Immigrant rights groups urge sheriffs to prioritize public safety over immigration enforcement
The letter urges sheriffs agencies to refrain from immigration-related issues, and stay away from what the organizers consider as the dangers of President Donald Trump's 'anti-immigrant rhetoric and harmful immigration agenda.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
25 minutes ago
- Yahoo
The rich already know how private equity mints money — and it's not from a 401(k)
The ultrawealthy are envied for many reasons. For instance, we wish we could access the same private-market investments that they favor. Now, after the White House issued an executive order on Aug. 7, you may be able to invest like the billionaires do. Homeowners rush to refinance as mortgage-rate plunge opens window of opportunity My wife and I are in our 50s and have $11 million. We're not leaving it to our kids. Is that wrong? You could receive up to $7,500 from the AT&T settlement. Here's how class-action suits work. But would you want to? The executive order allows ordinary retirement savers to invest in private assets and cryptocurrency. This will expand investment options for anyone with a 401(k) or similar tax-advantaged retirement plan. It is a big deal — opening part of America's $12.4 trillion defined-contribution market to private-asset managers. The largest private-equity firms and other asset managers are salivating at the opportunity to pitch this untapped market of retirement savers. Private assets encompass a range of investments that do not trade on a public exchange. Examples include hedge funds, private equity, private credit and infrastructure. The case for private assets is they can provide a buffer against inflation — plus steady returns. The downsides include high fees, illiquidity and complexity. The nation's biggest asset managers welcome the executive order. They want to develop funds that make private assets easier for people to buy, and argue that the added diversification serves savers' best interests. Larry Fink, chief executive of BlackRock BLK, says retirement savers should replace the traditional 60% stocks/40% bonds asset-allocation model with a 50/30/20 split: 50% stocks, 30% bonds and 20% private assets. Read: Larry Fink proposes an alternative to the 60/40 portfolio. It means more fees. Should you be excited about this widening menu of investment choices? It depends on whom you ask. Some investment professionals like the idea of making private assets more available to more people. 'Historically, a number of private-market strategies have produced higher performance and additional diversification in defined-benefit pensions,' says Peter von Lehe, head of investment solutions and strategy at Neuberger Berman. 'It's appropriate that a broader range of investors have access to private assets in their defined-contribution plans because of the potential for return and diversification that these long-term investments can provide.' However, von Lehe cautions that these investments are illiquid and 'have a higher degree of complexity.' He says his 'most appropriate use case' for private-market investments is through professionally managed target-date funds or other funds that allocate a percentage of defined-contribution money to these complex but potentially more lucrative alternatives. Read: Here's something the rich know about managing investment risk that can help you, too Financial advisers have differing views on the role of private assets in client portfolios. Steven Roge, a certified financial planner in Bohemia, N.Y., says private markets are not for everyone. 'It's for people in the wealth-accumulation phase, say 40 to 50 years old, who have a long time horizon and a high risk tolerance,' Roge says. 'And they have to be sophisticated enough to understand it. We know if they don't understand it, they may not stick with it.' Of the firm's 300 clients, he says that 'only about a dozen' fit the bill for adding private-market assets to their retirement accounts. Even with the expanded investment options that may result from the White House's action, Roge remains a fan of passive strategies for most investors. 'Indexing is how they will win over the long run,' he says. 'But some clients want something that's special and different' as they seek market-beating returns. Given the illiquidity of private assets, Roge anticipates setting expectations for those clients who tend to monitor their portfolio daily — and who engage in frequent trading. 'These private investments may only price four times a year,' Roge says. 'That's not enough action for certain clients who track their portfolio like a hawk.' In his personal portfolio, Roge uses private markets — especially private equity — to diversify his holdings. He says he allocates about 25% to alternative assets. 'It helps me sleep at night knowing my portfolio isn't being pushed around by the volatility of public markets,' he says. Roge adds that he is not concerned about the current high valuations of private-equity funds. 'The valuations [of private-equity funds] are more realistic than the erratic valuations we see in public markets on a daily basis,' he says. Other advisers are more skeptical of the White House executive order. 'It's less being done out of interest for the general public and more for private industry lobbying the [Trump] administration,' says Alex Ruda, an adviser in Silver Spring, Md. The executive order undoubtedly pleases asset managers and private-equity firms. For years, they've wanted to attract retirement savers' money. These savers bear primary responsibility for managing their 401(k) compared with today's older retirees, many of whom receive employer-funded defined-benefit pensions. While some younger savers enjoy picking their investments, others dread it. 'The average American worker isn't equipped to navigate these complex [private-market] investments,' Ruda says. 'And they may fall prey to a little performance chasing given where we are in the market cycle' — as private markets have outperformed publicly traded stocks since 2000. Ruda feels so strongly about not incorporating private assets into client portfolios that he's willing to forgo newcomers who express such interest. 'If I wanted to broaden my client base, I'd have to play to what they want,' he says. 'But I don't have to do that. So I'd say to them, 'I'm not the best fit.'' Read next: Here's what it's like to invest in private equity — and why you don't want it in your 401(k) More: As private equity enters retirement plans, is it too dangerous for average investors to jump in? I'm a senior who barely survives on $1,300 a month. No way could I live on $1,000. 'I am a senior citizen': My car needs $3,500 for repairs, but only has a trade-in value of $6,000. Do I bother fixing it?
CBS News
28 minutes ago
- CBS News
Trump administration to more heavily scrutinize "good moral character" requirement for U.S. citizenship
The Trump administration is signaling it will more heavily scrutinize applications filed by legal immigrants seeking American citizenship, in its latest effort to tighten access to U.S. immigration benefits. U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, the federal agency overseeing the country's legal immigration system, instructed officers on Friday to consider additional factors when determining whether immigrants applying for U.S. citizenship have a "good moral character." Typically, legal immigrants with U.S. permanent residency, also known as a green card, can apply for naturalized American citizenship after a 3- or 5-year period, depending on their case. Demonstrating "a good moral character" has long been one of the requirements in U.S. immigration law for American citizenship, alongside passing English and civics tests. For decades, under Republican and Democratic administrations, the "good moral character" assessment has generally been satisfied if applicants don't have any of the criminal offenses or disqualifying conduct outlined in U.S. immigration law. Those disqualifying factors range from violent crimes like murder and aggravated felonies to drug offenses and being a "habitual drunkard." But a policy issued Friday by USCIS expands the "good moral character" assessment, saying that determination must involve "more than a cursory mechanical review focused on the absence of wrongdoing." Instead, the review, the agency told its officers, should be "a holistic assessment of an alien's behavior, adherence to societal norms, and positive contributions that affirmatively demonstrate good moral character." The directive orders officers to place a "greater emphasis" on applicants' "positive attributes and contributions," listing community involvement, family caregiving and ties, educational attainment, "stable and lawful" employment, the length of time spent in the U.S., and paying taxes as some of those factors. The memo also mandates "greater scrutiny" of factors that show applicants lack a "good moral character," beyond the crimes and disqualifying conduct detailed in U.S. immigration law. Those factors, the policy said, include "acts that are contrary to the average behavior of citizens in the jurisdiction where aliens reside," including actions that are "technically lawful" but also "inconsistent with civic responsibility within the community." USCIS listed "reckless or habitual traffic infractions, or harassment or aggressive solicitation" as some of those actions. Lastly, the new USCIS policy instructs officers to weigh factors that could show that applicants who have engaged in wrongdoing have rehabilitated, such as complying with probation, paying overdue taxes or child support and receiving letters of support from their community. Over the past decade, the U.S. government has naturalized between 600,000 and 1 million immigrants as citizens annually, USCIS figures show. In a statement to CBS News, USCIS chief spokesman Matthew Tragesser said the directive is another effort by President Trump's administration to "restore integrity" to the U.S. immigration system. "U.S. citizenship is the gold standard of citizenship — it should only be offered to the world's best of the best," Tragesser added. "Today, USCIS is adding a new element to the naturalization process that ensures America's newest citizens not only embrace America's culture, history, and language but who also demonstrate Good Moral Character." Doug Rand, a former senior USCIS official during the Biden administration, suggested the Trump administration's policy is designed to scare legal immigrants from applying for American citizenship and require officers to put their "thumb on the scale" to find more reasons to deny applications. "They're trying to increase the grounds for denial of U.S. citizenship by kind of torturing the definition of good moral character to encompass extremely harmless behavior," Rand said, citing the policy's reference to traffic infractions. While the Trump administration has launched a highly visible crackdown on illegal immigration by deploying thousands of troops to the southern border, expanding immigration raids across the country, and fast-tracking deportations of those in the U.S. illegally, it has simultaneously moved to restrict legal immigration, with less fanfare. The Trump administration has virtually shut down refugee admissions, terminated Biden-era programs that allowed migrants to enter the U.S. legally, limited visas for certain countries and implemented aggressive vetting procedures for legal immigration benefits. Those efforts include expanded vetting of social media activity of legal immigrants and stricter screening requirements for some applications.
Associated Press
28 minutes ago
- Associated Press
Putin emerges from the Alaska summit with increased stature and Trump echoing a Kremlin position
In Alaska, President Vladimir Putin walked on a red carpet, shook hands and exchanged smiles with his American counterpart. Donald Trump ended the summit praising their relationship and calling Russia 'a big power ... No. 2 in the world,' albeit admitting they didn't reach a deal on ending the war in Ukraine. By Saturday morning Moscow time, Trump appeared to have abandoned the idea of a ceasefire as a step toward peace -– something he and Ukraine had pushed for months -– in favor of pursuing a full-fledged 'Peace Agreement' to end the war, echoing a long-held Kremlin position. The 'severe consequences' he threatened against Moscow for continuing hostilities were nowhere in sight. On Ukraine's battlefields, Russian troops slowly grinded on, with time on their side. The hastily arranged Alaska summit 'produced nothing for Mr. Trump and gave Mr. Putin most of what he was looking for,' said Laurie Bristow, a former British ambassador to Russia. The summit spectacle Putin's visit to Alaska was his first to the United States in 10 years and his first to a Western country since invading Ukraine in 2022 and plunging U.S.-Russia relations to the lowest point since the Cold War. Crippling sanctions followed, along with efforts to shun Russia on the global stage. In another major blow, the International Criminal Court in 2023 issued an arrest warrant against Putin on accusations of war crimes, casting a shadow on his foreign trips and contacts with other world leaders. Trump's return to the White House appeared to upend all that. He warmly greeted Putin, even clapping for him, on a red carpet as U.S. warplanes flew overhead as the world watched. The overflight was both 'a show of power' and a gesture of welcome from the U.S. president to the Kremlin leader, 'shown off to a friend,' said retired Col. Peer de Jong, a former aide to two French presidents and author of 'Putin, Lord of War.' Russian officials and media reveled in the images of the 'pomp-filled reception' and 'utmost respect' that Putin received in Alaska. Putin has 'broken out of international isolation,' returning to the world stage as one of two global leaders and 'wasn't in the least challenged' by Trump, who ignored the arrest warrant for Putin from the ICC, Bristow told The Associated Press. For Putin, 'mission accomplished' Putin 'came to the Alaska summit with the principal goal of stalling any pressure on Russia to end the war,' said Neil Melvin, director of international security at the London-based Royal United Services Institute. 'He will consider the summit outcome as mission accomplished.' In recent months, Trump has pressed for a ceasefire, something Ukraine and its allies supported and insisted was a prerequisite for any peace talks. The Kremlin has pushed back, however, arguing it's not interested in a temporary truce -– only in a long-term peace agreement. Moscow's official demands for peace so far have remained nonstarter for Kyiv: It wants Ukraine to cede four regions that Russia only partially occupies, along with the Crimean Peninsula, illegally annexed in 2014. Ukraine also must renounce its bid to join NATO and shrink its military, the Kremlin says. After Alaska, Trump appeared to echo the Kremlin's position on a ceasefire, posting on social media that after he spoke to Ukraine's President Volodymyr Zelenskyy and European leaders, 'it was determined by all that the best way to end the horrific war between Russia and Ukraine is to go directly to a Peace Agreement, which would end the war, and not a mere Ceasefire Agreement, which often times do not hold up.' In a statement after the Trump call, the European leaders did not address whether a peace deal was preferable to a ceasefire. The pro-Kremlin tabloid Komsomolskaya Pravda described it as a 'huge diplomatic victory' for Putin, whose forces will have time to make more territorial gains. The summit took place a week after a deadline Trump gave the Kremlin to stop the war or face additional sanctions on its exports of oil in the form of secondary tariffs on countries buying it. Trump already imposed those tariffs on India, and if applied to others, Russian revenues 'would probably be impacted very badly and very quickly,' said Chris Weafer, CEO of Macro-Advisory Ltd. consultancy. In the days before Alaska, Trump also threatened unspecified 'very severe consequences' if Putin does not agree to stop the war. But whether those consequences will materialize remains unclear. Asked about it in a post-summit interview with Fox News Channel, Trump said he doesn't need 'to think about that right now,' and suggested he might revisit the idea in 'two weeks or three weeks or something.' Alexandra Prokopenko of the Carnegie Russia Eurasia Center and a former adviser at the Russian Central Bank, posted on X that it was 'an important tactical victory for Putin' that gives Moscow 'an opportunity to build alternatives and be prepared.' More pressure on Ukraine In a statement after the summit, Putin claimed the two leaders had hammered out an 'understanding' on Ukraine and warned Europe not to 'torpedo the nascent progress.' But Trump said 'there's no deal until there's a deal.' In his Fox interview, Trump insisted the onus going forward might be on Zelenskyy 'to get it done,' but said there would also be some involvement from European nations. Zelenskyy will meet Trump at the White House on Monday. Both raised the possibility of a trilateral summit with Putin, but Kremlin aide Yuri Ushakov said it wasn't discussed in Alaska. The Kremlin has long maintained that Putin would only meet Zelenskyy in the final stages of peace talks. 'Trump now appears to be shifting responsibility towards Kyiv and Europe, while still keeping a role for himself,' Tatiana Stanovaya of the Carnegie Russia and Eurasia Center wrote on X. Fiona Hill, a senior adviser on Russia in his first administration, told AP that Trump has met his match because 'Putin is a much bigger bully.' Trump wants to be the negotiator of 'a big real estate deal between Russia and Ukraine,' she said, but in his mind he can 'apply real pressure' only to one said — Kyiv. Hill said she expects Trump to tell Zelenskyy that 'you're really going to have to make a deal' with Putin because Trump wants the conflict off his plate and is not prepared to put pressure on the Russian president. Far from the summit venue and its backdrop saying 'Pursuing Peace,' Russia continued to bombard Ukraine and make incremental advances on the over 600-mile (1,000-kilometer) front. Russia fired a ballistic missile and 85 drones overnight. Ukraine shot down or intercepted 61 drones, its air force said. Front-line areas of Sumy, Dnipropetrovsk, Donetsk and Chernihiv were attacked. Russia's Defense Ministry said it had taken control of the village of Kolodyazi in the Donetsk region, along with Vorone in the Dnipropetrovsk region. Ukraine did not comment on the claims. Russian forces are closing in on the strongholds of Pokrovsk and Kostiantynivka in the Donetsk region, which Moscow illegally annexed in 2022 but still only partially controls. 'Unless Mr. Putin is absolutely convinced that he cannot win militarily, the fighting is not going to stop,' said Bristow, the former ambassador. 'That's the big takeaway from the Anchorage summit.' —— Associated Press writers John Leicester in Paris and Elise Morton and Pan Pylas in London contributed.
