logo
A DEA immigrant informant fears he could be deported: 'Matter of life and death'

A DEA immigrant informant fears he could be deported: 'Matter of life and death'

Yahoo02-04-2025

These days, fear doesn't leave him alone, the Honduran immigrant and Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) informant said, even when he's working in construction or at home with his family. He spends sleepless nights, watching his daughters and praying that the Trump administration doesn't deport him to Honduras, where he claims death awaits him for his collaboration with U.S. authorities.
'Thank God, the opportunity to be in this country has been the best thing ever. My focus has always been my family, my work, and going to church,' he said in an interview with Noticias Telemundo. He requested anonymity for fear of retaliation from the Honduran criminal group he was involved in.
'If tomorrow they expel me — I don't know what will happen to me. My problem isn't small, it's a matter of life or death,' the informant said, explaining he's provided information to U.S. authorities that, among other things, led to the arrest of a major Honduran drug trafficker.
Federal agencies often rely on the help of confidential informants to conduct investigations and secure the conviction of drug traffickers and criminal kingpins. Some of these informants, however, are in the country illegally.
Immigrant informants like the Honduran man and others who've spoken publicly about their cases say that without the protection of a visa or legal immigration status, they're always at risk of deportation and potential danger if they're sent away.
Though the Honduran informant doesn't have a visa or green card, he was able to obtain protection under the Convention Against Torture (CAT) — a measure that prevents deportation to a person who runs a real risk of being tortured in their home country.
However, experts consulted by Noticias Telemundo confirmed that current laws that allow for deportations to third countries apply to cases of deportation suspension and CAT protection. This, despite the fact that in many cases international criminal networks have tentacles throughout Latin America.
Noticias Telemundo contacted the Department of Justice, the Department of Homeland Security, Citizenship and Immigration Services, the DEA and the FBI for information and comment on the situation of immigrant informants, following President Donald Trump's promise to carry out the largest migrant deportation plan in the country's history. It did not receive a response from the agencies.
"The FBI investigates more than 250 types of crimes, including counterterrorism, counterintelligence, kidnapping, extortion and drug trafficking, and I can tell you that much of the work, almost of all of it, involves help" from informants, said Arturo Fontes, who worked for 28 years at the FBI on drug trafficking and organized crime cases. Fontes was one of the agents who tracked Mexican drug trafficker Joaquín 'El Chapo' Guzmán.
'We always say that informants are the wheels, and the government is the cart. And without the wheels, the cart can't move forward; informants are too important,' Fontes said.
The Honduran informant said that "in another country, without the collaboration of a third party outside law enforcement, it's very difficult for the FBI or the DEA to capture someone — sometimes we make mistakes, like everyone else, but if it weren't for what we were able to do, maybe they wouldn't have arrested anyone.'
The DEA had more than 18,000 informants assigned to its national offices between 2010 and 2015 and more than 9,000 of them received nearly $237 million in total payments for information or services, according to an audit by the DOJ's Office of the Inspector General. That figure has not been updated in subsequent public reports; also, the latest report doesn't indicate how many of the informants were foreign nationals.
In 2021, the group Open the Books, which charts government spending, reported that informant funding from the DEA, FBI and the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (ATF) reached $550 million.
Rocky Herron, a former agent who spent 31 years investigating drug trafficking networks, said that in his "career at the DEA, there are no cases without an informant — every investigation depends on them."
"Maybe the informant introduces an undercover agent who carries out the investigation, but that agent has to enter the organization through someone, or it could be a person who falls into prison and wants to negotiate a reduced sentence with the government and provides information," Herron said. "I used informants in all my investigations.'
The complex relationship between law enforcement and immigrant informants has produced high-profile cases in which individuals have alleged they provided crucial assistance in a criminal investigation but later faced deportation.
Ernesto Gamboa, a Salvadoran auto mechanic in the West Coast, generated headlines when he claimed he helped police for 14 years in hundreds of drug raids — but faced deportation in 2009 once he ended his collaboration claiming he had stopped getting a stipend. Authorities later dropped deportation charges against him.
Carla Deras, a Mexican immigrant, stated she was recruited by ICE to assist in dismantling a child-trafficking ring; she said an agent she worked with urged authorities not to deport her while she was waiting to obtain a special visa. But after the agent left, Deras said she was left in limbo. 'We're illegal. I don't have any money, and I can't apply for unemployment benefits,' she said in a 2010 interview with the Los Angeles Times.
'There are almost no restrictions on who the government can pressure to become informants,' Alexandra Natapoff, a Harvard Law School scholar and author of 'Snitching: Criminal Informants and the Erosion of American Justice,' told Noticias Telemundo.
'We don't provide good protections for any whistleblower, let alone those pressured to cooperate under threat of deportation,' she said.
In 2017, then-Justice Department Inspector General Michael E. Horowitz told Congress that 'the use of informants carries risks because these individuals typically have criminal records, and they often provide assistance or cooperation in exchange for cash or the prospect of a reduced sentence, rather than out of a desire to help enforce the law.'
Foreign informants face immigration problems even though cooperation with authorities could give them an opportunity to apply for an S visa, which allows federal law enforcement agencies to submit applications for them to receive a green card.
'Normally, the district attorney helps the applicant apply for a visa, but it can be very difficult to obtain and time-consuming,' Kevin Johnson, a law professor at the University of California, Berkeley, said. 'With Trump, we're seeing a tightening of the requirements for all visas — so I wouldn't be surprised if this category is subject to special scrutiny.'
Several former federal agents interviewed by Noticias Telemundo said the process is so exhaustive that it's rare to obtain this kind of visa. Although there is a legal limit of 200 S visas per year, a report by the Congressional Research Service indicates that between 1995 and 2004, only 511 were approved for informants. In 2012, for example, only one such visa was issued.
The Honduran informant said he hasn't been able to obtain an S visa.
Attorney Javier Maldonado, who has litigated immigration issues in Texas for decades and has had many clients who've cooperated with authorities, said about half of those clients have ultimately been deported.
"It's a huge risk,' he said. 'I've had clients who have cooperated with these law enforcement agencies, and I always have to warn them that the balance of power is not equal. They depend on the mercy of the agencies and what they want to decide.'
'Many of these individuals have immigration or criminal records that prevent them from regularizing their legal status in the United States,' Maldonado said. He said that if authorities don't facilitate the process for an informant, "they remain in a kind of limbo unless they request measures such as suspension of deportation and the Convention Against Torture.'
'All of us who are currently in the program, those of us who have collaborated, are in grave danger,' the immigrant informant said, citing the death in Honduras of someone who had helped them with the investigation.
Maldonado, the attorney, said 'these migrants are at great risk," especially if they're from certain regions of the world like Central America.
'They have great concern about returning to those countries," Maldonado said, "and now that the president has started sending people to El Salvador even if they're not from that country, that's going to make many more fearful of what might happen if they're detained.'
The Honduran informant said he wants to stay in the U.S. working in construction. He enjoys getting up early and watching the bricks he hauls and installs become walls and roofs of new homes.
'It's hard; it's 10 to 11 hours a day in the cold and the sun. And I do it to support my family because, since my first daughter was born, it has radically changed my life,' he said.
'I regret my mistakes a thousand times over,' the informant said. 'If I had come to this country when I was young, maybe I wouldn't be in this situation.'
An earlier version of this story was first published in Noticias Telemundo.
This article was originally published on NBCNews.com

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Is a $5,000 DOGE stimulus check a real thing? What we know
Is a $5,000 DOGE stimulus check a real thing? What we know

Yahoo

time12 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

Is a $5,000 DOGE stimulus check a real thing? What we know

In February, President Donald Trump said he was considering a plan to pay out $5,000 stimulus checks to American taxpayers from the savings identified by billionaire Elon Musk's Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE). Are they happening? No official plan or schedule for such a payout has been released, and a decision on the checks would have to come from Congress, which has so far been cool to the idea. And there have been questions as to how much DOGE has actually saved. The idea was floated by Azoria investment firm CEO James Fishback, who suggested on Musk's social media platform X that Trump and Musk should "should announce a 'DOGE Dividend'" from the money saved from reductions in government waste and workforce since it was American taxpayer money in the first place. He even submitted a proposal for how it would work, with a timeline for after the expiration of DOGE in July 2026. "At $2 trillion in DOGE savings and 78 million tax-paying households, this is a $5,000 refund per household, with the remaining used to pay down the national debt," he said in a separate post. Musk replied, "Will check with the President." "We're considering giving 20% of the DOGE savings to American citizens and 20% to paying down the debt," Trump said in a during the Saudi-sponsored FII PRIORITY Summit in Miami Beach the same month. DOGE has dismantled entire federal agencies, wiped out government contracts and led the firings of tens of thousands of federal workers, leaving many agencies struggling to continue operations. DOGE checks? Elon Musk dodges DOGE stimulus check question during Wisconsin rally: Here's what he said. Fishbeck suggested that the potential refund go only to households that are net-income taxpayers, or households that pay more in taxes than they get back. The Pew Research Center said that most Americans with an adjusted gross income of under $40,000 effectively pay no federal income tax. They would not be eligible. If DOGE achieves Musk's initial goal of stripping $2 trillion from U.S. government spending by 2026, Fishback's plan was for $5,000 per household, or 20% of the savings divided by the number of eligible households. If DOGE doesn't hit the goal, Fishback said the amount should be adjusted accordingly. 'So again, if the savings are only $1 trillion, which I think is awfully low, the check goes from $5,000 to $2,500,' Fishback said during a podcast appearance. 'If the savings are only $500 billion, which, again, is really, really low, then the [checks] are only $1,250.' However, while Musk talked about saving $2 trillion in federal spending during Trump's campaign, he lowered the goal to $1 trillion after Trump assumed office and said in March he was on pace to hit that goal by the end of May. At a Cabinet meeting in April, Musk lowered the projected savings further to $150 billion in fiscal year 2026. Musk left the White House at the end of May when his designation as a "special government employee" ended. DOGE, the advisory group he created, is expected to continue without him. That depends on who you ask. On its website, DOGE claims to have saved an estimated $175 billion as of May 30, "a combination of asset sales, contract and lease cancellations and renegotiations, fraud and improper payment deletions, grant cancellations, interest savings, programmatic changes, regulatory savings, and workforce reductions." The site says that works out to $1,086.96 saved per taxpayer. However, many of DOGE's claims have been exaggerated and several of the initiatives to slash agency workforces have been challenged in court. DOGE has been accused of taking credit for contracts that were canceled before DOGE was created, failing to factor in funds the government is required to pay even if a contract is canceled, and tallying every contract by the most that could possibly be spent on it even when nothing near that amount had been obligated. The website list has been changed as the media pointed out errors, such as a claim that an $8 million savings was actually $8 billion. On May 30, CNN reported that one of its reporters found that less than half the $175 billion figure was backed up with even basic documentation, making verification difficult if not impossible. Some of the changes may also end up costing taxpayers more, such as proposed slashes to the Internal Revenue Service that experts say would mean less tax revenue generated, resulting in a net cost of about $6.8 billion. Over the next 10 years, if IRS staffing stays low, the cumulative cost in uncollected taxes would hit $159 billion, according to the nonpartisan Budget Lab at Yale University. The per-taxpayer claim on the website is also inflated, CNN said, as it's based on '161 million individual federal taxpayers' and doesn't seem to include married people filing jointly. This article originally appeared on Florida Times-Union: DOGE dividends: Will American taxpayers get a $5,000 check?

The 911 presidency: Trump flexes emergency powers in his second term
The 911 presidency: Trump flexes emergency powers in his second term

Hamilton Spectator

time16 minutes ago

  • Hamilton Spectator

The 911 presidency: Trump flexes emergency powers in his second term

WASHINGTON (AP) — Call it the 911 presidency. Despite insisting that the United States is rebounding from calamity under his watch, President Donald Trump is harnessing emergency powers unlike any of his predecessors. Whether it's leveling punishing tariffs , deploying troops to the border or sidelining environmental regulations , Trump has relied on rules and laws intended only for use in extraordinary circumstances like war and invasion. An analysis by The Associated Press shows that 30 of Trump's 150 executive orders have cited some kind of emergency power or authority, a rate that far outpaces his recent predecessors. The result is a redefinition of how presidents can wield power. Instead of responding to an unforeseen crisis, Trump is using emergency powers to supplant Congress' authority and advance his agenda. 'What's notable about Trump is the enormous scale and extent, which is greater than under any modern president,' said Ilya Somin, who is representing five U.S. businesses who sued the administration, claiming they were harmed by Trump's so-called 'Liberation Day' tariffs. Because Congress has the power to set trade policy under the Constitution, the businesses convinced a federal trade court that Trump overstepped his authority by claiming an economic emergency to impose the tariffs. An appeals court has paused that ruling while the judges review it. Growing concerns over actions The legal battle is a reminder of the potential risks of Trump's strategy. Judges traditionally have given presidents wide latitude to exercise emergency powers that were created by Congress. However, there's growing concern that Trump is pressing the limits when the U.S. is not facing the kinds of threats such actions are meant to address. 'The temptation is clear,' said Elizabeth Goitein, senior director of the Brennan Center's Liberty and National Security Program and an expert in emergency powers. 'What's remarkable is how little abuse there was before, but we're in a different era now.' Rep. Don Bacon, R-Neb., who has drafted legislation that would allow Congress to reassert tariff authority, said he believed the courts would ultimately rule against Trump in his efforts to single-handedly shape trade policy. 'It's the Constitution. James Madison wrote it that way, and it was very explicit,' Bacon said of Congress' power over trade. 'And I get the emergency powers, but I think it's being abused. When you're trying to do tariff policy for 80 countries, that's policy, not emergency action.' The White House pushed back on such concerns, saying Trump is justified in aggressively using his authority. 'President Trump is rightfully enlisting his emergency powers to quickly rectify four years of failure and fix the many catastrophes he inherited from Joe Biden — wide open borders, wars in Ukraine and Gaza, radical climate regulations, historic inflation, and economic and national security threats posed by trade deficits,' White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said. Trump frequently sites 1977 law to justify actions Of all the emergency powers, Trump has most frequently cited the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, or IEEPA, to justify slapping tariffs on imports. The law, enacted in 1977, was intended to limit some of the expansive authority that had been granted to the presidency decades earlier. It is only supposed to be used when the country faces 'an unusual and extraordinary threat' from abroad 'to the national security, foreign policy, or economy of the United States.' In analyzing executive orders issued since 2001, the AP found that Trump has invoked the law 21 times in presidential orders and memoranda. President George W. Bush, grappling with the aftermath of the most devastating terror attack on U.S. soil, invoked the law just 14 times in his first term. Likewise, Barack Obama invoked the act only 21 times during his first term, when the U.S. economy faced the worst economic collapse since the Great Depression. The Trump administration has also deployed an 18th century law, the Alien Enemies Act , to justify deporting Venezuelan migrants to other countries, including El Salvador. Trump's decision to invoke the law relies on allegations that the Venezuelan government coordinates with the Tren de Aragua gang, but intelligence officials did not reach that conclusion. Congress has ceded its power to the presidency Congress has granted emergency powers to the presidency over the years, acknowledging that the executive branch can act more swiftly than lawmakers if there is a crisis. There are 150 legal powers — including waiving a wide variety of actions that Congress has broadly prohibited — that can only be accessed after declaring an emergency. In an emergency, for example, an administration can suspend environmental regulations, approve new drugs or therapeutics, take over the transportation system, or even override bans on testing biological or chemical weapons on human subjects, according to a list compiled by the Brennan Center for Justice. Democrats and Republicans have pushed the boundaries over the years. For example, in an attempt to cancel federal student loan debt, Joe Biden used a post-Sept. 11 law that empowered education secretaries to reduce or eliminate such obligations during a national emergency. The U.S. Supreme Court eventually rejected his effort , forcing Biden to find different avenues to chip away at his goals. Before that, Bush pursued warrantless domestic wiretapping and Franklin D. Roosevelt ordered the detention of Japanese-Americans on the West Coast in camps for the duration of World War II. Trump, in his first term, sparked a major fight with Capitol Hill when he issued a national emergency to compel construction of a border wall. Though Congress voted to nullify his emergency declaration, lawmakers could not muster up enough Republican support to overcome Trump's eventual veto. 'Presidents are using these emergency powers not to respond quickly to unanticipated challenges,' said John Yoo, who as a Justice Department official under George W. Bush helped expand the use of presidential authorities. 'Presidents are using it to step into a political gap because Congress chooses not to act.' Trump, Yoo said, 'has just elevated it to another level.' Trump's allies support his moves Conservative legal allies of the president also said Trump's actions are justified, and Vice President JD Vance predicted the administration would prevail in the court fight over tariff policy. 'We believe — and we're right — that we are in an emergency,' Vance said last week in an interview with Newsmax. 'You have seen foreign governments, sometimes our adversaries, threaten the American people with the loss of critical supplies,' Vance said. 'I'm not talking about toys, plastic toys. I'm talking about pharmaceutical ingredients. I'm talking about the critical pieces of the manufacturing supply chain.' Vance continued, 'These governments are threatening to cut us off from that stuff, that is by definition, a national emergency.' Republican and Democratic lawmakers have tried to rein in a president's emergency powers. Two years ago, a bipartisan group of lawmakers in the House and Senate introduced legislation that would have ended a presidentially-declared emergency after 30 days unless Congress votes to keep it in place. It failed to advance. Similar legislation hasn't been introduced since Trump's return to office. Right now, it effectively works in the reverse, with Congress required to vote to end an emergency. 'He has proved to be so lawless and reckless in so many ways. Congress has a responsibility to make sure there's oversight and safeguards,' said Sen. Richard Blumenthal, D-Conn., who cosponsored an emergency powers reform bill in the previous session of Congress. He argued that, historically, leaders relying on emergency declarations has been a 'path toward autocracy and suppression.' Error! Sorry, there was an error processing your request. There was a problem with the recaptcha. Please try again. You may unsubscribe at any time. By signing up, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy . This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google privacy policy and terms of service apply. Want more of the latest from us? Sign up for more at our newsletter page .

The 911 presidency: Trump flexes emergency powers in his second term
The 911 presidency: Trump flexes emergency powers in his second term

Boston Globe

time18 minutes ago

  • Boston Globe

The 911 presidency: Trump flexes emergency powers in his second term

An analysis by The Associated Press shows that 30 of Trump's 150 executive orders have cited some kind of emergency power or authority, a rate that far outpaces his recent predecessors. The result is a redefinition of how presidents can wield power. Instead of responding to an unforeseen crisis, Trump is using emergency powers to supplant Congress' authority and advance his agenda. 'What's notable about Trump is the enormous scale and extent, which is greater than under any modern president,' said Ilya Somin, who is representing five U.S. businesses who sued the administration, claiming they were harmed by Trump's so-called 'Liberation Day' tariffs. Get Starting Point A guide through the most important stories of the morning, delivered Monday through Friday. Enter Email Sign Up Because Congress has the power to set trade policy under the Constitution, the businesses convinced a federal trade court that Trump overstepped his authority by claiming an economic emergency to impose the tariffs. An appeals court has paused that ruling while the judges review it. Advertisement Growing concerns over actions The legal battle is a reminder of the potential risks of Trump's strategy. Judges traditionally have given presidents wide latitude to exercise emergency powers that were created by Congress. However, there's growing concern that Trump is pressing the limits when the U.S. is not facing the kinds of threats such actions are meant to address. Advertisement 'The temptation is clear,' said Elizabeth Goitein, senior director of the Brennan Center's Liberty and National Security Program and an expert in emergency powers. 'What's remarkable is how little abuse there was before, but we're in a different era now.' Rep. Don Bacon, R-Neb., who has drafted legislation that would allow Congress to reassert tariff authority, said he believed the courts would ultimately rule against Trump in his efforts to single-handedly shape trade policy. 'It's the Constitution. James Madison wrote it that way, and it was very explicit,' Bacon said of Congress' power over trade. 'And I get the emergency powers, but I think it's being abused. When you're trying to do tariff policy for 80 countries, that's policy, not emergency action.' The White House pushed back on such concerns, saying Trump is justified in aggressively using his authority. 'President Trump is rightfully enlisting his emergency powers to quickly rectify four years of failure and fix the many catastrophes he inherited from Joe Biden — wide open borders, wars in Ukraine and Gaza, radical climate regulations, historic inflation, and economic and national security threats posed by trade deficits," White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said. Trump frequently sites 1977 law to justify actions Of all the emergency powers, Trump has most frequently cited the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, or IEEPA, to justify slapping tariffs on imports. The law, enacted in 1977, was intended to limit some of the expansive authority that had been granted to the presidency decades earlier. It is only supposed to be used when the country faces 'an unusual and extraordinary threat' from abroad 'to the national security, foreign policy, or economy of the United States.' Advertisement In analyzing executive orders issued since 2001, the AP found that Trump has invoked the law 21 times in presidential orders and memoranda. President George W. Bush, grappling with the aftermath of the most devastating terror attack on U.S. soil, invoked the law just 14 times in his first term. Likewise, Barack Obama invoked the act only 21 times during his first term, when the U.S. economy faced the worst economic collapse since the Great Depression. The Trump administration has also deployed an 18th century law, the Alien Enemies Act, to justify deporting Venezuelan migrants to other countries, including El Salvador. Trump's decision to invoke the law relies on allegations that the Venezuelan government coordinates with the Tren de Aragua gang, but intelligence officials did not reach that conclusion. Congress has ceded its power to the presidency Congress has granted emergency powers to the presidency over the years, acknowledging that the executive branch can act more swiftly than lawmakers if there is a crisis. There are 150 legal powers — including waiving a wide variety of actions that Congress has broadly prohibited — that can only be accessed after declaring an emergency. In an emergency, for example, an administration can suspend environmental regulations, approve new drugs or therapeutics, take over the transportation system, or even override bans on testing biological or chemical weapons on human subjects, according to a list compiled by the Brennan Center for Justice. Democrats and Republicans have pushed the boundaries over the years. For example, in an attempt to cancel federal student loan debt, Joe Biden used a post-Sept. 11 law that empowered education secretaries to reduce or eliminate such obligations during a national emergency. The U.S. Supreme Court eventually rejected his effort, forcing Biden to find different avenues to chip away at his goals. Advertisement Before that, Bush pursued warrantless domestic wiretapping and Franklin D. Roosevelt ordered the detention of Japanese-Americans on the West Coast in camps for the duration of World War II. Trump, in his first term, sparked a major fight with Capitol Hill when he issued a national emergency to compel construction of a border wall. Though Congress voted to nullify his emergency declaration, lawmakers could not muster up enough Republican support to overcome Trump's eventual veto. 'Presidents are using these emergency powers not to respond quickly to unanticipated challenges,' said John Yoo, who as a Justice Department official under George W. Bush helped expand the use of presidential authorities. 'Presidents are using it to step into a political gap because Congress chooses not to act.' Trump, Yoo said, 'has just elevated it to another level.' Trump's allies support his moves Conservative legal allies of the president also said Trump's actions are justified, and Vice President JD Vance predicted the administration would prevail in the court fight over tariff policy. 'We believe — and we're right — that we are in an emergency,' Vance said last week in an interview with Newsmax. 'You have seen foreign governments, sometimes our adversaries, threaten the American people with the loss of critical supplies,' Vance said. 'I'm not talking about toys, plastic toys. I'm talking about pharmaceutical ingredients. I'm talking about the critical pieces of the manufacturing supply chain.' Vance continued, 'These governments are threatening to cut us off from that stuff, that is by definition, a national emergency.' Republican and Democratic lawmakers have tried to rein in a president's emergency powers. Two years ago, a bipartisan group of lawmakers in the House and Senate introduced legislation that would have ended a presidentially-declared emergency after 30 days unless Congress votes to keep it in place. It failed to advance. Advertisement Similar legislation hasn't been introduced since Trump's return to office. Right now, it effectively works in the reverse, with Congress required to vote to end an emergency. 'He has proved to be so lawless and reckless in so many ways. Congress has a responsibility to make sure there's oversight and safeguards,' said Sen. Richard Blumenthal, D-Conn., who cosponsored an emergency powers reform bill in the previous session of Congress. He argued that, historically, leaders relying on emergency declarations has been a 'path toward autocracy and suppression.'

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store