FY 2027 H-1B Initial Registration Selection Process Completed

U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services has received enough electronic registrations for unique beneficiaries during the initial registration period to reach the fiscal year 2027 H-1B numerical allocations (known as the H-1B cap), including the advanced degree exemption (master’s cap). USCIS selected enough beneficiaries with properly submitted registrations to reach the H-1B cap and notified all prospective petitioners with selected beneficiaries that they are eligible to file an H-1B cap-subject petition for those beneficiaries. Registrants’ online accounts will display their registration status. For more information, visit the H-1B Electronic Registration Process page. H-1B cap-subject petitions for FY 2027, including those petitions eligible for the advanced degree exemption, may be filed with USCIS beginning April 1, 2026, if filed for a selected beneficiary and based on a valid registration. Only petitioners with registrations for selected beneficiaries may file H-1B cap-subject petitions for FY 2027. An H-1B cap-subject petition must be properly filed at the correct filing location or online at my.uscis.gov and within the filing period indicated on the relevant selection notice. The period for filing the H-1B cap-subject petition will be at least 90 days. Petitioners must include a copy of the applicable selection notice with the FY 2027 H-1B cap-subject petition. On Feb. 27, 2026, we published a new edition of Form I-129, Petition for a Nonimmigrant Worker (edition date 02/27/26). Beginning April 1, USCIS will only accept the 02/27/26 edition of Form I-129. All H-1B cap subject petitions for FY 2027 must use this edition of the form. An H-1B cap petition filed on behalf of a beneficiary must contain and be supported by the same identifying information and position information as the selected registration. Petitioners must submit evidence of the beneficiary’s valid passport or travel document used at the time of registration to identify the beneficiary and evidence of the basis of the wage level selected on the registration as of the date that the registration underlying the petition was submitted. See the How to Ensure You Properly File Your H-1B Cap-Subject Petition section on the H-1B Cap Season webpage for additional information. The Presidential Proclamation Restriction on Entry of Certain Nonimmigrant Workers requires certain H-1B petitions filed at or after 12:01 a.m. Eastern on Sept. 21, 2025, to be accompanied by an additional $100,000 payment as a condition of eligibility. See the Presidential Proclamation on Restriction on Entry of Certain Nonimmigrant Workers section on our H-1B Specialty Occupations page for additional details. Petitioners filing H-1B cap petitions on behalf of selected beneficiaries based on their valid registration must still submit evidence as provided in the Form I-129 instructions and establish eligibility for petition approval, as registration and selection only pertain to eligibility to file the H-1B cap-subject petition.

ICE agents will be stationed outside Marine Corps graduation events in South Carolina

WASHINGTON — ICE agents will be stationed outside graduation events for the nation’s newest Marines to identify whether any of their family members are undocumented, according to the Marine Corps. NBC News Icon Subscribe to read this story ad-free Get unlimited access to ad-free articles and exclusive content. arrow As the U.S. continues the war in Iran, the Marine Corps has boosted protection measures on bases, requiring everyone to present REAL IDs, U.S. passports or U.S. birth certificates to access any sites. Undocumented immigrants are generally ineligible for federal REAL IDs and don’t have U.S. passports or birth certificates. So people without identifying documents who arrive at the gate of Marine Corps Recruit Depot at Parris Island in Beaufort, South Carolina, for recruit family days and graduation events this week may now have to answer to Immigration and Customs Enforcement officials, the Marine Corps said. Because of “increased force protection measures” at the recruit depot, "federal law enforcement personnel will be present at installation access points to conduct enhanced screening and lawful immigration status inquiries during recruit family and graduation days,” a message on the Parris Island website read. While sometimes family members don’t have proper documentation, it wasn’t clear why ICE had decided to station at Parris Island. A DHS spokesperson said any suggestion that ICE would make arrests was false. "ICE will not be making arrests at the basic training graduation in Paris Island, SC,” the spokesperson said. Graduation is Friday morning, but family members are invited to visit the base and celebrate their sons’ and daughters’ completion of the grueling training beginning Wednesday. Marine recruits aren’t allowed to see their families during the 13-week boot camp. Recommended Women's Health Federal funding for reproductive health care could lapse Wednesday due to Trump administration delays From the Politics Desk Why Democrats still face an uphill climb to win the Senate: From the Politics Desk “While the Marine Corps routinely coordinates with federal partners on security matters, this is the first time in recent memory that federal law enforcement agencies have supported base access operations at Parris Island in this capacity,” according to a spokesperson for MCRD Parris Island. The spokesperson encouraged all visitors to be prepared for additional screening measures. “To help ensure a smooth and timely process, guests should bring proper identification and limit the number of items they carry onto the installation,” the spokesperson said. Marine Corps recruits have trained at Marine Corps Recruit Depot Parris Island since November 1915. It has graduation ceremonies about 46 weeks of the year, according to a spokesperson. It’s not clear whether ICE will be at the gate to Parris Island for the foreseeable future or whether the ICE involvement could expand to other bases. For more information, visit us at https://www.beverlyhillsimmigrationlaw.com/.

Trump’s Justice Department Dropped 23,000 Criminal Investigations in Shift to Immigration

Reporting Highlights A Striking Departure: The number of declinations marks a striking departure not only from the Biden administration but also the first Trump term, according to the ProPublica analysis. An Unusual Order: Former DOJ prosecutors said that they regularly reviewed caseloads. But none could recall an order like the one in February to review cases. Different Priorities: While Elon Musk’s DOGE operatives said they were rooting out federal waste, fraud and abuse, the DOJ declined over 900 cases of federal program or procurement fraud. These highlights were written by the reporters and editors who worked on this story. In the first days after Pam Bondi was appointed attorney general last year, the Department of Justice began shutting down pending criminal cases at a record pace. The cases included an investigation into a Virginia nursing home with a recent record of patient abuse; probes of fraud involving several New Jersey labor unions, including one opened after a top official of a national union was accused of embezzlement; and an investigation into a cryptocurrency company suspected of cheating investors. In total, the DOJ quietly closed more than 23,000 criminal cases in the first six months of President Donald Trump’s administration, abandoning hundreds of investigations into terrorism, white-collar crime, drugs and other offenses as it shifted resources to pursue immigration cases, according to an analysis by ProPublica. The bulk of these cases, which were closed without prosecution and known as declinations, had been referred to the DOJ by law enforcement agencies under prior administrations that believed a federal crime may have been committed. The DOJ routinely declines to prosecute cases for any number of reasons, including insufficient evidence or because a case is not a priority for enforcement. But the number of declinations under Bondi marks a striking departure not only from the Biden administration but also the first Trump term, according to the ProPublica analysis, which examined two decades of DOJ data, including the first six months of Trump’s second term. ProPublica determined the increase is not the result of inheriting a larger caseload or more referrals from law enforcement. In February 2025 alone, which included the first weeks of Bondi’s tenure, nearly 11,000 cases were declined, the most in a month since at least 2004. The previous high was just over 6,500 cases in September 2019, during Trump’s first administration. Some of the cases shut down were the result of yearslong investigations by federal agencies such as the FBI and the Drug Enforcement Administration. For complex cases, the DOJ can take years before deciding whether to bring charges. The shift comes as the DOJ has undergone an extraordinary overhaul under the Trump administration, with entire units shuttered, directives to abandon pursuit of certain crimes and thousands of lawyers quitting or, in some cases, being forced out of the agency. In doing so, the DOJ is retreating from its mission to impartially uphold the rule of law, keep the country safe and protect civil rights, according to interviews with a dozen prosecutors and an open letter from nearly 300 DOJ employees who have left the department under Trump. The Trump DOJ, the employees wrote, is “taking a sledgehammer” to long-standing work to “protect communities and the rule of law.” The change in priorities was outlined in a series of memos sent to attorneys early last year. Trump’s DOJ has said it is “turning a new page on white-collar and corporate enforcement” and emphasizing the pursuit of drug cartels, illegal immigrants and institutions that promote “divisive DEI policies.” Trump, in an address last March at the department, said the changes were necessary after a “surrender to violent criminals” during the past administration and would result in a restoration of “fair, equal and impartial justice under the constitutional rule of law.” The department prosecuted 32,000 new immigration cases in the first six months of the administration, which was nearly triple the number under the Biden administration and a 15% increase from the first Trump term. It has pursued fewer prosecutions of nearly every other type of crime — from drug offenses to corruption — than new administrations in their first six months dating back to 2009. The DOJ has also closed hundreds of cases involving alleged crimes that the administration has publicly emphasized as enforcement priorities. Even as the Trump administration unleashed Elon Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency operatives to root out waste, fraud and abuse in the federal government, the DOJ declined over 900 cases of federal program or procurement fraud. About three times as many cases of major fraud against the U.S. were declined under Trump compared with the average of similar time periods under prior administrations. And while the Trump administration has promised to “make America safe again,” its DOJ has declined more than 1,000 terrorism cases, also more than prior administrations. Federal prosecutor Joseph Gerbasi had spent years in the department’s Narcotic and Dangerous Drug Section helping build cases against major suppliers of fentanyl ingredients in India and China. After Bondi came in, he was left bewildered when his team was ordered to abandon its work. “All of the building blocks of what would become successful prosecutions were pulled out,” said Gerbasi, who retired as the section’s acting deputy chief for policy in March 2025 after 28 years with the department. The move had an “overwhelming deflating effect on morale,” he said. After Trump’s Inauguration, the Department of Justice Turned Down a Record Number of Cases The first quarter of 2025, and especially February of that year, saw the department declining to prosecute cases against thousands of defendants outside of its regular six-month review process. Source: DOJ data provided by TRAC Ken Morales/ProPublica Barbara McQuade, who worked as a federal prosecutor in Michigan for two decades until 2017 during Republican and Democratic administrations, said it was not unusual for new administrations to come to office with a few “pet priorities” — such as a focus on violent crime or drug trafficking. But she said those changes usually involved modest adjustments in policy and that most of the decisions on what crimes to focus on were typically made at the local level by the district U.S. attorney in coordination with the FBI or other agencies. “We would revise those about every five years, not having anything to do with any administration, just because it made sense,” she said. A DOJ spokesperson, in an emailed response to questions about the spike in declinations, said that in “an effort to clean, remediate, and validate data in U.S. Attorneys’ case management system,” the department reviewed all pending criminal matters opened prior to the 2023 fiscal year, which included updating the status of closed cases. “This Department of Justice remains committed to investigating and prosecuting all types of crime to keep the American people safe, and the number of declinations is a direct result of our efforts to run the agency in a more efficient manner.” The agency did not respond to questions about the types of cases declined. The spike of declined cases began in February 2025 when the department ordered prosecutors to review every open case launched prior to October 2022 and determine whether to close it. Such a review would typically take months, according to one attorney tasked with reviewing cases. A memo, which was described to ProPublica reporters, ordered the review to be completed within 10 days. Former DOJ prosecutors told ProPublica that they typically reviewed caseloads every six months with supervisors and that closing out languishing cases wouldn’t ordinarily be cause for concern. They said the February directive, however, was unusual. None could recall a similar order. The directive came as higher-ups in the department had begun making frequent demands for data about specific types of cases and charging decisions, such as the outcome of fentanyl cases, according to former prosecutor Michael Gordon. Gordon, who helped prosecute Jan. 6 cases before moving to white-collar crime prosecutions, said the “fire drills” from officials in Washington became so regular that he grew used to the forlorn look on his supervisor’s face when he showed up at Gordon’s door, apologetically delivering yet another frantic request. “It was either ‘give us stats we can use to make ourselves look good’ or ‘give us the stats to show how bad things are in this area,’” Gordon said. “It was never productive fact-finding.” Though Gordon didn’t see the memo, he remembered getting the request to review all cases that had been open for more than two years and report back on their status, entering into a master spreadsheet basic information about any that he wanted to keep pursuing. “The office was pushing us to close everything by a certain date so that when they had to report up to D.C. they had a low number of open cases,” he said. “You really had to go to bat to keep open a case that was more than two years old.” Gordon said he was fired by the DOJ last June. He has filed a lawsuit alleging his termination was politically motivated. The department did not respond to questions about Gordon’s comments or his lawsuit. The government filed a motion to dismiss the case late last year, arguing that the federal court did not have jurisdiction over the matter. The court has not yet ruled on that motion, and the case is still pending. Investigations into individuals or corporations declined for prosecution are generally not reported to courts and usually only disclosed in summary form by the DOJ in annual reports. To conduct its analysis, ProPublica obtained declination data from the DOJ and the Transactional Records Access Clearinghouse, a center that obtains data through Freedom of Information Act requests. The DOJ Declined a Slew of Cases Shortly After Pam Bondi Was Confirmed as Attorney General Nearly 11,000 criminal cases were declined during her first month in office. Source: DOJ data provided by TRAC Ken Morales/ProPublica Here are some of the areas most impacted by the spike in declinations. Drugs As president, Trump has spoken frequently about the “scourge” of drugs coming into the country. At the same time, the Justice Department has declined to prosecute nearly 5,000 cases of federal drug law violations, including trafficking and money laundering. The number of declinations were 45% higher than the average of the prior three new administrations. Gerbasi, the counternarcotics prosecutor, declined to comment on specific cases that might have been declined in his office. But, he said, once Bondi was appointed, the priority in the office became building cases against Tren de Aragua, a Venezuelan group that the Trump administration has labeled a foreign terrorist organization. “Tren de Aragua was not anywhere close to the scale or impact of the cartels we were focused on,” Gerbasi said. “But we were told to generate those cases.” He said his office had to scramble to fly people to investigate local gangs in small towns that were reportedly affiliated with Tren de Aragua. “They never would have merited a full-scale federal investigation,” he said. “It told me that decisions were going to be based on political appearances and not based on the merits of where investigative resources should be placed.” The DOJ declined to comment on Gerbasi’s remarks. Trump’s DOJ Has Rejected Far More Cases Than Previous Administrations Across a Wide Range of Categories Many of the dropped cases were in programs the DOJ has claimed were priorities. Source: TRAC, DOJ Note: “Other” primarily includes government regulatory offenses and theft. Comparison to average of past administrations only includes the first six months after a presidential administration change: Obama (2009), Trump (2017) and Biden (2021) Ken Morales/ProPublica National Security Under Bondi, the DOJ declined more than 1,300 cases involving terrorism and national security, nearly twice what was typical at the start of the most recent new administrations. While domestic terrorism was the hardest-hit program, just over 300 cases involving charges of providing material support to foreign terrorist organizations were also dropped. The DOJ program handling matters relating to national internal security — which considers cases of alleged spy activity and the security of classified information — saw over 200 declinations, which is four times as many as typical in the first six months of a new administration. Some of the cases related to serving as an unregistered foreign agent, a charge Bondi ordered prosecutors to stop pursuing unless they involved “conduct similar to more traditional espionage by foreign government actors.” Jimmy Gurulé, a former federal prosecutor and George W. Bush appointee to the U.S. Treasury Department who investigated the financing of terrorism, said the decline in terrorism cases was troubling. “The Trump DOJ has been used as a political weapon,” he said. “It’s a question of prioritizing resources. Are they going to be used for national security threats or to prosecute his political enemies and critics?” The DOJ did not respond to a request for comment on Gurulé’s remarks. Labor The DOJ shut down over 60 union corruption and labor racketeering cases, 2.5 times the number in Trump’s first term. Nearly half of the cases turned down for those offenses were out of the New Jersey U.S. attorney’s office, which in the past has aggressively pursued alleged union corruption. All were noted as declined for insufficient evidence. Most of those cases had been opened by Grady O’Malley, an assistant U.S. attorney who oversaw several prosecutions of union corruption while working in the New Jersey office over four decades. He retired in 2023 and was disturbed to learn from former colleagues that the office was shutting down the open union probes. A Trump supporter, O’Malley said that while he doesn’t blame the president, he worries the decision to drop so many cases could embolden unions that he and his colleagues spent years working to hold accountable. “No one is assigned to do labor union cases, and the unions have every reason to believe no one is looking.” The New Jersey U.S. attorney’s office said it had no comment on the declination of labor cases. White-Collar Crime The Trump administration has pledged to root out “rampant” fraud in federal benefit programs like food stamps and welfare. The controversial surging of federal agents to Minnesota in January began as a stated crackdown on noncitizens allegedly ripping off nutrition and child care programs. The DOJ, however, shut down more than 900 cases of federal program or procurement fraud in the first six months of the administration, including one targeting a mortgage lender accused by several state regulators of defrauding the Federal Housing Administration. The case was dropped due to “prioritization of federal resources and interests.” The U.S. attorney’s office for the Northern District of Alabama, which declined the case, did not reply to a request for comment. The number of fraud cases closed was about double that in the same time period of the Biden and first Trump administrations. The agency also closed over 100 health care fraud cases as a result of “prioritization of resources and interests” even though the Trump administration has said it is making this area of enforcement a priority. Among other cases the DOJ determined weren’t a priority: the probe into the Virginia nursing home accused of abuse, as well as investigations in Tennessee into fraud at a national hospital chain and one of the largest Medicaid managed care companies. The Western District of Virginia U.S. attorney’s office, through a spokesperson, declined to comment on the nursing home case. A spokesperson for the U.S. attorney in the Middle District of Tennessee said the office does not comment on investigations that do not result in public charges. The DOJ’s Antitrust Division, which focuses on preventing big businesses from creating harmful monopolies, also declined an unusually high number of cases in Trump’s second term. More than 40 cases were dropped within the first six months of Bondi’s tenure. That’s more than double the number declined in the same time period by the prior three new administrations. Despite the declinations, the department said it charged slightly more people with fraud in 2025 compared with the final year of the Biden administration, and those cases alleged larger financial losses. Promises Kept The DOJ under Bondi has also rapidly pursued many of the priorities laid out in Trump’s early executive orders and her own “first day” directives to staff. Trump in February 2025 issued an executive order pausing new investigations under the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act, which prohibits citizens and companies from bribing foreign entities to advance their business interests. The order asked the attorney general to review and “take appropriate action” on any existing probes to “preserve Presidential foreign policy prerogatives.” In the first six months, Bondi’s DOJ shut down 25 such cases, which is more than the combined number dropped by the prior three new administrations over the same time period. One of the cases declined for prosecution involved a major car manufacturer, which had reported possible anti-bribery violations to federal investigators involving a foreign subsidiary. The DOJ declined the case for prosecution last June, citing the “prioritization of federal resources and interests.” On her first day, Bondi ordered a review of criminal prosecutions under the Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances, or FACE Act, which prohibits people from illegally blocking access to abortion clinics and places of worship. The department dropped as many cases under the act in its first six months as the past three new administrations combined, over the same time frame. Bondi’s order focused on “non-violent protest activity,” although at least one of the closed cases was being investigated as a violent crime. The DOJ has since charged protesters against Immigration and Customs Enforcement and journalists in Minneapolis under the FACE Act. The defendants in the case have pleaded not guilty. The agency closed three times the number of cases alleging environmental crimes as the Biden administration did and one-and-a-half times as many as compared with Trump’s first term. The declinations came as the DOJ reassigned and cut prosecutors working on environmental cases. One-fifth of all of the dropped environmental protection cases were shut down for “prioritization of federal resources and interests.” How We Tracked Declined Cases To quantify declined cases, ProPublica used data from the Transactional Records Access Clearinghouse. The dataset consists of compiled FOIA responses of the United States attorneys offices’ criminal division case management system from January 2004 to July 2025, the latest available through TRAC. The data contains nearly 4 million unique cases involving individuals or organizations. We supplemented case details in the TRAC data with data directly from the DOJ. We counted how many declinations were recorded in the first six months of Trump’s second term, compared with the same period of time for prior changes in presidential administration. That includes the first six months of the first Obama administration, the first Trump administration and the Biden administration. Cases can have multiple defendants. Prosecutors can and do decline to prosecute some defendants in a case while pursuing prosecution for others. We counted each defendant separately. Trump’s second administration inherited around 100,000 open criminal investigations, comparable to the number that Biden’s DOJ inherited. Under Trump, the DOJ declined 20% of these existing cases in its first six months, compared with Biden’s 11%. Referrals from law enforcement under Trump’s second administration were lower than the other incoming administrations in the data except for Biden, whose DOJ operated during the COVID-19 lockdown. When looking at inherited investigations, we included only cases that were open at the start of a new administration. We excluded any that had progressed to prosecution, as those would no longer be eligible for a declination. To understand which types of cases the DOJ was declining, we looked both at the area of the DOJ that was handling the case as well as the lead charge being considered. DOJ programs represent distinct areas of subject matter expertise within the department’s prosecution divisions. To further aggregate, we grouped together programs by subject matter, primarily relying on their categorization in the DOJ’s Offices of the United States Attorneys 2024 fiscal year annual statistical report. When reviewing cases by lead charge, sometimes referred to as the investigative charge, we considered them separately from the assigned DOJ program. According to the DOJ’s documentation, these are the “substantive statute that is the primary basis for the referral.” We used a large language model to help us identify charges of interest, which we then confirmed by hand by reviewing the statutes. About 2% of cases were sealed, with the DOJ program and lead charge information redacted. For more information, visit us at https://www.beverlyhillsimmigrationlaw.com/.

Trump administration scaling back asylum crackdown enacted after D.C. National Guard shooting, sources say

The Trump administration is scaling back a crackdown on asylum that brought hundreds of thousands of immigration applications to a halt, two Department of Homeland Security officials told CBS News. In late November, after the shooting of two National Guard members in Washington, D.C., allegedly at the hands of an Afghan man who had been granted asylum in 2025, the Trump administration enacted a pause on asylum cases overseen by the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services. One of those National Guard members died from her injuries. The unprecedented move, which the Trump administration argued was necessary to address national security concerns, amounted to an indefinite suspension of all asylum requests filed outside of immigration court, regardless of the applicant's nationality. But the administration has decided to lift the asylum adjudication pause for most cases, except for those filed by nationals from countries affected by a travel ban or steep immigration restrictions stemming from a previous proclamation by President Trump, the DHS sources said, requesting anonymity to describe an internal plan that had not been formally announced. The asylum freeze will remain in place for immigrants from 39 nations whose citizens currently face full or partial entry restrictions under the "travel ban" proclamation, which Mr. Trump expanded in December. That list includes African countries like Senegal, Somalia and Nigeria; Asian nations like Afghanistan, Iran and Laos; and Latin American countries like Cuba, Haiti and Venezuela. In a statement to CBS News on Sunday, the Department of Homeland Security confirmed "USCIS has lifted the adjudicative hold for thoroughly screened asylum seekers from non high-risk countries." "This move allows resources to focus on continued rigorous national security and public safety vetting for higher-risk cases," DHS said, adding that the administration's "maximum screening and vetting for ALL aliens continues unabated." The Trump administration has also frozen all other legal immigration applications filed by nationals of the 39 nations listed on the "travel ban," including requests for work permits, green cards and even American citizenship. That suspension, which was also enacted after the shooting of the National Guard soldiers in Washington, remains in place. The pause in asylum and other immigration cases is one of several policies the second Trump administration has rolled out to tighten the legal U.S. immigration system. The administration has also sought to restrict work permits for asylum-seekers and to reexamine the cases of legal refugees admitted under the Biden administration. Trump administration officials have said their policies are designed to combat immigration fraud and national security concerns, and bolster vetting procedures they believe became too lax under the Biden administration. Pro-immigration advocates, meanwhile, have accused the administration of punishing legal immigrants who are complying with immigration rules. For more information, visit us at https://www.beverlyhillsimmigrationlaw.com/.

DOJ says it erroneously relied on ICE memo to justify immigration courthouse arrests

The Trump administration admitted in a court filing that it had erroneously relied on an ICE memo to justify arrests at immigration courthouses as part of an ongoing federal case brought by groups seeking to block the tactic. NBC News Icon Subscribe to read this story ad-free Get unlimited access to ad-free articles and exclusive content. arrow Federal prosecutors said Tuesday that they had used the memo, titled “2025 ICE Guidance,” to defend the Trump administration’s deployment of ICE agents at courthouses, which led to numerous arrests of immigrants attending hearings. ADVERTISING The memo indicated that "ICE officers or agents may conduct civil immigration enforcement actions in or near courthouses when they have credible information" that a targeted person would be "present at a specific location.” But, the Justice Department said in the court filing, the memo “does not and has never applied to civil immigration enforcement actions in or near” immigration courts. The Department of Homeland Security, which oversees ICE, did not immediately respond to a request for comment. ICE arrests Immigrants Inside New York City Courthouse Federal agents detain a person after an immigration court hearing in New York.Mostafa Bassim / Anadolu via Getty Images file In a filing Wednesday, the immigrant rights groups that brought the case challenging the administration’s tactics of arresting immigrants at mandated court hearings said the implications of the Justice Department's disclosure "are far-reaching." In a statement, Amy Belsher, a New York Civil Liberties Union attorney for the plaintiffs, called the development a "shocking revelation." Recommended Congress Indicted Florida Democratic congresswoman faces a rare public ethics trial White House Trump says he will order DHS to 'immediately' pay TSA officers as partial shutdown persists "It is yet again another example of ICE’s brazen disregard for the lives of immigrants in this country," Belsher said. "It is now clearer than ever that there is no justification for ambushing and arresting people who are showing up to court.” The government said in its filing that it became aware of the mistake Tuesday when it received an email that was sent to ICE personnel as a “reminder that the May 27, 2025, Guidance does not apply to Executive Office for Immigration Review (Immigration) courts, regardless of their location.” Prosecutors did not say why they also received the ICE email. Prosecutors said they informed the immigration rights groups that brought the case about the mistake. The U.S. district judge presiding over the case, Kevin Castel, had rejected the groups’ request to block the administration’s courthouse arrests. In the ruling, Castel said ICE’s guidance “allowed arrests at or near an immigration court.” In its filing Tuesday, the Justice Department repeatedly apologized to Castel for a "material mistaken statement of fact that the Government made to the Court and Plaintiffs" when it argued on behalf of the immigration agency. “Based on our discussions with ICE today, this regrettable error appears to have occurred because of agency attorney error,” prosecutors wrote. As of Wednesday night, Castel had not entered a response in the case’s public docket. As a result of the mistake, prosecutors acknowledged, the court's Sept. 12 opinion and order and the plaintiffs' briefs "will need to be reconsidered and re-briefed for the Court to adjudicate Plaintiffs’ APA [Administrative Procedure Act] claims against ICE on the merits." Prosecutors said they received approval from ICE counsel before they filed every brief and made any oral arguments to the court and plaintiffs in the case. Even though the government was withdrawing parts of its briefs that relied on the ICE memo, prosecutors wrote, the withdrawal "does not affect its arguments that ICE’s immigration courthouse arrests do not violate any so-called common-law privilege against courthouse arrests." The Trump administration’s tactic of detaining immigrants at scheduled hearings has sparked outcry. In May, Dylan Contreras, a New York City public school student with no criminal history, was detained after a routine hearing. Contreras, who was 20 at the time and pursuing a green card after having arrived from Venezuela, was released this month. DHS said that Contreras entered the U.S. during the Biden administration and that ICE was "following the law and placing these illegal aliens in expedited removal, as they always should have been." His lawyers argued Contreras was seeking asylum. New York Mayor Zohran Mamdani said on X, “What should have been a time for him to focus on finishing high school instead became ten long months of isolation, after he was taken into custody at what was supposed to be a routine immigration hearing last May.” For more information, visit us at https://www.beverlyhillsimmigrationlaw.com/.

ICE deployments created chaos for cities and cost them millions, NPR analysis finds

Immigration and Customs Enforcement deployments to American cities are a central part of President Trump's immigration crackdown. Yet, according to data analyzed by NPR — and interviews with law enforcement and city officials — these actions stretched local police departments thin, disrupted businesses and left city budgets struggling to absorb the fallout. In Los Angeles and Minneapolis, the immigration enforcement surge resulted in ballooning overtime costs for local police. In Portland, Ore., decreased police manpower contributed to longer call response times. Amid what the Trump administration has dubbed Operation Metro Surge, businesses in cities like Bloomington and St. Paul, Minn., lost revenue, experienced unrest, and were similarly left with high bills. Sponsor Message What unifies these ICE actions is they were all sustained over several weeks, in communities where local law enforcement isn't authorized to assist with federal immigration efforts. Still, these deployments resulted in knock-on effects that required the use of local police to bring about or preserve order. Police overtime surged as departments were forced to deploy officers for demonstrations, extra patrols, security around federal facilities and emergency responses tied to the raids — often at overtime pay rates. This map, created with overnment data provided by ICE in response to a FOIA request by the Deportation Data Project and analyzed by NPR, shows book-ins at facilities across the country between Jan. 20 and mid-October 2025. National Mapping ICE's expanding footprint, and the communities fighting back In cities already struggling with staffing shortages, like Los Angeles and Minneapolis, those extra hours quickly added up. In Los Angeles, where the financial situation is already dire, LAPD overtime spending climbed to $41 million in June 2025, when immigration raids sparked weeks of protests — well above the department's typical monthly range of $18 to $30 million, according to the city controller's office. In Minneapolis, the police department reported more than $6 million in overtime and standby pay in less than a month, from Jan. 7 to Feb. 8, according to the city's police chief. That's more than double the city's entire annual police overtime budget of $2.3 million. The full financial picture is still not fully known. City leaders are reviewing their budgets and expect costs to continue to go up. Sponsor Message Students walk from a bus at a St. Paul School District elementary school in St. Paul, Minnesota, U.S., March 18, 2026. National How one Minnesota school is bouncing back after the ICE surge In response to NPR's questions about how the immigration crackdown has affected city budgets, Abigail Jackson, a White House spokeswoman, provided a statement and included source links: "Illegal aliens cost American taxpayers over $150 billion in 2023 alone and expenditures for benefits provided to the illegal aliens who entered during the Biden surge will add $177 billion in mandatory federal spending through 2034." NPR has not independently verified these figures. The Department of Homeland Security did not respond to NPR's questions for this story. What happened in Los Angeles? In early June 2025, ICE agents began a series of aggressive immigration sweeps in Southern California. "The first three weeks of it, we were really balancing and teetering on martial law," LA councilwoman Eunisses Hernandez told NPR. She said the city didn't expect "such a heavy-handed and militarized and war-like response from the federal government to people expressing their First Amendment rights." The LAPD spent around $17 million between June 8 and 16 responding to the anti-ICE protests that broke out that month. Close to $12 million of that went to overtime costs, according to a report from the LA City Administrative Office. These figures do not include the costs of potential lawsuits or liability claims from residents and protesters injured during the demonstrations, and from aggressive policing by the LAPD that the city expects to face, Hernandez said. To meet these financial needs, the city has had to tap into its reserve funds. In response to questions from NPR, the LAPD did not provide any information about what types of activities officers were engaged in when they incurred the overtime hours. Cases in immigration courts nationwide can be appealed to the Board of Immigration Appeals. Here, federal agents stand outside an immigration court in New York on March 6, 2026. Immigration An immigration court few have heard of is quietly shaping policy behind the scenes The city controller's office pointed NPR to the public database of city funding for more information. But the data lacked specifics. Overtime costs for the LAPD for the entire month of June 2025 ballooned to more than $40 million. Overtime hovered between $22 million to a little over $33 million from January 2025 through May 2025. The LAPD, the country's third-largest police department, has struggled with short staffing – contributing to the need to spend millions on overtime in prior years, according to the LAist. LA Mayor Karen Bass did not answer questions about the financial repercussions on the city from the police response to the raids or on local businesses. U.S. Customs and Border Protection agents standoff against demonstrators as tear gas fills the air outside the federal ICE building during a protest in Portland, Ore., on June 14, 2025. U.S. Customs and Border Protection agents stand off against demonstrators as tear gas fills the air outside the federal ICE building during a protest in Portland, Ore., last June. Jenny Kane/AP/AP Portland's story: 'We are understaffed, under-resourced' Not long after the unrest in Los Angeles, Portland Police Bureau Chief Robert Day says protesters and federal agents began to converge on the city's ICE facility in June. Sponsor Message "The bulk of our overtime investment, and demands on our time have been at the [federal ICE] facility," Day told NPR. Like LA, Portland's police department has dealt with staffing shortages for years. From June until November 2025, Portland police officers were staffed at the ICE facility nearly every day, according to the city data provided to NPR. There were other times when officers were actively monitoring but weren't at the facility. Federal enforcement officers wearing camouflage uniforms and carrying firearms stand guard on a street near an Immigration and Customs Enforcement facility in Portland, Oregon, on October 6, 2025. National Guard deployments 9th Circuit rules that National Guard can deploy to Portland In 2025, the Portland Police Bureau recorded 38,213 overtime hours categorized as "event response," according to data provided to NPR. For context, Portland police racked up 19,166 overtime hours for event response for all of 2024. The overtime hours accrued in 2025 are nearly half of what was accrued when police responded to major protests in 2020 and 2021 following the death of George Floyd. Those protests lasted months, and the at-times chaotic demonstrations damaged property and sometimes turned violent. Police worked between 70,000 to more than 80,000 hours of overtime to respond to those events, according to the data. Local law enforcement's role at the ICE facility this summer and fall was to maintain order. Protests got out of hand at times. "The facility was badly damaged. It was heavily attacked. Windows broken and graffiti," Day said. During now-outgoing DHS Secretary Kristi Noem's October visit, Portland police were tasked with providing even more security to the center – 456 officers, resulting in close to 3,000 hours of overtime hours worked, according to data provided to NPR, and equating to "a few hundred thousand bucks," according to Day. "Cops were working long days, long weeks, over an extended period of time," Day said. "We are understaffed, under-resourced, and the rest of the city suffers because of that." In the summer and fall, that meant calls for service took much longer, according to Day. "Our average response time to priority calls has grown to 17,18 minutes … and it should be more like six to eight," he confirmed. Police stand during a noise demonstration outside the Graduate by Hilton Minneapolis hotel on Jan. 28, 2026, in Minneapolis. Police stand during a noise demonstration outside the Graduate by Hilton Minneapolis hotel in January. Adam Gray/AP/FR172090 AP Minneapolis police report PTSD symptoms At the peak of the immigration enforcement surge, there were around 3,000 ICE and Customs and Border Protection agents in the Minneapolis area. There are only around 600 cops in the Minneapolis Police Department, and statewide, there are around 10,000 law enforcement officers. Sponsor Message "I cannot imagine any other city going through the intensity and the sheer amount of chaos that happened here. It was terrible," Minneapolis Police Chief Brian O'Hara told NPR. "Minneapolis is a small city. This is not Chicago. It's not LA, I don't think it would be possible for them to overwhelm those cities in the way that this city was really overwhelmed by that surge." There is still a presence of ICE agents in the city, but far fewer than at its peak. Early on, O'Hara made big changes to respond to the deployments of federal agents to Minneapolis. He changed operational procedures and created a full-time position for a lieutenant to be available to monitor ICE-related calls. He also staffed the department's operation center with civilian community service officers to help monitor social media and the city's camera feed to see action in the streets in real time, he explained. By early January, O'Hara was instructing all sworn officers to be in uniform at all times while on duty. Thousands of people participate in a protest against the policies, both foreign and domestic, of the Trump administration on Sunday in New York City. National Nationwide anti-ICE protests call for accountability after Renee Good's death "I was afraid there was going to be a need for an emergency situation that would require a massive deployment. And the next day is when Renee Good was killed," he told NPR. "From that moment, until about a day or two after the third shooting that we had when Mr. Pretti died, I would say it just continued to escalate." When the police were responding to and protecting active crime scenes in the aftermath of the shootings, ICE agents continued with immigration stops and arrests. In response, demonstrations of thousands in opposition to the raids continued. Minneapolis police had to respond to all of it. O'Hara compared that chaos to the unrest after the 2020 killing of Floyd by a Minneapolis police officer, which led to major protests and riots. Sponsor Message After Good's death, all days off for officers were canceled. Police were tasked with handling marches, protests at hotels and monitoring vigil sites. Specialized units were activated and police generally tried to maintain order. As a result, overtime costs skyrocketed. O'Hara said the department spent about $6.4 million on overtime costs from Jan. 7 through Feb. 8. "It was, honestly, an overwhelming situation that for most of it, it felt like there was just no end in sight," he said. Activists gather in protest to light candles on frozen Lake Nokomis in Minneapolis, spelling, "Ice Out" on Jan. 31, 2026. Activists gather in protest to light candles on frozen Lake Nokomis in Minneapolis, spelling "Ice Out," in January. Alex Brandon/AP/AP By the third week of January, O'Hara said he received reports that officers were experiencing symptoms of PTSD, "which scared me," he said. The 2020 Floyd protests had a huge impact on the department – so much so it led to a mass exodus of officers reporting symptoms of PTSD. "As emotionally charged as things were on the street, it was difficult for them. It took them back to the feelings and things that they had experienced in 2020. That was really tough for a lot of the cops." ICE officers are taking DNA samples from protesters they've arrested Trump's Terms ICE officers are taking DNA samples from protesters they've arrested O'Hara continued, talking about staffing concerns: "It was my fear that we were going to wind up having this cycle again and just wind up losing more people. Unlike in 2020…there's absolutely no buffer. We're at bare bones here." With police pulled to respond to keep public order, officers were being pulled off of active investigations. Crimes weren't being solved or investigated as quickly as they could have, he added. The financial cost of the deployment to the city as a whole is also pronounced. Minneapolis issued a report on Feb. 13 that estimated the total economic fallout in one month during these operations was more than $203 million. The report lists a host of consequences from the raids, including residents detained, job losses and business closures. "The impact was both extraordinary and it was devastating for those months, while this invasion was taking place," Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey told NPR. "People were afraid to go out. Afraid to go to the grocery store. Terrified that their families were going to get ripped apart." Sponsor Message He said, "ICE is clearly to blame." NPR asked the White House to respond to this criticism. Jackson, the White House spokeswoman, said in her statement: "When will NPR ask sanctuary cities if they will reimburse the American people for expenses incurred by illegal aliens? Or if they will apologize to the victims of violent criminal illegal aliens?" Chief O'Hara said the problem was not that immigration enforcement was happening. The problem is the "unsafe and questionable methods" of the federal agents and "questionable leadership." Noem, the head of DHS at the time of this surge, was recently fired in part because of the political fallout from these operations. Consequences of ICE deployment spread beyond city borders St. Paul, the capital of Minnesota and close neighbor to Minneapolis, loaned some officers to Minneapolis to deal with the crush of Operation Metro Surge, according to Rebecca Noecker, the president of St. Paul's City Council. "This was a problem that we did not make and it's a problem we don't have the resources to solve," said Noecker. Following the shooting of Macklin Good in Minneapolis, St. Paul police spent $46,000 in overtime in just one day to assist the neighboring police department, Noecker said. From Jan. 7 to Feb. 5 St. Paul police shared with NPR that 4,679.75 employee overtime hours were worked in response to Operation Metro Surge. That cost $372,341.38. They didn't tell NPR how many officers worked the additional hours or provide additional data beyond early 2026. "The line between physically intervening with ICE to keep protesters safe and physically intervening with ICE in a way that prevents a lawful enforcement action is a really fine one," Noecker said. "What I heard mostly from our police was: 'We're really in an impossible situation.'" Community members and neighbors of people detained by ICE gather in protest at a Target store, on Jan. 19, 2026, in St. Paul, Minn. Community members and neighbors of people detained by ICE gather in protest at a Target store on Jan. 19 in St. Paul. Yuki Iwamura/AP/AP Noecker says the numbers her city is seeing now are not the end of the story. She expects these bills to go up. Sponsor Message In nearby Bloomington, Minnesota, 10 minutes south of Minneapolis, the city's police Chief Booker Hodges told NPR protests against ICE spilled into his community. He said, for example, demonstrations broke out in front of hotels where it was rumored that ICE agents were staying. In January, when the White House deployed federal law enforcement to Minneapolis "all hell broke loose," Hodges said. Border Patrol and other federal agents were seen following residents to nearby schools, which triggered emergency calls to the department. There were also racial profiling incidents targeting the city's large Latino and Somali population, Hodges told NPR. He also said officers of color were subjected to racist abuse by anti-ICE protesters. Hodges said his officers were exhausted, but that his department is fully staffed so didn't require as much overtime as other agencies. His department spent more than $32,000 in overtime costs in response to immigration protests and activities, he told NPR. That covered 60 police officers and totaled 415.5 hours. The work for these officers involved extra patrols in retail and at the city's more than four dozen hotels. It also required the deployment of the department's Public Order Group (a group trained to respond to public disorder). It was deployed once all of last year. This year, as of mid February, the group was deployed four times. He would like to see reimbursement from the federal government, but said, "it's pointless to even ask them for it." He says time would be better spent pushing for comprehensive immigration reform: "Because even though the surge has ended here, the laws that allowed it to take place are still in place." For more information, visit us at https://www.beverlyhillsimmigrationlaw.com/.

DOJ guts office that helps indigent immigrants obtain affordable legal aid, sources say

The Justice Department has quietly gutted a more than 60-year-old program created to ensure that low-income and indigent immigrants can receive competent and affordable legal representation, multiple sources with direct knowledge of the matter tell CBS News. The Recognition and Accreditation program, which is part of the Justice Department's Executive Office for Immigration Review, accredits non-attorneys who work for largely faith-based legal advocacy organizations such as Catholic Charities and Jewish Family Services so they are authorized to assist immigrants on everything from naturalization petitions to representation in DOJ's immigration courts. The handful of senior attorneys who operate the program were abruptly reassigned to work in immigration courts last week, leaving in place only two support staff with no legal authority to approve or renew accreditation applications, sources with direct knowledge said. The reassignment orders came from Jamee Comans, the acting Assistant Director for the Office of Policy, which administers the accreditation program. Comans was previously an immigration judge in Louisiana, and last September, she ordered the deportation of pro-Palestinian protester and former Columbia graduate student Mahmoud Khalil to either Algeria or Syria. Comans could not be immediately reached for comment. The attorneys showed up to their new work locations on Monday, where most were told they've been reassigned to work as entry-level law clerks — a job typically reserved for people who are fresh out of law school, the sources added. A spokesperson for the Executive Office for Immigration Review declined to comment, saying the office cannot discuss personnel matters. A government official told CBS that the program "isn't ending or being abolished. It is a longstanding program established by regulation and will continue." There has been no public announcement about any of the changes in the program. The video player is currently playing an ad. The spokesperson did not answer questions from CBS News about the fate of the program, though close to the time that CBS News sought comment, the EOIR assigned two other employees to review pending applications, the sources said. The program currently accredits more than 2,600 non-attorneys across more than 900 recognized programs, legal experts told CBS. The majority of those are partially accredited to assist immigrants with representation before the Department of Homeland Security as they petition for immigration benefits, such as green cards, naturalization or lawful status on humanitarian grounds. A smaller portion are fully accredited, which means they are allowed to represent immigrants in proceedings before the Justice Department's immigration courts. Anna Gallagher, the executive director of Catholic Legal Immigration Network Inc, also known as CLINIC, said that as of Monday morning, the program had sent out its weekly Monday email and appeared to be operating normally. But the removal of its lawyers, she said, is "alarming." "This program saves lives and it also helps alleviate the backlogs in the immigration system," said Gallagher, who noted that her organization's 400 affiliates provided legal services to over half a million people in 2025. "Lawyers can't cover the need and any attempt to slow down the program is just going to gum up a stressed and already broken system." The Justice Department has already taken numerous other steps to make it more challenging for immigrants to navigate the legal system. Last year, the department removed the head of the Office of Legal Access Programs and gutted most of its legal orientation services that helped prepare vulnerable immigrants such as unaccompanied children and families to navigate the legal system, and the department fired or removed more than 100 immigration judges. Last fall, the Justice Department's Board of Immigration Appeals mandated that anyone who crossed the border unlawfully without inspection should be held without bond — a decision that has strained government resources and flooded the federal district courts with habeas corpus petitions from immigrants seeking their release from detention. Earlier this month, the Justice Department imposed new rules that make it much harder for immigrants to appeal adverse rulings, a move lawyers predict will soon overwhelm the federal appellate courts next. As of Monday afternoon, staff received word that the accreditation program is being shifted to a different office called the Public Resources Program, which is already understaffed, sources said. The removal of staff from the accreditation program represents "one more nail in the coffin to how the courts can operate fairly and be expected to be a balanced, impartial institution of justice that Americans expect out of our immigration courts and all courts nationwide," said Greg Chen, the senior director of government relations for the American Immigration Lawyers Association. He added that accredited representatives are vital to the legal system. "Most of these people don't understand the legal system, let alone immigration law, and also are going to have limited English capacity to be able to navigate a highly complex process through the courts," he said. The Recognition and Accreditation program, which was created through federal regulation, has its roots in the faith-based community, where religious organizations felt it was their calling to help low-income individuals navigate the bureaucratic immigration legal system. The removal of all of the lawyers who work for the program represents "an attack on freedom of religion," said Peggy Gleason, a lawyer at the Immigrant Legal Resource Center, whose organization helps train some of the accredited representatives. "The reason these programs started in the 1950s is because the churches and faith-based organizations felt they had a pastoral duty to help this group of people." For more information, visit us at https://www.beverlyhillsimmigrationlaw.com/.

Trump administration is deporting parents without their children in violation of its own policies, report finds

The Trump administration is deporting a significant number of parents without asking them if they have children or allowing them to decide whether to bring their children with them, in apparent violation of its own policies, a major report has found. In interviews with dozens of parents deported to Honduras, as well as physicians and psychologists, government officials and staff at reception centers for deportees, researchers found that many parents were deported quickly after they were detained, without a chance to arrange for the care of their children. According to the report by the Women’s Refugee Commission (WRC) and Physicians for Human Rights (PHR), parents were forced to leave their children under the informal care of friends or family members who were also vulnerable to deportation. Others were separated from young children and toddlers – including a mother who was deported without her two-month-old baby. Immigration officials “didn’t ask me anything”, one 22-year-old mother told researchers in Honduras, where she was sent without her two-year-old child. “They never said: ‘You have a daughter, you can bring her,’ because I would have brought [my daughter], she is very attached to me.” Some pregnant and postpartum women, meanwhile, had arrived at reception centers in Honduras displaying “extremely high levels of emotional distress” including symptoms of anxiety and panic, according to staff at the centers. “What we’ve found is fairly significant evidence that [Immigration and Customs Enforcement officers] are not asking about people’s children at the time of arrest. They are not ensuring that those children have safe care, and they are not allowing parents an opportunity to decide what happens to their children if they are deported,” said Zain Lakhani, director of migrant rights and justice at WRC. people hold up signs in protest View image in fullscreen Protesters gather outside an ICE facility in Broadview, Illinois, on 28 February. Photograph: Matthew Rodier/NurPhoto/Shutterstock The researchers said they chose to interview parents in Honduras, after they were deported, because the administration has made it increasingly difficult for lawmakers and lawyers to visit immigrants in US detention centers. The researchers stationed at three reception centers for deportees in San Pedro Sula, Honduras, over the course of five days. They encountered 163 women – three of whom were visibly pregnant – and 1,094 men. Michele Heisler, a physician with PHR who interviewed parents in Honduras, said that several reported trying to explain to immigration officers that they had children, but were ignored. “We talked to parents who were detained one day, and they were literally deported a couple of days later,” said Heisler. Some had no opportunity to speak to a lawyer or coordinate with co-parents or other family members to reunite with their children before their deportations. “This type of sudden, traumatic separation for both parents and the children – I think it’s fair to say that this is going to create a really high burden of mental health distress,” Heisler said. The impact can be especially acute for tender-aged children and babies who are too young to understand why their parent is gone. “For a toddler, they are left with a sense of abandonment that’s kind of imprinted,” she said. Studies show that early traumas can have lasting psychological and physiological consequences. “It’s hard for all of us to understand why there is this gratuitous level of cruelty happening,” she added. Some of the parents interviewed were separated from children with disabilities and neurodivergence. One mother who was interviewed by researchers said she was detained while dropping off her son, who has autism, at school. “I left him and when I came back, I saw that some men were coming. They didn’t ask me anything, they just put me in handcuffs, and I couldn’t say even a word.” The US Department of Homeland Security (DHS) denied separating families. “Parents are given a choice: they can be removed with their children or place them with a safe person they designate,” a spokesperson said in a statement to the Guardian. Previous reporting from the Guardian, as well as findings in the report, suggests that is not always the case. Although the report was conducted in Honduras, Lakhani noted, she suspects that deportees to other countries likely face similar obstacles to reunification. In July 2025, the administration changed its “Detained Parents Directive”, weakening protections for noncitizen parents and stepped back its commitments to keep families unified. For example, the 2022 version of the directive stipulated that ICE had to take into consideration whether or not an individual was a parent or legal guardian of a child in its decisions on whether to detain or deport them. The 2025 version of the directive no longer includes that guidance. But interviews with deportees arriving in Honduras show that the administration is not even abiding by its current policies on family separation. “We’ve found fairly significant evidence that ICE [officials] are not asking about people’s children at the time of arrest. They are not ensuring that those children have safe care, and they are not allowing parents an opportunity to decide what happens to their children if they are deported,” Lakhani said. A collage shows two airplanes facing opposite directions, with boarding stairs extending downward from each plane into stripes on the United States flag. Behind the stripes the hands of a mother and child reach toward each other. Trump revives family separations amid drive to deport millions: ‘A tactic to punish’ Read more Once parents are deported away from their children, it can be incredibly difficult, expensive and logistically complicated to reunite with their children. Although the Honduran government has some capacity to assist parents in reunifications, it lacks a formal process to receive and process parents’ claims. If deportees’ children are US citizens, the process of acquiring proper paperwork for the children to live in Honduras can also be complicated, because it requires the consent of both parents. “What if the child’s father isn’t known to a mother or is not in contact with her? What if the child’s other parent is in detention in the US and cannot be contacted? What if they are a Mexican national, and they’ve been deported to Mexico?” Lakhani said. Often, parents who are deported are forced to leave their children with co-parents, family or friends who may also be undocumented, and vulnerable to arrest and deportation. Those adults may also be fearful of contacting the US government to coordinate the reunification of a child with parents, or lack the funds or travel documents required to chaperone the child to Honduras. The report makes recommendations including that the Honduran government invest more in helping deportees reintegrate, and prioritize assisting deported parents. It also calls on international organizations including the United Nations to coordinate and consult the Honduran government to provide sexual and reproductive healthcare, and mental healthcare for deportees. The report also calls on the US congress to codify policies to protect families and pregnant women in the immigration system, and asks DHS to “identify, document and protect medically vulnerable individuals in ICE custody” and create a “national coordinator” of child welfare to family reunification. For more information, visit us at https://www.beverlyhillsimmigrationlaw.com/.

ICE's detention expansion meets resistance in communities across the political spectrum

With its civil war memorials, rolling hills and quaint houses, Williamsport, Md. looks straight out of a Norman Rockwell painting. In the middle of it all, there's an enormous warehouse, scheduled to become one of the largest Immigration and Customs Enforcement detention centers in the country. It's part of ICE's plan to massively expand its detention system using the historic $45 billion Congress allocated the agency to do so. But in many cities and towns, detention expansion is being met with resistance from Democrats and Republicans. "Did you see the building?" A man named Donnie Dagenhart asks at the parking lot of the local Walmart, which is just a few minutes away from the new detention site. "It's huge." It is massive: if it gets built, the 825,000 square foot warehouse that ICE bought is projected to hold at least 1,500 people. Williamsport has a population of around 2,000. MARCH 9: Charles “Donnie” Dagenhart sits in his work truck outside of Walmart in outer Hagerstown, MD on Monday, March 9, 2026. Charles "Donnie" Dagenhart sits in his work truck outside of Walmart in outer Hagerstown, MD on Monday, March 9, 2026. Wesley Lapointe/for NPR Washington County is conservative: it voted for President Trump in the last election. In February the county board unanimously approved a resolution welcoming ICE, which was immediately met with angry local protests. Dagenhart, who owns a local construction company, says he supported Trump for years, but he's recently changed his tune. Among other things, he disagrees with how immigration is being enforced. "I just think we're living in a police state and it's getting worse," says Daggengart. "They're getting the wrong people. Let's get the bad ones out. That's what we should be doing, but we're not." Sponsor Message A similar tug of war is playing out in many towns across America as ICE expands its detention system. Some of the concerns are ethical: Aaron Peteranecz lives near the site. He says he has a moral problem with converting a giant warehouse into a place to hold human beings. "I went to Germany in grad school. I went to a few concentration camps, and the one thing that struck me the most about that, was you're standing at the gate to these camps, and it's just the town around you. And so people were just living their lives right next to these things, and this feels that same way." Peteranecz says he's specifically worried about conditions in ICE detention. ICE is on track for one of its deadliest years on record for detention, with 24 fatalities since October. A warehouse at 1879 Route 46 that was recently purchased by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement peaks through the backyards of homes in Stanhope, New Jersey, U.S., on Tuesday, March 10, 2026. CREDIT: José A. Alvarado Jr. for NPR, @josealvarado A warehouse at 1879 Route 46, recently purchased by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, is seen in the distance beyond the backyards of homes in Stanhope, New Jersey, on Tuesday, March 10, 2026. José A. Alvarado Jr. for NPR William Angus, 55, a Warren County resident, center, participates in protesting U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement’s purchase of a warehouse at 1879 Route 46 that is to be used as an immigrant processing facility at Ledgewood Avenue and Route 183 in Netcong, Roxbury Township, New Jersey, U.S., on Tuesday, March 10, 2026. CREDIT: José A. Alvarado Jr. for NPR, @josealvarado William Angus, 55, a Warren County resident, center, participates in protesting U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement's purchase of a warehouse at 1879 Route 46 that is to be used as an immigrant processing facility at Ledgewood Avenue and Route 183 in Netcong, Roxbury Township, New Jersey, U.S., on Tuesday, March 10, 2026. José A. Alvarado Jr. for NPR In the last few months, activists and local governments across the country have successfully pushed back against ICE's efforts to expand. In Kansas City, Missouri, in Oklahoma City, and smaller towns like Merrimack New Hampshire, widespread protests have blocked new ICE facilities. In other locations, residents say they are frustrated with what they see as a lack of pushback from local leadership. In the town of Roxbury, New Jersey, where a similar 500,000 square foot facility is being built, many neighbors told NPR they are outraged. While the town council has said they oppose the project, locals say they suspect the town leadership is quietly opening the door to ICE. At one of several very heated town meetings, local resident Susana Oliveri accused the town council of "rolling out the red carpet at the ICE detention center." Susannah Ollivierre, 52, sits for a portrait after a Roxbury Town Council Meeting at 1715 US-46, Ledgewood, New Jersey, U.S., on Tuesday, March 10, 2026. CREDIT: José A. Alvarado Jr. for NPR, @josealvarado Susannah Ollivierre, 52, sits for a portrait after a Roxbury Town Council Meeting at 1715 US-46, Ledgewood, New Jersey, U.S., on Tuesday, March 10, 2026. José A. Alvarado Jr. for NPR In Maryland, reactions from local and state governments have varied. The attorney general of Maryland is suing Department of Homeland Security to stop the facility being built in Williamsport, citing ethical and environmental concerns. Mayor Bill Green of Williamsport has been quiet on the matter. Green did not respond to NPR's multiple interview requests. Sponsor Message Meanwhile, for the private companies who run these centers, ICE's expansion has been a huge economic boom. During its February quarterly earnings call, CoreCivic, one of two main companies that operate many of ICE's detention and processing facilities, celebrated a more than 100% rise in ICE revenue, year over year. "With historic funding levels for border security, and an expectation of a continued increase in detention bed demand nationwide," CFO David Garfinkle announced, "we believe there are numerous opportunities to activate additional idle facilities we own" Not all are against the ICE detention centers coming to town. In nearby Hagerstown, where the poverty rate is nearly 22%, twice the national average, resident Tracy Landis says she's excited for the prospective detention center. She says this town desperately needs jobs. "Us American people need to take back our country. That's what needs to happen," says Landis. "Let ICE do their job, and give the Americans a chance to work and have a place to live." Many economists dispute the idea that deporting immigrants opens up jobs for native-born workers. In a statement to NPR, ICE said the Williamsport facility is expected to bring 1,125 jobs to the area, and said these retrofitted warehouses would meet ICE's standards. MARCH 9: The sun sets over downtown Williamsport, MD on Monday, March 9, 2026. The sun sets over downtown Williamsport, MD on Monday, March 9, 2026. Wesley Lapointe/for NPR MARCH 9: Bonnie and Robert Myers watch the sun set from their porch in Williamsport, MD on Monday, March 9, 2026. Bonnie and Robert Myers watch the sun set from their porch in Williamsport, MD on Monday, March 9, 2026. Wesley Lapointe/for NPR Bonnie Myers, who is sitting on her porch taking in the evening breeze, is skeptical. "I don't know," she says, shaking her head. "The way they've been treating people, I just rather they not be around here. But there's nothing we can do." This is a sentiment heard a lot out here: these are the Feds. There's nothing that can be done. Patrick Dattilio, with the activist group Hagerstown Rapid Response, which has fought against the detention center, says there are ways to push back. "All the protesting, all the fighting delays and makes this more expensive and makes it harder for the feds," says Dattilio. "Their power still comes from the people. And we are the people. We are the people here." MARCH 9: Patrick Dattilio, candidate for Washington County Democratic Central Committee, stands at Hagerstown City Park, in Hagerstown, MD, on Monday, March 9, 2026. Patrick Dattilio, candidate for Washington County Democratic Central Committee, stands at Hagerstown City Park, in Hagerstown, MD, on Monday, March 9, 2026. Wesley Lapointe/for NPR Last week, a judge granted a temporary restraining order against the Williamsport ICE facility while this whole thing plays out in court. That means for the next few days, anyway, that massive structure will be empty. For more information, visit us at https://www.beverlyhillsimmigrationlaw.com/.

200K truck drivers could lose their licenses in Trump’s immigration push

(NewsNation) — A new rule effective this week could strip up to 200,000 immigrant truck drivers of their commercial driver’s licenses, or CDLs. The regulations bar most immigrants from holding the licenses, with the only exceptions being people in the U.S. on H–2A (temporary agricultural workers), H–2B (temporary nonagricultural workers) or E–2 (treaty investors) visas. The newest rule includes barring asylum-seekers, as well as immigrants with Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals or Temporary Protected Status. There is ongoing litigation to try to block the policy. Drivers will lose their licenses as they expire, not immediately, though the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration “strongly recommends” that states audit their drivers’ qualifications soon. Border Patrol’s Gregory Bovino to retire after nearly 30 years It’s a win for the Trump administration, which has in recent months taken aim at immigrants holding CDLs after several fatal accidents and reports of states illegally issuing the licenses. A truck driver, who authorities have said wasn’t authorized to be in the U.S., is accused of making an illegal U-turn and causing a crash in Florida that killed three people last summer. Administration officials have attributed two additional fatal crashes — both in Indiana — to people unlawfully in the country. Play VideoDeadly Indiana crash renews debate over immigration, CDL standards | Morning in America Appeals court allows Trump to swiftly deport migrants to third countries “For far too long, America has allowed dangerous foreign drivers to abuse our truck licensing systems – wreaking havoc on our roadways. This safety loophole ends today,” Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy said in February while announcing the new CDL rules. Last month, the department also mandated that truckers take their licensing tests in English. While commercial drivers are required to demonstrate proficiency in English, many states previously allowed them to take the CDL test in other languages. More leadership changes coming to Trump’s immigration team Top border official Gregory Bovino, who became the face of Trump’s recent immigration crackdown, is set to retire at the end of the month. Bovino was removed from Border Patrol months ago as “commander at large” following tense immigration operations across the country and two fatal shootings by federal officers in Minnesota. MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA – FEBRUARY 7: People attend a public memorial service for Renee Good in Powderhorn Park on February 7, 2026 in Minneapolis, Minnesota. Today marks one month since Good, a mother of three, was shot and killed by federal agents. Protests continue calling for an end to immigration raids in the Twin cities which have already resulted in the fatal shooting deaths of Good and Alex Pretti, a VA nurse.(Photo by Stephen Maturen/Getty Images)Read More » UNITED STATES – MARCH 4: Ranking member Rep. Jamie Raskin, D-Md., references a DHS advertising campaign while questioning DHS Secretary Kristi Noem during the House Judiciary Committee hearing titled “Oversight of the Department of Homeland Security,” in Rayburn building on Wednesday, March 4, 2026. (Tom Williams/CQ-Roll Call, Inc via Getty Images)Read More » FILE – U.S. Border Patrol Cmdr. Gregory Bovino stands with Federal agents outside a convenience store, Jan. 21, 2026, in Minneapolis. (AP Photo/Angelina Katsanis, File)Read More » High school students gather for anti-ICE protest outside the State Capitol in St. Paul, Minnesota, to call for an end to federal immigration detentions and enforcement actions, days after 37-year-old Renee Nicole Good was shot and killed by a US Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agent, on January 14, 2026. Hundreds more federal agents were heading to Minneapolis, the US homeland security chief said on January 11, brushing aside demands by the Midwestern city’s Democratic leaders to leave after an immigration officer fatally shot a woman protester. In multiple TV interviews, US Homeland Secretary Kristi Noem defended the actions of the officer who shot and killed 37-year-old Renee Nicole Good, whose death has sparked renewed protests nationwide against President Donald Trump’s immigration crackdown. (Photo by Octavio JONES / AFP via Getty Images)Read More » MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA – FEBRUARY 7: People attend a public memorial service for Renee Good in Powderhorn Park on February 7, 2026 in Minneapolis, Minnesota. Today marks one month since Good, a mother of three, was shot and killed by federal agents. Protests continue calling for an end to immigration raids in the Twin cities which have already resulted in the fatal shooting deaths of Good and Alex Pretti, a VA nurse.(Photo by Stephen Maturen/Getty Images)Read More » UNITED STATES – MARCH 4: Ranking member Rep. Jamie Raskin, D-Md., references a DHS advertising campaign while questioning DHS Secretary Kristi Noem during the House Judiciary Committee hearing titled “Oversight of the Department of Homeland Security,” in Rayburn building on Wednesday, March 4, 2026. (Tom Williams/CQ-Roll Call, Inc via Getty Images)Read More » UNITED STATES – MARCH 4: Ranking member Rep. Jamie Raskin, D-Md., references a DHS advertising campaign while questioning DHS Secretary Kristi Noem during the House Judiciary Committee hearing titled “Oversight of the Department of Homeland Security,” in Rayburn building on Wednesday, March 4, 2026. (Tom Williams/CQ-Roll Call, Inc via Getty Images)Read More » Inside Noem’s tense relationship with controversial DHS inspector general That same operation led to criticism of Kristi Noem from both Democrats and Republicans about her handling of the shootings, the messaging she pushed about those killed and pricey ad campaigns for her department. Noem was pushed out of her job as Department of Homeland Security secretary earlier this month. Trump’s nominee to replace her, Sen. Markwayne Mullin, R-Okla., is set for his confirmation hearing with lawmakers Wednesday. Supreme Court considering protections for Haitian, Somali migrants The U.S. Supreme Court is taking up a major immigration case — one that could determine whether the Trump administration can end protections for some migrants from countries like Haiti and Somalia. Right now, Temporary Protected Status allows people to stay and work in the U.S. if their home countries are deemed too dangerous due to war, disaster or instability. Now, justices are being asked to decide not just the future of those protections but also who has the final say: the White House or the courts. For more information, visit us at https://www.beverlyhillsimmigrationlaw.com/.

Unconventional Judge Is Managing Trump’s Court Deportation Blitz

The Trump administration’s deportation agenda is getting pivotal support from a lesser-known official managing the more than 600 immigration judges deciding migrants’ fates. As chief immigration judge, Teresa Riley oversees the Justice Department’s immigration courts as they hear cases of migrants swept up in President Donald Trump’s crackdown. In her role, Riley has issued directives that advance the agenda set above by Trump, Stephen Miller, and other administration leaders, according to former officials and analysts. The changes make it increasingly difficult for immigrants to obtain asylum and avoid deportation, observers said. Riley, a former federal prosecutor appointed chief judge in December after roughly two months in an acting capacity, has less managerial experience than many of her predecessors. She’s also carrying out the role in an unconventional way. Riley is encouraging judges to refrain from granting asylum in most cases and telling them they’re not required to hold bond hearings despite federal judges’ declarations that noncitizens are entitled to argue for their release. Immigration judges, dubbed “deportation” judges in recent DOJ recruitment ads, are department employees with limited discretion and little of the autonomy of life-tenured judges. “When you take a step back and look at how all of this works together, the more people are detained, the harder it is for them to access counsel, the harder it is for them to be able to apply for and win relief,” said Kathleen Bush-Joseph, a US immigration policy analyst with the Migration Policy Institute. Riley, who joined the Cleveland Immigration Court in 2019, was sent for additional training after a 2021 complaint submitted by the American Immigration Lawyers Association’s Ohio chapter alleged she engaged in “bullying” and “hostile questioning” of migrants. She’s now part of leadership at DOJ’s Executive Office for Immigration Review advising judges to deny most asylum claims and issue deportation orders, according to former officials and policy analysts. EOIR leaders have fired more than 100 immigration judges, fast-tracked cases, and moved to cut off a key avenue for migrants challenging deportation orders. EOIR Director Daren Margolin called Riley “a highly qualified adjudicator and senior leader, who is effectively implementing the administration’s plan to enforce the immigration laws of the United States, as passed by Congress.” “After four years of the Biden Administration forcing immigration courts to implement a de facto amnesty for hundreds of thousands of aliens, this Department of Justice is restoring integrity to our immigration system,” Margolin said in an emailed statement. EOIR declined to make Riley available for an interview. Chief Judge As chief judge, Riley’s directives go beyond her job description, former EOIR officials said. Under federal regulations, the chief immigration judge may issue operational instructions and policy, including time frames for judges to resolve cases and managing judges’ dockets. The chief judge doesn’t have authority to “direct the result of an adjudication assigned to another immigration judge,” according to the regulations. Riley’s January guidance directing immigration judges they weren’t bound by a federal district judge’s ruling that noncitizens should be given bond hearings improperly interferes with “the impartiality that immigration judges should have,” said Margy O’Herron, an immigration adviser during the Biden administration and former Board of Immigration Appeals attorney. “The chief immigration judge is supposed to oversee the management functions of the immigration courts, not put a thumb on the scale that affects the outcome of adjudications,” O’Herron said. WATCH: When Can Noncitizens Be Deported? Immigration Law’s ‘Odd Anomaly’ Riley stood by the Trump administration’s stance on mandatory detention after a California federal judge on Feb. 18 overturned a BIA precedent that Riley relied on in her January guidance. Riley wrote in new guidance to immigration judges that the Feb. 18 ruling doesn’t vacate or overrule the Fifth Circuit’s recent decision upholding the administration’s interpretation of mandatory detention. The Ninth Circuit has since paused the California judge’s order. Prior chief judges didn’t issue this type of guidance, and it wouldn’t have made it past the EOIR director or general counsel’s office in earlier administrations, according to one former immigration judge who requested anonymity to speak openly about previous decision-making. O’Herron described the guidance similarly, noting it’s “very inconsistent with the way past leaders at EOIR across the six administrations that I worked in operated.” But Matt O’Brien, deputy executive director of the conservative Federation for American Immigration Reform, said in an email that Riley’s guidance was “both appropriate and necessary.” Federal district court judges don’t have authority to order immigration judges to hold bond hearings, he said. “The mere fact that the guidance given by Chief Immigration Judge Riley may be different than that issued by her predecessors is in no way an indication that her guidance is wrong,” said O’Brien, a former assistant chief immigration judge overseeing the court in Annandale, Va. An EOIR spokesperson said in an email that the Trump administration “is complying with court orders and fully enforcing federal immigration law.” “The level of illegal aliens currently detained is a direct result of this Administration’s strong border security policies to keep the American people safe,” the spokesperson said. Interactive graphic: Teresa Riley has less immigration experience than prior chief judges Courtroom Demeanor Before she quickly ascended to the chief judge role, Riley stood out from other judges early on in her time at the Cleveland Immigration Court for comments to immigrants that attorneys characterized as inappropriate from someone required by law to be an impartial adjudicator. AILA said in its 2021 complaint that, in at least one case in 2020, Riley referred to undocumented immigrants as “illegals.” AILA alleged that in another hearing, Riley questioned whether a migrant was being truthful about sexual abuse his daughter experienced because the man displayed “no emotion whatsoever.” “Can you explain to me why you’re rattling this off like you’re reading the newspaper?” Riley asked the father, according to a copy of the complaint obtained by Bloomberg Law. Maureen DeVito, who worked as an immigration attorney in Cleveland from 2019 to 2025, said the AILA complaint shows “very cruel statements” that align with her own experience. At a 2019 hearing, DeVito represented a 9-year-old Guatemalan migrant who started crying after Riley “made callous comments” telling the girl she could be deported even though, DeVito said, “this child had no agency or authority over the actions of her parent.” Riley had no visible reaction to the child’s emotion, said DeVito, who noted that others in the room “had astonished looks on their faces.” “She just continued on, traumatizing the child even further,” DeVito said of Riley. “I’d never seen a judge terrify a child like this before.” EOIR, which oversees immigration courts, closed AILA’s complaint after sending Riley for two weeks of training in 2021 on her tone and interactions with migrants who appear without an attorney, according to two people familiar with Riley’s time as a Cleveland judge. Riley remained in the role through Joe Biden’s administration. The immigration review office said in an August 2021 email to Neil Fleischer, then president of AILA’s Ohio chapter, that the complaint was “reviewed fully and handled appropriately,” and that “this matter is now considered closed,” according to text of the email shared by an Ohio AILA member. Some Ohio immigration attorneys noticed improvement in Riley’s tone with migrants following her additional training. But at least four lawyers and two additional people familiar with her time in Cleveland said Riley’s targeted questions doubting details in migrants’ stories persisted throughout her time as a judge, leading attorneys to question her impartiality. Riley continues to hear cases at the Cleveland court while serving as chief judge. Most of the people who spoke to Bloomberg Law about Riley requested anonymity because they continue to represent immigrants at the Cleveland court or because they weren’t authorized to speak publicly. Riley’s demeanor and behavior have been a repeated concern for attorneys and court staff, two of the people said. Some immigration lawyers refuse to take on cases that go before Riley because of her reputation, according to one Ohio attorney. In a 2022 hearing, Riley extensively questioned one of DeVito’s African clients when he described a family friend as an “uncle.” “When she couldn’t herself discern that this person is not a blood relative, she used it as grounds to say that the client was not credible, when in fact, it just represented her lack of cross-cultural understanding of different customs and cultures,” DeVito said. Margolin said in his statement that the allegations from AILA and other Ohio attorneys “are patently false, and part of a pattern of anonymously mischaracterizing events to defame EOIR leadership as they continue to effectively implement the administration’s plan to enforce the immigration laws of the United States.” An EOIR spokesperson said in an email that the office seriously investigates any credible complaints submitted against immigration judges and takes corrective action as needed, but that it doesn’t tolerate unsupported claims levied against judges. The spokesperson declined to comment on any specific allegations against Riley. Riley’s Background Riley, who is still primarily based in Cleveland, is among judges at a court that attorneys said is known for siding with the government most of the time. “There’s still good judges there who want to do the right thing, but there is a culture of judges becoming prosecutors and referees aligning with the other team,” said Julie Nemecek, an immigration attorney based in Columbus. Another immigration attorney who spoke anonymously said Riley gave the impression with intense questioning of migrants that she was acting like a federal prosecutor, including by raising problems she found with migrants’ claims that government attorneys hadn’t raised. Judges’ backgrounds and court culture can influence how they approach the job, said Emmett Soper, a former immigration judge and counsel to the EOIR director in the Biden administration. Riley, who graduated from the University of Akron School of Law in 2002, clerked for a Northern District of Ohio judge and worked briefly as a local prosecutor in Cuyahoga County before joining the US attorney’s office in 2009. ‘Rule of Law’ Commitment As a federal prosecutor, Riley had the reputation of being a strong litigator with a diligent work ethic, said David Sierleja, a former criminal chief in the office who hired her in 2009. Riley spent late hours in the office and had no problem telling law enforcement agents if she didn’t think there was enough evidence to bring a case, according to another former federal prosecutor who requested anonymity to speak openly about working with Riley. Riley’s background differs from several of her predecessors who held long careers at the immigration courts or in the administration counseling on immigration law before taking on the role, Soper said. Former Chief Judge Sheila McNulty, who was fired by the Trump administration in 2025, spent 15 years at EOIR in various roles, including as assistant chief judge and regional deputy judge. MaryBeth Keller held several leadership roles at EOIR since 1988 before her chief judge appointment in 2016, according to online bios. As an immigration judge, Riley denied asylum in 81% of cases from 2019 to 2025 in Cleveland, where judges had an average denial rate of roughly 75%, according to government data compiled by the Transactional Records Access Clearinghouse. That’s substantially higher than the national average denial rate for the same period, which was approximately 59%. As chief judge, Riley isn’t the ultimate decision-maker shaping the courts. She serves under the direction of top DOJ officials, including Attorney General Pam Bondi, who are making decisions that advance the administration’s deportation agenda, former judges and immigration policy analysts said. That includes the unusual mass firings of more than 100 immigration judges since the start of Trump’s second term, according to estimates from Justice Connection, an organization supporting former and current DOJ employees. Many of those fired were known for having high asylum grant rates or a previous career defending migrants in court. In O’Brien’s view, the immigration courts needed to change after past administrations gave judges “too much free rein” over migrants’ cases. “The Trump administration has made a clear effort to ensure that the immigration courts perform their intended functions in accordance with the laws they are charged with applying,” O’Brien said. Riley’s directives thus far show a “clear commitment” to “ensuring that the immigration court hews closely to the rule of law,” O’Brien said. For Soper, the former counsel to the EOIR director, Riley’s guidance suggests that the Trump administration sees her as useful to advancing its goals of limiting asylum hearings and increasing deportations. “She would not have been appointed to this position were she not, broadly speaking, supportive of what this administration is doing when it comes to the immigration courts and immigration law,” Soper said. For more information, visit us at https://www.beverlyhillsimmigrationlaw.com/.

Supreme Court to consider Trump administration's efforts to end deportation protections for Syrians, Haitians

Washington — The Supreme Court on Monday said it will consider the Trump administration's efforts to roll back temporary deportation protections for hundreds of thousands of immigrants from Syria and Haiti. While agreeing to take up the legal battle over Temporary Protected Status for the two countries, the Supreme Court did not allow the Trump administration to end the programs while it considers the case. The Justice Department had asked the high court to grant it emergency relief and freeze lower court orders blocking Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem's decisions to terminate TPS for more than 6,000 immigrants from Syria and 350,000 immigrants from Haiti. The Supreme Court instead said in a brief unsigned order that it is deferring consideration of the requests, leaving those lower court rulings in place for now. It set oral arguments in the cases for late April. The disputes over legal protections for immigrants from Haiti and Syria are the latest involving President Trump's immigration agenda to land before the Supreme Court in its current term. The high court also will hear arguments April 1 on the legality of the president's plan to end birthright citizenship. Decisions in each of the cases will likely come by the end of June or early July. The Supreme Court has already allowed the administration to lift deportation protections for more than 300,000 Venezuelans in the U.S. while legal proceedings continued. The Department of Homeland Security has also moved to terminate TPS designations for at least a dozen other countries, including Afghanistan, Nicaragua, Somalia and Yemen. The Trump administration has argued that courts cannot review the secretary's TPS determinations. Congress created TPS in 1990, and the program provides temporary immigration protections for people from countries beset by armed conflicts, natural disasters or other "extraordinary and temporary" conditions that make it unsafe for deportees to return. Migrants from a country designated for TPS generally cannot be removed from the U.S. and are authorized to work for the length of the designation, which is typically 18 months but can be extended. The dispute over TPS for Haiti Haiti was first designated for TPS in 2010 after the catastrophic earthquake that left more than 300,000 people dead and devastated the country. The program has since been extended for Haitian immigrants several times, including during the Biden administration in 2021 following the assassination of then-President Jovenel Moïse and again in 2024 because of economic, political, security and health crises. Skip Ad The video player is currently playing an ad. But after Mr. Trump returned to the White House last year, Noem took steps to rescind TPS for Haiti, effective Feb. 3. Noem determined the decision to end the protections "reflects a necessary and strategic vote of confidence in the new chapter Haiti is turning" and the "foreign policy vision of a secure, sovereign and self-reliant Haiti." While the secretary acknowledged that certain conditions in Haiti remained "concerning," Noem said parts of the country were "suitable" to return to. The State Department has warned U.S. citizens not to travel to Haiti because of "kidnapping, crime, terrorist activity, civil unrest and limited health care." In December, a group of five Haitian nationals challenged Noem's termination of TPS and sought to block the move. A federal district court granted their request, finding in part that Noem's decision to unwind the protections was likely motivated by racial animus. "Kristi Noem has a First Amendment right to call immigrants killers, leeches, entitlement junkies, and any other inapt name she wants," U.S. District Judge Ana Reyes wrote. "Secretary Noem, however, is constrained by both our Constitution and the [Administrative Procedure Act] to apply faithfully the facts to the law in implementing the TPS program. The record to-date shows she has yet to do that." Reyes also pointed to derogatory statements Mr. Trump has made about Haitians, including referring to Haiti as a "s***hole" country and, while on the campaign trail in 2024, promoting the conspiracy theory that Haitian immigrants living in Springfield, Ohio, were eating people's pets. City officials said there were no credible reports of Haitian immigrants abducting and eating pets. The Justice Department appealed Reyes' decision, and a divided three-judge panel on the U.S. appeals court in Washington, D.C., declined to freeze the lower court's decision. Justice Department lawyers asked the Supreme Court last week to step in and allow the Trump administration to rescind the deportation protections for Haitian nationals. The dispute over TPS for Syria Syria was designated for TPS by the Obama administration in 2012 after the brutal crackdown by former Syrian President Bashar al-Assad. Protections for Syrian immigrants were extended several times, including during Mr. Trump's first term. The Trump administration estimates there are more than 6,000 Syrian nationals covered by the program. But last September, Noem moved to end the program for Syrians, citing in part the collapse of the Assad regime at the end of 2024 and the lifting of sanctions against the country last year. The secretary determined that Syria no longer met the criteria for an armed conflict that jeopardized Syrian nationals returning to the country, and found there are "sporadic, isolated episodes of violence." The State Department has warned Americans not to travel to the area, citing "terrorism, civil unrest, kidnapping, hostage taking, and armed conflict." The deportation protections for Syrian nationals in the U.S. were set to end Nov. 21. But after a group of seven Syrians filed a lawsuit last October challenging Noem's decision to unwind TPS protections, a federal district court delayed the termination. U.S. District Judge Katherine Polk Failla found, in part, that Noem's move to rescind the protections for Syria was based on a political decision to end TPS altogether, citing comments by Mr. Trump and the secretary. "The president made sweeping and erroneous statements concerning his belief in the legality of the TPS program and its inutility to what can only be fairly described as an anti-immigrant agenda," she said. Of Noem, the judge said she "endeavored to terminate TPS status whenever presented with an opportunity to do so, resulting in termination decisions that are ground not in law and not in fact, but that are in political considerations simply not relevant under the TPS statute." The Trump administration filed an emergency appeal with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 2nd Circuit, and it declined to halt the lower court's decision in February. While the 2nd Circuit acknowledged that the Supreme Court had twice allowed the Trump administration to end temporary protections for Venezuelans, it said those cases involved a designation for a different country with different circumstances. The Trump administration sought emergency relief from the Supreme Court at the end of February and argued that the district court's order interfered with the government's foreign policy determinations and its interest in enforcing immigration laws. For more information, visit us at https://www.beverlyhillsimmigrationlaw.com/.