logo
Minnesota state representative admits she is in the US illegally during legislative debate

Minnesota state representative admits she is in the US illegally during legislative debate

Yahoo4 hours ago

A Minnesota State lawmaker told her colleagues on Monday that she is in the U.S. illegally, as is her family, and have been since fleeing Vietnam after the Vietnam War.
Rep. Kaohly Vang Her attended a special session of the Minnesota Legislature convened by Gov. Tim Walz on Monday, where lawmakers were debating about modifying MinnesotaCare eligibility for undocumented adult immigrants.
While arguments were being made, Her used the opportunity to share the story of how she arrived in the U.S., telling her colleagues that she is an illegal immigrant.
Her said she has been spending a lot of time with her father, who brought the family to the U.S. at the end of the Vietnam War. At one point, she asked her father how he brought the family to the U.S.
Colombian Woman Charged With Illegally Voting In 2024 Election Stealing $400,000 In Taxpayer Funded Benefits
She previously believed that her family was granted entry into the U.S. because her grandfather was a colonel in the war. But her father told her that was not true.
Read On The Fox News App
Her father worked for the U.S. Consulate, Her said, and was one of the few there who could speak English and type "really fast."
Her said her father had moved to the consulate away from the refugee camp she, her mother and sisters lived at, and his job was to process all the paperwork for the refugees who came to America.
Proposed Bill Would Require Law Enforcement In Blue State To Cooperate With Ice: 'A Line Of Communication'
While working at the U.S. Consulate, Her's family missed their opportunity to go to the U.S. three times, and there was one more time that they could attempt to go to the U.S.
Her told her mother they must have been lucky, but her mom said it was not luck.
"We did not have our names on that list to come to the U.S.," Her said, explaining that there was no priority for children of someone who worked for the CIA. "The only people that had names to come to the U.S. were if you were … in the military and you worked for the CIA or worked for USAID."
Her's parents worked for a Christian organization, which also did not count. But they were able to find a way by fudging the paperwork, to get to the U.S.
'Shameful': Legal Immigrants Face Uphill Battle Amid Ongoing Border Crisis
"What my father did was, one of our uncles worked for USAID, and because his mother had died, my father, as the one processing the paperwork, put my grandmother down as his mother," Her said. "And so, I am illegal in this country. My parents are illegal here in this country. And when we were fleeing that situation, never one time did my family say, 'Let's look at which state has the greatest welfare and which state has the greatest benefits, because that's the state we're going to go to.'"
"Nobody leaves their country unless they have to leave that country," she added.
Her told the room of lawmakers she shared the story because she wanted them to think about who they are calling illegal immigrants.
Her's family was "smarter" in how they came to the U.S., she said, although they broke the laws to get into the country.
"I never knew that," she said. "I just learned that now. So, when you're thinking about voting no on this bill, you're voting no against someone like me who paid more into this country than it has ever given to me, that the blood of my grandfather, who died for democracy, that he never received benefits being in this country, and yet he paid taxes his entire life into it."
Her's office did not respond to Fox News Digital's request for comment on the matter.
Still, Her asked her colleagues to give everyone the same opportunity her family had, however they got to the U.S.
"They didn't want to leave where they were," she said. "We are not looking to what state is going to give us the best benefits. We're looking to just be alive."Original article source: Minnesota state representative admits she is in the US illegally during legislative debate

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Pasco graduation disrupted by student yelling ‘should have started with English'
Pasco graduation disrupted by student yelling ‘should have started with English'

Yahoo

timean hour ago

  • Yahoo

Pasco graduation disrupted by student yelling ‘should have started with English'

A Pasco High School graduate and his family will be meeting with administrators this week after he disrupted the school's commencement ceremony with comments that criticized the principal's use of Spanish. As Bulldogs from the class of 2025 were handed their diplomas Saturday at Edgar Brown Memorial Stadium, one student reportedly spoke into a microphone, 'This is America. You should've started with English.' His comments appeared to be in reference to Principal Veronica Machado's welcome speech, which was given first in Spanish and then in English. The school and broader community have a large Spanish-speaking population. More than 80% of the school's population come from Hispanic and Latino backgrounds, and more than half of Pasco residents overall speak a language other than English at home. The district appears to have edited out the student's comments from the livestream on Sunday, and on Monday took the video down to add edits to clarify students' names. The interruption was caught by audience members and has been shared thousands of times across social media. 'We are disappointed and saddened that a Pasco High School student chose to disrupt the graduation ceremony on Saturday, June 7, 2025, by making a personal statement that does not reflect the values of our school district,' Pasco School District administrators said in a statement. 'Before participating in graduation ceremonies, all students are required to sign an agreement to uphold standards of appropriate conduct. The student's decision to move into the personal space of the name readers and speak over their microphone was a clear departure from that agreement and selfishly took attention away from the achievements of all graduates being celebrated. The district will take steps to prevent disruption of speakers on stage at all future events,' the statement continued. An administrator reportedly addressed the disruption on stage and after the ceremony. The district plans to hold a series of meetings and listening sessions this week with students, staff and families who were impacted. While district and school admin plan to meet with the student and his family, it's unclear if he will face any discipline or repercussions. School Board President Amanda Brown said in a statement on her personal social media account that it's important all students and families know they belong in their schools, that their languages and cultures are valued, and that Pasco continues to strive toward an inclusive environment. 'While every student is entitled to their voice and lived experience, I do not condone the manner or message in which this moment unfolded,' Brown said. 'I believe it is important to reaffirm that Pasco is a diverse and inclusive community, and our schools should reflect and celebrate that diversity. Language is a powerful expression of identity, and the use of Spanish during the ceremony was a meaningful way to honor our bilingual students, families and staff,' she continued. The school district is home to the state's largest dual language program, educating more than 2,000 multi-lingual students with instruction in Spanish and Russian in addition to English. The district says this program promotes bilingualism, biliteracy, socio-economic competency and high academic achievement. About 509 students graduated from Pasco High School over the weekend.

Trump orders Marines to Los Angeles as protests escalate over immigration raids, demonstrating the president's power to deploy troops on US soil
Trump orders Marines to Los Angeles as protests escalate over immigration raids, demonstrating the president's power to deploy troops on US soil

San Francisco Chronicle​

timean hour ago

  • San Francisco Chronicle​

Trump orders Marines to Los Angeles as protests escalate over immigration raids, demonstrating the president's power to deploy troops on US soil

(The Conversation is an independent and nonprofit source of news, analysis and commentary from academic experts.) William C. Banks, Syracuse University (THE CONVERSATION) President Donald Trump ordered a contingent of about 700 Marines to Los Angeles on June 9, 2025, in response to what Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth described as 'increased threats to federal law enforcement officers and federal buildings.' This dramatic escalation of the military presence in Los Angeles followed Trump's June 7 order to send about 2,000 National Guard troops into the city. Both measures were Trump's response to what he called 'numerous incidents of violence and disorder' by those protesting his administration's actions rounding up and deporting immigrants in the Los Angeles area. State and local officials decried Trump's actions, with California Gov. Gavin Newsom calling the move ' purposefully inflammatory,' as well as ' an illegal act.' California sued the Trump administration on June 9 to block its deployment of National Guard members. Other critics of Trump's actions said the scale and character of the protests did not warrant such extreme measures. Amy Lieberman, a politics and society editor at The Conversation U.S., spoke with William C. Banks, a scholar of the role of the military in domestic affairs, to understand the extent of a president's power to send American troops to Los Angeles. They can, but it is an extraordinary exercise of authority to use troops domestically. It has rarely been done in the U.S. as a way of responding to a civil disturbance. Congress has delegated that authority of deploying American troops domestically to the president in limited circumstances. Otherwise, the only authority is exercised by governors, who have control of the National Guard. Why was American law set up this way? The U.S. was founded in response to heavy-handed English use of the military by King George to interfere with the civil liberties and rights of the colonists in the lead-up to the American Revolution. So, when the founders created the U.S. Constitution, they were very careful to insert roadblocks that would make it difficult for the government to use troops to carry out its own programs. The country's framers also understood there might be occasions when it would be necessary to use the military domestically. They did a couple of things to control the exercise of military authority. One was to ensure that the commander in chief of the military was a civilian. Second, they gave the authority to call up the National Guard, what was known as the 'militia' in those days, to Congress, not to the president, in order to create a separation of powers. Under what circumstances can the president deploy troops to an American city? Under the Insurrection Act, which was signed into law in 1807, a president can deploy troops during what is called an insurrection, simply meaning when all hell breaks loose. The president can decide that it is ' impracticable,' according to the Insurrection Act, to enforce the laws of the U.S. in a given city, and he may call forth the military or the National Guard to help restore law and order. In order to invoke the Insurrection Act, the president first has to make a proclamation to those he calls the insurrectionists to cease and desist. Unless the alleged insurrectionists immediately do what the president says, the president then has the authority to deploy forces. Trump has repeatedly called the protesters in Los Angeles 'insurrectionists,' but has also walked those remarks back and hasn't made any kind of formal proclamation yet. When Trump ordered California's National Guard members to deploy to Los Angeles on June 7, he did so on a narrow statutory authority to protect federal buildings, properties and personnel that were trying to enforce immigration laws. What is the Posse Comitatus Act and how does it apply to the current situation in Los Angeles? Congress passed the Posse Comitatus Act in 1878. This act's name derives from an arcane Latin term that means 'the power of the county.' This law establishes a legal presumption in the U.S. that the military, if it is deployed domestically, should not engage in law enforcement. This act is an important part of American law. It means that the military and National Guard are trained on this principle that they are not to engage in domestic law enforcement activities. Those are reserved for police, sheriffs and marshals. Invoking the Insurrection Act is the principal exception to this law. So the Insurrection Act allows the military to act as law enforcement officials? That's right. By invoking the Insurrection Act the military could act as cops and have the right to arrest, investigate and detain civilians, with only the Constitution as a check on its power. This is not a situation that California National Guard members have trained for. They are trained to fight actual wildfires, but this is something entirely different. Are there any legal roadblocks that could curb the president's authority to send U.S. troops to Los Angeles? The short answer to this question is no. Can state governors or other elected officials prevent U.S. troops from being sent to their cities? In many ways that is the main question right now. California's governor, Gavin Newsom, has said that the state doen't need these military forces. Newsom's June 9 lawsuit against the Trump administration argues that the authority over the National Guard is reserved for states, 'unless the State requests or consents to federal control.' That has not happened in this case.

Scoop: Trump held lengthy Camp David strategy session with top team on Iran and Gaza
Scoop: Trump held lengthy Camp David strategy session with top team on Iran and Gaza

Axios

time3 hours ago

  • Axios

Scoop: Trump held lengthy Camp David strategy session with top team on Iran and Gaza

President Trump and his entire top foreign policy team huddled in Camp David for hours on Sunday to discuss U.S. strategy on the Iran nuclear crisis and the war in Gaza, two U.S. officials and another source with knowledge tell Axios. Why it matters: Trump's missions to reach a nuclear deal that averts war with Iran and a hostage and ceasefire deal that could end the war in Gaza have both faced recent setbacks. A senior U.S. official told Axios the president sees both crisis as intertwined and part of a broader regional reality he is trying to shape. Behind the scenes: U.S. officials said the "retreat" in Camp David included several policy sessions. The meeting on Iran and Gaza was attended by Trump, Vice President Vance, Secretary of State Marco Rubio, Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth, chief of staff Susie Wiles, special envoy Steve Witkoff, CIA director John Ratcliffe, director of national intelligence Tulsi Gabbard and other senior officials. Trump said Monday that "generals and admirals" also attended the meetings but declined to say what was discussed. "The retreat allowed all the senior people in the administration to sit together for a long time and discuss these issues," a U.S. official said. The White House didn't respond to a request for a comment. Split screen: Iranian officials have been finalizing their response to the U.S. nuclear deal proposal, and are expected to deliver a formal rejection in the next 24 hours. A senior White House official said the White House has received indications that despite saying "no," Iran will express interest in continuing the negotiations. "We sent the Iranians and very tough proposal, and we expect that they will give a harsh response." Trump said Monday that the Iranians were "good negotiators" but "sometimes they can be too tough," adding: "We're trying to make a deal so that there's no destruction and death. ... I hope that's the way it works out, but it might not work out that way. We'll soon find out." The White House says Trump's original deadline for a deal expires this Thursday, though both sides want to keep talking for now. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is more interested in pursuing a military option — though he's assured Trump he won't make a move while the talks are ongoing, as Axios reported. Trump called Netanyahu Monday before leaving Camp David. After the call, Trump told reporters Iran's demands were "just not acceptable," particularly on uranium enrichment. "So far, they're not there. I hate to say that, because the alternative is a very, very dire one." Iran's Foreign Ministry said a sixth round of talks would take place Sunday in Muscat, Oman. The senior U.S. official said Friday in Oslo was also an option. State of play: Trump and Netanyahu also discussed the situation in Gaza, a U.S. official said.

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