ICE rounds up immigrants making mandatory appearances at Lower Manhattan courthouse
Masked ICE agents detained several immigrants who were summoned for appointments Wednesday afternoon at the agency's Lower Manhattan office, pictures showed.
Federal agents were seen escorting at least four immigrants out of the US Immigration Court at Federal Plaza after the individuals had reported for scheduled appearances under the Intensive Supervision Appearance Program.
The program targets immigrants at various stages of deportation proceedings and typically requires check-ins every few weeks or months – with several weeks' notice given in advance.
5 Federal agents escort detainees to vehicles after exiting an Intensive Supervision Appearance Program office on June 04, 2025 in New York City.
Getty Images
5 A woman yells as her mother is escorted by Federal agents after exiting an Intensive Supervision Appearance Program office.
Getty Images
5 A woman cries after her husband is detained by federal agents in NYC.
Getty Images
5 A woman looks back at her daughter as she is placed in a vehicle by agents in NYC.
Getty Images
5 A man kisses his daughter as he is escorted by federal agents.
Getty Images
One photo captured a woman collapsed on the ground, crying, as the raid unfolded around her.
The large-scale roundups are a regular occurrence nationwide as the feds hone in on immigrants with final removal orders, sources told The Post.
Last week, as many at 10 migrants were detained while leaving the federal immigration courthouse at 26 Federal Plaza
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
9 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Commentary: Committing to the Chicago Principles of free speech is the only way forward for higher education
I've been a faculty member at the University of Chicago for 27 years; for 12 of them, I was married to the university's late president, Robert J. Zimmer. Bob was well known for his endorsement of the 'Chicago Principles' addressing academic free speech, which were formulated by a faculty committee he appointed in 2014. Now, in 2025, at a time when opposing ideological forces threaten to rip higher education apart altogether, it's clearer than ever we need to observe these principles if we are to maintain our universities as places for inquiry and learning rather than the nurturing of ideologies. First of all, let's be clear. Academic free speech and public free speech are not the same, and the Chicago Principles refer to the former, repeating a view of speech on campus with roots deep in the university's history. 'There is not an institution of learning in the country in which freedom of teaching is more absolutely untrammeled than in the University of Chicago,' remarked university President William Rainey Harper in 1902. Thirty years later, at a time of tension over a communist speaker on campus, President Robert M. Hutchins wrote that students 'should have freedom to discuss any problem that presents itself.' Today, when being either for or against the position of our national government comes with undue risk and when free speech seems to many to be an insoluble problem, these principles — what they allow and what they do not — offer us simple guidelines as the American university faces two crises, both political in nature. The first crisis is one of free speech — and free thought — under attack. Faculty across the country face constraints on the ability to express a liberal opinion on any controversial matter, especially if related to DEI (diversity, equity and inclusion) or other 'woke' topics. One of my friends from another university worries that despite her U.S. passport (she's originally Japanese) the ICE men will kidnap her off the street because her work is in gender, disability and health. She doesn't expect her administration to step in if she's detained — too many college administrations are primarily worried about losing additional government funding. My friend is not being paranoid, and that's pretty terrifying in a country known for tolerance and freedom. Professors and students have been shut down or removed (or have fled the U.S.) for their views. Just think of Rümeysa Öztürk, whose great crime appears to have been co-authoring a pro-Palestinian op-ed for her school newspaper while on a valid F-1 visa. Never mind the Chicago Principles, ICE's overreach in her case violates the First Amendment: The government shall not interfere with freedom of expression. Öztürk was not disruptive or violent. She simply published a point of view. Are we willing to let go of this democratic cornerstone that enables public discourse and government accountability? Don't we want to push back even a little? The second crisis is arguably one of pushing free speech too far. Some students and faculty on campuses around the country seem to be confusing vandalism and disruption with the function of learning. Is using a bullhorn an example of academic free speech? If you thereby chill the main function of a university, offering an education, by disrupting classes and students, the Chicago Principles would say it's not. Nor is taking over a campus quad, vandalizing university property, throwing paint or harassing people you disagree with. Free speech on campus is enabled by certain limits of time, place and manner that keep it manageable for all. The university 'may restrict expression that violates the law, that falsely defames a specific individual, that constitutes a genuine threat or harassment … or that is otherwise directly incompatible with the functioning of the university.' Without such limits a university will have difficulty following its calling. If the future of the university itself is now at stake, as so many seem to agree, it would be a good time to reinstate our commitment to these principles. University presidents need not have to decide whether or not to call in the police if tent cities spring up on campus and administrative buildings are taken over. It should never get to that stage in the first place. ____ Shadi Bartsch is a professor in humanities at the University of Chicago and former director of the Institute on the Formation of Knowledge. _____
Boston Globe
2 hours ago
- Boston Globe
Mass. lets criminals go, ICE arrests innocent people. They both need to change.
Get The Gavel A weekly SCOTUS explainer newsletter by columnist Kimberly Atkins Stohr. Enter Email Sign Up Cases like Lopez's show that sometimes, federal authorities have a legitimate gripe with the state's progressive policies. Because of a 2017 Supreme Judicial Court decision, there are instances when the state releases dangerous criminals instead of handing them over to Immigration and Customs Enforcement. Advertisement But the Trump administration is also overstating how much Massachusetts' policies, as bad as they can be, are to blame for its mounting arrests of noncriminals. Both sides need to give a little bit: Massachusetts should be willing to help in cases where ICE wants to arrest a convicted criminal like Lopez. The federal government has the right to deport people who are in this country illegally, and the state should help when it comes to violent criminals. Advertisement What the federal government doesn't have the right to do is compel local law enforcement to go after law-abiding, peaceable immigrants — whether they're here illegally or not. And it shouldn't be targeting noncriminals, either — or using local sanctuary policies as a pretext for the recent arrests of people with no criminal records. Over the past month, ICE has arrested 'If sanctuary cities would change their policies and turn these violent criminal aliens over to us into our custody instead of releasing them into the public, we would not have to go out to the communities and do this,' Acting ICE Director Todd Lyons said during an ICE The state's policies date to 2017, when the Supreme Judicial Court ruled in Lunn v. Commonwealth that the Legislature would have to specifically authorize court officers to honor requests from immigration authorities to hold deportable immigrants. So far, the Democratic-led Legislature has not done so, and it passed up different bills that would allow law enforcement to cooperate on detainers for immigrants who are here illegally and have committed heinous crimes. Inaction on Lunn has drawn scrutiny from conservatives and even a member of Healey's Cabinet. For Worcester County Sheriff Lew Evangelidis, for example, law enforcement's inability to coordinate with federal immigration authorities means that some criminal migrants can be released back into the community. 'Right now, there's no ability to notify ICE and hold that person for [ICE] to make a determination whether they wish to take them into custody and then provide them the due process that they get in the federal system,' he told me. Advertisement Meanwhile, Healey's secretary of Public Safety and Security, Terrence Reidy, has In a statement, Healey's office said it does cooperate with ICE to some extent, such as by notifying ICE when a criminal in state custody is scheduled to be released. But that leaves loopholes for cases like Lopez's, which result in ICE having to rearrest a criminal. There were no collateral arrests when ICE tracked down Lopez because they were banned under the Biden administration — but there could be if a similar arrest were made now. Still, the Trump administration is exaggerating the connection between sanctuary policies and collateral arrests. Cases where criminals like Lopez were released in spite of detainers may have fueled some collateral arrests in the past month. But the Department of Homeland Security has failed to give a detailed breakdown so it's hard to know just how many. In a Advertisement Meanwhile, some of ICE's higher profile examples of collateral arrest seem to have nothing to do with Lunn. Like the case of the 18-year-old Milford student, Marcelo Gomes da Silva, who was arrested on his way to volleyball practice in an operation meant for his father. He was But so far there It isn't crazy for the Trump administration to criticize Massachusetts policies that can and have allowed convicted criminal migrants to be released into the community. In fact, most Americans would agree — a recent University of Massachusetts Amherst But that poll also found that most people Carine Hajjar is a Globe Opinion writer. She can be reached at
New York Post
2 hours ago
- New York Post
4 killed in Kyiv after a Russian missile and drone attack across Ukraine, mayor says
A Russian missile and drone attack on Kyiv early Friday killed at least four people and injured 20 others, city mayor Vitali Klitschko said, as air raid sirens rang out during a wider combined attack across Ukraine. Klitschko said search and rescue operations were underway at several locations. Multiple explosions were heard in the capital, Kyiv, where falling debris sparked fires across several districts as air defense systems attempted to intercept incoming targets, said Tymur Tkachenko, head of the Kyiv City Administration. 4 The destruction inside a home after a Russian missile strike on Kyiv on June 6, 2025. AFP via Getty Images 'Our air defense crews are doing everything possible. But we must protect one another — stay safe,' Tkachenko wrote on Telegram. Authorities reported damage in several districts, and rescue workers were responding at multiple locations. They urged residents to seek shelter. In Solomyanskyi district, a fire broke out on the 11th floor of a 16-story residential building. Emergency services evacuated three people from the apartment, and rescue operations were ongoing. Another fire broke out in a metal warehouse. 4 Firefighters douse water on a building struck by a Russian drone attack in Kyiv. REUTERS 4 Police officers inspect the damage to a residential building targeted by the attack. AFP via Getty Images Tkachenko said the metro tracks between two stations in Kyiv were damaged in the attack, but no fire or injuries occurred. In northern Chernihiv region, a Shahed drone exploded near an apartment building, shattering windows and doors, according to regional military administration chief Dmytro Bryzhynskyi. He added that explosions from ballistic missiles were also recorded on the outskirts of the city. 4 A large hole was left in an apartment building during the early Friday attack. AFP via Getty Images The nighttime attack came hours after US President Donald Trump said it might be better to let Ukraine and Russia 'fight for a while' before pulling them apart and pursuing peace, in comments that were a remarkable detour from Trump's often-stated appeals to stop the three-year war. Trump spoke as he met with Germany's new chancellor, Friedrich Merz, who appealed to him as the 'key person in the world' who could halt the bloodshed by pressuring Russian President Vladimir Putin.
