Springfield's Haitian immigrants are terrified Trump will make them an ‘example' with mass deportations
Four months ago, then-presidential nominee Donald Trump repeatedly told his supporters a baseless lie that Haitian immigrants in Springfield, Ohio were eating residents' pets.
Now he's President, and members of Springfield's Haitian immigrant community are afraid he will make an 'example' out of them as he promises to carry out mass deportations across the country, Politico reports.
The Trump administration has already begun carrying out Immigration and Customs Enforcement raids across the country, including in Chicago, Newark, Miami and Colorado. He has also taken several other steps to implement his hardline immigration agenda, including attempting to end birthright citizenship.
Marjorie Koveleski, a Haitian-American Springfield resident for decades who helps usher in the new arrivals, told Politico many are afraid mass deportations will start with them.
'They think they're going to make Springfield the example,' she told Politico.
Brandon Sipes, a humanitarian crisis adviser for the Nazarene Compassionate Ministries in Springfield, told Politico 20-30 Haitian residents used to attend his church. Now, that number 'just bottomed out,' he said.
'The few families that would come to church, they were very afraid,' he told Politico.
Trump's rhetoric has taken its toll on the families that call Springfield home.
'This was very hard mentally, because at some points in time, people were afraid to come out or to go for groceries, to go shopping or anything,' Viles Dorsainvil, leader of Springfield's Haitian Community Help & Support Center, told Politico. 'That rhetoric was so negative that some folks in town left because they could not put up with all that pressure.'
Some 15,000 Haitian migrants have settled in the town under a program that grants temporary protected immigration status to individuals from countries the U.S. considers especially dangerous, including Haiti.
Last year, Trump, J.D. Vance and their MAGA allies repeatedly claimed immigrants were eating dogs and cats in the mid-sized town of some 58,000 people.
The theory – which city officials maintained there is no evidence for – was even discussed on the debate stage as Trump faced off against Kamala Harris. Debate moderator David Muir pointed out the claim was unfounded, but Trump doubled down.
The baseless claim appears to have originated from a post describing a fourth-hand account on a Springfield Facebook group. There is no evidence to support the theory and city officials have rejected the claim.
Trump's rhetoric already disturbed the community last year, as schools and government buildings were targeted by dozens of bomb threats in the weeks after he promoted the baseless conspiracy. GOP governor of Ohio Mike DeWine, a Trump supporter, even penned an op-ed for the New York Times in which he defended the Haitian population.
'They are there legally,' he wrote. 'They are there to work.' He also claimed the population has contributed to a 'resurgence in manufacturing and job creation' in the town.
The Independent has contacted the Trump administration for comment.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
7 minutes ago
North Carolina redistricting trial begins over racial gerrymandering claims
RALEIGH, N.C. -- North Carolina congressional and legislative districts drawn by Republicans that helped them retain majorities in Raleigh and Washington are in court, as federal lawsuits accuse mapmakers of illegally eroding Black voting power in the process. A trial scheduled by a three-judge panel will start Monday in Winston-Salem over allegations that GOP legislative leaders violated federal law and the U.S. Constitution when they enacted new electoral maps in the ninth-largest state in October 2023. Republican leaders counter that lawfully partisan — and not racial — considerations helped inform their decision-making. The lines were used in the 2024 elections, after which Republicans kept General Assembly majorities and flipped three U.S. House seats held by Democratic incumbents who didn't seek reelection because they decided the recast district made winning impossible. Those seat flips, which turned a 7-7 delegation into one with a 10-4 Republican advantage, helped the GOP keep narrow control of the House, which has helped advance President Donald Trump's agenda. Favorable rulings for the plaintiffs could force Republicans to redraw maps for the 2026 elections, making it harder to retain their partisan advantage. Otherwise, the districts could be used through the 2030 elections. The trial involves two lawsuits filed in late 2023. In one lawsuit, the North Carolina NAACP, Common Cause and several Black residents originally sued over redrawn state House and Senate maps and U.S. House districts. The other lawsuit filed by nearly 20 Black and Latino voters focused on the new congressional districts, four of which they argue are illegal racial gerrymanders. Pretrial rulings this spring and amended litigation dismissed challenges to the state House map and narrowed state Senate arguments to a handful of districts. Still, both lawsuits claim that lines are so skewed for GOP candidates that many Black voters cannot elect their preferred candidates, violating the Voting Rights Act. They allege the mapmakers submerged or spread out Black voting blocs, which historically have favored Democrats, into surrounding districts with white majorities — benefiting Republicans. They point to a region where the cities of Greensboro, High Point and Winston-Salem are located. They said Republicans split the region's concentrated Black voting population within multiple U.S. House districts. Then-Rep. Kathy Manning, a Greensboro Democrat, decided not to run again because her district shifted to the right. The plaintiffs also allege Republican mapmakers intentionally discriminated against Black and Latino voters. In a pretrial brief, lawyers for Republican leaders say the lawmakers used mapmaking rules that prohibited using data identifying the race of voters, in keeping with rulings on previous North Carolina redistricting maps in which judges chided them for emphasizing race. Instead, Republicans were able to lawfully use partisan data — like statewide election results — in drawing the new maps, the lawyers said. They cite a 2019 U.S. Supreme Court decision and an April 2023 state Supreme Court decision that neutered legal claims of illegal partisan gerrymandering. The plaintiffs counter that the 'racial sorting' within the challenged districts can't be explained by politics alone. The three judges were all nominated to the bench by Republican presidents: 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals Judge Allison Rushing (Donald Trump) and District Judges Thomas Schroeder (George W. Bush) and Richard Myers (Trump). The panel has set aside several days for a trial that won't end until July 9. Likely witnesses include individual plaintiffs, state legislators, redistricting experts and historians. No immediate decision is expected — the legal sides have until early August to file additional briefs. The court's ruling can be appealed. With candidate filing for the 2026 election starting Dec. 1, any required remapping would have to be completed by late fall to avoid election disruptions. North Carolina has a long history of redistricting litigation in federal courts. The U.S. Supreme Court ruled in landmark cases in the 1980s, 1990s and 2000s involving racial bias and the extent to which racial considerations could be used in forming districts that favored the election of Black candidates. The court's 2019 decision on partisan gerrymandering stemmed from a North Carolina case. The current maps were drawn after the state Supreme Court, with a Republican seat majority, essentially struck down rulings the court made in 2022 when it had a Democratic majority. Two other lawsuits challenging the 2023 district boundaries are pending. Statewide races in North Carolina are close, and Democrats have held the governor's mansion for most of the past 30 years. But Republicans have controlled the General Assembly — and thus redistricting — since 2011. Redistricting maps can't be blocked by a governor's veto.
7 minutes ago
A hillside of white crosses fuels misleading story about South Africa's farm killings
MOKOPANE, South Africa -- The white crosses are staked in the ground on an otherwise barren hillside on the edge of a farm, each one standing as a reminder of a terrible story of a person being killed. But the crosses, nearly 3,000 of them, do not tell the full story of South Africa's farm killings. The Witkruis Monument — which means White Cross Monument in the language spoken by South Africa's white Afrikaner minority — is a memorial only to white people who were killed on farms over the last three decades. It's a visceral snapshot seized on by some South Africans to drive a discredited narrative that white farmers in the majority Black country are being targeted in a widespread, race-based system of persecution. The false narrative has also been spread by conservative commentators in the United States and elsewhere — and amplified by South African-born Elon Musk and U.S. President Donald Trump. Last month, Trump escalated the rhetoric, using the term 'genocide' to describe violence against white farmers. The South African government and experts who have studied farm killings have publicly denounced the misinformation spread by Trump and others. Even the caretaker of Witkruis says the monument — which makes no reference to the hundreds of Black South African farmers and farmworkers who have been killed — does not tell the complete story. The killings of farmers and farmworkers, regardless of race, are a tiny percentage of the country's high level of crime, and they typically occur during armed robberies, according to available statistics and two studies carried out over the last 25 years. Yet because wealthier white people own 72% of South Africa's privately owned farms, according to census data, they are disproportionately affected by these often brutal crimes. Black people own just 4% of the country's privately owned farmland, and the rest is owned by people who are mixed race or of Indian heritage. Misinformation about farm killings has been fueled by right-wing political groups in South Africa and others outside the country, said Gareth Newman, a crime expert at the Institute for Security Studies think tank in Pretoria. Some of the fringe South African groups, which hold no official power, boycotted the country's first democratic elections in 1994, when South Africa's apartheid system of white minority rule officially ended. They have espoused a debunked theory of persecution — in a country where whites make up about 7% of the population — ever since. 'They held on to these beliefs as a way of maintaining social cohesion in their groups, making sure that they can obtain funding and support," Newman said. "And they were getting support from right-wing groups abroad because it fit their narrative." The Witkruis Monument was started in 2004 but recognizes victims going back to 1994. Each year, more crosses are planted to memorialize white farmers and their family members who were killed, organizers say. Recently, they've planted around 50 crosses a year. Kobus de Lange, a local Afrikaner farmer, has taken on the role of caretaker of Witkruis. He gave The Associated Press access to see the memorial, bringing along his wife and children to help tidy up the monument in the country's north, near the town of Mokopane. De Lange expressed the fear and frustration of a white farming community that feels authorities have not done enough to protect them. One of his sons wore a T-shirt with the slogan 'enough is enough' — written in their Afrikaans language — in reference to the killings. But de Lange acknowledged that the memorial does not capture the full scope of farm killings. 'It's across the board, there are Black farmers who are also attacked,' de Lange said. He said in some farm attacks, Black farmworkers are tortured by criminals for information on how to break into the main farmhouse. The Witkruis Monument would be willing to put up crosses to Black farmers and farmworkers who have been killed, but their relatives haven't requested it, he said. The monument includes memorabilia bearing the flags of conservative Afrikaner movements, symbols that are generally frowned upon because Afrikaners were at the heart of the apartheid government. From April 2023 through March 2024, there were 49 farm killings recorded by AfriForum, a white Afrikaner lobby group. That's about 0.2% of overall murders tallied by the government over the same period. The group recorded 296 farm robberies in that timeframe, or about 0.7% of all robberies. AfriForum's numbers don't include killings of Black farmers and workers, and the country's official crime statistics are not broken down by race. Black people make up more than 80% of South Africa's population of 62 million, and most victims of violent crime across South Africa are Black. But there is no public relations campaign to raise awareness about the killing of Black farmers. Across racial lines, most public outcry about crime in South Africa is over the high rates of rape and murder of women and children, which mostly takes place in cities and townships. To tamp down misinformation, South African police last month took the unprecedented step of providing a racial breakdown of farm killings during the first three months of the year. Between January and March, there were six murders on farms, down from 12 during the same period last year. One of the victims was white, the rest were Black. 'What Donald Trump is saying about whites being targeted does not exist," said MmaNtuli Buthelezi, who lives on a farm in Normandien, a rural area in KwaZulu-Natal province. Black farmworkers also feel vulnerable, Buthelezi said. "We don't even have small firearms. Our weapons are just a spear and a shield, and sticks we get from the woods.' Nomandien is an area where the farming community planted white crosses to raise awareness about farm killings in 2020. During a White House visit last month by South African President Cyril Ramaphosa, Trump showed a video in which he incorrectly referred to the location as a 'burial site' of slain white farmers. Also, and without evidence, Trump has accused South Africa's Black-led government of 'fueling' what he said was racially motivated violence against whites. In February, Trump issued an executive order punishing the country by banning all U.S. aid and assistance to South Africa. The Trump administration has cited a chant used by a minority Black-led political party in South Africa that has the lyrics 'shoot the farmer' as contributing to what it claims is the racially motivated killings of white farmers. Violent crimes against farmers were a problem for years before the apartheid-era chant was revived. The South African government investigated farm killings in 2003. It interviewed dozens of police detectives and other experts and concluded that robbery was the most common motive for violent crimes, including murders, that occurred on farms. A study by the South African Human Rights Commission in 2015 reached a similar conclusion. 'It is criminal individuals and groups that are targeting them because they are considered vulnerable,' said Newham, who has researched the subject for more than 15 years. 'They have things like cars, guns and laptops.' In some cases, perpetrators are former laborers who return to attack, kill and rob farm owners to settle disputes over money. In others, disgruntled former employees had returned simply for revenge, according to historical records of the National Prosecuting Authority.
8 minutes ago
Trump admin outlines US Steel plan, but union voices concerns
CALGARY, Alberta -- President Donald Trump would have unique influence over the operations of U.S. Steel under the terms of what the White House calls an 'investment' being made by Japan-based Nippon Steel in the iconic American steelmaker. Administration officials over the past few days provided additional insight into the 'golden share' arrangement that the federal government made as a condition for supporting the deal. The Pittsburgh-based steel maker and Nippon Steel plan $11 billion in new investments by 2028 after indicating that they plan to move forward with the deal under the terms of a national security agreement that has the White House's approval. The White House has described the deal as a 'partnership' and an 'investment' by Nippon Steel in U.S. Steel, although Nippon Steel has never backed off its stated intention of buying and controlling U.S. Steel as a wholly owned subsidiary in a nearly $15 billion offer it originally made in late 2023. Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick posted on social media on Saturday how the 'golden share' to be held by the president would operate, revealing that the White House is willing to insert itself aggressively into a private company's affairs even as it has simultaneously pledged to strip away government regulations so businesses can expand. Under the government's terms, it would be impossible without Trump's consent to relocate U.S. Steel's headquarters from Pittsburgh, change the name of the company, 'transfer production or jobs outside the United States,' shutter factories, or reincorporate the business overseas, among other powers held by the president. Lutnick also said it would require presidential approval to reduce or delay $14 billion in planned investments. 'The Golden Share held by the United States in U.S. Steel has powerful terms that directly benefit and protect America, Pennsylvania, the great steelworkers of U.S. Steel, and U.S. manufacturers that will have massively expanded access to domestically produced steel,' Lutnick posted on X. That $14 billion figure is higher than what the companies disclosed on Friday when Trump created a pathway for the investment with an executive order based on the terms of the national security agreement being accepted. Lawmakers from Pennsylvania say the higher figure includes the cost of an electric arc furnace — a more modern steel mill that melts down scrap — that Nippon Steel wants to build in the U.S., bringing the value of the deal to at least $28 billion. The president has the authority to name one of the corporate board's independent three directors and veto power over the other two choices, according to a person familiar with the terms of the agreement who insisted on anonymity to discuss them. The details of the board structure were first reported by The New York Times. Details of the agreement emerged as Trump was traveling to Alberta in Canada for the Group of Seven summit. Still, the full terms remain somewhat unclear. The companies have not made public the full terms of Nippon Steel's acquisition of U.S. Steel or the national security agreement with the federal government. On Sunday, the United Steelworkers, the labor union representing U.S. Steel employees, posted a letter raising questions about the deal forged by Trump, who during his run for the presidency had pledged to block Nippon Steel's acquisition of U.S. Steel. The union said it was 'disappointed' that Trump 'has reversed course' and raised basic questions about the ownership structure of U.S. Steel. 'Neither the government nor the companies have publicly identified what all the terms of the proposed transaction are,' the letter said. 'Our labor agreement expires next year, on September 1, 2026, and the USW and its members are prepared to engage the new owners" of U.S. Steel "to obtain a fair contract.' If Trump has as much control of U.S. Steel as he has claimed, that could put him in the delicate position of negotiating the salary and benefits of unionized steelworkers going into midterm elections. As president, Joe Biden used his authority to block Nippon Steel's acquisition of U.S. Steel on his way out of the White House after a review by the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States. After he was elected, Trump expressed openness to working out an arrangement and ordered another review by the committee. That's when the idea of the 'golden share' emerged as a way to resolve national security concerns and protect American interests in domestic steel production. As it sought to win over American officials, Nippon Steel made a series of commitments. It gradually increased the amount of money it was pledging to invest in U.S. Steel, promised to maintain U.S. Steel's headquarters in Pittsburgh, put U.S. Steel under a board with a majority of American citizens and keep plants operating. It also said it would protect the interests of U.S. Steel in trade matters and it wouldn't import steel slabs that would compete with U.S. Steel's blast furnaces in Pennsylvania and Indiana.
