ICE bars detained immigrants from getting bond hearings

The Trump administration wants to make millions of immigrants who entered the United States without legal authorization ineligible for bond hearings. This means they would need to remain in immigration detention as they fight deportation proceedings in court, which can take months and in some cases years. A U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement spokesperson told NBC News in an email Tuesday that the recently issued guidance "closes a loophole" in immigration law that had long been applied mostly to detain those who had recently arrived at the U.S.-Mexico border. “All aliens seeking to enter our country in an unlawful manner or for illicit purposes shall be treated equally under the law, while still receiving due process,” the ICE spokesperson wrote. “It is aligned with the nation’s long-standing immigration law.” The Washington Post first reported about the new ICE memo instructing immigration officials to keep immigrants detained “for the duration of their removal proceedings.” “I don’t think it’s beyond anyone’s notice that we are starting to see policies to keep people detained and keep people detained longer,” Vanessa Dojaquez-Torres, practice and policy counsel at the American Immigration Lawyers Association, told NBC News. “We’re seeing the administration’s goal of detaining and deporting more people grow,” Dojaquez-Torres added. The new guidance seems to give immigration authorities broader discretion to detain other types of immigrants — such as those who have lived in the U.S. for decades and have U.S. citizen children, and may potentially have legal pathways to remain in the country. Bond hearings help detainees show to immigration judges that they “are not a flight risk or a public safety risk,” Dojaquez-Torres. Under the new policy guidance, “the judge doesn’t even have the power to hear your bond case,” Dojaquez-Torres said. “It doesn’t matter if you’re the best person in the world, a judge won’t be able to hear your case… If they are agreeing with DHS’ view.” Recommended U.S. news Kansas City Chiefs wide receiver Rashee Rice sentenced to 30 days in jail for high speed crash news Abused and abandoned immigrant youth sue Trump administration over deportation fears In a Tuesday post on X, the U.S. Department of Homeland Security said President Donald Trump and his administration plan on "keeping these criminals and lawbreakers off American streets." "Now thanks to the Big Beautiful Bill," which set aside $45 billion to build new immigration detention centers, "we will have plenty of bed space to do so," DHS wrote on social media. Rebekah Wolf, director of immigration justice campaign at the American Immigration Council, told NBC News the organization has already received reports from across the nation of some immigration judges who are already “accepting the argument” from DHS and ICE. “And because the memo isn’t public, we don’t even know what law the government is relying on to make the claim that everyone who has ever entered without inspection is subject to mandatory detention,” Wolf said. There have also been reports of other immigration judges who have disagreed with the new guidance and have granted a bond hearing since the policy went into effect last week, Dojaquez-Torres said. In these cases, “ICE has appealed and refused to release people in the interim until the appeal has been finalized.” In the memo, ICE acting Director Todd M. Lyons, who oversees the nation’s immigration detention facilities, wrote that the new policy will likely face legal challenges, The Washington Post reported. Nicole Acevedo

Exclusive: US considered charging Minnesota judges, lawyers in immigration crackdown, sources say

FBI eyed judges, defense lawyers over virtual hearings for defendants in country illegally, sources say Status of early-stage probe into judges, defense lawyers remains unclear Virtual hearings common post-COVID, seen as routine by defense attorneys WASHINGTON, July 16 (Reuters) - The U.S. Justice Department explored bringing criminal charges against Minnesota judges and defense lawyers who discussed requesting virtual court hearings to protect defendants from being arrested by federal immigration officers, according to five people familiar with the matter. In February, FBI agents in Minneapolis opened a preliminary inquiry into whether local judges and defense attorneys obstructed immigration enforcement by requesting virtual hearings, and the concept was also pitched to law enforcement officials in Minneapolis and Washington, D.C., said the people, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss internal Justice Department deliberations. Jumpstart your morning with the latest legal news delivered straight to your inbox from The Daily Docket newsletter. Sign up here. Advertisement · Scroll to continue Report This Ad Reuters could not determine whether the probe is ongoing. To date, no judge or lawyer in Minnesota has been charged over the episode. Two of the people familiar with the discussions said FBI and Justice Department leadership in Washington supported the probe. A Justice Department spokesperson declined to comment. The probe was launched shortly after Emil Bove, the former Acting Deputy Attorney General who has since been nominated by President Donald Trump to serve as an appellate judge for the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit, ordered prosecutors in a January 21 memo to pursue potential criminal cases against "state and local actors" for impeding immigration enforcement. Advertisement · Scroll to continue Report This Ad The Senate Judiciary Committee is slated to vote on Bove's nomination on Thursday, with Democrats expected to oppose it. The Trump administration has taken aggressive steps against the legal system when its policies have been blocked, lashing out at judges over rulings it disagrees with and seeking to punish law firms and legal organizations that have challenged its policies. "They've been intimidating law firms and lawyers from the beginning," said Bennett Gershman, a former state prosecutor who teaches law at Pace University. "This is just ... part of the campaign to terrorize, intimidate, frighten people from speaking out." EMAIL TRAIL The Minneapolis probe followed comments made in an email chat maintained by Minnesota defense lawyers on February 6 discussing requesting virtual court hearings for defendants who were living in the U.S. illegally to reduce the risk that Immigration and Customs Enforcement officers would apprehend them at court, the five people told Reuters. 00:06 An $8 billion trial by Meta investors against Zuckerberg kicks off The video player is currently playing an ad. Fox News reported about the existence of the email chat in March, about a month after the Justice Department started its inquiry. The DOJ probe that the chat helped spark has not been previously reported. In the email chain, one defense attorney said judges in the Third Judicial District in Minnesota "proactively" reached out to public defenders and prosecutors to encourage them to request Zoom court hearings on any cases with immigration issues, and that such requests would be granted "liberally," according to an excerpt of the chat verified to Reuters by an attorney who saw the email messages. In late April, the Justice Department charged Hannah Dugan, a local elected judge in Milwaukee, for trying to help a migrant evade immigration authorities when he appeared in her courtroom for a hearing. The indictment also alleges she told the defendant's attorney he could "appear by Zoom" for his future court appearances.

More immigration judges are being fired amid Trump's efforts to speed up deportations

Another round of immigration judges began receiving emails on Friday informing them they are being let go, NPR has learned, adding to the growing list of immigration court personnel cut by President Trump amid his efforts to speed up deportations of immigrants without legal status. Fifteen immigration judges learned Friday that they would be put on leave and that their employment would terminate on July 22, according to two people familiar with the firings and a confirmation from the International Federation of Professional and Technical Engineers (IFPTE), a union that represents immigration judges. The two people spoke on condition of anonymity for fear of reprisals. Sponsor Message On Monday, two additional judges — from Chicago and Houston — learned they were being fired as well. "Pursuant to Article II of the Constitution, the Attorney General has decided not to extend your term or convert it to a permanent appointment," the email reviewed by NPR stated. It went out to judges in Massachusetts, Illinois, Ohio, Texas, New York and California. Signs direct traffic to the immigration court parking lot in Chicago, Ill., in August 2024. Law Trump wants to bypass immigration courts. Experts warn it's a 'slippery slope' Like the 50 other judges fired within the last six months, the union said, the judges who received the most recent notices were not given a reason for the terminations. They were at the end of their two-year probationary period with the Executive Office for Immigration Review (EOIR), which is part of the Justice Department. Dozens of others took the "Fork in the Road," a voluntary resignation program aimed at reducing the size of the federal workforce. EOIR declined to comment. "I wanted to ride it until the very end," said one of the fired judges, who spoke to NPR under the condition of anonymity since they are still employed by the department for a few more days. "I wanted to keep adjudicating, reviewing these cases. I figured as long as I am here, I can do some good." The terminations landed after Congress approved a mega-spending bill that allocated over $3 billion to the Justice Department for immigration-related activities, including hiring more immigration judges. The funding and additional personnel are aimed at alleviating the growing case backlog, which is nearly 4 million cases. Hiring and training new judges can take more than a year. Federal agents wait outside an immigration courtroom at the Jacob K. Javits Federal Building in New York on June 10, 2025. Immigration ICE's novel strategy allows for more arrests from inside immigration courts "It's outrageous and against the public interest that at a time when the Congress has authorized 800 immigration judges, we are firing large numbers of immigration judges without cause," said Matt Biggs, president of the IFPTE union. "This is hypocritical — you can't enforce immigration laws when you fire the enforcers." In recent months, EOIR leadership has criticized judges for not efficiently managing their caseloads and has encouraged adjudicators to streamline asylum reviews and give oral, as opposed to written, decisions on case dismissals. Trump has also voiced support for a plan in Florida to deputize members of the state's National Guard Judge Advocate General's Corps as immigration judges. Sponsor Message "There was a lot of political noise around us. I said, 'They're not going to pressure me out of this job,'" the fired judge said, noting that they extended some relief from removals and also approved final orders for deportation. "I have no regrets staying until the very end." People wait in a cue before being led into a downtown Chicago building where an immigration court presides in November 2024 in Chicago. Immigration He was fired under Biden. Under Trump, he's now leading an immigration court On July 3, Massachusetts' two Democratic U.S. senators, Elizabeth Warren and Ed Markey, sent a letter to EOIR Acting Director Sirce Owen raising concerns over a prior round of firings that included judges in Massachusetts courts. "As additional classes reach this mark over the coming months, EOIR must ensure that its conversion decisions are based solely on judges' performance, not their perceived loyalty to the Trump Administration's immigration agenda or any other criteria," Warren and Markey wrote, noting that typically 94% of judges are converted to permanent positions after their probationary period. At the start of the year, there were about 700 immigration judges across the United States' 71 immigration courts and adjudication centers. These judges are the only ones who can revoke someone's green card or issue a final order of removal for people who have been in the country for more than two years and are in the process of being deported. For more information, visit us at https://www.beverlyhillsimmigrationlaw.com/.

New ICE Policy Blocks Detained Migrants From Seeking Bond

WASHINGTON—The Trump administration is attempting to make millions of immigrants living in the country illegally ineligible to be released from detention on bond as they fight their deportation cases, according to a memo viewed by The Wall Street Journal. The policy shift, issued under what is known as interim guidance by acting U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement Director Todd Lyons last week, will apply to all immigrants who crossed the U.S.-Mexico border illegally, no matter when. Lyons told officers in a memo that such immigrants should remain in detention throughout their deportation proceedings, which can stretch for months or even years, according to the memo. The move marks a significant departure from decades of practice, when immigration judges had the latitude to release someone from detention on a bond if they weren’t deemed a flight risk. Immigration law states that all immigrants in the country illegally must be detained while their fates are decided, but with limited beds available in ICE jails, the government had considered the law effectively impossible to enforce. “The Biden administration dangerously unleashed millions of unvetted illegal aliens into American communities—and they used many loopholes to do so,” Homeland Security spokeswoman Tricia McLaughlin said. “President Trump and Secretary Noem are now enforcing this law as it was actually written to keep America safe.” The Washington Post on earlier reported on the new policy. Roughly 57,800 people were in ICE detention as of June 29, according to data from the Transactional Records Access Clearinghouse at Syracuse University, known as TRAC. With a coming infusion of tens of billions of dollars from President Trump’s signature tax and spending package, ICE is hoping to expand its detention capacity to 100,000 beds, up from roughly 40,000 under the Biden administration. Trump administration officials hope to soon begin stepping up deportation efforts, which have lagged behind in the early months of Trump’s second term. ICE agents detaining an immigrant in a courthouse. An immigrant is detained by ICE agents in New York. Photo: Bryan R. Smith/AFP/Getty Images Immigration officials asked the general counsel’s office at the Department of Homeland Security, ICE’s parent agency, to reconsider the longstanding policy of allowing immigrants to be released on bond, given that the agency will soon have the capacity to detain them, said an administration official familiar with the matter. A small number of people might still be released from detention, Lyons wrote, but those decisions will now be made by an ICE officer rather than a judge. The legal interpretation ICE is now using has faced previous legal challenges in Washington state, where advocates say immigration court judges in Tacoma for years denied bond to almost all of the immigrants there who have entered the country illegally. For more information, visit us at https://www.beverlyhillsimmigrationlaw.com/.

Federal judge issues new nationwide block against Trump’s order seeking to end birthright citizenship

Concord, New Hampshire CNN — A federal judge agreed Thursday to issue a new nationwide block against President Donald Trump’s executive order seeking to end birthright citizenship. The ruling from US District Judge Joseph Laplante is significant because the Supreme Court last month curbed the power of lower court judges to issue nationwide injunctions, while keeping intact the ability of plaintiffs to seek a widespread block of the order through class action lawsuits, which is what happened Thursday in New Hampshire. Ruling from the bench, Laplante granted a request from immigration rights attorneys to certify a nationwide class that “will be comprised only of those deprived of citizenship” and issued a preliminary injunction indefinitely blocking Trump’s Day One order from being enforced against any baby born after February 20. Protesters rally in support of detained Palestinian activist Mahmoud Khalil in March in New York. Related article Pro-Israel website was used to find names of student protesters to investigate, senior ICE official says “The preliminary injunction is just not a close call to the court,” Laplante said during a hearing. “The deprivation of US citizenship and an abrupt change of policy that was longstanding … that’s irreparable harm.” US citizenship, the judge added, “is the greatest privilege that exists in the world.” The judge, an appointee of former President George W. Bush, said he would pause his order for several days to give the Trump administration time to appeal his decision. Laplante issued a written 38-page order later Thursday as well. Laplante wrote that he “has no difficulty concluding that the rapid adoption by executive order, without legislation and the attending national debate, of a new government policy of highly questionable constitutionality that would deny citizenship to many thousands of individuals previously granted citizenship under an indisputably longstanding policy, constitutes irreparable harm, and that all class representatives could suffer irreparable harm absent an injunction.” Laplante’s ruling could prove to be a critical bulwark against Trump’s policy as other courts scramble to take a second look at their decisions in light of the Supreme Court’s ruling. ADVERTISING The White House called the ruling “an obvious and unlawful attempt to circumvent the Supreme Court’s clear order against universal relief.” “This judge’s decision disregards the rule of law by abusing class action certification procedures. The Trump Administration will be fighting vigorously against the attempts of these rogue district court judges to impede the policies President Trump was elected to implement,” White House spokesman Harrison Fields said in a statement. In February, Laplante indefinitely blocked the Trump administration from enforcing the order only against members of several nonprofit groups who would have been impacted by it. “I’m the judge who wasn’t comfortable with issuing a nationwide injunction. Class action is different,” the judge said at one point during Thursday’s hearing. “The Supreme Court suggested class action is a better option.” In his ruling earlier this year, Laplante said Trump’s order “contradicts the text of the Fourteenth Amendment and the century-old untouched precedent that interprets it.” Several other judges similarly ruled that Trump’s order was unconstitutional, but their injunctions applied nationwide and prompted the administration to mount the series of appeals that eventually landed before the Supreme Court. Class includes children impacted by Trump’s order Thursday’s proceeding focused largely on the request from immigration rights attorneys who brought the legal challenge for Laplante to certify a class of individuals that would include “all current and future children” who would be affected by Trump’s order and their parents. The judge’s ruling Thursday did not include the parents in the class. The judge appeared sympathetic to arguments pushed by the Justice Department that certifying a class including the parents might run up against the federal rules regarding class certification if those adults each had immigration situations that were significantly different from another adult in the class. DOJ attorney Eric Hamilton had wanted Laplante to allow for discovery so more information could be gathered on the adults who are part of the legal challenge, but the judge, aware of the urgency of the litigation, noted that such court-ordered fact-finding wouldn’t be feasible. “You’re right, (ordinarily) we’d conduct discovery before granting class certification,” Laplante said. “There’s no time for discovery.” His decision to keep the certified class somewhat narrow allows the case to proceed without that time-consuming process. “I think that the class representatives present issues … that the newborn infants do not,” he said. Class action lawsuits require “class representatives,” or individuals who, if the class is certified, will represent the class members. In this case, brought by the American Civil Liberties Union, those proposed representatives had included a Honduran asylum-seeker – referred to in court papers as “Barbara” and who is living in New Hampshire and expecting a baby in October – and a Brazilian man – referred to as “Mark” – who is attempting to get lawful permanent status. Mark’s wife, who is not in the US lawfully, gave birth in March. “If the Order is left in place,” the ACLU lawyers wrote, “those children will face numerous obstacles to life in the United States, including stigma and potential statelessness; loss of their right to vote, serve on federal juries and in many elected offices, and work in various federal jobs; ineligibility for various federal programs; and potential arrest, detention, and deportation to countries they may have never even seen.” Chief Justice John Roberts and Associate Justice Amy Coney Barrett. Related article The behind-the-scenes power John Roberts wields to ensure his influence with justices Signed by Trump on January 20, the executive order, titled “PROTECTING THE MEANING AND VALUE OF AMERICAN CITIZENSHIP,” said that the federal government will not “issue documents recognizing United States citizenship” to any children born on American soil to parents who were in the country unlawfully or were in the states lawfully but temporarily. The Supreme Court said in its June 27 ruling that the administration cannot begin enforcing the order for 30 days, though the government is allowed to begin developing guidance on how the policy will be implemented. In the other challenges to Trump’s order, lower courts around the country have asked the parties to submit written legal arguments addressing how the Supreme Court’s ruling could impact the nationwide injunctions issued in those cases, and more court proceedings are expected in the coming days and weeks. But that process will take time and it’s unclear whether any of those courts will narrow their injunctions ahead of when Trump is permitted to enforce the birthright policy. “I feel like we’re the only people who rushed around here,” Laplante quipped during Thursday’s hearing. ACLU attorney Cody Wofsy in a statement said the judge’s decision is “a huge victory and will help protect the citizenship of all children born in the United States, as the Constitution intended.” What the Supreme Court said Laplante’s decision aligns with the Supreme Court’s blockbuster ruling last month, which left class-action litigation on the table as a way to block Trump’s birthright citizenship order – and potentially other policies. The Supreme Court’s decision was focused on one type of court order – a nationwide injunction – but several of the justices were keen to note that plaintiffs suing an administration would have other avenues to shut down policies that might run afoul of the Constitution or federal law. Writing for the majority, Justice Amy Coney Barrett suggested the kind of class-action litigation immigrant rights groups are now pursuing have many advantages. Justice Brett Kavanaugh, a conservative who is often closer to the center of the court in high-profile cases, seemed especially open to having the Supreme Court review, on an emergency basis, exactly the kind of order Laplante issued. “Today’s decision on district court injunctions will not affect this court’s vitally important responsibility to resolve applications for stays or injunctions with respect to major new federal statutes and executive actions,” Kavanaugh wrote. “Deciding those applications is not a distraction from our job. It is a critical part of our job.” The Supreme Court is seen on Capitol Hill in Washington, DC, on April 25, 2024. video Related video SCOTUS limits judges ability to stop Trump Perhaps, Kavanaugh mused, a district court might issue “the functional equivalent of a universal injunction” by “granting or denying a preliminary injunction” in a class-action suit. “No matter how the preliminary-injunction litigation on those kinds of significant matters transpires in the district courts, the courts of appeals in turn will undoubtedly be called upon to promptly grant or deny temporary stays or temporary injunctions in many cases,” Kavanaugh wrote. But Laplante’s ruling is nevertheless almost certain to force the justices to deal with a split that emerged over the particulars of those cases. And the court’s majority opinion left that split unsettled. Several conservatives, including Justices Samuel Alito and Clarence Thomas, warned against courts using class-action litigation to essentially supplant the kind of nationwide injunction the court had just shot down. “Lax enforcement of the requirements” for certifying a class, Alito wrote in an opinion joined by Thomas, “would create a potentially significant loophole to today’s decision.” Federal courts, he added, “should thus be vigilant against such potential abuses of these tools.” Whether Laplante’s decision is an “abuse” or exactly what the Supreme Court had in mind will likely wind up back before the justices in short order. For more information, visit us at https://www.beverlyhillsimmigrationlaw.com/.

Masked immigration agents are spurring fear and confusion across the U.S.

The arrests follow a pattern: masked agents, including Immigration and Customs Enforcement and other federal officers assigned to work with ICE, wearing plainclothes and sometimes arriving in unmarked vehicles. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Assistant Secretary for Public Affairs Tricia McLaughlin told NPR that agents are covering their faces to protect themselves from doxing and increasing threats. But civil rights groups and legal advocates say it's creating fear and undermining public trust. A man recounts the incident in Montebello, California, where ICE agents entered a junkyard and detained U.S. citizen Javier Ramirez. June 19, 2025. Zaydee Sanchez for NPR Immigration 'Antagonized for being Hispanic': Growing claims of racial profiling in LA raids "It may well be a reason for masking if you are engaged in a clandestine operation against an organized drug ring or a well-armed gang of some sort," said Stephen Kass, a member of the New York City Bar Association, which last month criticized agents for obscuring their identities through masking. "But that's not what's happening here." Kass is referring to arrests like the one that Job Garcia witnessed at a Home Depot in Hollywood, Calif. Garcia, a 37-year-old photographer and Ph.D. student at Claremont Graduate University, had just left the store when he saw men surround a box truck with a Latino man in the driver's seat. Some wore vests that read "POLICE — U.S. BORDER PATROL," and their faces were covered. Then, one smashed the truck's window. Sponsor Message "Hey, no les abra! Yo, are you f***ing serious, bro?" Garcia is heard yelling in the video he recorded, in which he warns the driver in Spanish to not open his door. When he stepped closer to film, Garcia says, agents shoved him to the ground. "Get down! Get him down!" one shouted. Garcia was detained for more than 24 hours. He said he was never told why, despite repeatedly stating he was born and raised in Los Angeles. "They never said what I was being detained for," he said. Garcia said he recorded agents because he "knew what these supposed ICE agents were doing was wrong, was unlawful," adding that he wanted them held accountable for how they were going about their arrests. "When you have masks on, you will look a little bit more terrifying. And I think what they were trying to do is inflict terror in the community," he said. Garcia believes the agents appeared to single him out because he's Latino. "They saw my appearance as a threat because there were also other white bystanders who were yelling at them. And they didn't go after them." He's now suing DHS and seeking $1 million in recompense, alleging he was targeted for speaking up. "What they're doing is actual terror, and the pain they're inflicting on the community is huge. Stripping people from their families — this is beyond politics. This is harming actual human beings." Garcia is being represented by the Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund (MALDEF). "There weren't warrants presented by these Border Patrol or ICE agents to the individuals in the parking lot," said MALDEF's Ernest Herrera. "A place where predominantly Latino workers or workers of Latin American origin were seeking work. And they were, we believe, profiled because of that." Herrera believes Garcia was also being profiled. Sponsor Message McLaughlin of DHS pushed back on those claims. "It's disgusting that he's going to charge these men and women as if there is some sort of profiling going on," McLaughlin said. She said Garcia was arrested because "he assaulted a Border Patrol officer and was actively, verbally harassing them. So it had nothing to do with his citizenship. It's the fact that he's actually going forth and assaulting [a] law enforcement officer." When asked why Garcia says he was not given an explanation for his arrest or release, McLaughlin said, "He was arrested — I'm happy to share this specific information with you." She added, "We have evidence that he did" allegedly assault agents. DHS did not provide NPR with evidence upon request. McLaughlin also denied reports that ICE agents who wear masks are failing to identify themselves. "I've been on a number of these operations," she said. "They are wearing vests that say ICE or ERO, which is the enforcement arm of ICE or Homeland Security Investigations. They clearly verbally identify themselves. And they also are flanked by vehicles that also say 'Homeland Security.'" When asked about federal regulations that require officers to identify themselves, McLaughlin said masking is about safety. "These are men and women who [are] being doxed online. We know that people take video of the operations as they're ongoing. Law enforcement. Their families have been targeted. Their personal addresses and information have been put on sites like Reddit and other online chat forums for people to target them," McLaughlin said. Democratic Sens. Alex Padilla of California and Cory Booker of New Jersey have introduced legislation that would ban federal immigration agents from wearing masks during arrests. In June, Padilla was forcefully removed by federal agents from a news conference in Los Angeles while attempting to question DHS Secretary Kristi Noem about the Trump administration's decision to send in the National Guard to the city. Sponsor Message Kass, of the New York City Bar Association, said his group has other safety concerns. "It also encourages violence," he said. "In many states, people are allowed to carry guns. They're also allowed to stand their ground when they're accosted by threatening strangers. This is an invitation for somebody to shoot back." And, he added, it risks abuse. "Once they are masked, they do not feel accountable because they do not feel they will be identified." There have been scattered reports of people impersonating immigration agents. In Philadelphia, police said a man with a gun and a fake badge robbed an auto shop while claiming to be with ICE. In North Carolina, another man allegedly posed as an agent and forced a woman to have sex under threat of deportation. DHS says it is investigating those reports. As for Garcia, he says life hasn't been the same since the arrest. He worries most about his mother, a U.S. citizen who has lived in the United States for four decades and doesn't speak English well. "We don't allow her to go out anymore by herself. Not without one of us with her." He says fear has taken hold in his community, especially among the most vulnerable. "People are just staying home altogether and not coming out." He describes feeling othered in his own country. Speaking out and suing, he says, is his way of taking back some power.

‘Essential isn’t a strong enough word’: Loss of foreign workers begins to bite US economy

President Donald Trump’s crackdown on immigration is starting to ripple across the U.S. economy. From small farms in California, to meat packing facilities in Nebraska to corporate giants like Disney, businesses are scrambling to replace workers after recent administration actions have taken immigrants, both legal and illegal, out of the labor force, including several hundred thousand people who had been given temporary work permits under President Joe Biden. 00:03 02:00 Read More That’s because foreign-born workers, or their relatives, have become critical in some labor sectors. “Essential isn’t a strong enough word,” said Matt Teagarden, head of the Kansas Livestock Association. “It is some version of an immigrant, maybe not first generation, but second or third generation, that are just critical to that work.” The emerging reports are the first signs of what economists and labor market experts had warned would result from Trump’s signature campaign issue, which has so far included revoking temporary legal status for several hundred thousand people who have been allowed to live and work in the U.S. in recent years without gaining citizenship. Daily operations have been thrown into question for the cattle ranchers in Teagarden’s organization because employers have become reliant on workers who, even if not directly threatened by the administration’s actions, may be related to people who are. “Am I going to have enough crew around tomorrow to get the cows milked and cows fed and everything done?” he said. “What’s my contingency plan to do the essentials, if not?” Trump has said he was working on addressing labor shortages in agriculture, telling supporters at a rally in Iowa on Thursday he wants to “work with the farmers” even if he ends up alienating “serious, radical-right people” who want to curb immigration. Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins on Tuesday suggested Medicaid participants who don’t yet meet the work requirements passed in Republicans’ megabill could supplement labor shortages in the agriculture industry. And the administration has taken some incremental actions intended to address concerns over the shortage of foreign-born workers, including creating an Office of Immigration Policy within the Department of Labor. The White House has touted the success of its immigration policies, arguing they have led to historically low border crossings and the prioritization of U.S.-citizen workers. The Department of Homeland Security said it arrested a little over 6,000 people crossing the U.S.-Mexico border illegally in June, among the lowest monthly border crossing figures in decades. “President Trump is a tireless advocate for American farmers — they keep our families fed and our country prosperous. He trusts farmers and is committed to ensuring they have the workforce needed to remain successful,” White House spokesperson Abigail Jackson said in a statement. “But there will be no safe harbor for the countless, unvetted, criminal illegal aliens that Joe Biden let waltz into the country.” The administration exacerbated the situation Monday, revoking legal status for approximately 76,000 people from Honduras and Nicaragua — and eliminating their work authorizations. It had previously done so for Haitians, Afghans, Venezuelans and Cameroonians. Some large corporations that rely on foreign-born workers, including those with protected status people admitted under other programs, have already felt the impacts. In May, Disney reportedly began cutting workers with temporary legal status, and Walmart took a similar step last month. Foreign-born workers at Amazon have reported receiving similar notices. Walmart and Amazon declined to comment. Disney did not respond to requests for comment. Mass arrests of people without legal status have sent a chill through several industries as Immigration and Customs Enforcement conducts raids around the country. Agriculture businesses have expressed concern about the knock-on effects of ICE raids — that they deter even legal workers from showing up to work, worsening existing labor shortages and jeopardizing crops. Trump’s immigration actions are squeezing the labor market even as some broader economic trends remain positive. Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell has repeatedly indicated as much, including at a congressional hearing in June, where he said economic growth is “slowing” due to a shrinking labor force. Tightening the labor market through strict immigration enforcement could permanently increase inflation, an Oxford Economics study from June finds, pointing to subsequent increases in production costs and lower output due to limited workers. Uncertainty in the labor market could contribute to an “economic malaise,” said Stuart Anderson, executive director at the nonpartisan think tank National Foundation for American Policy. “If you want to have a growing economy, you need to have a growing labor force,” Anderson said. “The idea that you are just going to create more opportunity by having fewer workers available just doesn’t work in practice, because that’s not the way business runs.” Watch: The Conversation Marco Rubio on his many roles, plus a chat with Trump’s ‘chief Twitter troll’ | The Conversation Play Video Marco Rubio on his many roles, plus a chat with Trump’s ‘chief Twitter troll’ | The Conversation Trump has signaled some willingness to ease access to foreign-born labor specifically for farmers and hospitality workers – industries he has long prioritized as a key political constituency. Agriculture lobbyists have pushed the administration for an expansion of the seasonal visa program to apply to year-round workers and an easing of wage requirements. Neither the administration nor Congress have yet to announce concrete steps on a solution for those groups despite Trump’s rhetoric, and any moves would need to be extensive to offset the exodus of workers. “American produce growers are facing a severe labor shortage that’s driving up food prices and threatening domestic production,” Sarah Gonzalez, spokesperson for the International Fresh Produce Association, said. “We appreciate President Trump’s recognition of this crisis and any efforts to stabilize the agricultural workforce. But lasting solutions require bipartisan legislation that ensures U.S. farmers have access to a legal, reliable workforce.” For more information, visit us at https://www.beverlyhillsimmigrationlaw.com/.

Outrage Pours in After House GOP Approves 'One of the Most Catastrophic Bills Passed in Modern History'

House Republicans on Thursday put the final stamp of approval on budget legislation that will inflict devastating cuts on Medicaid, federal nutrition assistance, clean energy initiatives, and other programs to help finance another round of tax breaks for the rich—an unparalleled upward transfer of wealth that's expected to have cascading effects across the United States for years to come. The sprawling legislation passed in a mostly party-line vote, with just two House Republicans—Reps. Brian Fitzpatrick (R-Pa.) and Thomas Massie (R-Ky.)—joining every Democrat in opposition to the bill, which now heads to President Donald Trump's desk. SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER Quality journalism. Progressive values. Direct to your inbox. Enter your email address Following the 218-214 vote, Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.) called the reconciliation package "one of the most cruel, immoral pieces of legislation that Congress has ever voted on." "Not only did this bill get worse from the last time the House voted on it, it will be remembered as one of the most catastrophic bills passed in modern history," said Omar. The following is a sample of reactions from lawmakers and advocacy groups decrying the legislation's attacks on healthcare, the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, reproductive rights, the climate, and more. A Tax Giveaway to the Ultra-Rich and Corporations at the Expense of Working People Republican Tax Bill Protest in Los Angeles People take part in a protest against the Republican tax bill in Los Angeles, California on December 4, 2017. Democrats and many economists warn that the GOP tax plan gives large tax cuts to corporations and the wealthy and will hurt middle class families. (Photo by Ronen Tivony/NurPhoto via Getty Images) April Verrett, president of SEIU: What the Republicans just did. It's outrageous, it's despicable, it's immoral, itss anti-American. But SEIU members won't forget. We will never forget that children will go hungry because of what they've done. We will never forget that people will suffer because of what they've done. And why? For the biggest steal of taxpayer money, of working people’s money – not just poor people, but senior citizens. Every American will feel the repercussions of this horrible bill, but we won't forget and we will get our just due. Joseph Geevarghese, executive director of Our Revolution: "Republicans have passed the most dangerous legislation of our lifetimes. This bill hands billionaires and corporations a trillion-dollar tax break, paid for by ripping health care from 17 million people, gutting funding for rural hospitals, slashing clean energy investments, and cutting food assistance for millions of children. "This reckless sellout to the billionaire class will trigger the largest transfer of wealth from working- and middle-class Americans to the ultra-wealthy in our nation’s history. This isn't just bad policy — it's a moral failure that will cost an untold number of lives. Every lawmaker who voted for this shameful legislation must be held accountable at the ballot box." Robert Weissman, co-president of Public Citizen: "Trump and Congressional Republicans have certainly delivered for the billionaire class. "There are 800 billionaires in the United States and 12 100-billionaires. They don’t need any financial help. But that’s precisely what Trump and Congressional Republicans have done, with a monstrosity of a bill that may constitute the single biggest upward transfer of wealth in American history." Amy Hanauer, executive director of the Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy: This abominable bill will make history—in appalling ways. Never before has legislation taken so much from struggling families to give so much to the richest. It makes the biggest cuts to food aid for hungry families, executes the largest cuts to health care ever, adds trillions to the national debt – all to give $117 billion to the richest 1 percent in a single year. It’s no wonder that this bill is also extremely unpopular. Historians – and voters – will look back at this as a dark day in U.S. history. David Kass, executive director of Americans for Tax Fairness: This bill represents a massive transfer of wealth from the working class to the top 1%. It enacts the largest Medicaid and SNAP cuts in history while adding over $3 trillion to the national debt. Furthermore it makes the tax code more complex with new special interest tax breaks and handouts to the ultra wealthy. In the coming years, Democrats must prioritize repealing and replacing these disastrous policies to protect American families from rising costs and loss of healthcare coverage. We need to create a truly fair tax system and an economy that works for all Americans, not just the wealthy few. A Historic Blow to Medicaid, SNAP, Social Security, and other Anti-Poverty Programs Care Workers Denounce Impact Of Republican Medicaid Cuts Care workers with the Service Employees International Union (SEIU) participate in a living cemetery protest to denounce the impact to patients, families and workers if Republicans cut Medicaid, healthcare and SNAP to pay for tax cuts for the wealthy at the US Capitol June 23, 2025 in Washington, DC. (Photo by Tasos Katopodis/Getty Images for SEIU) Bishop William Barber, co-founder Repairers of the Breach: Today, Congress passed one of the most morally-bankrupt pieces of legislation in our nation’s history. This big ugly bill is the largest cut to healthcare and food assistance for children in our nation’s history, and it funds a war on immigrant communities. All the while, the bill gives tax breaks to the wealthiest among us—on the backs of our most vulnerable neighbors. By passing this bill, lawmakers have officially codified the deaths of thousands of people. It’s policy murder in plain sight.” Many of the people who passed this bill also consistently profess to be led by religious values. There is no religion that supports the degradation of humans. Policymakers can’t just claim their religious values in one breath, and then turn around and approve legislation that’s guaranteed to kill people. The passage of this bill is deadly, but it is not a defeat. We must meet it with a resurrection. We will organize voters in every impacted community to push legislators who voted for this bill out of office and build a movement together that can reconstruct our democracy. Americans for Tax Fairness: Today, President Trump and his billionaire-backed Republican-controlled Congress successfully passed their reconciliation bill, passing the largest cuts in Medicaid and SNAP history while slashing billions from other essential programs to fund massive tax giveaways for billionaires and large corporations. The bill will raise average Americans’ costs by causing 17 million Americans to lose their health insurance and 2 million to lose access to food assistance. Throughout the opaque legislative process, the Republican majority in both houses didn’t hold a single hearing on their legislative proposals, and forced their members to vote under the cover of night and during weekend sessions, reflecting the GOP majority’s pattern of minimizing public attention to a wildly unpopular legislative package.Richard Fiesta, executive director of the Alliance for Retired Americans: Today, the House turned its back on the very people they were elected to serve. This bill isn't about lowering prices or helping everyday Americans — it’s about lining the pockets of billionaires and big corporations while ripping away essential health care and support from seniors, people with disabilities, and working families. Congressional Republicans have just voted for tax giveaways for the wealthy while throwing millions of people off of Medicaid, slashing half a trillion dollars from Medicare, and driving hundreds of nursing homes and local hospitals into crisis. All of this will make it harder for older Americans to get the health care they need at a price they can afford. To add insult to injury, this bill hastens the depletion of the Social Security Trust Fund's reserves by one year. It's a slap in the face to every family who paid into Social Security and Medicare over a lifetime of work. We will not forget how our representatives voted today. We will make sure every older American knows what is in this legislation — and who to hold accountable for this debacle. Tony Carrk, executive director of Accountable.US: Today's party-line vote by House Republicans to rip healthcare away and raise grocery costs for tens of millions of Americans is as devastating as it is enraging. For months, a decisive number of House Republicans voiced their concerns, acknowledging that this bill would make people poorer and sicker, only to vote in favor of this bill. It’s a cruel betrayal and proof positive you cannot trust career politicians who will put their interests over those of their own constituents' health care and wallets. Bobby Mukkamala, M.D., president of the American Medical Association (AMA): Today is a sad and unnecessarily harmful day for patients and health care across the country, and its impact will reverberate for years. Care will be less accessible, and patients may simply forego seeing their physician because the lifelines of Medicaid and CHIP are severed. This is bad for my patients in Flint, Michigan, and it is devastating for the estimated 11.8 million people who will have no health insurance coverage as a result of this bill. The American Medical Association’s mission is promoting the art and science of medicine and the betterment of public health. This bill moves us in the wrong direction. It will make it harder to access care and make patients sicker. It will make it more likely that acute, treatable illnesses will turn into life-threatening or costly chronic conditions. That is disappointing, maddening, and unacceptable. Max Richtman, president & CEO of the National Committee to Preserve Social Security and Medicare: In enacting President Trump’s ‘Unfair, Ugly Bill,’ House Republicans have voted to rip health coverage away from as many as 16 million Americans and food assistance from millions more. Make no mistake, the deepest cuts in history to Medicaid and SNAP will devastate older Americans who depend on both programs for health coverage, long-term care, and nutrition. 7.2 million seniors are dually enrolled in Medicare and Medicaid; 6.5 million rely on SNAP benefits to stay healthy and make ends meet. The bill could even trigger automatic cuts to Medicare down the road. These beneficiaries are some of the most vulnerable members of our society — and Republicans have put them at risk in order to pay for another tax cut mainly for the rich. Republicans have passed this mean-spirited legislation with little regard for public opinion or well-being. Recent polling suggests that Americans who know about the bill are against it 2 to 1. No matter. Republicans are enacting a craven agenda to shower their wealthy donors with tax cuts at the expense of seniors and lower-income Americans. This bill has rightly been called ‘downright regressive and cruel’ — and ‘the largest transfer of wealth from the poor to the rich in U.S. history.’ President Trump was planning to sign the bill on July 4th. We can’t think of anything LESS patriotic than depriving millions of Americans of health coverage to further enrich the already wealthy. This is not responsible leadership. It’s just the opposite. Make no mistake: older Americans and their advocates WILL NOT FORGET. Republicans will be held accountable — now and during the 2026 elections. If our response were boiled down to one word, it simply would be SHAME! National Nurses United: This is among the darkest days in the history of U.S. health care. People will suffer and die because of the cuts in this legislation to fund tax cuts for billionaires — certainly in the short term and potentially for decades to come if nothing is done. The policy goal here is clear: Take away everyday people’s health care coverage. Every politician who supports this legislation has blood on their hands and only themselves to blame when the impacts of these cuts devastate a health care system already in a near-constant state of crisis. These cuts will hurt these lawmakers’ constituents, our patients, who are already dealing with a broken health care system. Lawmakers have effectively signed the death warrants for millions today. It will steal money from safety-net community hospitals and reproductive health care clinics, like Planned Parenthood. It will kick people off their health insurance. It will effectively punish people for getting sick or injured, making us all sicker and less healthy. While we will only understand the larger impacts of this law as they unfold, experts have made clear that the potential is devastating: Millions will lose insurance coverage, and hundreds of hospitals will see critical hits to their funding. Meanwhile, the rich will get richer. A Gut Punch to Environmental Protections, Clean Energy, and the Effort to Confront the Climate Crisis Anti-Trump Rally Held Outside Downing Street During Auguration Of The 47th US President Protestors hold up a sign reading "Trump Climate Disaster" as they demonstrate during a rally opposing the inauguration of the 47th US President Donald Trump, outside Downing Street on January 20, 2025 in London, England. (Photo by Leon Neal/Getty Images) Beth Lowell, Oceana vice president for the United States: “Thriving and abundant oceans should not be bargaining chips at the Congressional table. This big, terrible bill is the worst environmental legislation in American history, unraveling safeguards and investments that Americans — and coastal economies — rely on and need. This disastrous bill would require the largest expansion of offshore oil and gas lease sales by area ever in the United States. We should be protecting our coasts and oceans, not opening the floodgates to more offshore drilling and increasing the risk of dangerous oil spills.” Manish Bapna, president of NRDC (Natural Resources Defense Council): Every lawmaker who voted for this cynical measure chose tax cuts for the wealthiest over Americans' health, pocketbooks, public lands and waters -- and a safe climate. They should be ashamed. This measure gives the wealthiest a tax break while the rest of us will pay more on our electric bills and at the pump. So much for President Trump's promise to save Americans money on their energy bills. This Trump energy tax will cost electricity customers billions of dollars in higher bills. Drivers will need to fill up more often at the pump. And costs for things like cleaner cars, solar energy and efficient air conditioners will skyrocket. We urgently need more clean, affordable energy, but this measure would bring the renaissance in American clean energy production to a halt and send good, domestic manufacturing jobs to our foreign rivals. Oil executives, industrial loggers and coal CEOs can all celebrate today as they gain unprecedented access to drill, log and mine on our public lands. The rest of us will soon find no trespassing signs on lands that have belonged to all of us for more than a century. John Noël, Greenpeace USA deputy climate program director: This is a vote that will live in infamy. This bill is what happens when a major political party, in the grips of a personality cult, teams up with oil company CEOs, hedge fund donors, and climate deniers. All you need to do is look at who benefits from actively undercutting the clean energy industry that is creating tens of thousands of jobs across political geographies. The megabill isn’t about reform—it's about rewarding the super rich and doling out fossil fuel industry handouts, all while dismantling the social safety nets on which millions depend for stability. It is a bet against the future. Ben Jealous, executive director of the Sierra Club: "This is a sad and scary day for all who work to build up our communities, care for our friends and neighbors, and wish to leave this planet in a better place for future generations. Instead of working to make life better for American families and communities, what Donald Trump and his loyalists in Congress have delivered today will mean higher energy costs for working families and small businesses, the end of life-saving health care that millions rely on, and ceding the race to build the clean energy economy of tomorrow to China. Trump and Congressional Republicans have advanced the most anti-environment, anti-job, and anti-American bill in history. The Sierra Club will not forget it. America will not forget it. Gretchen Goldman, president of the Union of Concerned Scientists: Our country will be paying the price for these reckless policies for decades to come. In passing this bill, lawmakers repeatedly overrode the needs and interests of their constituents. When benefits are lost, when energy prices spike, when major clean energy and clean transportation investments are canceled, when jobs are cut, when climate-exacerbated extreme weather disasters hit, people should know who they have to thank. This bill is a damning indictment of Congress' priorities and values. Our country needs policymakers willing to confront the challenges of our time and fight for a better tomorrow, not sell out America for the benefit of a few. An Assault on Reproductive Freedom and Health Rallies Across U.S. Protest New Restrictive Abortion Laws Women hold signs during a protest against recently passed abortion ban bills at the Georgia State Capitol building, on May 21, 2019 in Atlanta, Georgia. (Photo by Elijah Nouvelage/Getty Images) Kelly Baden, vice president for public policy at the Guttmacher Institute: The reconciliation bill is a sweeping attack on the health, rights and autonomy of millions of people across the country. It would strip health coverage from those who need it most, gut access to reproductive health care, and impose dangerous restrictions that disproportionately harm low-income communities, people of color, and those already facing systemic barriers to care." One of the most egregious provisions in the bill would block Planned Parenthood and other providers of abortion care from receiving Medicaid reimbursement for contraceptive services and other care for an entire year. This politically motivated exclusion could force one in three Planned Parenthood health centers to close their doors, cutting off access to contraception, STI testing and treatment, cancer screenings and abortion care for countless patients. These are not just numbers—these are real people whose lives and futures are being put at risk. On top of that, the bill’s broader Medicaid cuts represent a direct attack on the health and economic security of people with low incomes. Medicaid is not a luxury—it’s a lifeline. It ensures access to essential care, including sexual and reproductive health services, for millions of people. Slashing this program to finance tax cuts for the wealthy is not just wrong—it’s cruel. Let’s be clear: this bill is about advancing an extreme ideological agenda that prioritizes control over compassion, and politics over public health. Alexis McGill Johnson, president and CEO of Planned Parenthood Federation of America: The reconciliation bill is a targeted attack on Planned Parenthood health centers and patients that cannot stand. Everyone deserves access to high-quality, affordable health care. That’s what we’ve been fighting for the last century — and we’ll never stop. We’ll be suing the Trump administration to stop this unlawful attack. See you in court. Dr. Jamila Perritt, Physicians for Reproductive Health president and CEO: Federal programs like Medicaid, CHIP, SNAP, as well as funding for full spectrum sexual and reproductive health care are all left at the mercy of cowardly, out of touch lawmakers who value junk science over the evidence-based practices that keep our communities safe. Limitations on these essential programs will have horrible consequences for tens of millions of people and for our entire health care landscape. In contrast of its name, this bill is one of the ugliest actions we have seen from the Trump Administration to date. Only six months into a second Trump term, we have seen Title X funding be stripped away, the continued criminalization of those seeking lifesaving health care like abortion, as well as politically motivated attacks on those in support of full spectrum sexual and reproductive health care. This is not a coincidence – it is intentional. This is not, nor has it ever been acceptable. Progressive Lawmakers Weigh In Hands Off! National Day of Action Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-MN) speaks during the Hands Off! day of action against the Trump administration and Elon Musk on April 05, 2025 in Washington, DC. (Photo by Paul Morigi/Getty Images for Community Change Action) Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.): Because my Republican colleagues cowered to special interests and their billionaire donors, 17 million Americans will lose their health coverage. This passage could cause 50,000 Americans to die each year because Republicans shamefully voted to kick millions off Medicaid and failed to extend the premium tax credits in the Affordable Care Act. It will also increase healthcare costs and endanger access to care for all Americans. Rural hospitals will be forced to shut down. Nursing homes and community health centers will be gravely impacted. This bill is the biggest transfer of wealth from the poor to the rich in history. While working people will be devastated, billionaires will receive massive tax cuts. Not only are the tax cuts permanent for the ultra-wealthy, any benefit to low-income families is only temporary. It will deepen the wealth and income inequality gap. In poll after poll, the American people are clear in their disdain for this bill. From cuts to nutrition assistance to increasing the cost of college to higher utility bills – the American people are clear-eyed in opposing it. Donald Trump and Republicans know this, which is why they rammed this bill through. Every single American will remember who chose to side with billionaires instead of working people. This bill is morally bankrupt and an attack on working people. For those reasons, I voted NO.” Congressional Progressive Caucus Chair Greg Casar (D-Texas): "This bill is a betrayal of working Americans. So that billionaires can buy bigger yachts, millions of working people will be unable to afford to go to the doctor, put food on the table, or keep the lights on. For years, Washington Republicans have talked a big game about becoming the party of working people. This vote should be the final nail in the coffin of that idea. In the end, Washington Republicans will simply betray the working class people they won over in the last election. They've done what they always do: take from the working class to give to the rich. As Democrats, we must make sure they never live that down." Rep. Rashida Tlaib (D-Mich.): "This bill is an act of violence against our communities. At a time of extreme income and wealth inequality, while 60% of Americans are living paycheck to paycheck, this budget is absolutely devastating for the working families we represent." Rep. Summer Lee (D-Pa.): "Republicans just passed one of the most harmful bills in modern history that will devastate our communities for years to come." Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.): "Republicans in the House just cheered as they voted to kick 17 million people off their healthcare." Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.): "I don't think anyone is prepared for what they just did w/ICE. This is not a simple budget increase. It is an explosion—making ICE bigger than the FBI, U.S. Bureau of Prisons, DEA, and others combined. It is setting up to make what’s happening now look like child's play. And people are disappearing." Rep. Ayanna Pressley (D-Mass.): "Republicans have passed a bill that will be a death sentence—denying millions medical care, denying children food, and violently deporting immigrant families to destabilized countries. This is unforgivable." Rep. Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.): "Republicans passed Trump's Big Bad Betrayal Bill to kick 17 million Americans off their healthcare for a billionaire tax cut. Cruel, horrifying, and outrageous. But we must not lose hope. Democrats will not only fight back—we'll fight forward, press on, and justice will be won." Rep. Becca Ballint (D-Vt.): "The House shamefully passed Trump’s big ugly, horrific, terrible bill that will leave 17 million people without health insurance. I, like every Democrat, voted HELL NO. People are going to suffer. I'm horrified that Congress would pass such a harmful piece of legislation." "I never want to hear a Republican say they care about 'fiscal responsibility' ever again. This bill is the largest increase in our national debt in history." Rep. Maxwell Alejandro Frost (D-Fla.): House Republicans just passed Trump's evil, Big Ugly Budget. They caved, voting to take health care away from 17 million people, slash food aid, and rob the poor to reward the ultrarich. It's the largest transfer of wealth from the working class to billionaires in history. This is a dark day in America and a shameful betrayal to those we serve. Our people deserve better and I will always fight like hell to get it. The fight continues. Turbo-charging Trump's Mass Deportation Machine and Anti-Immigrant Agenda Protesters clash with law enforcement in downtown Los Angeles near the Federal Building and the Metropolitan Detention Center due to the immigration raids roil L.A. California National Guard stands guard as protesters clash with law enforcement in downtown Los Angeles at the Metropolitan Detention Center due to the immigration raids roil L.A. on Sunday, June 8, 2025 in Los Angeles, CA. (Jason Armond / Los Angeles Times via Getty Images) Joanna Kuebler, chief of programs at America’s Voice: Americans are already recoiling against the harm done by this administration's deportation agenda—the masked ICE agents running amok; the industries and small businesses worried about their future viability; the fear spreading in American communities and the separations tearing apart American families. Sadly, we fear it will get all the worse with the new and unprecedented infusion of tens of billions of dollars for Stephen Miller to fully scale the personal mass deportation crusade he’s dreamed about since his teenage years. Earlier this week, Vice President JD Vance admitted that slashing Medicaid, the tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans, the fiscal recklessness and all of the other unpopular and damaging provisions of this bill were 'immaterial' compared to the ICE and immigration enforcement money. Yet Stephen Miller's and MAGA's dreams are most Americans' nightmares. Turbocharging mass deportation endangers our economy, our families, our communities, and our history as a nation of immigrants. Roots Action: The expansion of fascism is here: - $74.9 billion for ICE detention and removal - $65.6 billion for CBP infrastructure, hiring, tech - $10 billion DHS slush fund - $3.5 billion for state enforcementAnd more! Hamilton Nolan, independent journalist : This bill contains enough money to build a new system of immigration detention centers far bigger than the entire federal prison system. The American Immigration Council says that it will be enough to facilitate the “daily detention of at least 116,000 non-citizens.” It will let ICE hire more field agents than the FBI. Its $170 billion in funding for Stephen Miller’s rabid campaign to purge America of brown people is comparable to the total annual funding for the United States Army. Donald Trump envisions himself as an all-powerful leader whose will is equal to law. He is bent on revenge against his political enemies. He has installed extreme loyalists in the Justice Department, the FBI, the Defense Department, the Department of Homeland Security, and all other security departments. The courts have declined to meaningfully restrain his abuses of these departments. This budget will give him the final piece of the puzzle that he needs to achieve his fever dream: a nationwide army of masked, unaccountable armed agents empowered to snatch anyone they like off the streets, and the physical infrastructure to imprison or deport those people at will. Thousands of men with guns, unrestrained by judges or local police, who do not answer to Congress, who point guns at the press, who arrest whoever they want, for reasons they do not share, and do whatever they wish with those people. The implications of this are going to make America a much darker place. Aaron Reichlin-Melnick, American Immigration Council senior fellow: With this vote, Congress makes ICE the highest-funded federal law enforcement agency in history, with more money per year at its disposal over the next four years than the budgets of the FBI, DEA, ATF, U.S. Marshals, and Bureau of Prisons combined. Astra Taylor, author and Strike Debt co-founder: The debt, deportation, and death bill has passed. Congress further decimates care work to fund violence work. ICE becomes the highest-funded federal law enforcement agency ever known. It hasn’t been sold this way, but it’s a massive public jobs program for fascists. Uzra Zeya, CEO of Human Rights First: “As millions of Americans lose access to health insurance, this bill forks over more than $150 billion to supercharge the policies of grave harm we've seen these past six months. It will fund more disappearances of people seeking asylum in our country, more masked agents in our courtrooms and neighborhoods to detain and manhandle those following the rules to be here, and more prisons where families, including infants, can now be incarcerated indefinitely due to this Big, Ugly, Betrayal of a bill."

US completes deportation of eight men to South Sudan after legal wrangling

Eight men deported from the US in May and held under guard for weeks at an American military base in the African nation of Djibouti while their legal challenges played out in court have reached the Trump administration’s intended destination, war-torn South Sudan, a country the state department advises against travel to due to “crime, kidnapping and armed conflict”. The men from Cuba, Laos, Mexico, Myanmar, Vietnam and South Sudan arrived in South Sudan on Friday after a federal judge cleared the way for the Trump administration to relocate them in a case that had gone to the supreme court, which had permitted their removal from the US. Administration officials said the men had been convicted of violent crimes in the US. “This was a win for the rule of law, safety and security of the American people,” Tricia McLaughlin, a Homeland Security spokesperson, said in a statement on Saturday announcing the men’s arrival in South Sudan. The supreme court cleared the way for the transfer of the men last Thursday. The men had been put on a flight in May bound for South Sudan but which was diverted to a base in Djibouti, where they were held in a converted shipping container. The flight was diverted after a federal judge found that the administration had violated his order by failing to allow the men a chance to challenge the removal. The supreme court’s conservative majority had ruled in June that immigration officials could quickly deport people to third countries. The majority halted an order that had allowed immigrants to challenge any removals to countries outside their homeland where they could be in danger. A flurry of court hearings on 4 July resulted in a temporary hold on the deportations while a judge evaluated a last-ditch appeal, before the judge decided he was powerless to halt their removals and that the person best positioned to rule on the request was a Boston judge whose rulings had led to the initial halt of the administration’s effort to begin deportations to South Sudan. By Friday evening, that judge had issued a brief ruling concluding that the supreme court had tied his hands. US authorities have reached agreements with other countries to house immigrants who cannot quickly be send back to their homelands. You've read 5 articles in the last year Article count on At this dangerous moment for dissent I hope you appreciated this article. Before you close this tab, I wanted to ask if you could support the Guardian at this crucial time for journalism in the US. When the military is deployed to quell overwhelmingly peaceful protest, when elected officials of the opposing party are arrested or handcuffed, when student activists are jailed and deported, and when a wide range of civic institutions – non-profits, law firms, universities, news outlets, the arts, the civil service, scientists – are targeted and penalized by the federal government, it’s hard to avoid the conclusion that our core freedoms are disappearing before our eyes – and democracy itself is slipping away. In any country on the cusp of authoritarianism, the role of the press as an engine of scrutiny, truth and accountability becomes increasingly critical. At the Guardian, we see it as our job not only to report on the suppression of dissenting voices, but to make sure those voices are heard. Not every news organization sees its mission this way – indeed, some have been pressured by their corporate and billionaire owners to avoid antagonizing this government. I am thankful the Guardian is different. Our only financial obligation is to fund independent journalism in perpetuity: we have no ultrarich owner, no shareholders, no corporate bosses with the power to overrule or influence our editorial decisions. Reader support is what guarantees our survival and safeguards our independence – and every cent we receive is reinvested in our work. The Guardian’s global perspective helps contextualize and illuminate what we are experiencing in this country. That doesn’t mean we have a single viewpoint, but we do have a shared set of values. Humanity, curiosity and honesty guide us, and our work is rooted in solidarity with ordinary people and hope for our shared future.

The Costs of Mass Deportation Are Soaring: Harming America’s Economy, Public Safety, and Constitutional Rights

Washington, DC — The devastating cost and dire consequences of President Trump and Stephen Miller’s mass deportation obsession continues to be on display across the nation, affecting all Americans. New reporting highlights the economic costs of raids that are overwhelming nursing home care, agricultural and construction workers and threatening regional economies; the public safety costs of the obsessive focus on immigration enforcement above real threats, including terrorism; and the human and moral cost to our nation – from the outrageous story of the father of three Marines being beaten and abducted by ICE to the horrific story of a pregnant mother delivering a stillborn baby while in detention. According to Vanessa Cárdenas, Executive Director of America’s Voice: “Make no mistake: the Trump/Miller campaign against immigrants is bringing real harm to every American. Their obsession is harming American industries, risking the safety of citizens and communities, and destroying the lives of our neighbors, friends, and families. For them, cruelty is the point, chaos is a bonus. And now they want to turbocharge those harms by massively expanding ICE funding in the big, ugly bill. At what cost to Americans’ safety, prosperity and families will the Trump administration continue their reckless and harmful mass deportation agenda?” See below for key stories grouped into the types of costs and consequences on display: Economic Costs The Washington Post, “Local economies under pressure as ICE crackdowns create climate of fear,” including: “From California grocery stores to chicken chains in suburban D.C., businesses that serve large immigrant populations are reporting shifts in consumer behavior — fewer in-store visits, lower receipts and more delivery orders — that threaten to drag down local economies, according to interviews with business owners, as well as spending data.” Syracuse Post-Standard editorial, “Crackdown on migrant farm labor a moral and policy failure,” including: “As the federal crackdown on immigration expands to farm fields and meat packing plants, the crippling effects on these businesses and your pocketbooks are just beginning.” KFF Health News, “Dual Threats From Trump and GOP Imperil Nursing Homes and Their Foreign-Born Workers” including: “Existing staffing shortages and quality-of-care problems would be compounded by other policies pushed by Trump and the Republican-led Congress, according to nursing home officials, resident advocates, and academic experts.” Associated Press, “A look at how Trump’s big bill could change the US immigration system,” noting: “President Donald Trump’s spending cuts and border security package would inject roughly $150 billion into his mass deportation agenda over the next four years, funding everything from an extension of the United States’ southern border wall to detention centers to thousands of additional law enforcement staff.” Public Safety Costs San Francisco Chronicle, “Exclusive: Nearly one-third of National Guard drug enforcement team were pulled to go to L.A.,” including: “Nearly a third of the California National Guard troops who had been doing drug enforcement work have been pulled away as part of President Donald Trump’s deployment of troops to Los Angeles. Of the 447 National Guard members on the Counterdrug Task Force, 142 have been pulled off of the assignment as part of the Los Angeles deployment, according to data from the California National Guard.” Boston Globe, “Threat of Iranian retaliation sparks questions about US terrorism readiness amid Trump immigration crackdown,” including: “…Trump has refocused the priorities that have dominated Washington since the Sept. 11, 2001, terror attacks, including by dramatically shifting federal resources toward achieving his goals on immigration and border security.” The Bulwark, “Trump’s Mass Deportations Are Making Us More Vulnerable to Domestic Terrorism,” including: “The collective law-enforcement of this country, from the federal to the local level, only has so much money and so many people. As the president orders the federal agencies to focus on deporting cooks, truck drivers, and farm hands—and encourages state and municipal agencies to help—resources and attention shift away from the most dangerous criminals.” Moral Costs and Human Toll Nashville Banner, “ICE Arrested a Pregnant Tennessee Woman — While in Detention in Louisiana, She had a Stillbirth” including: ““I [Iris Dayana Monterroso-Lemus] told them to just send me back to Guatemala because I was pregnant and wasn’t getting the medical attention I needed,” she said. “I called Immigration, ICE, I called and sent texts, but still, nothing. They told me I had to wait for my flight. Can you imagine?”” NBC News, “Marine veteran defends gardener father seen being hit by immigration agents in video,” including: “The Marine veteran son of a California gardener seen in a graphic video being repeatedly struck on the head by a masked Customs and Border Patrol agent and chased at gunpoint is pushing back against government statements that his father attacked agents with a weed trimmer. Narciso’s son Alejandro Barranco, 25, a Marine veteran, told MSNBC on Tuesday that had he treated a detainee the same way while he was serving as a Marine, “it would have been a war crime.” Newsweek, “Green Card Holder For 58 Years Faces Deportation,” including: “Victor Avila, a 66-year-old long-term U.S. green card holder who legally immigrated in 1967 and has held a green card since, was detained by Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), according to a GoFundMe. Avila was returning home visiting his son who is a member of the U.S. Airforce when he was detained.” The Guardian, “‘Handcuffed like we’re criminals’: Ohio teen soccer star recounts deportation,” including: “The Ohio high school graduate and soccer standout who was recently deported from the US to Honduras despite having no arrest record has described being “handcuffed like we’re some big criminals” for the entirety of his deportation flight.” NBC News, “Dreamer who spent 15 days in ICE detention says she was ‘scared and felt alone’,” including: “Scared, alone and heartbroken: that’s how 19-year-old Caroline Dias Goncalves said she felt the two weeks she spent in a detention center in Colorado after immigration authorities arrested her following a traffic stop.” For more information, visit us at https://www.beverlyhillsimmigrationlaw.com/.

Kilmar Abrego Garcia describes ‘severe beatings’ and ‘psychological torture’ in Salvadoran prison

Kilmar Abrego Garcia, whose illegal deportation by the Trump administration captured national attention, is now offering a chilling account of his mistreatment in a Salvadoran prison, claiming he suffered “severe beatings,” sleep deprivation, malnutrition and other forms of torture at the hands of his jailers. Abrego, a native of El Salvador, revealed details of his time in the country’s notorious anti-terrorism prison in a legal filing Wednesday. It’s the first time he has provided a firsthand description of his experience after the Trump administration summarily deported him there in March in violation of a court order. 00:03 02:00 Read More The administration for months resisted a judge’s command to bring Abrego back to the United States. But last month, federal prosecutors secured an indictment against him in Tennessee for human smuggling. At that point, the administration arranged for him to be released from Salvadoran custody and returned to the U.S. to face those charges. The Salvadoran prison where Abrego was initially housed, known as the Anti-Terrorism Confinement Center or by its Spanish-language acronym CECOT, is reputed to be rife with gang violence and human rights abuses. But there are few first-hand accounts of treatment there because El Salvador’s president, Nayib Bukele, has vowed that its prisoners will never be released. Abrego’s account of physical and psychological torture stands in stark contrast to the portrayal by the Trump administration and Bukele, who posted a photo of what he claimed was Abrego having “margaritas” with Sen. Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.), after the senator secured a meeting with Abrego in April. (Van Hollen has since said the margaritas were staged by Salvadoran officials). The Trump administration told a federal judge in May, after Abrego had been moved out of CECOT to another prison, that he was “in good health” and had “gained weight.” But Abrego said he lost 31 pounds at CECOT in his first two weeks there. And he reported witnessing and suffering harrowing violence and abuse. Abrego’s lawyers presented his account in a 40-page proposed amendment to a lawsuit over his deportation. Asked about the court filing, a spokeswoman for the Department of Homeland Security accused the media of “falling all over themselves to defend Kilmar Abrego Garcia.” “The media’s sympathetic narrative about this criminal illegal gang member has completely fallen apart, yet they continue to peddle his sob story,” the spokeswoman, Tricia McLaughlin, said. Abrego allegedly entered the U.S. illegally around 2011 and had lived in Maryland for more than a decade when the Trump administration deported him. The deportation violated a 2019 order from an immigration judge who barred the U.S. from sending Abrego to El Salvador because he faced a danger of gang violence there. The Supreme Court noted that the deportation was “illegal” after a Justice Department lawyer admitted that the deportation had been a mistake. ‘Whoever enters here doesn’t leave’ In the new court filing, Abrego described being the first person off an airplane in El Salvador after the Trump administration flew him there with more than 200 men on March 15. He recalled bright lights illuminating the airfield and cameras trained on him while officials forcefully guided him — shackled in chains — to a bus. The next day, Bukele triumphantly circulated cinematically edited videos of the deportees being handed over to Salvadoran authorities. The officials repeatedly struck Abrego in the head, his lawyers wrote, summarizing his account. He observed a U.S. immigration agent communicating with the Salvadoran officials “to confirm the identities of the Salvadoran nationals on board before the bus departed,” the lawyers continued. “Upon arrival at CECOT, the detainees were greeted by a prison official who stated, ‘Welcome to CECOT. Whoever enters here doesn’t leave,’” according to the account. “Plaintiff Abrego Garcia was then forced to strip, issued prison clothing, and subjected to physical abuse including being kicked in the legs with boots and struck on his head and arms to make him change clothes faster. His head was shaved with a zero razor, and he was frog-marched to cell 15, being struck with wooden batons along the way.” Members of the Salvadoran army stand guard at maximum security penitentiary. Members of the Salvadorian army stand guard at maximum security penitentiary CECOT (Center for the Compulsory Housing of Terrorism) on April 4, 2025 in Tecoluca, San Vicente, El Salvador. | Alex Peña/Getty Images “By the following day, Plaintiff Abrego Garcia had visible bruises and lumps all over his body,” his lawyers continued. Abrego said he shared a cell with 20 other people, who were forced to kneel overnight, “with guards striking anyone who fell from exhaustion.” “During this time, Plaintiff Abrego Garcia was denied bathroom access and soiled himself,” according to the account. “The detainees were confined to metal bunks with no mattresses in an overcrowded cell with no windows, bright lights that remained on 24 hours a day, and minimal access to sanitation.” His lawyers also described “psychological torture,” with prison officials telling Abrego he would be moved to cells with gang members. Abrego indicated he witnessed violence among inmates in those cells, with prison guards declining to intervene. Abrego was held incommunicado for over a month with no ability to contact his family or consult a lawyer, according to the account. His first contact with the outside world occurred when Van Hollen visited him on April 17, his lawyers wrote. Rebutting alleged gang ties The new court filing also seeks to undercut the Trump administration’s claims about Abrego, including the assertion that he is an MS-13 gang member. President Donald Trump has repeatedly made such a claim, even falsely insisting in a TV interview that Abrego has “MS-13” tattooed on the knuckles of his left hand. Watch: The Conversation Marco Rubio on his many roles, plus a chat with Trump’s ‘chief Twitter troll’ | The Conversation Play Video Marco Rubio on his many roles, plus a chat with Trump’s ‘chief Twitter troll’ | The Conversation However, Abrego claims prison officials at CECOT with extensive experience dealing with MS-13 and other gangs examined his tattoos and saw nothing to signify gang membership. “The Salvadoran authorities recognized that Plaintiff Abrego Garcia was not affiliated with any gang and, at around this time, prison officials explicitly acknowledged that Plaintiff Abrego Garcia’s tattoos were not gang-related, telling him ‘your tattoos are fine,’” Abrego’s lawyers wrote in the submission to Greenbelt, Maryland-based U.S. District Court Judge Paula Xinis. Xinis herself has also said that the Justice Department failed to produce evidence to support its allegation that Abrego is affiliated with the gang. Abrego’s new court filing also alleges that in the days after Abrego was arrested in Maryland in March, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement officials lied to him by indicating he’d see a judge before he’d be deported. Those false assurances were part of a deliberate effort “to prevent him from taking actions to assert his legal rights,” the new complaint says. Abrego is currently detained in Tennessee while his criminal case is pending. Though a federal magistrate judge ordered his release from custody last month, Abrego asked to remain incarcerated until at least mid-July, following conflicting statements from the Trump administration about whether it would rapidly deport him once again — this time to a country other than El Salvador. For more information, visit us at https://www.beverlyhillsimmigrationlaw.com/.

Local officials grow wary of helping ICE detain immigrants

A growing number of local law enforcement officials are alarmed about their jails and prisons holding immigration detainees without warrants, saying it exposes their departments to legal risks. Why it matters: It's the latest sign of tension between local authorities and Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents, whose strong-arm tactics in arresting immigrants have shocked communities across the nation. Zoom in: As part of President Trump's push to deport "millions" of unauthorized immigrants, ICE has leaned on local agencies to help arrest and temporarily detain unauthorized immigrants. Over the past decade most of ICE's arrests involved people who already were in law enforcement custody, according to a review of 10 years of data from Transactional Records Access Clearinghouse (TRAC). But with ICE arrests soaring to more than 2,000 a day under Trump, local jail and prison officials are increasingly concerned about being liable for detainees' care — particularly when ICE leaves them in local facilities for lengthy periods. The officials note that in the past, lawsuits filed on behalf of ICE detainees wrongly left languishing in local jails have cost local governments enormously — $92.5 million in one New York City case involving 20,000 people who were held in prison for ICE without due process between 1997 and 2012. How it works: ICE can ask a local agency to hold someone they believe isn't legally in the U.S., using a request called a detainer. Usually there's a 48-hour limit on this request. A detainer request from ICE isn't the same as a warrant issued by a judge, which local agencies require to hold their suspects. "The ICE administrative warrant is not enough to hold somebody's liberty away," Minnesota Attorney General Keith Ellison (D) told Axios. "It's essentially holding somebody and locking them up when there's no legal, lawful authority to do so." "The risk to the institution that's holding them is civil liability," he added. "They could end up paying a lot of money — and not just money, but injunctive relief." The National Sheriffs' Association has asked the Trump administration to clarify how long someone should be held on ICE's behalf, and has raised the issue with Border Czar Tom Homan. The group also has been lobbying Congress to pass a law addressing the issue for sheriffs, who often manage jails. Between the lines: A few law enforcement officials have spoken publicly about their concerns for ICE detainees' civil liberties under Trump's deportation push — and have faced a backlash from GOP officials for doing so. In February, Sheriff Dan Marx of Winneshiek County, Iowa, aired his concerns about cooperating with ICE detainers in a since-deleted Facebook post. "The only reason detainers are issued is because the federal agency does not have enough information or has not taken the time to obtain a valid judicial warrant," Marx wrote. "These detainers are violations of our 4th Amendment protection against warrantless search, seizure and arrest, and our 6th Amendment right to due process." Marx's post led Iowa Gov. Kim Reynolds — a Republican who has ordered the state's local law enforcement to "fully cooperate" with Trump's deportation mission — to file a formal complaint against the sheriff. Marx was investigated by Iowa's attorney general over whether he violated a state law mandating such cooperation. He deleted his first post and issued another statement that said in part: "I do not believe law enforcement officials should have to choose between upholding their sworn duty to the Constitution and following the state statute." He declined to be interviewed because of the investigation. "From a constitutional standpoint, if we're going to hold somebody in jail or detain them, we want to be doing so lawfully and have legal grounds to do so. And I think for a sheriff to ask for a judicial warrant is reasonable," Michael Tupper, a former police chief in Marshalltown, Iowa, told Axios. In a New Orleans court, the Orleans Parish Sheriff's Office is being sued by Louisiana's attorney general for not honoring ICE detainers. Orleans Parish has a policy of honoring ICE detainers only when a detainee has a warrant for a violent offense. The policy stems from has a legal settlement from 2010, when two men in the Orleans jail were held without due process for two months longer than their sentences, waiting for ICE. Louisiana Attorney General Liz Murrill (R) argues it amounts to a sanctuary policy, in violation of state law. The case is ongoing. Several other jurisdictions nationwide have faced similar lawsuits when people have been held on ICE detainers longer than their sentences or after their cases were dismissed. Some, like Orleans Parish, are changing their policies to limit their exposure to such suits. Montgomery and Delaware counties in Pennsylvania, for example, now require judicial warrants in addition to an ICE detainers to hold immigration detainees. What they're saying: "When a sheriff or a police chief stands up and voices concerns, they are oftentimes painted as soft on crime, or, you know, they don't care about keeping their community safe," Tupper said. "It's really the opposite. These folks are trying to do the right thing for the community." As Trump's deportation effort continues, that pressure on police chiefs and sheriffs is likely to build. "If they speak up too much," said retired police chief Mark Prosser of Stormlake, Iowa, "then perhaps an immigration enforcement activity is going to come to a community near you." For more information, visit us at https://www.beverlyhillsimmigrationlaw.com/.