Families of detained Americans plead that they are not forgotten
'One of the most challenging things' about being imprisoned in Russia, Marc Fogel recalled, 'was feeling like I might be forgotten.'
Fogel, a teacher, was detained for three and half years before being released in mid-February – becoming one of the first American detainees freed during President Donald Trump's second term.
Fogel returned to Washington, DC, on Wednesday – in front of a mural of Americans detained abroad – to join with the families of others still imprisoned to call for their release.
'I am one of the lucky ones, and I want you to know that I and my family will work relentlessly for you all, because we want all of your loved ones here soon,' he said.
Fogel was among several Americans who had been freed from detention abroad who attended Wednesday's mural unveiling. It was the third iteration of the project, organized by the Bring Our Families Home Campaign and created by artist Isaac Campbell, displaying 10-foot-tall faces of Americans detained abroad on an alley wall in the Georgetown neighborhood of the nation's capital.
'It gives them a name. Their faces, as you can see, are larger than life, so that they can no longer be ignored,' said Scott St. Clair, whose son, Joseph St. Clair, is a veteran imprisoned in Venezuela. He is one of nine Americans there designated as wrongfully detained.
The mural shows St. Clair, Ksenia Karelina, Mahmood Habibi, Lucas Hunter, Andre Khachatoorian, David Barnes, Jorge Marcelo Vargas, Robert Gilman, Wilbert Castaneda, Youras Ziankovich, Shahab Dalili and Zack Shahin. Karelina and Ziankovich have both been freed – Ziankovich's release happened on the same day the mural was unveiled.
The families of those whose faces are now displayed – held in countries like Venezuela, Russia, Iran and the United Arab Emirates – spoke of the pain of their loved ones' detentions.
'I want you to imagine something, imagine someone you love with all your heart confined in a box, four walls, no lights, no windows, feeling isolated, in immense pain and completely uncertain if they will ever be free. Unfortunately for us, that nightmare is our everyday reality,' said the granddaughter of Vargas, a US citizen detained in Venezuela.
They also called for the US government to do its utmost to bring their loved ones home.
'Please, Mr. President, members of the Congress, use your authority, use your voices, use your resolve. Let the world know that America does not abandon its people,' said Patti St. Clair.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Politico
14 minutes ago
- Politico
Trump wants a manufacturing boom. The industry is buckling.
President Donald Trump is vowing to spark a manufacturing boom with tariffs to protect American workers and industry. So far, it's manufacturers that have borne the brunt of the pain. The president's surprise decision to raise tariffs on imported steel and aluminum to 50 percent will hit domestic manufacturing just as a new report shows the industry is already contracting. Uncertainty about where tariff rates will ultimately land — or where they'll be applied — has forced businesses to make hard decisions that could cut into both profits and hiring. And a leading trade group on Thursday called on Trump to give the companies a break on the tariffs. 'For a president who is intent on building U.S. manufacturing, the tariff strategy he's laid out is remarkably short-sighted,' said Gordon Hanson, a Harvard Kennedy School professor whose groundbreaking 2016 research work, 'The China Shock,' was among the first to sound the alarm about the threat to American industry. 'It fails to recognize what modern supply chains look like.' 'Even if you're intent on reshoring parts of manufacturing, you can't do it all,' he said. 'Steel and aluminum are part of that.' If Trump's tariffs fail to result in a manufacturing renaissance — a central focus of his presidential campaign — it could weaken the prospects of a GOP coalition that's increasingly reliant on working-class voters who supported his protectionist trade policies. But as unanticipated tariffs continue to drive up input costs for companies that need steel and aluminum for production, the warning signs emanating from manufacturers are getting louder. An index published this week by the Institute for Supply Management, which tracks manufacturing, slipped for the third straight month in May as companies made plans to scale back production. A quarterly survey conducted by the National Association of Manufacturers reported the steepest drop in optimism since the height of the Covid-19 pandemic, with trade uncertainty and raw material costs cited as top concerns. Federal Reserve data this month reported weaker manufacturing output. The manufacturers' association on Thursday urged Trump to develop a 'speed pass' that would allow companies to avoid costly new duties on imported raw materials and components that are essential to U.S. producers. 'The steel and aluminum tariffs are almost custom-made to hurt American manufacturing,' said Ernie Tedeschi, a former top Biden administration economist who's now with the Yale Budget Lab. Trump and top administration officials argue that tariffs will encourage investment in domestic manufacturers, which should lead to better-paying jobs, a more resilient economy and more secure supply chains. Exports climbed in April as the president's tariffs took hold, which contributed to an eye-popping decline in the U.S. trade deficit. Indeed, the overall economy remains solid, and businesses are continuing to hire, according to Friday's jobs report for May. Despite the trade headwinds, employment in the manufacturing sector has remained steady since Trump took office. 'As the president says, if you don't make steel, you can't fight a war. He's protecting that industry and bringing it back,' Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick told Senate lawmakers this week. 'You're going to see more steel and aluminum furnaces and mills in the history of this country get built over the next three years.' The White House did not respond to a request for comment. Trump welcomed the monthly jobs report, posting on Truth Social: 'AMERICA IS HOT! SIX MONTHS AGO IT WAS COLD AS ICE! BORDER IS CLOSED, PRICES ARE DOWN. WAGES ARE UP!' Still, domestic manufacturers who rely on international supply chains for critical steel and aluminum inputs will face tough choices if they want to maintain their profits while keeping output steady. 'Higher costs are expected. Higher input prices. The question is, what do you do with those costs? How much can you pass along to the consumer? How much can you negotiate with your suppliers?' said Andrew Siciliano, a partner at KPMG who leads the consulting firm's trade and customs practice. The challenges posed by the increase in steel and aluminum tariffs are particularly acute because it's far from clear whether domestic suppliers will be able to meet the demands of domestic manufacturers. Almost half the aluminum used in the U.S. last year came from foreign sources, according to federal data, and roughly a quarter of all steel is imported. Either way, 'input costs are going to be higher,' Siciliano said. 'If they pass it on, it could affect demand. If they don't pass it on, it could affect profitability.' That isn't to say manufacturers won't benefit from tariffs in the long term. To the extent that Trump's overall tariff regime limits imports, U.S.-based industrial production could expand to address unmet demand. The Budget Lab's analysis of Trump's tariff regime — which includes the 50 percent tariffs on steel and aluminum — projects that manufacturing output could grow by 1.3 percent over the next five years if existing import duties are left in place. But Tedeschi cautioned that growth may exclude segments like electronic and semiconductor production — which tend to generate higher incomes for workers. Meanwhile, output in other sectors like construction or agriculture would likely contract. Julia Coronado, founder of MacroPolicy Perspectives, also said the flurry of new import duties may prompt some manufacturers to actually move their manufacturing facilities offshore rather than subject their supply chains and production processes to multiple tariffs. 'If I have to assemble a bunch of parts and inputs, why don't I just don't do that on the Canadian or Mexican side of the border and then pay the tariff on the final good?' she said. An even bigger challenge may involve finding and training workers who can staff up any facilities that reshore. Most Americans work in the service sector and, to the extent tariffs lead to reshoring, those facilities will likely rely heavily on automation, according to economists at the Bank of America Institute. Finding qualified workers in the U.S. is either too difficult or too expensive. 'Whatever manufacturing production comes back to the U.S. will require far fewer jobs than 30 or 40 years ago,' Hanson said. 'It's just the way the world has gone.'
Yahoo
14 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Who are the United States Supreme Court Justices?
Politics in the United States in recent years have surrounded the position of the president. But that has not changed the American political system. It's still all about checks and balances in the United States, which includes the judicial branch and Supreme Court. That arm of the U.S. government has nine justices seated on the bench, all of which were appointment by presidents at one point or another. Their jobs are for life and the group of nine is led by one chief justice. As of 2025, here is the full list of the nine justices in the United States Supreme Court. Date appointed: Sept. 29, 2005. Appointed by: President George W. Bush. Political affiliation: Republican. Date appointed: Oct. 23 1991. Appointed by: President George H. W. Bush. Political affiliation: Republican. Date appointed: Jan. 31, 2006. Appointed by: President George W. Bush. Political affiliation: Republican. Date appointed: Aug. 8, 2009. Appointed by: President Barack Obama. Political affiliation: Democrat. Date appointed: Aug. 7, 2010. Appointed by: President Barack Obama. Political affiliation: Democrat. Date appointed: April 10, 2017. Appointed by: President Donald Trump. Political affiliation: Republican. Date appointed: Oct. 6, 2018. Appointed by: President Donald Trump. Political affiliation: Republican. Date appointed: Oct. 27, 2020. Appointed by: President Donald Trump. Political affiliation: Republican. Date appointed: June 30, 2022. Appointed by: President Joe Biden. Political affiliation: Democrat. This article originally appeared on The List Wire: List of United States Supreme Court Justices
Yahoo
14 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Opinion - Why are ICE agents running amok? Because they can.
As the Trump administration pushes for more mass deportations, law enforcement officers from the Department of Homeland Security are suddenly everywhere. In San Diego, Homeland Security officers conducted a SWAT-style raid on a restaurant, handcuffing 19 employees over an hour and slamming the manager against a wall in the process. Eventually, they arrested four people. The raid was so heavy-handed that the officers had to deploy flashbang grenades to escape from the angry crowd that gathered in response. Even members of Congress aren't safe. Last week, Homeland Security officers forced their way into Rep. Jerry Nadler's (D) New York office without a warrant. When one of the staffers protested, she was handcuffed and detained. The cases you hear about are only the tip of the iceberg. Federal officers are fanning out across the country, conducting raids, traffic stops, even scooping people up at courthouses when they appear for immigration hearings and carting them away in leg irons and shackles — harsh treatment that you seldom see even when felons are arrested. This heavy-handedness and cruelty isn't a glitch — it's intentional, as Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security Kristi Noem and Tom Homan, President Trump's border czar, attempt to frighten immigrants into leaving the country. Even legal residents and American citizens are getting caught up in the crackdown. And the worst part is, while things like barging into a congressman's office and detaining his staffers aren't legal, there is nothing anyone can do about it. If Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents force their way into your house without a warrant, slap you around and detain your family at gunpoint while conducting an illegal search, you have no way of getting your constitutional claims into federal court. As a practical matter, these agents are above the law and cannot be held accountable for violating your constitutional rights. Why this is true is yet another example of our system of checks and balances failing to appreciate the risk of a president deciding to simply the the law. After the Civil War, to ensure that states abided by the Constitution, Congress passed 42 U.S. Code 1983, giving individuals the right to sue in federal court when their constitutional rights had been violated under color of state law. At the time, it was inconceivable that there should be a similar need to sue for constitutional violations by the federal government. For one thing, law enforcement was almost exclusively under state control — the FBI was not founded until 1908. Moreover, the federal government was seen, generally, as the perennial good guy and the guarantor of constitutional rights, a position it held right through the civil rights era. As the federal government and federal law enforcement grew, this became more and more untenable. So in 1971, in a case called Bivens v. Six Unknown Fed. Narcotics Agents, the Supreme Court created what is known as a 'Bivens action' as an analogue of section 1983, giving individuals the right to sue in court when their Fourth Amendment rights were violated under color of federal law. Since then, the Supreme Court has been reluctant to extend the reach of Bivens, ultimately holding in 2022 that no one could ever bring a legal claim for excessive force — or any constitutional claim — against a federal officer enforcing immigration laws. This is dangerous, especially now. The rule of law is not supposed to run on the honor system. Section 1983 and Bivens actions are not just about monetary damages. They are a way for citizens to hold their government accountable. Officers' understanding that they may someday have to explain their actions is a powerful deterrent to bad behavior. Nobody likes accountability, but it makes all of us, including police officers, better people. The current system of 'what happens in ICE, stays in ICE' is the opposite of that. Unchecked by the courts, ICE's behavior will only get worse over the next three and a half years. Even the most well-meaning bureaucracies are subject to mission creep, so you can expect Noem's troops to expand their activities well beyond detaining immigrants. The Homeland Security officers who invaded Nadler's office were hunting for protesters, and Homan has already threatened state officials and even members of Congress with arrest for 'interfering' with ICE. When it comes to constitutional rights, no man is an island. The threats, performative cruelty and denials of basic due process are not attacks on immigrants. They are attacks on the rule of law itself. You should be just as upset and concerned by the Guatemalan snatched off the street and hustled onto a plane with no notice and no due process as you are by the sobbing staffer handcuffed in Nadler's office. In the eyes of our Constitution, they are all of us. Chris Truax is a charter member of the Society for the Rule of Law and an appellate attorney. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
