logo
Lombardo at 76 vetoes, a record; family leave, medical debt bills among victims

Lombardo at 76 vetoes, a record; family leave, medical debt bills among victims

Yahoo19 hours ago

LAS VEGAS (KLAS) — Republican Gov. Joe Lombardo has outdone himself, vetoing more bills — 76 so far — than the 75 pieces of legislation he rejected two years ago.
It's a single-session record, and he has until midnight Friday to issue more vetoes.
The fate of a 77th bill — Senate Bill 305, which would have elevated lacrosse to a sanctioned high school sport — appeared to be in limbo. Lombardo's veto was communicated to the Nevada secretary of state, but the bill was removed from the Legislature's list of vetoes.
The Democrat-controlled Nevada Legislature tried again this year to pass a few bills Lombardo vetoed two years ago — gun control, rent control provisions and some legislation on health care — but mostly, Lombardo's vetoes this year were or new proposals.
With relatively little power in the Legislature, Nevada Republicans are relying on Lombardo to stand firm against Democrats.
By midday on Wednesday, notices had been published on 65 vetoes (including nine Senate bills) since the Legislature adjourned. Later Wednesday afternoon, another batch of vetoes were posted, this time 12 Assembly bills.
One of those bills would have expanded paid family leave for both state employees and workers in private business.
FAMILY LEAVE: Assembly Bill 388 (AB388) had passed in the Assembly, 26-16, and narrowly in the Senate, 11-9, with one senator excused absent. The bill would have applied to companies with 50 or more employees. Lombardo said mandating family leave for workers would 'severely disrupt the economic stability of businesses across Nevada.'
'Nevada has long prided itself on maintaining a business-friendly environment — one that supports growth, innovation, and job creation,' the governor's veto message said. 'Now is not the time to introduce broad, burdensome mandates that would significantly disrupt this balance, particularly for Nevada's small and mid-sized businesses.'
Democratic Assem. Selena La Rue Hatch, who sponsored the bill, said as it moved to the governor's desk on June 2: 'No one should have to choose between a paycheck and caring for a newborn, an ailing parent, or their own health.'
A Progressive group commented, 'This veto sends a clear message: working families are not the priority. Governor Lombardo had a chance to stand with Nevada's families—and he instead chose to stand with business interests,' a statement from Battle Born Progress leader Shelbie Swartz said.
Other bills that Lombardo rejected Wednesday include:
CENSORSHIP: AB416 would have prevented school districts from making their own decisions on limiting access to books and other materials. The bill would have allowed access to materials that had not been deemed obscene by the courts. That's just too slow, according to Lombardo's veto message. 'Because AB 416 disconnects parents and schools from decisions best made at the local level and is constitutionally dubious, I cannot support it,' he said.
MEDICAL DEBT: AB204 would have outlawed predatory practices related to collecting medical debts. Advocates said it could reduce the financial harm caused by unexpected or unaffordable medical bills, calling medical debt one of the state's most common and damaging forms of consumer debt. While acknowledging the need for reforms, Lombardo rejected the bill. He said it could undermine fairness by discouraging responsible payment, and could increase health care costs in the long run.
'This veto sends the wrong message to the thousands of Nevada families struggling to pay for basic healthcare,' according to Adam Zarrin, director of government affairs at The Leukemia & Lymphoma Society. 'At a time when people are rationing medications, delaying care, and going into debt just to stay healthy, the Governor chose to stand with the status quo instead of with patients.'
DRESS CODE: AB320 added leniency to courtroom dress codes, an attempt to recognize that community members might have different ideas what 'professional' attire means — and not everyone can afford a suit. It would have taken away the court's ability to penalize people solely for the way they dressed in court. Lombardo said in his veto message that the intent was understandable, but the bill had practical and legal problems. The bill lacks clear enforcement standards and improperly intrudes on courts' authority, he said.
HEALTH CARE OVERCHARGES: AB282 required medical care providers to respond to patients who reported they were overcharged. When the overcharge was confirmed, providers would be required to issue refunds or face a fine if they missed a deadline. Lombardo said medical billing is complex, and the bill oversimplified how things actually work, putting an unfair share of responsibility for overpayments on providers.
COMMUNITY BENEFITS: AB226 would have required a 'community benefits' agreement for companies receiving tax abatements from the state. Recent agreements including the A's stadium deal, Allegiant Stadium and other big projects have carried conditions that have been lumped under community benefits. Lombardo said it sends the wrong message as Nevada tries to bring in new businesses.
Also vetoed by Lombardo on Wednesday: AB213, AB328, AB414, AB441, AB588 and AB600.
Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Kilmar Abrego Garcia pleads not guilty to human smuggling charges in Tennessee federal court
Kilmar Abrego Garcia pleads not guilty to human smuggling charges in Tennessee federal court

Yahoo

time34 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

Kilmar Abrego Garcia pleads not guilty to human smuggling charges in Tennessee federal court

NASHVILLE, Tenn. (AP) — Kilmar Abrego Garcia, whose mistaken deportation has become a flashpoint in President Donald Trump's immigration crackdown, pleaded not guilty on Friday to human smuggling charges in a federal court in Tennessee. The plea was the first chance the Maryland construction worker has had in a U.S. courtroom to answer the Trump administration's allegations against him since he was mistakenly deported in March to a notorious prison in El Salvador. The Republican administration returned Abrego Garcia to the U.S. last week to face criminal charges related to what it said was a human smuggling operation that transported immigrants across the country. The charges stem from a 2022 traffic stop in Tennessee during which Abrego Garcia was driving a vehicle with nine passengers. His lawyers have called the allegations 'preposterous.' Friday's hearing will also focus on whether Abrego Garcia should be released from jail while awaiting trial on the smuggling charges. A federal judge will hear arguments from Abrego Garcia's lawyers and attorneys for the U.S. government. Before the hearing began in Nashville, Abrego Garcia's wife told a crowd outside a church that Thursday marked three months since the Trump administration 'abducted and disappeared my husband and separated him from our family.' Her voice choked with emotion, Jennifer Vasquez Sura said she saw her husband for the first time on Thursday. She said, 'Kilmar wants you to have faith,' and asked the people supporting him and his family ''to continue fighting, and I will be victorious because God is with us.'' Abrego Garcia is a citizen of El Salvador who had been living in the United States for more than a decade before he was wrongfully deported by the Trump administration. The expulsion violated a 2019 U.S. immigration judge's order that shielded him from deportation to his native country because he likely faced gang persecution there. While the Trump administration described the mistaken removal as 'an administrative error,' officials have continued to justify it by insisting Abrego Garcia was a member of the MS-13 gang. His wife and attorneys have denied the allegations, saying he's simply a construction worker and family man. U.S. attorneys have asked U.S. Magistrate Judge Barbara Holmes to keep Abrego Garcia in jail, describing him as a danger to the community and a flight risk. Abrego Garcia's attorneys disagree, pointing out he was already wrongly detained in a notorious Salvadoran prison thanks to government error and arguing due process and 'basic fairness' require him to be set free. The charges against Abrego Garcia are human smuggling. But in their request to keep Abrego Garcia in jail, U.S. attorneys also accuse him of trafficking drugs and firearms and of abusing the women he transported, among other claims, although he is not charged with such crimes. The U.S. attorneys also accuse Abrego Garcia of taking part in a murder in El Salvador. However, none of those allegations is part of the charges against him, and at his initial appearance June 6, the judge warned prosecutors she cannot detain someone based solely on allegations. One of Abrego Garcia's attorneys last week characterized the claims as a desperate attempt by the Trump administration to justify the mistaken deportation three months after the fact. 'There's no way a jury is going to see the evidence and agree that this sheet metal worker is the leader of an international MS-13 smuggling conspiracy,' private attorney Simon Sandoval-Moshenberg said. In a Wednesday court filing, Abrego Garcia's public defenders argued the government is not even entitled to a detention hearing — much less detention — because the charges against him aren't serious enough. Although the maximum sentence for smuggling one person is 10 years, and Abrego Garcia is accused of transporting hundreds of people over nearly a decade, his defense attorneys point out there's no minimum sentence. The average sentence for human smuggling in 2024 was just 15 months, according to court filings. The decision to charge Abrego Garcia criminally prompted the resignation of Ben Schrader, who was chief of the criminal division at the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Middle District of Tennessee. He posted about his departure on social media on the day of the indictment, writing, 'It has been an incredible privilege to serve as a prosecutor with the Department of Justice, where the only job description I've ever known is to do the right thing, in the right way, for the right reasons.' He did not directly address the indictment and declined to comment when reached by The Associated Press. However, a person familiar with the matter who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss a personnel matter confirmed the connection. Although Abrego Garcia lives in Maryland, he's being charged in Tennessee based on a May 2022 traffic stop for speeding in the state. The Tennessee Highway Patrol body camera video of the encounter that was released to the public last month shows a calm exchange between officers and Abrego Garcia. It also shows the officers discussing among themselves their suspicions of human smuggling before sending him on his way. One of the officers says, 'He's hauling these people for money.' Another says Abrego Garcia had $1,400 in an envelope. Abrego Garcia was not charged with any offense at the traffic stop. Sandoval-Moshenberg, the private attorney, said in a statement after the video's release that he saw no evidence of a crime in the footage. Meanwhile, the lawsuit over Abrego Garcia's mistaken deportation isn't over. Abrego Garcia's attorneys have asked a federal judge in Maryland to impose fines against the Trump administration for contempt, arguing that it flagrantly ignored court orders forseveral weeks to return him. The Trump administration said it will ask the judge to dismiss the lawsuit, arguing that it followed the judge's order to return him to the U.S. ___ This story has been corrected to show the Trump administration said that the human smuggling operation transported immigrants across the country, not that it brought immigrants into the country illegally. ___ Finley reported from Norfolk, Va.

Analysis: Americans' – and Republicans' – increasingly complicated relationship with Israel
Analysis: Americans' – and Republicans' – increasingly complicated relationship with Israel

CNN

time36 minutes ago

  • CNN

Analysis: Americans' – and Republicans' – increasingly complicated relationship with Israel

The president who promised to easily and quickly bring about peace has now found himself accounting for yet another major escalation. President Donald Trump had publicly discouraged Israel from striking Iran in recent days, as he pushed to instead secure a deal to curtail Iran's nuclear program. But it didn't pan out. Israel launched a massive attack overnight that targeted Iran's nuclear facilities and killed high-ranking officials – strikes that Trump told CNN by phone early Friday were 'very successful.' It all reinforces how the world we live in is much more complex than the one Trump pitched on the campaign trail. And from a domestic perspective, the situation with Israel is arguably more complex than it has been in many decades. Multiple indicators suggest Americans' support for Israel has reached historic lows as its war in Gaza has dragged on. And while Republicans are much more likely to back Israel than Democrats, even that is getting more complicated – particularly as influential voices on the right voice skepticism of a hardline approach to Iran. Much remains to shake out amid the historic escalation in the Middle East. Things will shift. There is a real question about whether Iran is even capable now of the kind of significant retaliation that could lead to a wider war. But the US decisions that lie ahead aren't as easy as they once might have seemed, politically speaking. A Quinnipiac University poll released this week – ahead of Israel's strikes – epitomized the shifting landscape. Polls for decades have asked Americans to choose whether they sympathize more with Israelis or Palestinians, and Israel is almost always the runaway favorite. But this one showed Americans sided with the Israelis by a historically narrow margin: 37% to 32%. After Hamas' October 2023 terror attack on Israel, that margin had been 61-13% in the Israelis' favor. So a 48-point edge has shrunk to five. That's not only the lowest advantage for Israel since Quinnipiac began polling this question in 2001, but it appears to be about the lowest since at least 1980 across multiple polls, according to data compiled by the Roper Center for Public Opinion Research. Those findings, while telling, don't strictly apply to a conflict between Israel and Iran. But it's also clear that overall support for Israel has waned over the past year and a half. To wit: A March poll from the Pew Research Center showed 53% of Americans – a majority – had an unfavorable opinion of Israel. That was up from 42% in 2022, before the current war in Gaza. The same poll showed Americans said by more than a 20-point margin that they lacked confidence in Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. A March poll from Marquette University Law School showed Americans evenly split on Israel: 43% favorable to 43% unfavorable. And a February Reuters/Ipsos poll showed about 4 in 10 Americans leaned toward the idea that Israel's problems are 'none of our business.' What was particularly striking about that last one: These views were almost completely nonpartisan. It was about 4 in 10 Democrats, independents and Republicans who said Israel's business was none of ours. That suggests that Trump's injection of non-interventionism in the conservative movement has caught on, even as it relates to our most significant ally in the Middle East. But it's more than just non-interventionism; there are also plenty of signs that even Republicans have soured on Israel. The Quinnipiac poll showed the percentage of Republicans who sympathized more with the Israelis than Palestinians dropping from 86% in October 2023 to 64% today. (Almost all of the shift was to a neutral position, rather than to the Palestinians.) And the Pew poll showed unfavorable views of Israel among Republicans and Republican-leaning independents rising from 27% in 2022 to 37% in March. Most remarkably, right-leaning voters under the age of 50 were about evenly split in their views of Israel. These modest but significant shifts have come as certain corners of the MAGA movement have adopted a more skeptical view of the American alliance with Israel and cautioned against a hardline approach to Iran. Those tensions are perhaps best exemplified by an intense and ongoing feud between Fox News host Mark Levin and his former Fox colleague, Tucker Carlson. Carlson on Friday morning went so far as to say the United States should decouple itself from Israel altogether. He said the Trump administration should 'drop Israel. Let them fight their own wars.' Carlson said the United States not only shouldn't send troops, but that it shouldn't provide any funding or weapons. Also this week, Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard used her personal X account to promote a cryptic video. She urged people to 'reject this path to nuclear war' and said certain 'elite warmongers' were carelessly pushing us toward it, in the knowledge that they personally had nuclear shelters that others didn't. It's not clear if Gabbard was alluding to the tensions in the Middle East – as opposed to, say, the war between Russia and Ukraine. But she has long advocated a softer approach to Iran. Back in 2020, while she was still a Democrat, she called Trump's killing of a top Iranian commander an unconstitutional 'act of war.' Republican Sen. John Kennedy of Louisiana responded this week that Gabbard should 'change her meds.' In other words, this isn't even simple on the right anymore. Trump leads a country and a movement that are increasingly torn about the path ahead. He has landed firmly in Israel's corner thus far. But very difficult decisions could lie ahead.

Immigrants Are Embracing Trump's Crackdown on Immigration
Immigrants Are Embracing Trump's Crackdown on Immigration

Newsweek

time40 minutes ago

  • Newsweek

Immigrants Are Embracing Trump's Crackdown on Immigration

Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. New data shows a growing number of immigrant voters are backing Donald Trump and his hardline immigration agenda—marking a dramatic reversal from past elections. Why It Matters The Trump administration has pledged to carry out the largest mass deportation in U.S. history and has conducted numerous ICE raids, some of which have swept up people with proper documentation. Trump's aggressive stance on immigration has resulted in widespread protests, especially in Los Angeles, where Trump authorized the deployment of 2,000 National Guard troops to Los Angeles after reported violence against law enforcement, specifically ICE agents carrying out deportation raids in the city. But despite the unrest, data suggests that Trump's messaging on border enforcement and immigration control may be resonating with segments of the immigrant community. President Donald Trump speaks during an event to sign a bill blocking California's rule banning the sale of new gas-powered cars by 2035, in the East Room of the White House, Thursday, June 12, 2025,... President Donald Trump speaks during an event to sign a bill blocking California's rule banning the sale of new gas-powered cars by 2035, in the East Room of the White House, Thursday, June 12, 2025, in Washington. More Alex Brandon/AP What To Know According to an analysis of the American National Election Studies (ANES) by CNN's Harry Enten, immigrant voters, who favored Democrats by 32 points on immigration policy in 2020, now trust Republicans more on the issue by 8 points—a staggering 40-point swing. Trump's share of the immigrant vote has steadily increased—from 36 percent in 2016 to 39 percent in 2020 and now to 47 percent in 2024, based on Cooperative Election Study (CES) data analyzed by Enten. Perhaps even more telling is how immigrant voters feel about immigrants who are in the country illegally. In 2020, their net favorability stood at +23 points. This year that has flipped to -6—a 29-point decline in support for undocumented immigrants among immigrants themselves. Enten did not specify which demographics were included in his aggregate. It comes as polls suggest that Trump's hardline immigration stance is resonating with much of the public. In a sharp turnaround from his first term, Trump now holds a net positive approval rating on immigration, rising from -21 in June 2017 to +1 today, according to CNN's Harry Enten—his biggest gain on any issue. A YouGov/CBS News poll conducted June 4-6 found 54 percent of Americans support Trump's deportation program targeting undocumented immigrants, surpassing his ratings on the economy (42 percent) and inflation (39 percent). Additionally, 51 percent approve of ICE conducting searches. An RMG Research poll echoed that result, with 58 percent backing the deportation efforts. And in an Insider Advantage survey, 59 percent approved of Trump's decision to send National Guard troops to Los Angeles in response to the protests. But the support has limits. Some polls show that Trump's handling of deportations is broadly unpopular. A survey conducted by YouGov/Economist found that just 39 percent of respondents approve of how the former president is managing deportations, while 50 percent disapprove, giving him a net approval rating of minus 11. A separate Quinnipiac poll showed even deeper dissatisfaction, with 40 percent approval and 56 percent disapproval—netting a negative 16-point rating on the issue. Meanwhile, 56 percent disapprove of how Trump's mass deportation program is being implemented, according to the CBS/YouGov poll. A separate YouGov survey found only 39 percent approve of the administration's overall approach to deportations, while 50 percent disapprove. The issue remains deeply polarizing as 93 percent of Republicans support the deportation plan, compared to just 18 percent of Democrats. Independents are divided. Nearly half of Americans believe Trump is going further than he promised during his campaign. His military deployment is even more controversial. A June 9-10 YouGov poll found only 34 percent of Americans support sending Marines to Los Angeles, while 47 percent disapprove. A majority—56 percent—say state and local governments, not the federal government, should handle the situation. But among immigrant voters, Trump's immigration policy appears to be resonating. Experts say that immigrants are increasingly backing Donald Trump's hardline immigration stance due to frustration over what they see as a broken and unfair system. Thomas Gift, a political science professor at University College London, told Newsweek that many immigrants feel betrayed by current immigration policies, especially ones created under President Joe Biden. "Part of this shift likely stems from frustration among immigrants who feel they 'followed the rules' and now resent those who entered the country unlawfully," Gift explained. Jeremy Beck, co-president of the immigration reduction group NumbersUSA, told Newsweek that more immigrants came to the U.S. between 2021 and 2025 than during any other period in history—"more than half of them illegally." Between 2021 and 2024, there were over 10.8 million total illegal border encounters, according to the Department of Homeland Security, far exceeding the 2.8 million total from 2017–2020. That surge, he said, has spurred a backlash even among immigrant voters who helped form Trump's "winning coalition in November." These voters, he added, sent a "decisive message" to Washington: "Manage immigration at levels we can sustain, and credibly enforce the limits." The shift is also visible in the broader electorate. Beck pointed to Latino-majority districts in Texas and Colorado where Trump or immigration hardliners performed strongly. Trump made historic gains among Hispanic voters in 2024, with only 55 percent supporting Kamala Harris to Trump's 43 percent—an 8-point increase from 2020 and the highest percentage for a Republican presidential candidate since such data has been tracked. Beck concluded that Trump's "willingness to enforce immigration laws gives him a clear advantage" with voters—especially immigrants who went through the legal process. "After the border crisis, voters are aware of how important it is to manage immigration policy in the national interest," he said. But Maria Cristina Garcia, Professor of American Studies at Cornell University, cautioned against drawing broad conclusions from polling on immigrant views toward immigration enforcement and support for Donald Trump. "This poll as represented here in the video doesn't really tell me much," she said, emphasizing that Latino and immigrant communities are far from monolithic. Garcia argued that attitudes on immigration vary significantly depending on national origin, geography, and personal history. "People of Mexican ancestry who live in border counties along the Rio Grande... are likely more hawkish on immigration than, say, a Dominican American in Washington Heights in NYC," she explained. Similarly, Cuban Americans differ in outlook depending on when and why they migrated to the U.S. But she noted that economic conditions strongly influence immigration attitudes, which could explain their support for Trump: "Historically, U.S. citizens (including the foreign-born) have been more likely to demand bars to immigration when the economy sputters and they experience more pressure on their day-to-day lives." Gift echoed this, explaining that, like other Americans, immigrants are feeling the economic pressure from illegal immigration, including "stresses on public services, housing shortages, and rising competition in certain labor markets." Beck, meanwhile, noted that immigrants are often the first to feel the impact of mass migration: "They tend to work in the same occupations. They feel the downward pressure on their wages, and witness the degradation of workplace conditions for themselves as well as new arrivals." According to a 2024 report, approximately 36 percent of immigrants lived in lower-income households, compared to 29 percent of U.S.-born individuals. And a recent survey by the Kaiser Family Foundation (KFF) indicates that 43 percent of immigrants anticipate their financial situation will worsen in the coming year, compared to approximately 33 percent of U.S.-born individuals. Trump has sought to attribute economic pressures like this to illegal immigration. During a June 2024 presidential debate, Trump claimed that illegal immigrants were "taking Black jobs" and argued they were "killing" working opportunities for minority communities. "His big kill on the Black people is the millions of people that he's allowed to come in... They're taking Black jobs now... and they're taking Hispanic jobs," he said. And in a March 2025 speech to Congress, Trump blamed "open-border" policies for causing widespread strain—implying economic stress on hospitals, schools, and communities, which often correlates with inflation concerns. "Joe Biden didn't just open our borders—he flew illegal aliens over them to overwhelm our schools, hospitals and communities," he said. For Beck, this is why immigration resonates so strongly with immigrant voters grappling with economic anxiety. "The party that can set enforceable limits on immigration that serve the interests of immigrant voters could achieve a lasting realignment," he said. What People Are Saying Enten said: "There is no bloc of voters that shifted more to the right from 2020 to 2024 than immigrant voters." Thomas Gift said: "Part of this shift likely stems from frustration among immigrants who feel they "followed the rules" and now resent those who entered the country unlawfully or are seen as having bypassed the legal process. Like other Americans, immigrants themselves are affected by many of the same perceived challenges associated with illegal immigration, such as stresses on public services, housing shortages, and rising competition in certain labor markets. These numbers show just how far Biden's alleged "open border policies" have shifted immigrants toward supporting the Republican Party." Maria Cristina said: "This poll as represented here in the video doesn't really tell me much, though. "Let's say these pollsters just focused on Latinos who are foreign-born citizens. You're likely to find differences across Latino groups and geographic regions. People of Mexican ancestry who live in border counties along the Rio Grande, for example, are likely more hawkish on immigration than, say, a Dominican American in Washington Heights in NYC. A Cuban American who arrived in the 1960s and has no family left in Cuba might be more hawkish than a Cuban-born US citizen who arrived in 1996 and hopes to one day sponsor a family member. The more interesting question (to me) is why are some groups more hawkish than others? What is it about their experience that has led them to hold certain perspectives? "For many foreign-born citizens (like all citizens in general), perspectives on immigration are tied to the state of the economy. Historically, US citizens (including the foreign-born) have been more likely to demand bars to immigration when the economy sputters and they experience more pressure on their day-to-day lives. "As for why some immigrants voted for much depends on the group. Immigrants that fled a communist country, for example, might believe the MAGA-GOP's falsehood that Democrats are socialists or communists and worry about it. Or they might worry about the culture wars and feel that the Democratic party disregards their more religious or patriarchal values. There are many different reasons for the shift to the GOP. If so, voting GOP doesn't necessarily mean they liked Trump. Indeed, I'd like to see a polling question of GOP voters on whether they actually liked Trump." "But in the end, immigrants are most concerned about the economy and the opportunities they believe will be available to them." Jeremy Beck said: "Those are remarkable findings, although not entirely surprising. Whenever immigration levels spike, recent immigrants are among the first Americans to feel the impact. They tend to work in the same occupations. They feel the downward pressure on their wages, and witness the degradation of workplace conditions for themselves as well as new arrivals. They see the exploitation. They live in communities overwhelmed by unsustainable numbers. Mass immigration's strain on infrastructure, hospitals, schools, and homeless shelters affects foreign-born citizens directly and indirectly. "More people came to the U.S. between 2021-2025 than in any other period in history; more than half of them illegally. The shift in immigrant voters is part of a broader shift in American voters who live off of their wages as opposed to their stock portfolios. These immigrant voters were part of Trump's winning coalition in November and they delivered a decisive message to Washington, D.C. last November: Manage immigration at levels we can sustain, and credibly enforce the limits. Enten's polling should not be surprising to anyone who remembers the shift toward Trump in majority-Latino districts in South Texas. Or in Colorado's 8th district, which is 40 percent Latino, where two candidates campaigned on who was tougher on immigration enforcement. The border crisis was tied with inflation for the top reason voters did not vote for Vice President Harris; and thirty six percent of Latino voters cited immigration as a top concern. One out of four Democratic voters believe the Party deliberately open the border. President Trump willingness to enforce immigration laws gives him a clear advantage with these voters. Many immigrant voters who themselves work through a sometimes difficult legal process understandably rejected policies that led to a crisis in which millions of people who should not have been admitted to the U.S. were released into the country outside of the legal system established by Congress. "After the border crisis, voters are aware of how important it is to manage immigration policy in the national interest. The party that voters trust to fully enforce the law within the limits of the law has an advantage. The party that can set enforceable limits on immigration that serve the interests of immigrant voters could achieve a lasting realignment." What Happens Next Trump's approval rating among immigrant voters is likely to fluctuate. Meanwhile, coordinated nationwide protests against Trump and his administration's policies are also planned to take place in cities in all 50 states on the president's birthday on June 14.

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