logo
New militarized border zone spurs national security charges against hundreds of immigrants

New militarized border zone spurs national security charges against hundreds of immigrants

SANTA FE, N.M. (AP) — Several hundred immigrants have been charged with unauthorized access to a newly designated militarized zone along the southern U.S. border in New Mexico and western Texas since the Department of Justice introduced the new approach in late April.
President Donald Trump's administration has transferred oversight of a strip of land along the U.S.-Mexico border to the military while authorizing U.S. troops to temporarily detain immigrants in the country illegally — though there's no record of troops exercising that authority as U.S. Customs and Border Protection conducts arrests. The designated national defense areas are overseen by U.S. Army commands out of Fort Bliss in the El Paso area in Texas and Fort Huachuca in Arizona.
The novel national security charges against immigrants who enter through those militarized zones carry a potential sentence of 18 months in prison on top of a possible six month sentence for illegal entry. The full implications are unclear for migrants who pursue legal status through separate proceedings in federal immigration court.
The Trump administration is seeking to accelerate mass removals of immigrants in the country illegally and third-country deportations, including Venezuelans sent to an El Salvador prison amid accusations of gang affiliation. The administration has deployed thousands of troops to the border, while arrests have plunged to the lowest levels since the mid-1960s.
The federal public defender's office in Las Cruces indicates that roughly 400 cases had been filed in criminal court there as of Tuesday as it seeks dismissal of the misdemeanor and petty misdemeanor charges for violating security regulations and entering restricted military property. Court records show that federal prosecutors in Texas — where a National Defense Area extends about 60 miles (97 kilometers) from El Paso to Fort Hancock — last week began filing the military security charges as well.
Las Cruces-based federal Magistrate Judge Gregory Wormuth is asking for input from federal prosecutors and public defense attorneys on the standard of proof for the trespassing charges 'given the unprecedented nature of prosecuting such offenses in this factual context.'
Public defenders say there needs to be proof that immigrants knew of the military restrictions and acted 'in defiance of that regulation for some nefarious or bad purpose.'
New Mexico-based U.S. Attorney Ryan Ellison, appointed in April, says hundreds of 'restricted area' signs have been posted in Spanish and English to warn that entry is prohibited by the Department of Defense, along New Mexico's nearly 180-mile (290-kilometer) stretch of border.
In a court filings, Ellison has said there's no danger of ensnaring innocent people when it comes to immigrants who avoid ports of entry to cross the border in willful violation of federal law — and now military regulations.
ACLU attorney Rebecca Sheff said basic freedoms are at risk as the government flexes its power at the border and restricts civilian access.
'The extension of military bases ... it's a serious restriction, it's a serious impact on families that live in the border area,' she said.
The Department of Justice has warned Wormuth against issuing an advisory opinion on legal standards for trespassing in the military area.
'The New Mexico National Defense Area is a crucial installation necessary to strengthen the authority of servicemembers to help secure our borders and safeguard the country,' Ellison said in a court briefing.
Democratic U.S. Sen. Martin Heinrich of New Mexico expressed concern Wednesday in a letter to Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth that anyone may be stopped and detained by U.S. Army soldiers for entering a 170-square-mile —440-square-kilometer) area along the border previously overseen by the Department of Interior and frequently used for recreation and livestock ranching.
Hegseth has emphasizing a hard-line approach to enforcement.
'Let me be clear: if you cross into the National Defense Area, you will be charged to the FULLEST extent of the law,' he said in a post on the social platform X.
___
Associated Press reporter Valerie Gonzalez in McAllen, Texas, contributed.

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Trump says he thinks the government has a 'very easy case' against Kilmar Abrego Garcia
Trump says he thinks the government has a 'very easy case' against Kilmar Abrego Garcia

Yahoo

time35 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

Trump says he thinks the government has a 'very easy case' against Kilmar Abrego Garcia

President Donald Trump on Saturday said that it wasn't his decision to bring Kilmar Abrego Garcia, a Maryland man who was mistakenly deported to El Salvador, back to the U.S. to face federal charges, saying the 'Department of Justice decided to do it that way, and that's fine.' 'That wasn't my decision,' Trump said of Abrego Garcia's return in a phone call with NBC News on Saturday. 'It should be a very easy case' for federal prosecutors, the president added. Trump added that he did not speak with Salvadoran President Nayib Bukele about Abrego Garcia's return, even though the two men spoke about Abrego Garcia during an April meeting in the Oval Office. His remarks came after Abrego Garcia arrived back in the U.S. on Friday and was charged in an indictment alleging he transported people who were not legally in the country. The indictment came amid a protracted legal battle over whether to bring him back from El Salvador that escalated all the way up to the Supreme Court. Abrego Garcia's family and lawyers have called him a family man, while Trump and his administration have alleged that he is a member of the gang MS-13. The case drew national attention amid the Trump administration's broader push for mass deportations. After Abrego Garcia's deportation, lawyers for the Trump administration said he was deported in an 'administrative error,' as Abrego Garcia had previous legal protection from deportation to El Salvador. Still, the Trump administration did not attempt to bring Abrego Garcia back, even as the Supreme Court ruled that it had to 'facilitate' his return to the U.S. Democrats, including Sen. Chris Van Hollen, D-Md., had for weeks said that Abrego Garcia was denied due process when he was detained and deported, arguing that he should have been allowed to defend himself from deportation before he was sent to El Salvador. Trump on Saturday called Van Hollen, who went to visit Abrego Garcia in jail in El Salvador in April, a 'loser' for defending the man's right to due process. 'He's a loser. The guy's a loser. They're going to lose because of that same thing. That's not what people want to hear,' the president said about Van Hollen. 'He's trying to defend a man who's got a horrible record of abuse, abuse of women in particular. No, he's a total loser, this guy.' On Friday, Attorney General Pam Bondi alleged that Abrego Garcia 'was a smuggler of humans and children and women. He made over 100 trips, the grand jury found, smuggling people throughout our country.' In a statement Friday, Abrego Garcia's lawyer called Bondi's move 'an abuse of power, not justice.' This article was originally published on

Trump dumps the Federalist Society — and even Republicans are shooketh
Trump dumps the Federalist Society — and even Republicans are shooketh

Yahoo

time35 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

Trump dumps the Federalist Society — and even Republicans are shooketh

In a major about-face, Donald Trump is turning on the conservative powerhouse that built his judicial legacy, the Federalist Society. Yale Law professor Akhil Reed Amar warns that this break with the very group that helped propel him to power marks a dangerous shift. 'He just wants loyalty to himself—thugs and hacks,' Amar says, adding that Federalist Society judges are principled and loyal to the Constitution, not to Trump. 'The Senate needs to play a really important role now—especia

Elon Musk Deletes His Explosive Donald Trump Claim Tied to Jeffrey Epstein amid Their Public Feud
Elon Musk Deletes His Explosive Donald Trump Claim Tied to Jeffrey Epstein amid Their Public Feud

Yahoo

time35 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

Elon Musk Deletes His Explosive Donald Trump Claim Tied to Jeffrey Epstein amid Their Public Feud

Elon Musk has deleted his X post claiming that President Donald Trump's name is mentioned in the Jeffrey Epstein files Musk's claim came after the two men clashed about a new budget bill backed by the president The tech billionaire's decision to take down the post may be a sign of de-escalation in their highly publicized feudElon Musk has taken down his explosive claim that President Donald Trump's name is in the Jeffrey Epstein files — a move which may be a step toward de-escalation in the public feud between the two men. In the since-deleted post, which Musk shared on X on Thursday, June 5, the tech billionaire claimed that Trump appears in the high-profile case files, writing that it was the 'real reason' the files had not been made public. "Have a nice day, DJT!" he added sarcastically. Trump responded to the claim on Friday, June 6, by reposting a statement on Truth Social that was originally written by Epstein's former lawyer, David Schoen, on X. In the statement, Schoen claimed that his client 'had no information to hurt President Trump.' "I was hired to lead Jeffrey Epstein's defense as his criminal lawyer 9 days before he died,' the statement began. 'He sought my advice for months before that. I can say authoritatively, unequivocally, and definitively that he had no information to hurt President Trump. I specifically asked him!" Trump's name has previously been publicly linked with Epstein. His name was mentioned in flight logs released earlier this year by Attorney General Pam Bondi a total of seven times. However, the appearance of Trump's name in the flight logs does not necessarily indicate wrongdoing, as many of the individuals named could have been on Epstein's plane for legitimate reasons. The president was friends with the disgraced financier and pedophile for many years, but the two had a falling out in the mid-2000s, Trump told reporters shortly before Epstein died by suicide in 2019. Musk's deleted claim came on the heels of a number of verbal jabs with the president following the release of a controversial new budget bill. "I'm sorry, but I just can't stand it anymore," Musk posted to X — which he owns — on Tuesday, June 3. "This massive, outrageous, pork-filled Congressional spending bill is a disgusting abomination. Shame on those who voted for it: you know you did wrong. You know it." During an Oval Office press conference on Thursday, June 4, Trump responded to Musk's criticisms. "Elon knew the inner workings of this bill better than almost anyone sitting here," Trump told reporters. "He had no problem with it. All of a sudden he had a problem, and he only developed the problem when he found out that we're going to have to cut the [electric vehicle] mandate, because that's billions and billions of dollars." Trump also predicted Musk's attacks would get personal after saying he was "very disappointed in Elon." The war of words also came just days after it was announced Musk would be leaving the Trump administration. Read the original article on People

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