Video shows a Venezuelan man tackled in a New Hampshire courthouse. He was then sent by ICE to Texas.
A Venezuelan man facing misdemeanor charges in New Hampshire was tackled inside a courthouse by Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents who also knocked over an older bystander in the process. The man has since been detained in Texas, according to online records.
Recently released security camera footage from Nashua Circuit Court shows two agents throwing Arnuel Marquez Colmenarez to the floor and handcuffing him on Feb. 20. An older man using a cane to walk also ended up flat on his back.
Marquez Colmenarez, 33, had been charged on Feb. 9 with drunken driving, driving without a license and failing to provide information after an accident. He was heading to his arraignment on those charges when he was apprehended, Nashua Police say.
Jared Neff, the court liaison officer for the Hudson Police Department, said he was in the prosecutor's office when he heard a loud commotion near the elevators.
"There were voices yelling 'Stop!' and then a loud 'bang' which sounded like people had fallen on the ground and were actively fighting and struggling," he wrote in an incident report.
Neff said he helped restrain Marquez Colmenarez, whom he described as actively resisting attempts to handcuff him. The agents were working on orders to detain immigrants in the country illegally, Neff said. They told Neff they had tried to detain Marquez Colmenarez quietly in the elevator, but he had fled.
A judge later issued a bench warrant after he failed to appear for his arraignment. The prosecutor handling the case wasn't contacted by federal agents before the arraignment and didn't witness the arrest, police said.
As of Monday, Colmenaraz was being held at a U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement facility in Texas, according to an online database. The agency did not immediately respond to an email seeking comment.
Immigration officers were a growing presence at courthouses during President Trump's first term, prompting pushback from judges and other local officials. The president has gone further in his second term.
As part of Mr. Trump's
immigration crackdown
, his administration in its first days
repealed a policy
initially put in place by the U.S. Department of Homeland Security in 2011, which directed agents to avoid making arrests in "sensitive" locations like schools, houses of worship and hospitals, and expanded under former President Joe Biden to include courthouses and other places where immigrants may be trying to "access essential services."
Under current policy, immigration officials can make arrests "in or near courthouses when they have credible information that leads them to believe the targeted alien(s) is or will be present" and as long as they are not prohibited from doing so by state or local law. After the Biden-era rule was terminated, the Homeland Security Department issued a statement saying the new Trump administration "will not tie the hands of our brave law enforcement, and instead trusts them to use common sense."
In Boston,
an ICE agent was held in contempt
last month after he detained a suspect while he was on trial. The man detained, originally from the Dominican Republic and living with family in Massachusetts at the time, was on trial for allegedly pretending to be someone else in his driver's license application, CBS News Boston reported. The man's lawyers said ICE agents did not identify themselves and put him in a pickup truck as he was leaving court. He was taken into custody and detained in Plymouth, Massachusetts, according to the station.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Boston Globe
an hour ago
- Boston Globe
The legal issues surrounding Trump's use of troops to suppress protests
Here is a closer look. Advertisement What did Trump's order do? Trump called up National Guard troops to be put under federal control, issuing an order late Saturday that authorized Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth to use them to protect immigration enforcement agents, buildings and functions from interference by protesters. As justification, the White House cited recent protests against Immigration and Customs Enforcement raids in Los Angeles. Get Starting Point A guide through the most important stories of the morning, delivered Monday through Friday. Enter Email Sign Up The order called for at least 2,000 National Guard troops to be deployed for at least 60 days. Trump also authorized Hegseth to use regular federal troops 'as necessary' to augment the work of the federalized National Guard units. The National Guard consists of military forces in the state, largely part-time troops who have separate, full-time civilian jobs. Normally, each state's governor controls its National Guard, directing it to deal with a disaster or civil disorder. But under certain circumstances, federal law allows the president to take control. Advertisement On its face, deploying active-duty troops into an American city is an escalation because they fight war full time and, unlike a National Guard, may come from anywhere around the country. Legally, both federalized National Guard forces and active-duty troops are federal troops, under the control of the defense secretary and the president. What are the rules of engagement? This is unclear. For now, the federalized troops appear to have limited authority, Stephen I. Vladeck, a Georgetown University law professor, wrote in analyzing the order over the weekend. It says the troops can protect ICE agents and federal buildings against attacks by protesters, but it does not authorize them to carry out immigration raids or police the city's streets in general. But Trump's order did not specify any standards for when troops would be able to use force -- such as arresting people or shooting them -- if his administration deemed a protest to threaten federal personnel, property or functions. Notably, Hegseth has railed against military lawyers who promoted what he saw as unduly restrictive rules of engagement aimed at protecting civilians in war zones. He has fired the top judge advocate general lawyers who give advice on legal constraints. And his remarks since Saturday have not signaled restraint. On social media, Hegseth called protests against ICE in Los Angeles 'violent mob assaults' intended to prevent the removal of migrants living in the country illegally who he said were engaged in an 'invasion.' Hina Shamsi, director of the American Civil Liberties Union National Security Project, said Sunday that 'no matter who carries the gun or what uniform they wear, it's important to remember that the Constitution -- and in particular the First Amendment -- applies and troops' conduct is governed by strict constitutional limits.' Advertisement Is it legal to use federal troops on U.S. soil? Usually it is not, but sometimes it can be. Under an 1878 law called the Posse Comitatus Act, it is normally illegal to use federal troops on domestic soil for policing purposes. But an 1807 law, the Insurrection Act, creates an exception to that ban for situations in which the president decides that 'unlawful obstructions, combinations or assemblages, or rebellion against the authority of the United States' make it 'impracticable' to enforce federal law. Trump's order criticized the protests as violent and said they threatened to damage federal immigration detention facilities. 'To the extent that protests or acts of violence directly inhibit the execution of the laws,' it added, 'they constitute a form of rebellion against the authority of the government of the United States.' But he did not invoke the Insurrection Act. What legal authority did Trump cite? Trump invoked a statute, Section 12406 of Title 10 of the U.S. Code, that allows him to call National Guard members and units into federal service under certain circumstances, including during a rebellion against the authority of the federal government. The call-up statute does not, on its face, appear to confer any authority to use any kind of federal troops -- whether they be federalized National Guard members or active-duty Marines -- in the ways Trump has authorized. But Trump also referred to 'the authority vested in me as president by the Constitution,' which may suggest his administration believes he can claim inherent constitutional power as the commander in chief to use troops on U.S. soil in those ways. During the Vietnam War, William Rehnquist, then a lawyer for the Justice Department before being confirmed to the Supreme Court, wrote memos for its Office of Legal Counsel saying that presidents had inherent power to use troops to prevent anti-war protesters from obstructing federal functions or damaging federal property in the District of Columbia and at the Pentagon. Advertisement Using troops in such a protective capacity would not violate the Posse Comitatus Act, Rehnquist argued at the time. But there was no definitive court test of that idea. Moreover, the nation's capital and the campus of the Pentagon are both federal enclaves, unlike the businesses in Los Angeles where ICE agents are carrying out raids. Must a state's governor consent to federal troops? Not always. But Section 12406 says that orders for National Guard call-ups 'shall be issued through the governors of the states.' One of the state's complaints is that Hegseth ignored that provision, notifying the general in charge of California's National Guard without going through Newsom. The Insurrection Act would provide a separate basis for federalizing California's National Guard or for using active-duty troops without going through a governor. California Attorney General Rob Bonta said Monday that his office had been studying that law should Trump try to invoke it, but he insisted that local authorities were 'completely prepared' to address any developments. Using federal troops on domestic soil outside military bases for policing purposes has happened only in rare and extraordinary circumstances, and doing so over the objection of a state's governor is even more unusual. The last time a president used federal troops for domestic policing purposes was in 1992, when President George H.W. Bush invoked the Insurrection Act to suppress widespread riots in Los Angeles after a jury acquitted police officers who had been videotaped beating a Black motorist, Rodney King. But in that instance, California's governor, Pete Wilson, and Los Angeles' mayor, Tom Bradley, asked for federal assistance. Advertisement Presidents have not used federal troops without the permission of state governors since the Civil Rights Movement, when Southern governors defied court orders to desegregate public schools. Which troops is Trump using? For now, the National Guard troops have come from the California National Guard, while about 700 Marines joining them are normally based at Twentynine Palms in California, according to U.S. Northern Command. But Trump directed Hegseth to 'coordinate with the governors of the states' -- plural -- in identifying which units to call into federal service. That raises the possibility that Hegseth could send troops from a Republican-controlled state, further heightening the political tensions. Another possibility is that the administration envisions expanding the use of troops to other parts of the country. Trump's order is not limited to Los Angeles, stating instead that troops must protect immigration enforcement operations at any 'locations where protests against these functions are occurring or are likely to occur.' What is the status of the court challenge? The state filed a lawsuit Monday evening. It argued that the Trump administration had violated the procedure required by the National Guard call-up statute in bypassing Newsom. It also argued that local law enforcement could handle policing the protests, and by sending federal troops into the fray, Trump was trammeling states' rights protected by the 10th Amendment. It reserves to the states those governing powers that the Constitution does not bestow on the federal government. The Justice Department has not yet responded to the lawsuit and declined to comment. As events unfold, there could also be lawsuits on behalf of protesters, invoking individual rights such as First Amendment protections for freedom of speech and assembly. Advertisement This article originally appeared in
Black America Web
an hour ago
- Black America Web
Doechii Slams Trump Administration In Powerful BET Awards Acceptance Speech
Source: Kevin Winter / Getty Doechii was all smiles as she accepted the 2025 BET Awards for 'Best Female Hip Hop Artist.' After all, it's the 'Anxiety' artist's first BET Award. But instead of a traditional acceptance speech, she used her platform to bring awareness to the peaceful protest outside the Peacock Theater, which is being forcefully interrupted by authorities. 'I do want to address what's happening right now, outside the building,' she said passionately.'These are ruthless attacks that are creating fear and chaos in our communities. In the name of law and order, Trump is using military forces to stop a protest, and I want you all to consider what kind of government it appears to be — when every time we exercise our democratic right to protest, the military is deployed against us.' Dozens of people have been detained and taken into custody during raids by Immigration and Customs Enforcement, prompting protests in the DTLA area, NBC News reports. 'People are being swept up and torn from their families, and I feel it is my responsibility as an artist to use this moment to speak up for all oppressed people,' she added. Per AP, an initial 2,000 Guard troops ordered by Trump started arriving Sunday, which saw the most violence during three days of protests driven by anger over Trump's stepped-up enforcement of immigration laws that critics say are breaking apart migrant families. These attacks on our civil liberties is more evidence of the Trump Administration's failure to the people. 'This isn't about public safety,' Gov. Gavin Newsom said. 'It's about stroking a dangerous President's ego.' SEE ALSO Doechii Slams Trump Administration In Powerful BET Awards Acceptance Speech was originally published on Black America Web Featured Video CLOSE
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
How viral images are shaping views of L.A.'s immigration showdown
As protesters and police officers clashed in the streets of Los Angeles, a parallel conflict raged on social media, as immigration advocates and President Donald Trump's allies raced to shape public opinion on the impacts of mass deportations on American life. The sprawling protests against Immigration and Customs Enforcement raids were captured from all angles by cellphones and body cameras and streamed in real time, giving a visceral immediacy to a conflict that led to more than 50 arrests and orders from the Trump administration to deploy the National Guard. Subscribe to The Post Most newsletter for the most important and interesting stories from The Washington Post. Amateur videographers and online creators shared some of the mayhem's most-talked-about videos and images, often devoid of context and aimed at different audiences. Clips showing officers firing less-lethal rounds at an Australian journalist or mounted police directing their horses to stride over a sitting man fueled outrage on one side, while those of self-driving Waymo cars on fire and protesters holding Mexican flags stoked the other. The protests have become the biggest spectacle yet of the months-long online war over deportations, as Trump allies work to convince Americans that the issue of undocumented immigration demands aggressive action. But immigrant families and advocates have also been winning attention, and seeking public support, through emotional clips of crying families grappling with removal orders, anti-ICE gatherings and young children in federal custody. The messaging war comes at a time of polarized public sentiment over Trump's immigration policies. An Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research poll in April found that roughly half the country believed Trump's deportations had gone too far, while the other half thought his actions were about right or hadn't gone far enough. 'To advance your side of the story, you need a piece of content that the algorithm likes. You need something that really grabs people's attention by the throat and doesn't let it go,' said Laura Edelson, an assistant professor at Northeastern University's Khoury College of Computer Sciences. 'If you're on the pro-ICE side of this, you need to find visual images of these protests that look really scary, look really dangerous because that's what's going to draw human attention,' she added. But if 'you don't think that ICE should be taking moms away from their families and kids, you're going to have a video that starts with a crying child's face.' A White House official, speaking on the condition of anonymity to discuss internal plans, said Trump's digital strategists were following the president's lead by spotlighting images of destruction while insisting that he would always intervene in moments of unrest. The White House, which has said the ICE deportations are necessary to solve a national crisis, on Sunday posted an Instagram photo of Trump and a warning that looters and rioters would be given 'no mercy.' 'We're obviously following the president's direction. He is driving the message through his posts and his comments to the press,' the official said. 'We are definitely playing offense here. We are once again boxing the Democrats into the corner of defending criminal illegal aliens.' The unrest and its online propagation also heightened activity around projects like People Over Papers, a crowdsourced map for tracking the locations of ICE officers. Reports flooded in as the clashes continued, said Celeste, a project organizer in L.A. who spoke on the condition that her last name not be used for fear of government retribution. 'I haven't slept all weekend,' she said. She added, however, that she worried violent imagery from the ground could hurt the protesters' cause. She said she planned to start making Spanish-language videos for her 51,000 TikTok followers, explaining to skeptics that the violence isn't reflective of the protests, which she sees as necessary to counter ICE's agenda. The L.A. unrest followed weeks of online skirmishes over deportations, some of which have been touched off by the White House's strategy to lean into policy fights with bold and aggressive messaging. The White House last month posted a video that it said showed an 'EPIC takedown of 5 illegal aliens' outside a home improvement store and included an ICE hotline to solicit more tips. The clip, recorded by ICE agents' cameras, was liked 68,000 times but also drew criticism from commenters, who called it 'disturbing' and said this 'isn't a reality show.' After a similar ICE raid on Saturday outside a Home Depot in Paramount, a predominantly Latino suburb of L.A., witnesses sent out alerts on social media, and protesters raced to the scene. Within hours, the Trump administration called for the deployment of 2,000 National Guard troops to neutralize the unrest. On his Truth Social account a week earlier, Trump celebrated the Supreme Court clearing the way for the removal of some immigrants' legal protections by posting a photo of a jet-filled sky with the phrase, 'Let the Deportations Begin!' The White House has also posted stylized mug shots of unnamed immigrants it said were charged with heinous crimes. 'I love this version of the white house,' one commenter said, with a cry-laugh emoji. 'It feels like a movie every day with President Trump.' During the protests, the administration has worked with new-media figures and online influencers to promote its political points. Phil McGraw, the TV personality known as Dr. Phil who now runs the conservative media network Merit Street, posted an exclusive interview with border czar Tom Homan and embedded with ICE officers last week during L.A. raids, as the company's spokesperson first told CNN. Some top administration officials have worked to frame the protests in militaristic terms, with White House Deputy Chief of Staff Stephen Miller on Saturday sharing a video of the protest and calling it 'an insurrection against the laws and sovereignty of the United States.' Others, like Vice President JD Vance, have treated it as a chance for dark jokes. When posters on X said Vance could do the 'funniest thing ever' by deporting Derek Guy, a prominent menswear commentator who discussed how his family had been undocumented after fleeing Vietnam, the vice president on Monday posted a brief clip of Jack Nicholson nodding with a sinister grin. Some far-right influencers urged their followers to identify people caught on camera during the civil unrest. In one X post with more than 29,000 likes, the account End Wokeness shared a video of masked figures throwing rocks at police from an overpass and said, 'These are insurrectionists trying to kill cops. Make them famous.' In more left-leaning online spaces, some posters watching from the sidelines offered advice on how protesters could best position their cause to the rest of the world. On the r/ICE_raids subreddit, some posters urged L.A. protesters to stop carrying non-American flags. It's 'adding ammo to ICE's justification,' one poster said, attaching a screenshot of a Homeland Security post showing masked protesters with Mexican flags. Many accounts, knowingly or unknowingly, shared images that warped the reality of what was happening on the ground. An X account with 388,000 followers called US Homeland Security News, which is not affiliated with DHS but paid for one of X's 'verified' blue check marks, posted a photo of bricks that it said had been ordered to be 'used by Democrat militants against ICE agents and staff!! It's Civil War!!' The photo actually originated on the website of a Malaysian construction-supply company. The post has nevertheless been viewed more than 800,000 times. On Sunday night, California Gov. Gavin Newsom's X account tried to combat some of the misinformation directly, saying a viral video post being passed around as evidence of the day's chaos was actually five years old. Even before the L.A. protests, the increased attention on ICE activity had driven a rush of online organizing and real-world information gathering, with some people opposed to mass deportations tracking the movements of ICE officers with plans to foil or disrupt raids. In one viral TikTok post last week, a Minneapolis protester marching in a crowd outside the site of a rumored ICE raid said he had learned of it from Reddit, where a photo had been posted of Homeland Security Investigations officers outside a Mexican restaurant. The local sheriff's office later told news crews that the operation was not an immigration-enforcement case and that no arrests had been made. Some online creators treated the L.A. clashes as a prized opportunity for viral content. On Reddit, accounts with names like LiveNews_24H posted 'crazy footage' compilations of the unrest and said it looked like a 'war zone.' On YouTube, Damon Heller, who comments on police helicopter footage and scanner calls under the name Smoke N' Scan, streamed the clashes on Sunday for nearly 12 hours. Jeremy Lee Quinn, a photographer who shares protest footage to his social media followers, posted to Instagram on Saturday a video of protesters cheering from a bridge as officers tried to extinguish a burning police vehicle. Quinn, who also documented Black Lives Matter marches and the U.S. Capitol riots, said viewers on the left and right treat viral videos like weapons in their arsenal. Far-left viewers might take away from the videos ideas for militant tactics to use in future protests, he said, while far-right viewers will promote the videos to suggest the other side craves more violent crime. Either way, his material gets seen - including through reposts by groups such as the LibsOfReddit subreddit, which shares screenshots mocking liberal views on undocumented immigrants and transgender people. 'You end up with a far-right ecosystem that thrives on these viral moments,' Quinn said. As short-form video and social media platforms increasingly become many Americans' news sources of choice, experts worry they could also amp up the fear and outrage engendered by polarizing events. The fragmentation of social media and the attention-chasing machinery of its recommendation algorithms helps ensure that 'there are a lot of people talking past each other,' said Northeastern's Edelson, not seeing one another's content or 'even aware of the facts that are relevant to the other side.' Darrell West, a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution, a Washington think tank, said videos can play a uniquely forceful role in shaping people's reactions to current events because they 'encapsulate the emotion of the moment.' 'There's a heavy dose of misinformation,' he added. 'And, you know, people just end up getting angrier and angrier.' Related Content 'He's waging a war on us': As Trump escalates, Angelenos defend their city To save rhinos, conservationists are removing their horns Donald Trump and the art of the Oval Office confrontation
