated by the benefit requestor on the request. This guidance, contained in Volumes 1, 11, and 12 of the Policy Manual, is effective immediately and applies to benefit requests pending or filed on or after April 2, 2025. The guidance contained in the Policy Manual is controlling and supersedes any related prior guidance. For more information, see the Policy Alert.

Form I-9, Employment Eligibility Verification

Edition Date: 01/20/25. You can find the edition date at the bottom of the page on the form and instructions.

Employers may also use the following previous editions:
• Form I-9 with an 08/01/23 edition date, valid until its expiration date of 05/31/2027; and
• Form I-9 with an 08/01/23 edition date, valid until its expiration date of 07/31/2026.

You can find the expiration date at the top of the page on the form and instructions.

Employers using an electronic version of Form I-9 must update their systems with the version that has the expiration date of 05/31/2027 by 07/31/2026.

Edition dates are listed in mm/dd/yy format.

Expiration dates are listed in mm/dd/yyyy format.

US immigration officials look to expand social media data collection

SAN FRANCISCO (AP) — U.S. immigration officials are asking the public and federal agencies to comment on a proposal to collect social media handles from people applying for benefits such as green cards or citizenship, to comply with an executive order from President Donald Trump. The March 5 notice raised alarms from immigration and free speech advocates because it appears to expand the government’s reach in social media surveillance to people already vetted and in the U.S. legally, such as asylum seekers, green card and citizenship applicants -- and not just those applying to enter the country. That said, social media monitoring by immigration officials has been a practice for over a decade, since at least the second Obama administration and ramping up under Trump’s first term. Below are some questions and answers on what the new proposal means and how it might expand social media surveillance. Advertisement What is the proposal? The Department of Homeland Security issued a 60-day notice asking for public commentary on its plan to comply with Trump’s executive order titled “Protecting the United States from Foreign Terrorists and Other National Security and Public Safety Threats.” The plan calls for “uniform vetting standards” and screening people for grounds of inadmissibility to the U.S., as well as identify verification and “national security screening.” It seeks to collect social media handles and the names of platforms, although not passwords. The policy seeks to require people to share their social media handles when applying for U.S. citizenship, green card, asylum and other immigration benefits. The proposal is open to feedback from the public until May 5. What is changing? Advertisement “The basic requirements that are in place right now is that people who are applying for immigrant and non-immigrant visas have to provide their social media handles,” said Rachel Levinson-Waldman, managing director of the Brennan Center’s Liberty and National Security Program at New York University. “Where I could see this impacting is someone who came into the country before visa-related social media handle collection started, so they wouldn’t have provided it before and now they’re being required to. Or maybe they did before, but their social media use has changed.” “This fairly widely expanded policy to collect them for everyone applying for any kind of immigration benefit, including people who have already been vetted quite extensively,” she added. What this points to — along with other signals the administration is sending such as detaining people and revoking student visas for participating in campus protests that the government deems antisemitic and sympathetic to the militant Palestinian group Hamas — Levinson-Waldman added, is the increased use of social media to “make these very high-stakes determinations about people.” In a statement, a spokesperson for the United States Citizenship and Immigration Service said the agency seeks to “strengthen fraud detection, prevent identity theft, and support the enforcement of rigorous screening and vetting measures to the fullest extent possible.” Advertisement “These efforts ensure that those seeking immigration benefits to live and work in the United States do not threaten public safety, undermine national security, or promote harmful anti-American ideologies,” the statement continued. USCIS estimates that the proposed policy change will affect about 3.6 million people. How are social media accounts used now? The U.S. government began ramping up the use of social media for immigration vetting in 2014 under then-President Barack Obama, according to the Brennan Center for Justice. In late 2015, the Department of Homeland Security began both “manual and automatic screening of the social media accounts of a limited number of individuals applying to travel to the United States, through various non-public pilot programs,” the nonpartisan law and policy institute explains on its website. In May 2017, the U.S. Department of State issued an emergency notice to increase the screening of visa applicants. Brennan, along with other civil and human rights groups, opposed the move, arguing that it is “excessively burdensome and vague, is apt to chill speech, is discriminatory against Muslims, and has no security benefit.” Two years later, the State Department began collecting social media handles from “nearly all foreigners” applying for visas to travel to the U.S. — about 15 million people a year. Advertisement How is AI used? Artificial intelligence tools used to comb through potentially millions of social media accounts have evolved over the past decade, although experts caution that such tools have limits and can make mistakes. Leon Rodriguez, who served as the director of USCIS from 2014 to 2017 and now practices as an immigration attorney, said while AI could be used as a first screening tool, he doesn’t think “we’re anywhere close to where AI will be able to exercise the judgment of a trained fraud detection and national security officer” or that of someone in an intelligence agency. “It’s also possible that I will miss stuff,” he added. “Because AI is still very much driven by specific search criteria and it’s possible that the search criteria won’t hit actionable content.” Advertisement What are the concerns? “Social media is just a stew, so much different information — some of it is reliable, some of it isn’t. Some of it can be clearly attributed to somebody, some of it can’t. And it can be very hard to interpret,” Levinson-Waldman said. “So I think as a baseline matter, just using social media to make high-stakes decisions is quite concerning.” Then there’s the First Amendment. “It’s by and large established that people in the U.S. have First Amendment rights,” she said. This includes people who are not citizens. “And obviously, there are complicated ways that that plays out. There is also fairly broad authority for the government to do something like revoking somebody’s visa, if you’re not a citizen, then there’s steps that the government can take — but by and large, with very narrow exceptions, that cannot be on the grounds of speech that would be protected (by the First Amendment).” For more information, visit us at https://www.blogger.com/blog/posts/24496902.

Rubio says at least 300 foreign students’ visas have been revoked

Secretary of State Marco Rubio said Thursday that at least 300 foreign students have had their visas revoked amid the Trump administration’s immigration crackdown, a far higher number than was previously known. “Maybe more, it might be more than 300 at this point,” Rubio said at a press conference in Guyana when asked to confirm Axios reporting on the topic. “We do it every day. Every time I find one of these lunatics, I take away their visa,” he added, saying he hopes it’s even more than the 300 estimate. “I hope at some point we run out because we have gotten rid of all of them, but we’re looking every day for these lunatics that are tearing things up.” Axios was the first to report that 300 foreign students’ visas had been revoked and that administration officials are looking to block some colleges that have too many “pro-Hamas” foreign students from admitting any international individuals. The Hill has reached out to the State Department for comment. Up Next - Trump on pulling Stefanik nomination: 'We don't want to take any chances' Multiple high-profile cases have come out of Columbia University, Tufts and the University of Alabama as the Trump administration’s crackdown on pro-Palestinian foreign students escalates. Sign up for the Morning Report The latest in politics and policy. Direct to your inbox. Email address By signing up, I agree to the Terms of Use, have reviewed the Privacy Policy, and to receive personalized offers and communications via email, on-site notifications, and targeted advertising using my email address from The Hill, Nexstar Media Inc., and its affiliates On top of student visa holders, the Trump administration has gone after multiple permanent legal residents, such as Mahmoud Khalil, who has a green card. For more information, visit us at https://www.beverlyhillsimmigrationlaw.com/.

U.S. to revoke legal status of more than a half-million migrants, urges them to self deport

The Trump administration will be revoking the legal status of hundreds of thousands of Latin American and Haitian migrants welcomed into the U.S. under a Biden-era sponsorship process, urging them to self-deport or face arrest and removal by deportation agents. The termination of their work permits and deportation protections under an immigration authority known as parole will take effect in late April, 30 days after March 25, according to a notice posted by the federal government. The move will affect immigrants from Cuba, Haiti, Nicaragua and Venezuela who flew to the U.S. under a Biden administration program, known as CHNV, that was designed to reduce illegal immigration at the U.S.-Mexico border by giving would-be migrants legal migration avenues. A total of 532,000 migrants entered the U.S. under that policy, which was paused soon after President Trump took office, though it's unclear how many have been able to secure another status that will allow them to stay in the country legally. CBS News first reported in early February that the Trump administration was planning to revoke the legal status of individuals who entered the U.S. under the CHNV process. The Department of Homeland Security said it will seek the arrest and deportation of those subject to the policy change if they fail to depart the U.S. in the next 30 days. Officials are urging migrants to use the newly repurposed CBP Home smartphone app to register for self-deportation. But DHS said it retains the authority to target migrants who arrived under this program before the 30-day period lapses. Officials say those prioritized for arrest will include migrants who have failed to apply for another immigration benefit like asylum or a green card. In a statement, DHS spokeswoman Tricia McLaughlin said the migrants allowed into the U.S. under the CHNV process were "loosely vetted," and argued the program undercut American workers. "The termination of the CHNV parole programs, and the termination of parole for those who exploited it, is a return to common-sense policies, a return to public safety, and a return to America First," McLaughlin added. Friday's announcement is the latest effort by the Trump administration to discontinue humanitarian-based immigration programs that allow migrants to enter or stay in the country with the government's permission. The CHNV program in question was hailed by the Biden administration as a successful policy that reduced illegal border crossings by migrants from Cuba, Haiti, Nicaragua and, to a lesser extent, Venezuela. But Republicans denounced it as an effort to circumvent the limits Congress placed on legal immigration, and noted that the program had some recorded instances of fraud. The Biden administration last fall made a decision not to allow CHNV beneficiaries to renew their two-year work permits under the program, saying they could apply for other benefits, like asylum and Temporary Protected Status. That prospect, however, changed dramatically when Mr. Trump took office. His administration has already announced plans to phase out the TPS programs for Haitians and Venezuelans. It also suspended all pending immigration benefit applications filed by those who arrived under CHNV, citing concerns about fraud and vetting. More from CBS News Trump administration cites new deportation grounds in Mahmoud Khalil case Judge rebukes Justice Dept., raises due process questions in deportation case Trump revokes security clearances of Kamala Harris, Hillary Clinton For more information, visit us at https://www.beverlyhillsimmigrationlaw.com/.

U.S. to revoke legal status of more than a half-million migrants, urges them to self deport

The Trump administration will be revoking the legal status of hundreds of thousands of Latin American and Haitian migrants welcomed into the U.S. under a Biden-era sponsorship process, urging them to self-deport or face arrest and removal by deportation agents. The termination of their work permits and deportation protections under an immigration authority known as parole will take effect in late April, 30 days after March 25, according to a notice posted by the federal government. For more information, visit us at https://www.beverlyhillsimmigrationlaw.com/.

The ‘bad immigrant’ lie — and why it’s so dangerous

Today, in communities across the country, Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents are grabbing people, regardless of immigration status. People are afraid to go to work, and to send their children to school. A new and disturbing level of terror is growing around us. And that’s exactly what the Trump administration wants — to foster and help flourish the fear that has kept us increasingly divided. While they tell Americans that they are going after all of the bad and scary immigrants that have held the country hostage, to the shock of none, many of those targeted by ICE in just the first two weeks of February had no criminal convictions or pending charges. Simultaneously, President Trump is selling the idea of a “gold card” visa to wealthy would-be immigrants, while those who have been building and contributing to this country for years are cornered and caged for the “crime” of being poor and working-class people of color. I grew up undocumented and living in fear. My family and I walked on eggshells, constantly afraid that making the slightest slipup could lead to racial profiling, deportation and our family being broken apart. We did everything we could to show this country we were “good” immigrants. We worked hard, and kept our heads down. We didn’t complain when we were exploited and abused in the workplace. We stayed out of trouble, and paid our taxes. I learned English, became an honors student, and went above and beyond in my volunteer work and community service. That didn’t stop my dad from being constantly racially profiled by the police and my then 12-year-old younger brother from being assaulted by the NYPD on his way home from school for being a young Latino man and, therefore, suspicious. Amazing, kind and beautiful friends have been shackled, detained and deported. In spite of doing everything right and making sacrifices for our families and our communities, immigrants have, over and over again, become the punching bags of politicians who have nothing else to offer the American people. Growing up, I felt proud about my parent’s sacrifices and their courage to leave everything behind and seek a better life in the U.S. But over time, I started to feel ashamed of being a poor undocumented immigrant of color. As a young immigrant living in a post-9/11 America, I experienced firsthand being labeled a “threat” and a “suspect” in the place I call home. Everything around me — what I watched on TV and the stories of immigrants I read about — told me my parents and I were “bad” for fleeing poverty and being in this country seeking refuge and a better life. Sadly, my young mind internalized the lie and felt the urgency to show this country that I was worthy of being here. Many immigrants believe this too, and consequently think that nothing could possibly happen to them or their families because they are “good” immigrants. Yet today, we’re seeing a constant flood of stories of so-called “good” immigrants and their families being torn apart by deportation efforts — from model students with green cards whose only crime was using their voice to Trump-supporting Latino voters who genuinely believed in his promises to fight for them. Some on the left have piled onto their pain with vindicated glee, but while I’m frustrated with those who thought that a red hat and hate would give them the extra patriot points, I do understand them. Immigrants are made to believe in “personal responsibility” — a trap from which there is no way out. We’re pushed to buy into the idea that somehow, while our president can pardon his family, friends and cronies without reserve, people like us, who have to flee our homes and come to this country in search of safety and security, must be continuously punished for the “crime” of wanting a better life for our families. This is exactly what the president and his administration are doing. They are blaming immigrants for the costs of eggs, housing, a failing healthcare system and an economy that benefits only the rich. They are scapegoating immigrants to distract us from this administration’s cruelty and fealty to rich men like Elon Musk, who are stealing our resources, our data and our money while the majority of Americans are struggling to make ends meet. “Bad” immigrants being the nation’s scapegoat is not new, but the faces and cultures of who we define as such have. In the 1920s, during the Prohibition Era, German, Italian and Irish immigrants were also labeled as immoral, un-American drunks and blamed for threatening public welfare and deteriorating American values. Ironically, many of those same immigrants have now become “white” in America’s story, and some of their descendants are now saying the same things about people like me, and calling for the mass deportation of immigrants. As we always have, immigrants power key sectors in our economy, from the agricultural to the construction sectors. In 2022, undocumented workers paid an estimated $96.7 billion in taxes. But beyond their economic contributions, immigrants make us better because many of us, documented and undocumented, believe in the aspirational values of this country, and are doing the work to achieve the promise of a nation where true democracy, equality, freedom and justice prevail. Although history sometimes repeats itself, we have the ability to make different choices this time around. Regardless of what this administration has to say, immigrants are not to blame for everything that ails this country. Quite the contrary — we are just as much a part of American communities as anyone else who just wants to do right by their families. But it’s not just American citizens who support Trump who need to hear that. My fellow immigrants need to hear it, too. For more information, visit us at https://www.beverlyhillsimmigrationlaw.com/.

What the Venezuelans Deported to El Salvador Experienced

n the night of Saturday, March 15, three planes touched down in El Salvador, carrying 261 men deported from the United States. A few dozen were Salvadoran, but most of the men were Venezuelans the Trump Administration had designated as gang members and deported, with little or no due process. I was there to document their arrival. For more than a year, I have been embedded throughout El Salvador’s society, working on a book chronicling the country’s transformation. From the huts of remote island fishermen to the desk of the President, from elite homicide detective units to elementary school classrooms, I have interviewed government officials and everyday people, collecting stories that would shock Stephen King. I’ve stood in classrooms full of happy students which not long ago were empty, because children here once learned early that schools were places to be raped or recruited. I’ve interviewed killers in prison and sat with them face-to-face. The video player is currently playing an ad. As I stood on the tarmac, an agent with the U.S. Department of Homeland Security's ICE Special Response Team told me that some of the Venezuelans had weakly attempted to take over their plane upon landing. It wasn’t unusual for detainees to try to make a last stand, the agent said, guarding the doorway to the plane at the top of the gangway stairs. “They began to try to organize to overthrow the plane by screaming for everyone to stand up and fight. But not everyone was on board,” the agent said, cautioning me to be careful because some of the Venezuelans would fight once they were offloaded. Venezuelan Deportation to El Salvador Philip Holsinger Venezuelan Deportation to El Salvador PHILIP HOLSINGER Venezuelan Deportation to El Salvador Philip Holsinger Even if not fighting, almost all the detainees came to the door of the plane with angry, defiant faces. It was their faces that grabbed me, because within a few hours those faces would completely transform. The Venezuelans emerging from their plane were not in prison clothes, but in designer jeans and branded tracksuits. Their faces were the faces of guys who in no way expected what they first saw—an ocean of soldiers and police, an entire army assembled to apprehend them. Venezuelan Deportation to El Salvador Philip Holsinger Venezuelan Deportation to El Salvador Philip Holsinger One of the alleged organizers of the attempted overthrow fought the U.S. agents on the plane, cursing the Americans, the Salvadorans, President Nayib Bukele himself. El Salvador’s Minister of Defense, René Merino, who had been standing on the tarmac at the bottom of the gangway, rushed aboard, dragged the guy to the gangway himself, and flung him into the waiting hands of black-masked guards. Venezuelan Deportation to El Salvador Philip Holsinger The transfer from the plane to the buses that would carry them to prison was rapid, yet it might as well have been the crossing of an ancient continent. I felt the detainees’ fear as they marched through a gauntlet of black-clad guards, guns raised like the spears of some terrible tribe. I walked the line of buses waiting to depart, photographing faces. A guard noticed one of the detainees turned toward the window and wrenched his head back down into his chest. Around 2 a.m., the convoy of 22 buses, flanked by armored vehicles and police, moved out of the airport. Soldiers and police lined the 25-mile route to the prison, with thick patrols at every bridge and intersection. For the few Salvadorans, it was a familiar landscape. But for a Venezuelan plucked from America, it must have appeared dystopian—police and soldiers for miles and miles in woodland darkness. The Terrorism Confinement Center, a notorious maximum-security prison known as CECOT, sits in an old farm field at the foot of an ancient volcano, brightly lit against the night sky. I’ve spent considerable time there and know the place intimately. As we entered the intake yard, the head of prisons was giving orders to an assembly of hundreds of guards. He told them the Venezuelans had tried to overthrow their plane, so the guards must be extremely vigilant. He told them plainly: Show them they are not in control. Venezuelan Deportation to El Salvador Philip Holsinger The intake began with slaps. One young man sobbed when a guard pushed him to the floor. He said, “I’m not a gang member. I’m gay. I’m a barber.” I believed him. But maybe it’s only because he didn’t look like what I had expected—he wasn’t a tattooed monster. The men were pulled from the buses so fast the guards couldn’t keep pace. Chained at their ankles and wrists, they stumbled and fell, some guards falling to the ground with them. With each fall came a kick, a slap, a shove. The guards grabbed necks and pushed bodies into the sides of the buses as they forced the detainees forward. There was no blood, but the violence had rhythm, like a theater of fear. Inside the intake room, a sea of trustees descended on the men with electric shavers, stripping heads of hair with haste. The guy who claimed to be a barber began to whimper, folding his hands in prayer as his hair fell. He was slapped. The man asked for his mother, then buried his face in his chained hands and cried as he was slapped again. Venezuelan Deportation to El Salvador Philip Holsinger After being shaved, the detainees were stripped naked. More of them began to whimper; the hard faces I saw on the plane had evaporated. It was like looking at men who passed through a time machine. In two hours, they aged 10 years. Their nice clothes were not gathered or catalogued but simply thrust into black garbage bags to be thrown out with their hair. They entered their cold cells, 80 men per cell, with steel planks for bunks, no mats, no sheets, no pillow. No television. No books. No talking. No phone calls and no visitors. For these Venezuelans, it was not just a prison they had arrived at. It was exile to another world, a place so cold and far from home they may as well have been sent into space, nameless and forgotten. Holding my camera, it was as if I watched them become ghosts. For more information, visit us at https://www.beverlyhillsimmigrationlaw.com/.

'Chilling and Unprecedented': Trump Memo Threatens Law Firms That Cross His Administration

Legal advocacy groups have issued a sharp rebuke to U.S. President Donald Trump's directive aimed at holding "accountable" law firms and lawyers that, according to him, "engage in frivolous, unreasonable, and vexatious litigation against the United States." "Accountability is especially important when misconduct by lawyers and law firms threatens our national security, homeland security, public safety, or election integrity," Trump wrote in a memorandum to U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi and U.S. Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem, which was issued late Friday. Trump directed Bondi to "seek sanctions against attorneys and law firms" who engage in objectionable litigation, and scrutinize litigation against the government stretching back over the past eight years. The new directive is a widening of Trump's campaign against lawyers and law firms he does not like. Reuters reported Saturday that the Trump administration has been hit with over 100 legal challenges, taking aim at various White House actions. Multiple legal groups denounced the move, saying they would not be intimidated. Nancy Northup, president and CEO of the Center for Reproductive Rights, wrote on Sunday that for over 30 years her organization "has stood strong against attacks on reproductive freedom. We have litigated scores of cases in federal courts, including against the U.S. government, regardless of the political party in power." "We will not back down in the face of the president's intimidation campaign—not while his administration refuses to defend women who are denied emergency abortion care; not while it condones violence at abortion clinics; and not while doctors are under threat of criminal prosecution for providing essential care. Not now and not ever," she continued. Cecillia Wang, national legal director of the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), echoed this sentiment in a statement released on Saturday. "This action by the president of the United States is a chilling and unprecedented attack on the foundations of liberty and democracy. Good lawyers, regardless of ideology or party, will remain undeterred in the honorable pursuit of our profession. We will continue to stand up for the people and the rule of law," Wang wrote. Trump specifically called out lawyers working in the immigration space. "The immigration system... is likewise replete with examples of unscrupulous behavior by attorneys and law firms. For instance, the immigration bar, and powerful Big Law pro bono practices, frequently coach clients to conceal their past or lie about their circumstances when asserting their asylum claims," he wrote. Kelli Stump, the president of the American Immigration Lawyers Association (AILA), and the group's executive director Ben Johnson, pushed back on Trump's claims. "The broad assertion that immigration attorneys are acting improperly in their efforts to represent individuals against an increasingly complex and restrictive immigration system is both unfounded and dangerous," they wrote in a statement on Saturday. The memo also name drops Marc Elias, a prominent attorney who has worked for multiple major Democratic political campaigns. Skye Perrymen, the CEO and president of the legal group Democracy Forward—where Elias serves as board chair—said in a statement on Saturday that "the ongoing threats to the legal profession and the rule of law by the president are intended to intimidate and inspire fear, but instead they should inspire action." "The president's increasing targeting of lawyers, the legal profession, and judges is in response to a number of instances where communities across the nation have had to go to federal court to protect their rights from this administration's overreach and where judges nominated by both Republican and Democratic presidents and confirmed by the U.S. Senate have found that the Trump-Vance administration's actions warrant scrutiny and, in many cases, are unlawful," added Perrymen. Democracy Forward, the ACLU, and AILA have all brought cases challenging Trump administration actions. The order comes at the end of a rocky week for the field of law. On Thursday, one of the country's top law firms, Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison LLP, brokered a deal with the White House in order to spare the firm from an executive order that suspended security clearances for lawyers and staff. As part of the deal, according to a post from Trump on social media, the firm "will dedicate the equivalent of $40 million in pro bono legal services over the course of President Trump's term to support the administration's initiatives, including: assisting our nation's veterans, fairness in the justice system, the president's Task Force to Combat Antisemitism, and other mutually agreed projects." For more information, visit us at https://www.beverlyhillsimmigrationlaw.com/.

Judge rips DOJ's 'woefully insufficient' response to questions about Alien Enemies Act case

A federal judge on Thursday blasted the Justice Department’s latest response to his demand for more information about deportation flights that were carried out under a wartime law known as the Alien Enemies Act, calling it “woefully insufficient.” U.S. District Judge James Boasberg wrote in a three-page ruling that the government “again evaded its obligations” to provide information that he had been demanding for days about the timing of the Saturday flights. President Donald Trump had invoked the rarely used law to deport people the administration claimed were members of a Venezuelan gang deemed a “foreign terrorist organization.” At an emergency hearing on Saturday, the judge had directed that any deportation flights being carried out under the AEA authority immediately return to the U.S. Two flights landed in Honduras and El Salvador within hours of the judge’s order. New Court Ringmaster To Oversee Trump Grand Juries In Washington James Boasberg, incoming chief judge of the US District Court, in Washington, DC, US, on Monday, March 13, 2023. Boasberg, who starts a seven-year term as chief judge on March 17, will oversee the court's secret grand jury proceedings, including pending and future legal fights related to Special Counsel Jack Smiths probes of Trump, among other duties.Valerie Plesch / Bloomberg / Getty Images file The DOJ response was submitted under seal, but Boasberg said the department told him he could disclose the contents. It comprised “a six-paragraph declaration from the Acting Field Office Director for Enforcement and Removal Operations at U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement’s Harlingen, Texas, Field Office” that did not include any new information about the flights, the judge wrote. ADVERTISING The Justice Department later released its filing. As to another of the judge’s questions, whether the government would try to assert a “state secrets” privilege in order to get out of answering questions, the ICE official said, “I understand that Cabinet Secretaries are currently actively considering whether to invoke the state secrets privilege over the other facts requested by the Court’s order.” Recommended From the Politics Desk Trump's legal fights and Elon Musk's business overlap: From the Politics Desk Lethal Injection Judge rejects California DA's request to change mass shooter's death sentence to life without parole The judge called the response “woefully insufficient. To begin, the Government cannot proffer a regional ICE official to attest to Cabinet-level discussions of the state-secrets privilege.” He said he wanted a sworn declaration by a “person with direct involvement in the Cabinet-level discussions regarding invocation of the state-secrets privilege” by Friday morning, and to be notified of any decision on the issue by Tuesday. He also directed the Justice Department to submit a filing explaining how it “did not violate the Court’s Temporary Restraining Orders by failing to return class members removed from the United States on the two earliest planes that departed on March 15, 2025.” Trump’s new clashes with federal judges 02:59 Trump, who called for Boasberg to be impeached earlier in the week, trashed him in a post on his social media platform after the ruling, accusing him of "doing everything in his power to usurp the Power of the Presidency" and calling his rulings "ridiculous." In a statement before the judge’s ruling, a DOJ spokesperson said, “The Department of Justice continues to believe that the court’s superfluous questioning of sensitive national security information is inappropriate judicial overreach.” Follow live politics coverage here Boasberg had issued an order Wednesday demanding DOJ answer his questions and warned of the possibility of “consequences” if it did not. U.S. deports alleged members of the Tren de Aragua to be imprisoned in El Salvador A man the administration accuses of being a Venezuelan gang member is escorted from a plane in San Luis Talpa, El Salvador, after being deported by the U.S. on Sunday.Secretaria de Prensa de la Presi via Reuters A Justice Department lawyer refused to answer any questions about the flights at a tense hearing Monday and maintained the government had complied with the judge’s more limited written order shortly after the Saturday hearing. The judge summarized the DOJ’s position as, “we don’t care, we’ll do what we want,” and ordered it to respond to his questions by noon on Tuesday. The Justice Department responded to some of his questions in the Tuesday filing, but refused to answer detailed questions about the flights, calling his request “inappropriate.” The lawyers contended the types of details Boasberg sought would “disclose sensitive information bearing on national security and foreign relations.” “If, however, the Court nevertheless orders the Government to provide additional details, the Court should do so through an in camera and ex parte declaration, in order to protect sensitive information bearing on foreign relations,” they wrote Tuesday. The judge then said they could file such a response under seal and directly to him by Wednesday at noon. But the Justice Department still refused to comply, and argued the judge should pause the case until an appeals court rules on the administration’s motion for an emergency stay. “The distraction of the specific facts surrounding the movements of an airplane has derailed this case long enough and should end until the Circuit Court has had a chance to weigh in,” the Justice Department filing said, while also pushing for a delay so that it could present the argument that disclosing the information would reveal “state secrets.” The judge then extended his deadline to Thursday at noon, directing the government to either answer his questions or “invoke the state-secrets doctrine and explain the basis for such invocation.” Boasberg also took issue with the government’s contention he was trying to “beat a dead horse solely for the sake of prying from the Government legally immaterial facts.” He said he wants the information “to determine if the Government deliberately flouted its Orders issued on March 15, 2025, and, if so, what the consequences should be.” The government’s appeal is proceeding in the meantime, with oral arguments scheduled for Monday afternoon. For more information, visit us at https://www.beverlyhillsimmigrationlaw.com/.

Could Visa and Green Card Holders Be Deported? What the Law Says

ttorneys have told Newsweek that many immigrants in the United States with legal status, including temporary visas and green cards, are increasingly anxious that their documentation could be revoked. The arrests of Palestinian protester Mahmoud Khalil, a permanent resident now fighting deportation, along with a handful of others with visas and green cards, have brought attention to questions over the securities offered by holding legal status in the U.S. "I feel like anxiety is higher. I think what people have realized over the last weeks and days is that immigration status in the United States can be challenged, it can be revoked, and there can be serious consequences," David Leopold, an immigration attorney at UB Greensfelder in Ohio, told Newsweek. The Trump administration has made it clear that it is getting tough on immigration enforcement, both when it comes to those who crossed the southwest border illegally and those who violate immigration laws. In recent weeks, President Donald Trump has sought to impose various policy changes while also relying on immigration law clauses that have existed for decades but were perhaps underutilized. US visa revocation U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio (inset) has said he will seek the revocation of visas for those found to show support for terrorist organizations or with viewpoints which do not match U.S. foreign policy. Getty Images Secretary of State Marco Rubio told CBS' Face the Nation on Sunday that "every day now we are approving visa revocations," following multiple reports of visas being canceled for students accused of promoting pro-Hamas messaging in college campus protests. One such case involving Columbia University graduate Mahmoud Khalil has seen U.S. authorities look to withdraw his permanent resident status. A German citizen whose green card extension application was underway was still detained by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and interrogated, according to his mother. "It's definitely an uncertain time, and we are, for sure, seeing a marked increase in clients seeing a heightened level of anxiety," Eliss Taub, a partner at immigration law firm Siskind Susser, told Newsweek. "All of my clients are here in the United States with authorization. I'm even hearing from clients who have green cards who are nervous about traveling outside the states." Taub said she is telling clients not to travel outside the U.S. unless necessary, regardless of where they are from. Who Decides Who Can Keep Their Visa? USCIS leaflet An information booklet for new immigrants seen in 2020. Getty Images Recent stories about visa revocations have involved Border Patrol, ICE and other Department of Homeland Security agents, and the State Department. This is because different agencies are involved at different stages of the immigration process. "For example, USCIS, the immigration service, might approve an H-1B petition for somebody to come to the United States to work in a specific position for a specific employer, and that person might be sitting in some other country when that petition gets approved," Taub explained. "In order for them to come here, they have to go and visit a U.S. embassy or consulate in their home country to apply for a visa, and so that's the State Department that operates all of the U.S. consular posts. So, the State Department is going to decide: 'Is this person eligible for a visa?' "In this context, the word visa is important. It's like a ticket of admission into the United States. It says, 'I am allowed to come to the border and ask you to admit me, in this status, because I meet all the requirements.'" The State Department carries out background checks before approval, but when a visitor or immigrant arrives at the border, U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) takes over, and its agents assess whether any issues have been flagged. Taub said this could even apply to those entering the U.S. on a tourist visa. A person initially stating that they were staying in the U.S. for a two-week visit to Walt Disney World before telling a border agent they may stay longer and travel around could cause suspicion and lead to problems later. What Protections Do Green Card Holders Have? The United States Citizenship and Immigration Service (USCIS) says that a green card holder has the right to live permanently in the U.S. provided they do not commit any actions that "would make you removable under immigration law." This includes breaking laws and not filing taxes. A green card holder is protected by all U.S. laws, including those at the state and local levels, and they can apply for jobs more freely than those who may be in the U.S. on work-based visas. Travel is also far easier with a green card than with other temporary visas, but holders must make sure they do not leave for more than six months at a time. "There's a reason why somebody would want a green card versus to be here on a temporary visa because it is lawful permanent residence, it gives you the ability to live and work permanently in the United States. But that said, it is not citizenship," Taub said. Green card holders must renew their cards every 10 years and can apply for citizenship after three years if they are married to a U.S. citizen or five if not. Can Visa and Green Card Holders Be Deported? US Deportation U.S. Customs and Border Protection agents guide illegal immigrants onboard a removal flight at Fort Bliss, Texas, on January 23, 2025. Dept. of Defense photo by U.S. Army Sgt. 1st Class Nicholas J. De La Pena If visa or green card holders are found to be violating immigration rules or U.S. law, they can face deportation or removal. A person arriving at the border who is denied entry by CBP would likely simply be sent home rather than placed in detention if they were coming on a temporary nonimmigrant visa. The federal government can decide to put an immigrant who is within the U.S. into removal proceedings, which would involve a court hearing. Part of this would be the revocation of their specified visa. "There are many grounds of deportability, including criminal convictions, prostitution, domestic violence," Stephen Yale-Loehr, a retired immigration professor at Cornell University, told Newsweek. "One of the more obscure grounds that has existed for many years allows the secretary of State to put someone into deportation proceedings if the Secretary determines that that person's presence has serious adverse foreign policy consequences." "That provision has not been used very often," Yale-Loehr continued. "I can only recall one time, or two times, in the last 30 years, but now we have seen at least two instances where this administration has invoked that ground of deportability, both to revoke those students' visas and to place them in deportation proceedings." The students in question were Khalil, who is a graduate, and a doctoral student also at Columbia who was accused of "advocating for violence and terrorism" in protests on campus last year. "Coming to the United States on a visa is a privilege, not a right," Rubio said on March 12. "The Trump Administration is determined to deny or revoke your visa if you're here to support terrorists." Read more ICE detains 18 people showing up for scheduled immigration appointments Donald Trump has an unlikely legal path to a third term: What experts say What Elon Musk has said about China—Billionaire's business ties to US rival What About Due Process? The rise of visa revocations has not just been connected to those accused of showing support for Palestine or the Venezuelans deported for alleged ties to Tren de Aragua over the weekend. The reports have also included a French researcher who had messages on his phone expressing a negative opinion about Trump's cuts to science funding, along with German and British tourists who ended up in ICE custody. Mahmoud Khalil protest Pro-Palestinian activists participate in a "Fight for our Rights" rally and in support of Mahmoud Khalil in Times Square on March 15, 2025. LEONARDO MUNOZ/AFP via Getty Images Yale-Loehr said anyone in the United States, even those without legal immigration status, has constitutional rights, such as the right to free speech and the right to due process—i.e., to have their case heard in court. The former professor added that the president of the United States has discretionary powers regarding immigration, however, because the issue touches on foreign relations. "This administration seems more willing to use these old deportation grounds that have been around since the Red Scare of 1950s as a way to go after people who do speak out," he said. "We'll have to see whether the courts strike down these efforts as violating the students' constitutional rights or whether they say that, despite the Constitution, the president does have the right to deport these people." For more information, visit us at https://www.beverlyhillsimmigrationlaw.com/.

Navy warship is sent to the southern border to carry out Trump's immigration plans

A U.S. Navy destroyer, designed to intercept ballistic missiles, has been deployed to the southern border as part of President Trump's push to seal the border and crack down on immigration, defense officials said. The USS Gravely set sail on Saturday from Naval Weapons Station Yorktown in Virginia. The warship previously served in the Middle East, where it was responsible for shooting down missiles fired by Houthi rebels in the Red Sea. Now, it will help assist U.S. Northern Command in its mission to "protect the United States' territorial integrity, sovereignty, and security," Gen. Gregory Guillot, who oversees U.S. Northern Command, said in a statement. The command is the Defense Department's operation lead in using military forces to tighten border security. Sponsor Message An American flag (L) and Mexican flag (R) fly along the US-Mexico border in El Paso, Texas in January 2025. National As Trump shrinks other parts of government, immigration task forces grow The dispatch of the Gravely is the latest move under Trump's executive order from January declaring a national emergency at the United States' southern border. It's in addition to the thousands of active-duty troops ordered to the U.S.-Mexico border. As of last Tuesday, about 9,600 service members had been deployed or were scheduled to deploy there, according to U.S. Northern Command. In recent weeks, the Trump administration has also been developing plans to build immigration detention facilities on U.S. military bases around the country. Defense officials did not clarify where exactly the Gravely will travel to, except to say it will operate in both domestic and international waters. An immigrant prepares to board a military removal flight last month at Fort Bliss, near El Paso, Texas. National DHS memo lays out plans to detain migrants at Fort Bliss and other U.S. bases More generally, U.S. Northern Command's area of responsibility includes "the continental United States, Alaska, Canada, Mexico and the surrounding water out to approximately 500 nautical miles," the military headquarters' website reads. It also includes the Straits of Florida, parts of the Bahamas, the Caribbean region, Puerto Rico, the U.S. Virgin Islands and the Gulf of Mexico, which Trump renamed the Gulf of America in one of his first executive actions. The ship will carry members of a U.S. Coast Guard Law Enforcement Detachment. Defense officials said the Navy destroyer will be part of law enforcement missions including "maritime related terrorism, weapons proliferation, transnational crime, piracy, environmental destruction, and illegal seaborne immigration." Sponsor Message At 509 feet long and capable of holding over 300 crew members, the Gravely is considered larger than any Coast Guard vessels. For more information, visit us at https://www.beverlyhillsimmigrationlaw.com/.

Trump administration deports hundreds of immigrants even as a judge orders their removals be stopped

The Trump administration has transferred hundreds of immigrants to El Salvador even as a federal judge issued an order temporarily barring the deportations under an 18th century wartime declaration targeting Venezuelan gang members, officials said Sunday. Flights were in the air at the time of the ruling. U.S. District Judge James E. Boasberg issued an order Saturday temporarily blocking the deportations, but lawyers told him there were already two planes with immigrants in the air — one headed for El Salvador, the other for Honduras. Boasberg verbally ordered the planes be turned around, but they apparently were not and he did not include the directive in his written order. White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt, in a statement Sunday, responded to speculation about whether the administration was flouting court orders: “The administration did not ‘refuse to comply’ with a court order. The order, which had no lawful basis, was issued after terrorist TdA aliens had already been removed from U.S. territory.” The acronym refers to the Tren de Aragua gang, which Trump targeted in his unusual proclamation that was released Saturday In a court filing Sunday, the Department of Justice, which has appealed Boasberg’s decision, said it would not use the Trump proclamation he blocked for further deportations if his decision is not overturned. Trump sidestepped a question over whether his administration violated a court order while speaking to reporters aboard Air Force One on Sunday evening. Republican presidential nominee former President Donald Trump speaks along the southern border with Mexico, on Aug. 22, 2024, in Sierra Vista, Ariz. (AP Photo/Evan Vucci, File) Republican presidential nominee former President Donald Trump speaks along the southern border with Mexico, on Aug. 22, 2024, in Sierra Vista, Ariz. (AP Photo/Evan Vucci, File) RELATED COVERAGE The Statue of Liberty is seen from the Staten Island Ferry, Monday, Sept. 9, 2024, in New York. (AP Photo/Pamela Smith, file) From France comes a call for Trump’s America to return Lady Liberty. Here’s why it won’t happen Spirits with and without the star mark in Bilka in Randers, Denmark, making it easier for customers to buy European goods, Monday, March 17, 2025. (Bo Amstrup/Ritzau Scanpix via AP) ‘Danish Viking blood is boiling.’ Danes boycott US goods with fervor as others in Europe do so too South Africa's ambassador to the U.S. Ebrahim Rasool speaks at the South African Embassy in Washington, Dec. 6, 2013. (AP Photo/Cliff Owen, File) Trump administration says South African ambassador has to leave the US by Friday Advertisement “I don’t know. You have to speak to the lawyers about that,” he said, although he defended the deportations. “I can tell you this. These were bad people.” Asked about invoking presidential powers used in times of war, Trump said, “This is a time of war,” describing the influx of criminal migrants as “an invasion.” Trump’s allies were gleeful over the results. “Oopsie…Too late,” Salvadoran President Nayib Bukele, who agreed to house about 300 immigrants for a year at a cost of $6 million in his country’s prisons, wrote on the social media site X above an article about Boasberg’s ruling. That post was recirculated by White House communications director Steven Cheung. Secretary of State Marco Rubio, who negotiated an earlier deal with Bukele to house immigrants, posted on the site: “We sent over 250 alien enemy members of Tren de Aragua which El Salvador has agreed to hold in their very good jails at a fair price that will also save our taxpayer dollars.” Steve Vladeck, a professor at the Georgetown University Law Center, said that Boasberg’s verbal directive to turn around the planes was not technically part of his final order but that the Trump administration clearly violated the “spirit” of it. “This just incentivizes future courts to be hyper specific in their orders and not give the government any wiggle room,” Vladeck said. The immigrants were deported after Trump’s declaration of the Alien Enemies Act of 1798, which has been used only three times in U.S. history. Advertisement In this photo provided by El Salvador's presidential press office, a prison guard transfers deportees from the U.S., alleged to be Venezuelan gang members, to the Terrorism Confinement Center in Tecoluca, El Salvador, Sunday, March 16, 2025. (El Salvador presidential press office via AP) In this photo provided by El Salvador’s presidential press office, a prison guard transfers deportees from the U.S., alleged to be Venezuelan gang members, to the Terrorism Confinement Center in Tecoluca, El Salvador, Sunday, March 16, 2025. (El Salvador presidential press office via AP) Advertisement The law, invoked during the War of 1812 and World Wars I and II, requires a president to declare the United States is at war, giving him extraordinary powers to detain or remove foreigners who otherwise would have protections under immigration or criminal laws. It was last used to justify the detention of Japanese-American civilians during World War II. Venezuela’s government in a statement Sunday rejected the use of Trump’s declaration of the law, characterizing it as evocative of “the darkest episodes in human history, from slavery to the horror of the Nazi concentration camps.” Tren de Aragua originated in an infamously lawless prison in the central state of Aragua and accompanied an exodus of millions of Venezuelans, the overwhelming majority of whom were seeking better living conditions after their nation’s economy came undone during the past decade. Trump seized on the gang during his campaign to paint misleading pictures of communities that he contended were “taken over” by what were actually a handful of lawbreakers. The Trump administration has not identified the immigrants deported, provided any evidence they are in fact members of Tren de Aragua or that they committed any crimes in the United States. It also sent two top members of the Salvadoran MS-13 gang to El Salvador who had been arrested in the United States. Advertisement Video released by El Salvador’s government Sunday showed men exiting airplanes onto an airport tarmac lined by officers in riot gear. The men, who had their hands and ankles shackled, struggled to walk as officers pushed their heads down to have them bend down at the waist. The video also showed the men being transported to prison in a large convoy of buses guarded by police and military vehicles and at least one helicopter. The men were shown kneeling on the ground as their heads were shaved before they changed into the prison’s all-white uniform — knee-length shorts, T-shirt, socks and rubber clogs — and placed in cells. The immigrants were taken to the notorious CECOT facility, the centerpiece of Bukele’s push to pacify his once violence-wracked country through tough police measures and limits on basic rights The Trump administration said the president actually signed the proclamation contending Tren de Aragua was invading the United States on Friday night but didn’t announce it until Saturday afternoon. Immigration lawyers said that, late Friday, they noticed Venezuelans who otherwise couldn’t be deported under immigration law being moved to Texas for deportation flights. They began to file lawsuits to halt the transfers. “Basically any Venezuelan citizen in the US may be removed on pretext of belonging to Tren de Aragua, with no chance at defense,” Adam Isacson of the Washington Office for Latin America, a human rights group, warned on X. The litigation that led to the hold on deportations was filed on behalf of five Venezuelans held in Texas who lawyers said were concerned they’d be falsely accused of being members of the gang. Once the act is invoked, they warned, Trump could simply declare anyone a Tren de Aragua member and remove them from the country. Boasberg barred those Venezuelans’ deportations Saturday morning when the suit was filed, but only broadened it to all people in federal custody who could be targeted by the act after his afternoon hearing. He noted that the law has never before been used outside of a congressionally declared war and that plaintiffs may successfully argue Trump exceeded his legal authority in invoking it. The bar on deportations stands for up to 14 days and the immigrants will remain in federal custody during that time. Boasberg has scheduled a hearing Friday to hear additional arguments in the case. He said he had to act because the immigrants whose deportations may actually violate the U.S. Constitution deserved a chance to have their pleas heard in court. “Once they’re out of the country,” Boasberg said, “there’s little I could do.” _____ For more information, visit us at https://www.beverlyhillsimmigrationlaw.com/.

Experts say Palestinian activist Mahmoud Khalil, a green card holder, can't be deported without due process

The detaining of Mahmoud Khalil, the Columbia University student and Palestinian activist who possessed a green card, has raised questions about the deportation risks faced by lawful permanent residents amid the Trump administration's escalating crackdown on immigration. President Donald Trump's administration, which has alleged that Khalil was a supporter of Hamas, has said it has the authority to deport Khalil under the Immigration and Nationality Act. "Secretary [Marco] Rubio reserves the right to revoke the visa of Mahmoud Khalil under the Immigration and Nationality Act, the Secretary of State has the right to revoke a green card or a visa for individuals who are adversarial to the foreign policy and national security interests of the United States of America," White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt said during a press conference this week. MORE: Activist Mahmoud Khalil asked Columbia University for legal support day before ICE arrest, his wife says Khalil, whose detention has sparked protests this week, is married to an American citizen who is eight months pregnant. He has not been charged with a crime, and some supporters have accused the government of abducting him. Under the Immigration Nationality Act, which experts say is rarely invoked, the government can charge a green card holder as being deportable without being convicted of a crime if there are reasonable grounds to believe they engaged in certain criminal or terrorist activities. But experts and immigration attorneys ABC News spoke with said the statute does not give the secretary of state the power to deport green card holders like Khalil without going through a procedure. "The way the statute is constructed, it doesn't mean that Secretary Rubio can just say, 'Oh, I determined this, and therefore we're just going to deport you out of the country,'" said Greg Chen of the American Immigration Lawyers Association. "You would still need to go through a process." Spencer Platt/Getty Images Protestors rally in support of Mahmoud Khalil outside of the Thurgood Marshall Courthouse, during a hearing regarding Khalil's arrest, in New York City, Mar. 12, 2025. Spencer Platt/Getty Images After the federal government invokes the statute, individuals like Khalil are entitled to argue their case before an immigration judge. Khalil is set to appear before an immigration judge later this month in Louisiana. "There are some due process and protective procedures that the person is entitled to," Chen said, "including being given a notice of the charges, and an opportunity to confront that evidence and to bring his or her own evidence in response." Chen told ABC News that typically it can take months or even years for immigration cases to "go from start to finish" -- but because of Khalil's "unique circumstances," a judge can prioritize a case and expedite the process. Experts told ABC News there are a number of reasons why an individual could lose their green card, including marriage fraud, immigration fraud, violent crimes and other offenses. Andrew Nietor, an immigration attorney, told ABC News said that while there are cases where the government invokes the Immigration and Nationality Act for certain green card holders with criminal convictions, he said he has never seen a case like Khalil's. "I've never seen this ground of deportation invoked," Nietor said. "It's almost always a green card holder who is almost always in deportation proceedings because of some type of criminal conviction." For more information, visit us at https://www.beverlyhillsimmigrationlaw.com/.

Trump's new travel ban could prohibit entry to the US from this 'red list' of countries

The Trump administration is finishing a travel ban that would prohibit citizens from a list of blacklisted countries from entering the U.S., officials told The New York Times and Reuters. The ban would fall under an executive order, signed by the president on Jan. 20, titled “Protecting the United States from Foreign Terrorists and Other,” which is meant to address “national security and public safety threats.” The order claims it will protect U.S. citizens from “aliens who intend to commit terrorist attacks, threaten our national security, espouse hateful ideology, or otherwise exploit the immigration laws for malevolent purposes.” Here is what you need to know about the pending travel ban. What countries would be on Trump's new travel ban? Secretary of State Marco Rubio, Attorney General Pam Bondi, Secretary of Homeland Security Kristi Noem, and Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard have a deadline of 60 days from the order to identify such countries and enact the ban. According to Reuters, the following "red list" countries are considered to be on the travel ban list: Sudan Venezuela Somalia Syria Yemen Iran Libya Cuba North Korea Pakistan and Afghanistan are expected to be added to the list. Which countries did the Trump administration previously ban? During Trump’s first term, his administration created a series of bans against citizens from Muslim-majority countries. Get the Think Texas newsletter in your inbox. Your weekly fix of Texas history, nostalgia, myths and more. Delivery: Varies Your Email According to NAFSA.org, Trump's first administration had travel bans 3.0 and 4.0. Travel ban 3.0 barred certain Iran, Libya, North Korea, Syria, Venezuela, Yemen, and Somalia citizens. Travel ban 4.0 contained restrictions on immigrants but not on nonimmigrants. Travel ban 4.0 did not impact acquisition of nonimmigrant visas like F-1 student, J-1 exchange visitor, H-1B worker, etc., or admission to the U.S. in those categories. Here is a list of the 3.0 and 4.0 bans: Travel ban 3.0 countries Iran Libya North Korea Syria Venezuela Yemen Somalia Travel ban 4.0 countries Eritrea Kyrgyzstan Nigeria Myanmar Sudan Sudan What happened to the original ban? Former President Joe Biden reneged Trump's initial executive order in 2021. How would the ban affect American travelers? Experts have indicated that Americans might encounter a heightened risk of harassment while traveling to countries targeted by the Trump administration.American Society of Travel Advisors CEO Zane Kerby told Travel Weekly that "blanket 'entire country' travel bans constrain legitimate business and discourage friendly foreign visitors" and "risks retaliation from targeted countries and their allies." For more information, visit us at https://www.beverlyhillsimmigrationlaw.com/.