'Spineless creeps': ICE lawyers are hiding their names in court
According to a new report from The Intercept, judges are declining to identify attorneys working for ICE during deportation proceedings spurred on by the agency. At one hearing, the oulet noted that the judge stated her own name, the name of the immigrants facing deportation, and the name of their attorneys, but failed to identify the ICE attorney.
'We're not really doing names publicly,' an immigration judge in New York City, ShaSha Xu, said during a hearing in June.
Xu cited 'privacy' as a justification, adding that 'things lately have changed.'
Attorneys and legal experts are baffled by the move. Attorney Kenneth White said he'd worked as a prosecutor in cases against 'white supremacists [and] street gang members' and never felt the need to hide who he was..
'This is not the act of a legitimate government,' White wrote on BlueSky. 'What's with these spineless creeps?'
Elissa Steglich, a law professor and co-director of the Immigration Clinic at the University of Texas at Austin, told The Intercept that concealing identities in the courtroom is an oddity.
'I've never heard of someone in open court not being identified,' Steglich said. 'Part of the court's ethical obligation is transparency, including clear identification of the parties. Not identifying an attorney for the government means if there are unethical or professional concerns regarding [the Department of Homeland Security], the individual cannot be held accountable. And it makes the judge appear partial to the government.'Identity concealment might be odd in court, but it's becoming commonplace throughout ICE. Across the country, ICE agents have been masking up during raids and at immigration court.
ICE has justified agents wearing masks because of safety risks, claiming assaults against its agents are up almost 700%. DHS' data showed 79 assaults in a six month period this year, compared to 10 assaults in the same period in 2024. That number isn't adjusted to account for the increased number of ICE arrests this year. ICE arrests have increased in every state since President Donald Trump took office and have more than doubled in 38 states, according to the New York Times.
This agency has been in the spotlight thanks to Trump's mass deportation plan, and Amerians aren't liking what they see. ICE agents have refused lawmakers entry to agency facilities, detained tourists, and carried out raids that sparked days of protests in Los Angeles. The agency is set to have its efforts supercharged by a massive funding increase in Trump's 'big, beautiful' spending package.
The post 'Spineless creeps': ICE lawyers are hiding their names in court appeared first on Salon.com.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
17 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Bank of Canada, Crown corporations set to align with Liberal cost-cutting plans
OTTAWA — The Bank of Canada and most other federal Crown corporations will be looking to trim their budgets alongside a wider government effort to cut costs. A spokesperson for the Bank of Canada confirms the central bank will "align" with the Liberal government's plans to carve out savings of 15 per cent in departments' operational spending over the next three years. The Bank of Canada is a Crown corporation responsible for monetary policy in Canada but operates independently and its budget is managed by its own board of directors. An internal email obtained by The Canadian Press shows Bank of Canada staff were informed Tuesday of the central bank's plans trim costs. A Treasury Board spokesperson confirms that most Crown corporations and other federally funded institutions are also subject to the Liberals' cost-cutting exercise, as first reported by the Toronto Star. Prime Minister Mark Carney has touted plans to "spend less" and "invest more" ahead of his plan to publish a new budget in the fall. This report by The Canadian Press was first published July 17, 2025. Craig Lord, The Canadian Press Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
Yahoo
17 minutes ago
- Yahoo
President Trump working on executive order intending to 'preserve' college sports from 'threat'
WASHINGTON, D.C. — A draft of the long-discussed presidential executive order intends to 'preserve' college athletics from 'unprecedented threat' and destruction, it says, by implementing new policies related to athlete compensation, antitrust protection, athlete employment, state law uniformity and Olympic sport participation. The draft, though not believed to be the final version, is expected to align closely with the order that President Donald Trump has long been exploring and offers a window into his thinking. It is not clear when, or even if, Trump will announce an executive order, which for four months has been discussed in the public sphere. The draft was provided to Yahoo Sports by three different congressional sources, all confirming that the document is believed to have originated from the White House. Attempts to reach White House staff were unsuccessful. The draft, seven pages long and titled 'SAVING COLLEGE SPORTS,' outlines directives from Trump to members of his Cabinet to create policy related to various aspects of college athletics. Those aspects primarily include directing the attorney general and Federal Trade Commission to: (1) provide college leaders with protection from antitrust law around the 'long-term availability' of scholarships and opportunities for athletes; (2) prevent 'unqualified and unscrupulous agents' from representing athletes; and (3) support uniformity by, presumably, preempting the varying NIL state laws. The draft also requests that the assistant to the president for domestic policy work with the U.S. Olympic team to provide 'safeguards' for NCAA Olympic sports; and directs the secretary of education and National Labor Relations Board to implement policy 'clarifying that status' of athletes, presumably as students and not employees. In its introduction, the order purports that such directives are necessary to preserve an industry in chaos and on the brink of destruction. 'It is no exaggeration to say that America's system of collegiate athletics plays an integral role in forging the leaders that drive our Nation's success,' the order says. 'Yet the future of college sports is under unprecedented threat.' Court rulings, the order says, have "eliminated limits on athlete compensation, recruiting inducements, and transfers between universities, unleashing a sea change that threatens the viability of college sports.' While some of these changes are 'long overdue,' the order says that the inability to maintain rules 'will destroy what Americans recognize today as college sport.' 'It is the policy of my Administration that college sports should be preserved,' the draft reads. The order says that the House settlement 'provides little assurance' in preserving the sport and expects it to be 'upended soon' by new litigation over increased compensation and fewer rules. The order describes a potential athlete-employment model as making the industry "financially untenable.' Steve Berman, one of the co-lead plaintiff attorneys in the House settlement, released a statement to Yahoo Sports calling a potential executive order as 'unwarranted' and describing it as flouting the president's "own philosophy on the supposed 'art of the deal.'" 'Plain and simple, college athletes don't need Trump's help, and he shouldn't be aiding the NCAA at the expense of athletes,' Berman, managing partner and co-founder of Hagens Berman, said in a statement to Yahoo Sports. 'Step back, Mr. President. These fabulous athletes don't need your help. Let them make their own deals. And the Supreme Court with your appointee, Justice Kavanaugh, condemned the NCAA's compensation rules as a violation of the antitrust laws. Why give them immunity, Mr. President, in light of that ruling?" The order gives the attorney general and Federal Trade Commission 60 days to make necessary revisions to new policy and gives the secretary of education and secretary of the treasury 120 days to develop financial education for athletes. Any timing on the release of the order — if it is released at all — remains a murky topic. Trump has been determined to get involved in college athletics. Most recently, he held a golf outing with two of the sport's most notable names, SEC commissioner Greg Sankey and Notre Dame athletic director Pete Bevacqua. Reports of an executive order surfaced in late April, as well as plans to form a presidential commission to study the industry. In fact, the executive order appears to create a commission (though it does not describe it as such) of 'individuals and organizations involved in collegiate athletics, including athletes, schools, conferences, governing bodies, and leaders with experience relating to college sports, as well as the Congress and State governments' to assure that college sports is being preserved. Trump's plans — both the order and commission — were 'paused' in May as congressional lawmakers urged White House leadership to give them more time to agree to college sports legislation. A congressional bill governing the sport is believed to be a more permanent solution than an executive order that is subject to legal challenges. The pause in White House action in May provided a runway for House and Senate negotiations over college sports legislation. More movement has taken place in the House, where a bipartisan bill, the SCORE Act, is expected to soon go before a full House committee for vote, at which point it could land on the House floor — the furthest that any all-encompassing college sports legislation has advanced since the NCAA's lobbying effort began five years ago. However, the bill faces steep odds in gaining enough Democrat support for passage in the Senate, where filibuster rules require a 60-vote minimum. There are 53 Republicans in the Senate. The Senate, though, has been working toward the introduction of its own legislation, led by Sen. Ted Cruz, who, much like Trump, has made college sports regulation a priority. He's been in negotiations now for months with several Democrats, most notably Chris Coons, Richard Blumenthal and Cory Booker. No agreement has been reached despite more than a year of intense talks. Though at first deemed to be a 'bipartisan issue,' college sports legislation has created significant enough differences among Democrats and Republicans that no single bill has reached the House or Senate floor despite the introduction of more than a dozen pieces of legislation over five years. Dividing the two parties is an array of issues, most notably the idea of preventing athletes from being deemed employees. Democrats are less inclined in such a provision because of their relationship with trial lawyers and labor unions, Cruz said during an interview in September of 2023. On the same day and at the same event, Chris Murphy, a Democrat from Connecticut, and Rep. Lori Trahan, a Democrat from Massachusetts, pushed college leaders to examine a model to share revenue with athletes and collectively bargain with them. 'You might disagree,' Murphy said, 'but I think it feels and smells a lot like employment at the highest level of the sport.' But there are other problematic concepts. For instance, the oversight and enforcement of the college athletics industry (should the NCAA or College Sports Commission be granted such authority or a federal entity, something that many Democrats support); guarantees around long-term athlete healthcare for lower-resourced Division I schools that cannot afford such (will the power conference schools subside?); and how limited is the liability or antitrust protection for the leadership of college sports? Meanwhile, as lawmakers continue negotiations, college administrators are mired in legal negotiations of their own related to the new House settlement and revenue-sharing concept. The settlement's primary goal — to shift athlete pay from NIL booster collectives to the schools — is at risk of crumbling as House plaintiff attorneys contend that college leaders are violating terms of the settlement by denying certain collective contracts.
Yahoo
17 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Settlement reached in investors' lawsuit against Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg and other company leaders
WILMINGTON, Del. (AP) — A settlement was announced Thursday in court in a class action investors' lawsuit against Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg and current and former company leaders over claims stemming from the privacy scandal involving the Cambridge Analytica political consulting firm. The suit had sought billions of dollars in reimbursement for fines and legal costs. No details on the settlement were shared when it was announced in Delaware's Court of Chancery at the start of what would have been the second day of trial, at which point nothing related to the settlement had been filed with the court. The attorneys involved left court without commenting. A communications representative from Meta said the company had no comment. Investors had alleged in the lawsuit that Meta did not fully disclose the risks to Facebook users that their personal information would be misused by Cambridge Analytica, a firm that supported Donald Trump's successful Republican presidential campaign in 2016. Shareholders say Facebook officials repeatedly violated a 2012 consent order with the Federal Trade Commission under which Facebook agreed to stop collecting and sharing personal data without users' consent. Facebook later sold user data to commercial partners in direct violation of the consent order and removed disclosures from privacy settings that were required under consent order, the lawsuit alleged. Facebook agreed to pay a $5.1 billion penalty to settle FTC charges in the fallout. The social media giant also faced significant fines in Europe and reached a $725 million privacy settlement with users. Shareholders wanted Zuckerberg and others to reimburse Meta an estimated $8 billion or more for the FTC fine and other legal costs. Zuckerberg and former Chief Operating Officer Sheryl Sandberg had been expected to testify. Other current and former board members, including billionaires Marc Andreessen and Peter Thiel, were also included as defendants. Earlier this year, Sandberg was sanctioned for deleting emails from her personal account related to the Cambridge Analytica investigation. Jeffrey Zients, who served as an outside director from 2018 to 2020, avoided sanctions in the same case because his role made it less likely he had access to relevant information. Testifying on the first day of this lawsuit, Zients said he had supported the FTC settlement for which shareholders were seeking reimbursement. ___ Associated Press reporter Barbara Ortutay in San Francisco contributed to this report. Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
