Trump administration revokes humanitarian parole of local teacher
Hundreds of thousands of people in the United States under a program called humanitarian parole are at risk of being sent back to their home countries by the Trump administration.
News4 spoke with a man named Wuilman Vanegas who is one of those impacted.
'I cannot deny, you know, it's been difficult,' Vanegas said. 'It's been like, stressful.'
Vanegas and his family moved to the U.S. 10 months ago on humanitarian parole, a Biden-era program that gives individuals temporary legal status for urgent humanitarian reasons or for significant public benefit.
Vanegas, who taught high schoolers in Nicaragua for 15 years, now works three part time jobs. He teaches Spanish at two grade schools, including one in Prince George's County, and at Howard University.
Last month, he received notice his parole was being revoked and he and his family needed to leave by April 25.
'How can I get a solution about this situation in a short period of time?' Vanegas said. 'That is something that I, that we have been thinking about and it's been something that is difficult, you know.'
Whether the Vanegas family has to leave the U.S. is in limbo. Earlier this month, a federal judge in Boston blocked the Trump administration's push to end humanitarian parole.
'Based on the information that we know, it seems that we will have more time,' Vanegas said.
The Vanegas family's parole was supposed to last two years, but they've grown attached to their community.
Now, Vanegas is trying to secure full time employment so he can apply for a visa.
He's received a lot of support from his employers, neighbors and friends. He started a fundraiser to help cover expenses while the family tries to work out their puzzle. It's almost at its goal.
'I think that teaching is one of the most wonderful professions, you know, where you can help children, and you can help the community,' he said. 'I'm just asking to get an opportunity, you know, to continue doing what I have been doing my whole life.'
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Reuters
21 minutes ago
- Reuters
Overview of Federal Actions on LGBTQIA+ Rights Practical Law The Journal
The current Trump administration has enacted policies that significantly lower federal protections for LGBTQIA+ individuals, particularly transgender people. The administration has relied heavily on executive orders and agency directives to affect the rights of LGBTQIA+ individuals as they relate to military service, health care, education, and civil rights enforcement (see, for example, Executive Order 14183, titled 'Prioritizing Military Excellence and Readiness,' and Executive Order 14173, titled 'Ending Illegal Discrimination and Restoring Merit-Based Opportunity'). For most of US history, LGBTQIA+ individuals faced negative treatment in various settings. For example, during World War II, the federal government dishonorably discharged gay individuals from the military. Additionally, from the late 1940s through the 1960s, a time known as the Lavender Scare, the US government either fired or forced gay individuals to resign from government service. (See Nat'l Park Serv.: LGB Military History and Libr. of Cong.: LGBTQIA+ Studies: A Resource Guide.) The modern LGBTQIA+ rights movement is commonly believed to have begun in 1969, when a police raid on the Stonewall Inn in New York City instigated a spontaneous uprising by LGBTQIA+ patrons. The following year, in 1970, the first Pride marches took place in New York, Los Angeles, and Chicago. (Libr. of Cong.: The History of Pride.) Over the course of the movement that continues today, the federal government has taken steps to either expand or contract the rights of LGBTQIA+ individuals. Several times, restrictions imposed by one administration on these rights have been reversed by later administrations, reflecting changing political and social priorities. Major federal milestones in recent history include: Lawrence v. Texas. In 2003, the US Supreme Court struck down sodomy laws nationwide and decriminalized same-sex sexual conduct. In so holding, the Court overturned its 1986 holding in Bowers v. Hardwick (478 U.S. 186 (1986)). It held that an adult's consensual sexual intimacy at home is a vital interest in liberty and privacy that is protected by the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. (539 U.S. 558 (2003).) The repeal of 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell.' In 2010, the Obama administration repealed 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell,' allowing gay, lesbian, and bisexual individuals to serve openly in the US military. The policy had previously been enacted in 1993 and required service members to hide their sexual orientation or face discharge. (US Dep't of Def.: Don't Ask, Don't Tell Resources.) United States v. Windsor. In 2013, the Supreme Court struck down Section 3 of the Defense of Marriage Act (passed by Congress in 1996) that banned federal recognition of same-sex marriages. The Court found that the law violated the Fifth Amendment's guarantee of equal protection. (570 U.S. 744 (2013).) Obergefell v. Hodges. In 2015, the Supreme Court ruled that same-sex marriage is a constitutional right nationwide. It held that the Due Process Clause and the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment guarantee same-sex couples the right to marry. (576 U.S. 644 (2015).) Bostock v. Clayton County. In 2020, the Supreme Court held that Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 shields employees from workplace discrimination based on their sexual orientation or gender identity. The decision extended federal workplace protections for these employees and made it illegal for employers to fire or discriminate against someone for being gay or transgender. (590 U.S. 1731 (2020); for more information, see Sex Discrimination Under Title VII and the EPA and Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity Discrimination Under Title VII on Practical Law.) 303 Creative LLC v. Elenis. In 2023, the Supreme Court ruled that under the First Amendment, the state could not compel a website designer to create work that violated her values. The decision highlighted the tension between free expression and anti-discrimination laws. (600 U.S. 570 (2023).) The Trump administration has rolled back various LGBTQIA+ protections that were enacted by the preceding Biden administration. Additionally, state and local governments continue to pass legislation impacting LGBTQIA+ rights (for more information, see Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity and Expression Discrimination State and Local Laws Chart: Overview on Practical Law). Counsel should stay informed on evolving policies and court rulings under the current administration to effectively advise on LGBTQIA+ rights in areas such as employment, health care, education, and public accommodations. (For resources for counsel to assist employers in addressing sexual orientation and gender identity in the workplace, see Workplace Diversity and Inclusion Toolkit
North Wales Chronicle
31 minutes ago
- North Wales Chronicle
Trump administration open to discussion on key issues, Merz says
Mr Merz described his Oval Office meeting and extended lunch with Mr Trump on Thursday as constructive but also candid, noting the two leaders expressed different views on Ukraine. He said: 'Yesterday, in the meeting at the Oval Office, I expressed a distinctly different position on the topic of Ukraine than the one Trump had taken, and not only was there no objection, but we discussed it in detail again over lunch.' The White House meeting marked the first time the two sat down in person. Mr Merz, who became chancellor in May, avoided the kind of confrontations in the Oval Office that have tripped up other world leaders, including Ukraine's Volodymyr Zelensky and South Africa's Cyril Ramaphosa. The German chancellor presented Mr Trump with a gold-framed birth certificate of the president's grandfather, Friedrich Trump, who emigrated from Kallstadt, Germany. Mr Trump called Mr Merz a 'very good man to deal with'. The American administration, Mr Merz said, is open to discussion, listens and is willing to accept differing opinions. He added: 'Let's stop talking about Donald Trump with a raised finger and wrinkled nose. You have to talk with him, not about him.' Mr Merz said he also met with senators on Capitol Hill, urging them to recognise the scale of Russian rearmament. 'Please take a look at how far Russia's armament is going, what they are currently doing there; you obviously have no idea what's happening,' he said he told them. 'In short, you can talk to them, but you must not let yourself be intimidated. I don't have that inclination anyway.' Mr Merz, who speaks English fluently, stressed the need for transatlantic trust and said he reminded Mr Trump that allies matter. 'Whether we like it or not, we will remain dependent on the United States of America for a long time,' he said. 'But you also need partners in the world, and the Europeans, especially the Germans, are the best-suited partners. 'This is the difference between authoritarian systems and democracies: authoritarian systems have subordinates. Democracies have partners — and we want to be those partners in Europe and with America.' He reiterated that the US remains committed to Nato, particularly as Germany and others boost their defence spending. Mr Trump has in the past suggested the US might abandon its commitments to the alliance if member countries do not meet defence spending targets. Mr Merz said: 'I have absolutely no doubt that the American government is committed to Nato, especially now that we've all said we're doing more. 'We're ensuring that we can also defend ourselves in Europe, and I believe this expectation was not unjustified.' 'We've been the free riders of American security guarantees for years and we're changing that now.'
North Wales Chronicle
31 minutes ago
- North Wales Chronicle
Trump bid to ban foreign Harvard students temporarily blocked by judge
Mr Trump's proclamation, issued on Wednesday, was the latest attempt by his administration to prevent the nation's oldest and wealthiest college from enrolling a quarter of its students, who account for much of Harvard's research and scholarship. Harvard filed a legal challenge the next day, asking for a judge to block Mr Trump's order and calling it illegal retaliation for Harvard's rejection of White House demands. Harvard said the president was attempting an end-run around a previous court order. A few hours later, US District Judge Allison Burroughs in Boston issued a temporary restraining order against Mr Trump's Wednesday proclamation. Harvard, she said, had demonstrated it would sustain 'immediate and irreparable injury' before she would have an opportunity to hear from the parties in the lawsuit. Ms Burroughs also extended the temporary hold she placed on the administration's previous attempt to end Harvard's enrolment of international students. Last month, the Department of Homeland Security revoked Harvard's certification to host foreign students and issue paperwork to them for their visas, only to have Ms Burroughs block the action temporarily. Mr Trump's order this week invoked a different legal authority. If Mr Trump's measure were to survive this court challenge, it would block thousands of students who are scheduled to come to Harvard's campus in Cambridge, Massachusetts, for the summer and autumn terms. 'Harvard's more than 7,000 F-1 and J-1 visa holders — and their dependents — have become pawns in the government's escalating campaign of retaliation,' Harvard wrote in a court filing on Thursday. While the court case proceeds, Harvard is making contingency plans so students and visiting scholars can continue their work at the university, president Alan Garber said in a message to the campus and alumni. 'Each of us is part of a truly global university community,' Mr Garber said on Thursday. 'We know that the benefits of bringing talented people together from around the world are unique and irreplaceable.' Harvard has attracted a growing number of the brightest minds from around the world, with international enrolment growing from 11% of the student body three decades ago to 26% today. Rising international enrolment has made Harvard and other elite colleges uniquely vulnerable to Mr Trump's crackdown on foreign students. Republicans have been seeking to force overhauls of the nation's top colleges, which they see as hotbeds of 'woke' and antisemitic viewpoints. Mr Garber says the university has made changes to combat antisemitism. But Harvard, he said, will not stray from its 'core, legally-protected principles', even after receiving federal ultimatums. Mr Trump's administration has also taken steps to withhold federal funding from Harvard and other elite colleges that have rejected White House demands related to campus protests, admissions, hiring and more. Harvard's 53 billion dollar (£39 billion) endowment allows it to weather the loss of funding for a time, although Mr Garber has warned of 'difficult decisions and sacrifices' to come.
