ICE agents deploy new tactic
ICE agents deploy new tactic | The Excerpt
On Saturday's episode of The Excerpt podcast: USA TODAY National Correspondent Trevor Hughes discusses a new tactic from ICE - arresting people as they leave mandatory court hearings. President Donald Trump Friday threatened steep tariffs on European Union goods and targeted iPhones. A judge has halted a Trump administration action barring Harvard from enrolling foreign students. Trump also ordered changes to nuclear power regulations. Listen to our special episode on nuclear power here. Sunday marks five years since the murder of George Floyd. His legacy is under siege as racial justice efforts lose ground. IndyStar Motor Sports Reporter Nathan Brown talks about a cheating scandal ahead of Sunday's Indianapolis 500 car race. Here's a schedule and how to watch.
Let us know what you think of this episode by sending an email to podcasts@usatoday.com.
Hit play on the player below to hear the podcast and follow along with the transcript beneath it. This transcript was automatically generated, and then edited for clarity in its current form. There may be some differences between the audio and the text.
Podcasts: True crime, in-depth interviews and more USA TODAY podcasts right here
Taylor Wilson:
Good morning. I'm Taylor Wilson, and today is Saturday, May 24th, 2025. This is The Excerpt. Today we take a closer look at a new tactic being used by ICE, plus Trump aims to overhaul regulation surrounding nuclear power, and we talk about a cheating scandal ahead of tomorrow's Indianapolis 500.
ICE is now targeting people as they leave certain mandatory immigration court hearings. I spoke with USA TODAY national correspondent Trevor Hughes about the new tactic.
Hiya, Trevor.
Trevor Hughes:
Hey, good to be here.
Taylor Wilson:
Good to have you as always. So just starting with the basics, what is ICE doing here? Tell us about really this new tactic showing up outside courthouses.
Trevor Hughes:
It's a little complicated to explain, but at the end of the day, it's really about scheduling more people for deportation quicker. There are many, many people who entered the country under Joe Biden's administration and they are following the process that existed under Biden. What the Trump administration has figured out is if they cancel that process, they can then schedule people immediately for deportation. So that's what's happening here. If someone has entered the country within the past two years using the CBP1 app, which allowed you to schedule an asylum claim, etc., etc., the Trump administration has basically decided that they will drop the prosecution of those cases and then that allows them to deport you immediately. Under normal circumstances, if you have a pending immigration case, you cannot be deported.
Taylor Wilson:
So Trevor, I mean just functionally, is this a case of migrants getting this decision from inside the courthouse, walking outside, and then ICE agents are awaiting them for detention right outside the courthouse?
Trevor Hughes:
Yes, that's exactly what's happening. There have actually been some confrontations in Arizona and a couple other places now where advocates or family members of these folks who are being taken into custody are actually pushing back or really getting a little bit aggressive with these ICE agents because they feel like this is a very unfair change that the Trump administration has made.
Taylor Wilson:
Well, some advocacy groups are suing to stop the process, Trevor. What's the latest there and what do many advocates argue as it pertains to the Constitution on this issue?
Trevor Hughes:
This is one of those situations where the Trump administration is sort of forging ahead despite a number of different court challenges on a bunch of different fronts. Advocates would argue that if you followed the rules that existed at the time, you shouldn't be punished because there's a new president who is changing those rules. Now, of course, the president has said it's practically impossible to hold hearings for more than a million people, two million people, three million people, and that there's no way that our court systems or the immigration court systems even could handle this. And so that's why they're moving to this expedited system.
Taylor Wilson:
Of course, this is really just part of a string of new tactics from the Trump administration. What else might be coming? What are you keeping an eye on in the coming weeks and months Trevor?
Trevor Hughes:
I mean, again, it's really important to remember the president ran on this platform. He's executing what he said he would do, and that we talked to hundreds of thousands of voters over the course of the who said this was the kind of thing they wanted to see. They wanted to see aggressive immigration enforcement. And I'll tell you the emails I've been getting from folks, people in this country, many of them are very happy with what's happening.
I think you're going to continue to see the Trump administration really scaling up. They've set a goal of deporting a million people a year, which is a huge increase from existing practice. And as part of that, the congressional legislation that's being considered right now for the budget would include funding for 100,000 detention beds.
Taylor Wilson:
Trevor Hughes is a national correspondent with USA TODAY. Thanks as always, Trevor.
Trevor Hughes:
You bet.
♦
Taylor Wilson:
President Donald Trump reignited trade tensions to end the week with back-to-back social media posts targeting Apple and the European Union. In a morning message on his platform Truth Social, Trump warned Apple CEO Tim Cook of a new 25% import tax if his company's trademark iPhones are not made in the United States. A half hour later, Trump wrote that he was recommending a 50% tariff on the European Union starting June 1st. The comments sent global markets into another round of turmoil after weeks of de-escalation had brought some relief from market chaos.
Trump's warning to Apple came as the company is planning to shift production of iPhones sold in the U.S. from China to India by the end of 2026, Trump said he long ago informed Cook he expected these iPhones to be built in the U.S. Meanwhile, Trump said his administration's talks with the EU are going nowhere, and he said the tariffs on EU imports will go into effect if European companies don't relocate manufacturing bases to the U.S. That demand seemed improbable to be met with the June 1st date just over a week away.
♦
Hours after Harvard University sued the Trump administration for revoking its ability to enroll international students, a federal judge temporarily barred the Department of Homeland Security from allowing the change to take effect. U.S. District Judge Alison Burroughs, a Barack Obama appointee, granted the Ivy League School's request for a temporary restraining order yesterday. She wrote that the administration's new policy would bring immediate and irreparable injury to Harvard's campus. The ban took effect immediately and will remain in place until the judge decides whether to issue a broader pause while the two sides battle in court. A hearing to consider a preliminary injunction is set for next week.
♦
President Trump signed a series of executive orders yesterday intended to overhaul the regulation of commercial nuclear reactors and speed the process of building and deploying nuclear power. The move involves a long held Republican goal of deregulating nuclear power. According to a senior White House official, the four executive orders aim to expedite reactor research and development, streamline regulations to allow the Pentagon and other agencies to build reactors on federally owned land, they also changed the Nuclear Regulatory Commission and set new timelines for its consideration of construction permits and expand domestic uranium and enrichment capabilities. The NRC has overseen commercial nuclear reactors since its creation in 1975. The U.S. has only two operational commercial reactors whose construction was approved since 1978. For a conversation on nuclear power and whether it's the solution, check out our special episode. There's a link in today's Show Notes.
♦
Tomorrow marks five years since the police murder of George Floyd in Minneapolis. The murder sparked a massive outpouring of grief and anger as protesters took to the streets with signs echoing some of his last words, "I can't breathe." Artists across the country adorned their cities with his image and the intersection where Floyd took his last breaths was transformed from a gas station and corner store into a living memorial. But the future of the square has been a subject of heated debate and across the nation, other memorials honoring Floyd and the Black Lives Matter movement have been removed, vandalized, or fallen into disrepair. As symbols of Floyd's Place in history have faded, so to have hopes for federal police reform, commitments to DEI, and American optimism about the future of racial justice. You can read more on that ahead of tomorrow's anniversary with a link in today's show description.
♦
With Indianapolis 500 car race set for tomorrow, a cheating scandal has hit IndyCar. I spoke with Indianapolis Star Motor Sports reporter Nathan Brown for more on that and a look ahead to tomorrow's big race. Nathan, thanks for being on the show.
Nathan Brown:
Thanks for having me.
Taylor Wilson:
So starting with this, I mean what happened with this cheating scandal? Give us some basics here.
Nathan Brown:
Well, take us back to Sunday afternoon for the second day of Indy 500 qualifying here at IMS and two of the three cars for Team Penske, the cars of Josef Newgarden and Will Power, Josef being the driver who's won this race each of the last two years, were found to have had an illegally modified safety device on the back of their cars. That's probably the simplest way to put it. Every car before they go through each step in the qualifying process has their car go through tech inspection to make sure all of the competitive pieces on the car are within the legal limits and everything else on the car is safe and properly put together.
These two pieces on the back of the cars called the Attenuator, it's essentially a piece that sticks out the lower portion of the back of the car that's used to help lessen the blow that ultimately gets to the drivers in the instance of a crash or some sort of a rearward impact, had been modified to basically just have two pieces that were sitting right next to each other have a seam in between them filled in, smoothed over, and ultimately that stood out to the tech inspectors on the IndyCar side. They were reminded that this was a part that is not supposed to be modified according to the rule book, and ultimately they were not allowed to make their runs on Sunday.
Taylor Wilson:
Okay. So Nathan, for those of us outside the motorsports community, just help us understand how big a deal this is and how this is landing with the motorsports world.
Nathan Brown:
There are two main aspects to this. One from a competition standpoint, Josef Newgarden has won this race each of the last two years. No one in the previous 108 runnings of the Indy 500 has ever won this race three times in a row, so Josef was coming into this year attempting to do something no one has ever done in what is considered the biggest race in the world, and he's had an incredibly fast car. No one has also ever won this race farther back than 28th place, and the last time that that happened was in 1936.
The other big part to come out of this is the idea that there could be changes to the way in which the sport is governed in the future. I'd reported back last month in April that IndyCar had been considering and having talks about the creation of a third-party officiating body that would official the races, so that's hand-out penalties, make sure everything is up to snuff when cars are on track, as well as an independent crew that would manage and lead that tech inspection process.
There are some concerns out there because it appears this modification with this car was missed for more than a year. It's just not something that IndyCar says it has checked all that often. This is something that had been apparently illegally on the cars since before last year's IndyCar 500 that Josef won, and so there has been a massive calling from folks throughout the paddock a lot more publicly than we've really ever seen that IndyCar needs an independent group to make sure that there are no conflicts of interest within the sport. No one has ever accused Roger Penske of exercising any sort of influence on the way this sport is officiated or in any attempt to give any special treatment to Team Penske.
But it's just really the optics of this whole situation that continue to be a problem whenever his team or his drivers are in the news on the wrong side of things. And because this team is very successful, they're always fighting for race wins and championships, and it's just become something that's been a little bit too hard to ignore and something that I think we will see change here potentially in the next six months to a year.
Taylor Wilson:
Well, it's clear to me, Nathan, this cheating scandal will hang over the race this weekend at least a little bit. But what are some other storylines you're looking out for Sunday? And just help our listeners, Nathan, understand how big the Indy 500 is in motorsports.
Nathan Brown:
The Indianapolis Motor Speedway will play host to roughly 350,000 people on Sunday. If you took stock of other cities throughout the state, this racetrack alone would be the second largest city in the state of Indiana. This is the first time that this race has sold out its grandstands since 2016. We've got lots of drivers, big names in this sport, hoping to go for their first ever Indy 500. You've got your two-time defending series champion Alex Palou, Championship contenders for years and years [inaudible 00:12:08] and Colton Herda, you've got that history that Josef Newgarden is going for. It's always a really crazy day here at the track. This race is the largest single-day sporting event in the world, and it's something really special, not only to watch on TV, but to experience in person.
Taylor Wilson:
All right, Nathan Brown covers motorsports for the Indianapolis Star part of the USA TODAY Network. Thank you, Nathan.
Nathan Brown:
Thank you.
Taylor Wilson:
You can tune into the Indy 500 tomorrow afternoon around 12:45 Eastern Time on Fox, and you can follow along with USA TODAY Sports and the Indy Star.
♦
What does it take to become a Pulitzer Prize winning humorist? Have a thick skin and don't take anything too seriously.
Dave Barry:
One of the things you learn if you write in any kind of column, but especially a humor column, is no matter what you write, somebody's going to be really angry at you and want you fired. There was a certain percentage of my readers, I called them the humor impaired, who never figured out that I was kidding.
Taylor Wilson:
Humor columnist Dave Barry is out with a memoir that chronicles his childhood through adulthood and finds the funny and even the darkest places. Hear his conversation with my colleague Dana Taylor tomorrow morning right here on this feed.
♦
And thanks for listening to The Excerpt. You can get the podcast wherever you get your audio. If you're on a smart speaker, just ask for The Excerpt. I'm Taylor Wilson, I'll be back Monday for Memorial Day right here on The Excerpt from USA TODAY.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
CBS News
9 minutes ago
- CBS News
Medicaid enrollees fear losing health coverage if Congress enacts work requirements
It took Crystal Strickland years to qualify for Medicaid, which she needs for a heart condition. Strickland, who's unable to work due to her condition, chafed when she learned that the U.S. House had passed a bill that would impose a work requirement for many able-bodied people to get health insurance coverage through the low-cost, government-run plan for lower-income people. "What sense does that make?" she asked. "What about the people who can't work but can't afford a doctor?" The measure is part of the version of President Donald Trump's "Big Beautiful" bill that cleared the House last month and is now up for consideration in the Senate. Trump is seeking to have it passed by July 4. The bill, as it stands, would cut taxes and government spending — and also upend portions of the nation's social safety net. For proponents, the ideas behind the work requirement are simple: Crack down on fraud and stand on the principle that taxpayer-provided health coverage isn't for those who can work but aren't. The measure includes exceptions for those who are under 19 or over 64, those with disabilities, pregnant women, main caregivers for young children, people recently released from prisons or jails, or during certain emergencies. It would apply only to adults who receive Medicaid through expansions that 40 states chose to undertake as part of the 2010 health insurance overhaul. Many details of how the changes would work would be developed later, leaving several unknowns and causing anxiety among recipients who worry that their illnesses might not be enough to exempt them. Advocates and sick and disabled enrollees worry, based largely on their experience, that even those who might be exempted from work requirements under the law could still lose benefits because of increased or hard-to-meet paperwork mandates. Strickland, a 44-year-old former server, cook, and construction worker who lives in Fairmont, North Carolina, said she could not afford to go to a doctor for years because she wasn't able to work. She finally received a letter this month saying she would receive Medicaid coverage, she said. "It's already kind of tough to get on Medicaid," said Strickland, who has lived in a tent and times and subsisted on nonperishable food thrown out by stores. "If they make it harder to get on, they're not going to be helping." Steve Furman is concerned that his 43-year-old son, who has autism, could lose coverage. The bill the House adopted would require Medicaid enrollees to show that they work, volunteer or go to school at least 80 hours a month to continue to qualify. A disability exception would likely apply to Furman's son, who previously worked in an eyeglasses plant in Illinois for 15 years despite behavioral issues that may have gotten him fired elsewhere. Furman said government bureaucracies are already impossible for his son to navigate, even with help. It took him a year to help get his son onto Arizona's Medicaid system when they moved to Scottsdale in 2022, and it took time to set up food benefits. But he and his wife, who are retired, say they don't have the means to support his son fully. "Should I expect the government to take care of him?" he asked. "I don't know, but I do expect them to have humanity." About 71 million adults are enrolled in Medicaid now. And most of them — around 92% — are working, caregiving, attending school or disabled. Earlier estimates of the budget bill from the Congressional Budget Office found that about 5 million people stand to lose coverage. A KFF tracking poll conducted in May found that the enrollees come from across the political spectrum. About one-fourth are Republicans; roughly one-third are Democrats. The poll found that about 7 in 10 adults are worried that federal spending reductions on Medicaid will lead to more uninsured people and would strain health care providers in their area. About half said they were worried reductions would hurt their ability or their family to get and pay for health care. Amaya Diana, an analyst at KFF, points to work requirements launched in Arkansas and Georgia as keeping people off Medicaid without increasing employment. Amber Bellazaire, a policy analyst at the Michigan League for Public Policy, said the process to verify that Medicaid enrollees meet the work requirements could be a key reason people would be denied or lose eligibility. "Massive coverage losses just due to an administrative burden rather than ineligibility is a significant concern," she said. One KFF poll respondent, Virginia Bell, a retiree in Starkville, Mississippi, said she's seen sick family members struggle to get onto Medicaid, including one who died recently without coverage. She said she doesn't mind a work requirement for those who are able, but worries about how that would be sorted out. "It's kind of hard to determine who needs it and who doesn't need it," she said. Lexy Mealing, 54 of Westbury, New York, who was first diagnosed with breast cancer in 2021 and underwent a double mastectomy and reconstruction surgeries, said she fears she may lose the medical benefits she has come to rely on, though people with "serious or complex" medical conditions could be granted exceptions. She now works about 15 hours a week in "gig" jobs but isn't sure she can work more as she deals with the physical and mental toll of the cancer. Mealing, who used to work as a medical receptionist in a pediatric neurosurgeon's office before her diagnosis and now volunteers for the American Cancer Society, went on Medicaid after going on short-term disability. "I can't even imagine going through treatments right now and surgeries and the uncertainty of just not being able to work and not having health insurance," she said. Felix White, who has Type I diabetes, first qualified for Medicaid after losing his job as a computer programmer several years ago. The Oreland, Pennsylvania, man has been looking for a job, but finds that at 61, it's hard to land one. Medicaid, meanwhile, pays for a continuous glucose monitor and insulin and funded foot surgeries last year, including one that kept him in the hospital for 12 days. "There's no way I could have afforded that," he said. "I would have lost my foot and probably died." ___ Associated Press writer Susan Haigh in Hartford, Connecticut, contributed to this article.
USA Today
20 minutes ago
- USA Today
Trump's 'big beautiful bill' would end EV subsidies: Could this kill Tesla?
Trump's 'big beautiful bill' would end EV subsidies: Could this kill Tesla? Show Caption Hide Caption Trump's 'Big, Beautiful Bill' aims at cutting EV tax credits President Donald Trump's tax bill includes a measure to kill an Obama-era electric vehicle tax credit. Billionaire Elon Musk is fighting to make sure federal tax incentives for electric vehicles (EVs) -- a key subsidy that makes buying EVs more affordable -- remain in place. President Donald Trump's new bill seeks to eliminate these tax incentives, which would otherwise be in place until 2032. Musk's company Tesla (NASDAQ: TSLA) has already seen sales struggle to grow across many key geographies. Deliveries last quarter fell by 32% quarter over quarter, and by 13% year over year. Could the elimination of EV tax credits be a lethal blow to the struggling automaker? You might be surprised by the answer. Is Tesla struggling financially? When it comes to potential regulation "killing" an operating business like Tesla, the first thing investors must consider is the effect on sales growth. Already, demand growth has been stagnating for Tesla. And while the company has teased new potential revenue sources like its robotaxi venture, there aren't many high-visibility milestones ahead that will meaningfully boost revenue over the next year or two. Analysts expect the company to refresh its existing lineup, but details are scarce on releasing any brand new models in 2025 or 2026. Even if a new model is released, it's unlikely that production will scale meaningfully over the next 12 to 24 months. Is Tesla coming out with a new model soon? Where does this leave Tesla over the near term? In the same position it is in today, attempting to stoke demand for an increasingly stale lineup. Making the company's vehicles $4,000 to $7,500 more expensive -- the range of federal incentives that Trump is proposing to eliminate -- could ultimately accelerate sales declines for Tesla. Any potential demand boost from releasing a more affordable Model Y or Model 3, meanwhile, could be completely offset by eliminated tax credits, resulting in minimal net savings for customers. In return, Tesla may need to compress its profit margins in order to keep demand growth on track. Does Tesla have a lot cash on hand? Fortunately, Tesla has the capital to withstand a multiyear stagnation in sales growth. It has $16 billion in cash and equivalents on the books, more than every other competitor. Its profit margins are also positive -- a rarity in the EV world -- meaning it can afford to cut profits a bit without going into the red. It should be mentioned, though, that Tesla has also relied on selling automotive regulator credits -- earned by selling carbon-free vehicles -- to maintain profitability. The company earned $595 million last quarter by selling these credits versus a net income of $409 million. But most of this "free" income from selling credits comes from states like California and New York, as well as incentive programs in the E.U., making them unlikely to be cut should U.S. federal incentives change. Still, Tesla's biggest advantage is its $1 trillion market cap. Tesla could easily double the cash levels on its balance sheet while diluting shareholders by just 1% to 2%. This makes it very unlikely for the company to go under anytime soon. In fact, the elimination of EV tax credits could be a secret win for Tesla. Eliminating EV tax credits could actually help Tesla Many investors might be surprised to learn that ExxonMobil wishes for a carbon tax to be implemented. A carbon tax would make its output more expensive to buyers, potentially limiting demand. But if production costs rise, it's possible that many small competitors can't compete, leaving more of the market for well-capitalized behemoths like Exxon. The same may prove true for Tesla. Most of its EV competition comes from unprofitable companies with minimal room for error like Rivian and Lucid Group. These EV makers are roughly 99% smaller than Tesla, with limited ability to tap the market for more capital at will. The elimination of EV tax credits would hurt them more than Tesla, potentially leaving more long-term market share for Musk and his investors. Of course, the immediate effect will be negative for Tesla and the rest of the industry. But it should be stressed that bills are not laws. The EV tax credit may end up in place until 2032 like previously planned. But the elimination of these subsidies certainly won't "kill" Tesla. In fact, there's an argument that it could be a long-term advantage due to lessened competition. Ryan Vanzo has no position in any of the stocks mentioned. The Motley Fool has positions in and recommends Tesla. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy. The Motley Fool is a USA TODAY content partner offering financial news, analysis and commentary designed to help people take control of their financial lives. Its content is produced independently of USA TODAY. Don't miss this second chance at a potentially lucrative opportunity Offer from the Motley Fool: Ever feel like you missed the boat in buying the most successful stocks? Then you'll want to hear this. On rare occasions, our expert team of analysts issues a 'Double Down' stock recommendation for companies that they think are about to pop. If you're worried you've already missed your chance to invest, now is the best time to buy before it's too late. And the numbers speak for themselves: Nvidia: if you invested $1,000 when we doubled down in 2009, you'd have $368,190 !* if you invested $1,000 when we doubled down in 2009, !* Apple: if you invested $1,000 when we doubled down in 2008, you'd have $37,294 !* if you invested $1,000 when we doubled down in 2008, !* Netflix: if you invested $1,000 when we doubled down in 2004, you'd have $653,702!* Right now, we're issuing 'Double Down' alerts for three incredible companies, available when you joinStock Advisor, and there may not be another chance like this anytime soon. See the 3 stocks » *Stock Advisor returns as of June 9, 2025
USA Today
31 minutes ago
- USA Today
Majority of Americans disapprove of Trump admin, but he leads on immigration: new poll
Majority of Americans disapprove of Trump admin, but he leads on immigration: new poll Show Caption Hide Caption Trump salutes Army during military parade, fireworks light up DC sky President Donald Trump saluted the U.S. Army on it's 250th birthday with a military parade and live music. WASHINGTON – A majority of Americans say they disapprove of Donald Trump's second term – with even some Republicans hitting the president – as immigration remains his strongest policy issue. A new NBC News Decision Desk Poll, conducted along with SurveyMonkey, found that 45% of Americans approve of the way Trump is handling his job as president, while 55% disapprove. Those figures remain unchanged from an NBC News survey in April. Trump's rating differ along party lines. Among Republicans, 89% approve of the president's second term in office, compared to eight percent of Democrats and 35% of Independents. Approximately 12% of Republicans said they disapprove of the president's job, compared to 92% of Democrats and 65% of Independents. Republicans were five percentage points less likely to report that they strongly support the president's administration, compared to the survey results from April. Much of that shift came from respondents who say they identify with the president's MAGA – Make America Great Again – movement. The survey also found an intensity gap among Republicans and Democrats over how they feel about the Trump administration's actions. Pollsters asked respondents to pick one emotion from a list of responses: Thrilled, happy, satisfied, neutral, dissatisfied, angry and furious. Fifty-one percent of Democrats agreed that they feel "furious" about the Trump administration, compared to 23 percent of Republicans who agreed. GOP survey respondents also shifted seven percentage points away from feeling "thrilled" about Trump from earlier surveys: 25% of Republicans said they felt thrilled over Trump's actions in the latest poll, compared to 32% who said the same in April. Still, only one percent of Republicans said they felt furious over Trump's actions. The latest survey was conducted among 19,410 adults nationwide between May 30 and June 10. It has a margin of error of plus or minus 2.1 percentage points. Trump leads on immigration issue Trump has focused much of his presidency on advancing his immigration agenda, including deporting thousands of migrants to countries such as Colombia, Mexico and El Salvador. During his 2024 campaign, the sweeping deportations became his signature promise to voters. Now, Trump is leading on the issue. According to the survey, 51% of Americans approve Trump's handling of border security and immigration, while 49% disapprove. The survey was conducted as Trump had sent in National Guard troops to quell protests against immigration enforcement in the Los Angeles area, against California Democratic Gov. Gavin Newsom's wishes. Additional protests against the Trump administration's immigration actions have broken out across the country. On the economy, approximately 45% of Americans reported that "their personal financial situation" is about the same as it was last year, and 34% said it has gotten worse. Approximately 21% said their finances have improved over the last year, results that didn't see a major shift from NBC's April survey.
