logo
A dozen Mass. cities are ‘on notice' over sanctuary laws, feds say

A dozen Mass. cities are ‘on notice' over sanctuary laws, feds say

Yahoo6 days ago

The Trump administration placed Boston, 11 other towns and cities in Massachusetts, and more than 500 communities across the country 'on notice' Thursday over their laws dealing with immigration enforcement, accusing them of violating federal law by providing sanctuary to undocumented immigrants.
Federal authorities said the 'lawless' jurisdictions should expect to receive 'formal notification' of noncompliance with federal law, along with demands that local officials revise any policies out of step with federal immigration statutes.
'These sanctuary city politicians are endangering Americans and our law enforcement in order to protect violent criminal illegal aliens,' U.S. Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem said in a statement Thursday.
The announcement followed up on an executive order signed by President Donald Trump last month directing the Department of Homeland Security to publish a list of jurisdictions that decline to cooperate with federal immigration authorities.
Local officials in such jurisdictions, often known as sanctuary cities, argue that by avoiding cooperation with immigration agents on noncriminal matters, they allow undocumented residents to feel comfortable interacting with police without fear of deportation.
Cities are safer when all members of the public are willing to call and help police, proponents of sanctuary policies say.
Read more: Sanctuary or not, immigrant fears transcend borders in Chelsea, Revere
In Boston, for example, police are barred from asking members of the public about their immigration status or assisting federal agents with civil immigration enforcement.
Boston's law does not prevent police from assisting immigration authorities with criminal investigations into drugs, weapons, human trafficking, or other matters.
Read more: Boston's Trust Act: What it is and how it works
The list of sanctuary jurisdictions included communities in nearly three dozen states, including all six in New England. In Massachusetts, the communities identified by the Trump administration were:
Amherst
Boston
Cambridge
Chelsea
Concord
Holyoke
Lawrence
Newton
Northampton
Orleans
Somerville
Springfield
The government said Massachusetts as a whole also qualified as a sanctuary jurisdiction, potentially referring to a ruling from the state's highest court barring any police department from detaining someone at the request of federal officials but absent a warrant.
The government further listed every county in the state as a sanctuary jurisdiction, excluding Hampden County.
The list was based on a number of factors, including whether the communities self-identified as sanctuary jurisdictions, how much they comply with federal immigration law, whether they had restrictions on information sharing with the immigration enforcement authorities, and what protections they provide people in the country without documentation, federal officials said.
The Trump administration has attempted to pull federal funding from some sanctuary communities. Cities have contested the moves in court, arguing they have no responsibility to enforce federal immigration law.
Federal departments and agencies will be tasked with identifying federal grants or contracts with the jurisdictions and suspending or terminating the flow of money, according to Trump's executive order.
ICE takes two into custody in Amherst in crackdown on 'sanctuary' communities
Man helped kill 11 people, mostly teens, in Brazil. Now, he's in US prison for perjury
Arrested by ICE? Witness an arrest? These are your rights
Sen. Warren, Mass. pols demand answers from Trump on 'attacks on international students'
Mass. Gov. Healey slams ICE over migrant arrests on Nantucket, Vineyard
Read the original article on MassLive.

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Top US universities raced to become global campuses. Under Trump, it's becoming a liability
Top US universities raced to become global campuses. Under Trump, it's becoming a liability

Washington Post

time20 minutes ago

  • Washington Post

Top US universities raced to become global campuses. Under Trump, it's becoming a liability

WASHINGTON — Three decades ago, foreign students at Harvard University accounted for just 11% of the total student body. Today, they account for 26%. Like other prestigious U.S. universities, Harvard for years has been cashing in on its global cache to recruit the world's best students. Now, the booming international enrollment has left colleges vulnerable to a new line of attack from President Donald Trump. The president has begun to use his control over the nation's borders as leverage in his fight to reshape American higher education. Trump's latest salvo against Harvard uses a broad federal law to bar foreign students from entering the country to attend the campus in Cambridge, Massachusetts. His order applies only to Harvard, but it poses a threat to other universities his administration has targeted as hotbeds of liberalism in need of reform. It's rattling campuses under federal scrutiny, including Columbia University , where foreign students make up 40% of the campus. As the Trump administration stepped up reviews of new student visas last week, a group of Columbia faculty and alumni raised concerns over Trump's gatekeeping powers. 'Columbia's exposure to this 'stroke of pen' risk is uniquely high,' the Stand Columbia Society wrote in a newsletter. People from other countries made up about 6% of all college students in the U.S. in 2023, but they accounted for 27% of the eight schools in the Ivy League, according to an Associated Press analysis of Education Department data. Columbia's 40% was the largest concentration, followed by Harvard and Cornell at about 25%. Brown University had the smallest share at 20%. Other highly selective private universities have seen similar trends, including at Northeastern University and New York University, which each saw foreign enrollment double between 2013 and 2023. Growth at public universities has been more muted. Even at the 50 most selective public schools, foreign students account for about 11% of the student body. America's universities have been widening their doors to foreign students for decades, but the numbers shot upward starting around 2008, as Chinese students came to U.S. universities in rising numbers. It was part of a 'gold rush' in higher education, said William Brustein, who orchestrated the international expansion of several universities. 'Whether you were private or you were public, you had to be out in front in terms of being able to claim you were the most global university,' said Brustein, who led efforts at Ohio State University and West Virginia University. The race was driven in part by economics, he said. Foreign students typically aren't eligible for financial aid, and at some schools they pay two or three times the tuition rate charged to U.S. students. Colleges also were eyeing global rankings that gave schools a boost if they recruited larger numbers of foreign students and scholars, he said. But the expansion wasn't equal across all types of colleges — public universities often face pressure from state lawmakers to limit foreign enrollment and keep more seats open for state residents. Private universities don't face that pressure, and many aggressively recruited foreign students as their numbers of U.S. students stayed flat. The college-going rate among American students has changed little for decades, and some have been turned off on college by the rising costs and student debt loads. Proponents of international exchange say foreign students pour billions of dollars into the U.S. economy, and many go on to support the nation's tech industry and other fields in need of skilled workers. Most international students study the STEM fields of science, technology, engineering and math. In the Ivy League, most international growth has been at the graduate level, while undergraduate numbers have seen more modest increases. Foreign graduate students make up more than half the students at Harvard's government and design schools, along with five of Columbia's schools. The Ivy League has been able to outpace other schools in large part because of its reputation, Brustein said. He recalls trips to China and India, where he spoke with families that could recite where each Ivy League school sat in world rankings. 'That was the golden calf for these families. They really thought, 'If we could just get into these schools, the rest of our lives would be on easy street,'' he said. Last week, Trump said he thought Harvard should cap its foreign students to about 15%. 'We have people who want to go to Harvard and other schools, they can't get in because we have foreign students there,' Trump said at a news conference. The university called Trump's latest action banning entry into the country to attend Harvard 'yet another illegal retaliatory step taken by the Administration in violation of Harvard's First Amendment rights.' In a lawsuit challenging the Trump administration's previous attempt to block international students at Harvard, the university said its foreign student population was the result of 'a painstaking, decades-long project' to attract the most qualified international students. Losing access to student visas would immediately harm the school's mission and reputation, it said. 'In our interconnected global economy,' the school said, 'a university that cannot welcome students from all corners of the world is at a competitive disadvantage.' ___ The Associated Press' education coverage receives financial support from multiple private foundations. AP is solely responsible for all content. Find AP's standards for working with philanthropies, a list of supporters and funded coverage areas at

What A-list economists are saying about Trump's tax bill as Musk rebels against it
What A-list economists are saying about Trump's tax bill as Musk rebels against it

Business Insider

time21 minutes ago

  • Business Insider

What A-list economists are saying about Trump's tax bill as Musk rebels against it

Elon Musk has departed his role as a "special government employee" in Trump's White House — and he's using his time outside the administration to hammer the GOP spending bill that's a cornerstone of the president's agenda. "This massive, outrageous, pork-filled Congressional spending bill is a disgusting abomination," Musk wrote on X earlier this week. Trump responded by saying Musk's criticism of the legislation is "disappointing." President Trump's tax bill will likely face a vote in the Senate in the coming weeks after passing the House in May. It would reduce the tax rates of lower-income workers, particularly those earning less than $107,200, and eliminate taxes on tips, social security, and overtime. The bill would also cut spending on social programs like Medicaid and SNAP benefits, which provide food assistance to low-income Americans. Like Musk, investors and economists are seemingly concerned that the bill will cause the national debt to balloon and further widen the US budget deficit. The non-partisan Congressional Budget Office said this week that it would grow the deficit by $2.4 trillion over the next decade . Trump and his allies have pushed back, arguing that higher economic growth from lower taxes would help boost government revenue. Here's what top economists are saying about the bill. Phillip L. Swagel, director of the Congressional Budget Office Despite the lower tax rates for low earners, Swagel said in a May 20 letter that the bill would negatively impact poorer Americans. "CBO estimates that household resources would decrease by an amount equal to about 2 percent of income in the lowest decile (tenth) of the income distribution in 2027 and 4 percent in 2033, mainly as a result of losses of in-kind transfers, such as Medicaid and SNAP," he wrote. "By contrast, resources would increase by an amount equal to 4 percent for households in the highest decile in 2027 and 2 percent in 2033, mainly because of reductions in the taxes they owe." William McBride, chief economist at the Tax Foundation McBride, along with several colleagues at the non-partisan Tax Foundation think tank, said in a May 23 report that while the bill would support economic growth, it wouldn't be enough to offset the revenue loss from tax cuts. "Our preliminary analysis finds the tax provisions included in the House-passed bill would increase long-run GDP by 0.8 percent," the report said. "The bill's tax and spending changes would increase the 10-year budget deficit by $2.6 trillion from 2025 through 2034 on a conventional basis before added interest costs. On a dynamic basis, accounting for economic growth, the deficit would increase by $1.7 trillion over ten years before interest costs." It continued: "The bill's tax provisions alone would reduce federal tax revenue by $4.1 trillion from 2025 through 2034 on a conventional basis before added interest costs. On a dynamic basis, accounting for economic growth, the revenue reduction would fall by nearly 22 percent to $3.2 trillion over 10 years before added interest costs." 6 Nobel Laureates Six Nobel Prize-winning economists — including Daron Acemoglu, Simon Johnson, Peter Diamond, Paul Krugman, Oliver Hart, and Joseph Stiglitz — said in a June 2 letter that the bill would worsen wealth inequality in the US. "The combination of cuts to key safety net programs like Medicaid and SNAP and tax cuts disproportionately benefiting higher-income households means that the House budget constitutes an extremely large upward redistribution of income. Given how much this bill adds to the U.S. debt, it is shocking that it still imposes absolute losses on the bottom 40% of U.S households," the letter said. "The House bill addresses none of the nation's key economic challenges usefully and exacerbates many of them," it added. Ken Rogoff, professor of economics at Harvard University Rogoff, former chief economist at the IMF, cast doubt on the notion that the bill would boost growth in a piece for Project Syndicate this week. "Trump and his acolytes argue that his "big, beautiful bill" will supercharge economic growth, generating enough revenue to make up for sweeping tax cuts. But history offers little support for such claims," he wrote. "While both Democratic-led spending sprees and Republican-backed tax cuts have fueled the growth of US debt over the past two decades, tax reductions have accounted for the lion's share of the increase. Moreover, the notion that tax cuts pay for themselves was already discredited in the 1980s, when President Ronald Reagan's tax cuts led to soaring deficits rather than self-sustaining growth." He added: "Will America's rising debt ultimately trigger a full-blown crisis? Perhaps, but a continued upward drift in long-term interest rates is more likely." Desmond Lachman, senior fellow at the American Enterprise Institute Lachman, a former IMF official who currently works for a conservative-leaning think tank, said in a June 4 post that rising bond yields, a declining dollar, and appreciating gold prices could be harbingers of an economic crisis brought on by Trump-driven policy volatility. Trump's tax bill is adding to investors' fears due to its inflationary implications. But one of its clauses undermines confidence in the reliability of the returns on Treasurys, he said. "That bill includes a clause that has to be sending shivers down foreign investors' spines. According to Section 899, the US Treasury can impose additional taxes of up to 20 percent on income earned by foreign entities from countries that enact taxes deemed 'unfair' to US interests."

Trump-Musk Alliance Unravels Over ‘Big Beautiful Bill'
Trump-Musk Alliance Unravels Over ‘Big Beautiful Bill'

Yahoo

time22 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

Trump-Musk Alliance Unravels Over ‘Big Beautiful Bill'

(Bloomberg) -- From the moment Donald Trump and Elon Musk joined forces, betting in Washington held that the president's bond with the First Buddy who bankrolled his comeback election win wouldn't last. ICE Moves to DNA-Test Families Targeted for Deportation with New Contract Next Stop: Rancho Cucamonga! US Housing Agency Vulnerable to Fraud After DOGE Cuts, Documents Warn Where Public Transit Systems Are Bouncing Back Around the World The Global Struggle to Build Safer Cars The breakup finally arrived this week, an escalating tit-for-tat between the world's richest man and the president of the US, who spent much of Thursday sniping at one another via social media posts and cameras in the Oval Office. Speaking to reporters, Trump pronounced himself 'very disappointed' in Musk over the billionaire's harsh criticism of a Republican tax and spending bill. Posting on X, his social media platform, Musk declared that Trump wouldn't have won a second term without his help. 'Such ingratitude,' the Tesla Inc. and SpaceX CEO declared. For a rift that had seemed inevitable, the descent into public recrimination was startling, even by Trump's volatile standard, which often sees former allies and underlings cast aside without fanfare. Musk spent the early months of Trump's second term offering obsequious praise and absorbing some of the political backlash of the slashing budget cuts and employee firings that have been a pillar of Trump's agenda. Trump, meanwhile, had elevated Musk, a government novice in a temporary role, to a position of unprecedented breadth to reshape and unmake the entire federal bureaucracy, with only occasional checks from the agency heads actually confirmed by the Senate. But on Thursday, their blow-up found Trump accusing Musk of trying to tank the spending bill because its elimination of electric vehicle credits hurt Tesla's bottom line, while Musk took to social media posts to deny Trump's Oval Office comments and taunt the president with his own past postings. 'Where is this guy today??' Musk wrote. Musk went so far as to poll his social media followers about whether he should 'create a new political party in America that actually represents the 80% in the middle?' Their relationship first blossomed at the height of the 2024 presidential campaign and deepened as Musk joined the new administration to slash the federal bureaucracy — a role that aligned with the tech titan's commercial interests and his politics with the philosophy of others in the incoming administration, like Russ Vought, the director of the Office and Management and Budget. But it unraveled this week over the unavoidable task of putting the administration's rhetoric about spending into practice, via a tax bill that's the centerpiece of Trump's domestic agenda. With posts on social media urging lawmakers to reject Trump's 'Big Beautiful Bill,' Musk exposed a rupture that had been growing between him and the president for weeks, fueled at first by clashes with cabinet members over agency cuts and differences with the administration's sweeping tariff plans. Musk's public break with Trump threatens further fallout for the allies he helped to install in key positions across federal agencies during his time overseeing the Department of Government Efficiency that he prodded Trump to create. It also raises questions about whether the biggest billionaire spender of the 2024 election will remain a reliable source of campaign funding to sustain Republican control of the House in the midterm elections and to make permanent Trump's political movement. Steve Bannon, the former White House chief strategist who was deputized in 2017 to confront Musk about his demands for EV and battery mandates, said he cautioned Trump and his inner circle about the entrepreneur after the 2024 election. 'I warned people in the transition, this guy is unpredictable, immature and a narcissist, and he'd turn on anybody — including the president — when it suited him,' says Bannon, who has frequently criticized Musk on his 'War Room' podcast. Bannon says Musk's downfall from his status as 'Chief Buddy' was inevitable, because he could not produce the $1 trillion in budget cuts he claimed he could during the transition. 'He was too incompetent and lied about being able to find a trillion dollars of cuts in waste, fraud and abuse,' says Bannon. 'He misled everybody, including the president.' Trump's Orbit Administration officials who have bristled at Musk's power and bedside manner have been moving to reassert their influence in the executive branch since he announced his departure from DOGE, people familiar with the matter said. That includes the installation of a close associate of White House Chief of Staff Susie Wiles as chief of staff at NASA – an agency that is crucial to SpaceX, a company that makes up a third of his net worth. People familiar with the matter said the withdrawal of the nomination of Jared Isaacman, a Musk ally who was poised to run the space agency, was driven by Sergio Gor – the director of the Presidential Personnel Office, with whom Musk had sparred during his DOGE tenure. 'A lot of Musk's power stemmed from the fact that he was seen as an extension of Trump,' said Stephen Myrow, who runs Beacon Policy Advisers. 'But now that there's distance between them, that power might be waning.' 'I always talk about the 'evolving orbit' around Trump – people are always drifting in and out,' Myrow added. 'I wouldn't say Musk's relationship with Trump is severed. But between Isaacman's nomination being pulled and his public criticisms of the tax bill, he looks to be in the waning phase of his orbit.' Earlier: Former NASA Nominee Suggests Ties to Musk Caused His Ouster A White House official in an email pointed to multiple past donations that Isaacman had made to Democrats, suggesting that was the reason his nomination was nixed. In a podcast interview Wednesday, Isaacman said he didn't believe that was the reason, given the information had long been publicly available. 'President Trump is the ultimate decision maker on who has the privilege of serving in his historic administration,' White House spokesperson Liz Huston said. 'Any claims to the contrary are completely false.' Musk didn't respond to a message seeking comment. On X, his social media platform, one user said Isaacman's removal was a 'gut punch for the space agency,' to which Musk responded with a '100' emoji, indicating he agreed 100%. 'At Great Personal Cost' The fissure caps a roller-coaster 11 months from Musk's endorsement of Trump in July of 2024. Musk spent hundreds of millions of dollars to elect Trump and Republicans in 2024, and when the once and future president defeated Kamala Harris in November's election, he turned to Musk to lead an effort to slash the size and scope of government. Musk scythed through the federal bureaucracy while Trump unleashed a flurry of executive actions, each seeking to dismantle the administrative state at what the White House came to call 'Trump speed.' Yet swift progress on conservative priorities came with a price tag for Musk, who has seen his own net worth plummet in part because of reputational tarnish at home and abroad from his political actions and affiliation with Trump. Musk's net worth — much of it tied to the performance of Tesla — has dropped an estimated $64.1 billion so far this year, according to data compiled by Bloomberg Billionaires Index. It's the largest on-paper loss of any of the world's 500 richest people. And now, on his top political focus point of deficit reduction, any success Musk can claim — achieved, in his own words, 'at great personal cost and risk' — may be drowned out by the president's own signature legislation. The Congressional Budget Office projected that the House-passed tax and spending bill at the center of Trump's legislative agenda would add more than $2.4 trillion to US budget deficits over the next 10 years, slashing revenues by $3.67 trillion while only cutting spending by $1.25 trillion. That's way above even DOGE's most optimistic savings estimates. Its government website listing estimated savings states that DOGE has saved taxpayers about $180 billion year-to-date. However its 'Wall of Receipts' — a line-by-line list of contracts, grants and leases canceled since Inauguration Day — only accounts for less than half of that number. Adding to the risk for Musk's bottom line, Trump's bill would wipe out some valuable tax incentives that bolster his own companies. Musk personally appealed to House Speaker Mike Johnson to save tax credits for electric vehicles, according to a person familiar with the matter, but ultimately lost that fight. In an interview with Bloomberg Television on Thursday, Johnson did not confirm whether Musk had approached him over the credits, but said the two would speak later in the day, adding that Musk seems 'pretty dug in right now, and I can't quite understand the motivation behind it.' Musk's criticism of the spending package built slowly. On Tuesday, however, Musk lashed out, posting on his social media platform, X, that the bill was 'pork-filled' and 'a disgusting abomination.' Adding insult to injury for the White House, Musk has embraced the very argument that the administration has been trying to combat, noting the bill would significantly widen the federal budget deficit. By Wednesday afternoon, Musk was posting about 'debt slavery' and sharing an image of Uma Thurman holding a samurai sword — the poster for the film 'Kill Bill.' Widening Rift The rift between the two billionaire showmen — each renowned for seeking out the spotlight, and not for sharing it — had seemed to be widening for a while. Even as Musk embraced his DOGE role and continued making periodic appearances at the White House, he broke with some of Trump's policies. Musk has criticized tariffs, the primary tool in Trump's economic agenda, but one that has shown the potential for massive disruption in markets Musk moves in, including those for batteries critical to the fate of Tesla's automotive and energy units. An outside Trump adviser said the president remained furious about an incident, reported by The New York Times, in which Musk angled to obtain a classified briefing from the Pentagon about the upshot of a war with China, where Musk has extensive economic interests, especially via Tesla. As public furor grew over DOGE's unilateral cuts to federal agencies, Trump publicly reined Musk in, asserting that cabinet officials would have final say over proposed reductions. In a May 20 appearance at the Qatar Economic Forum, Musk told Bloomberg's Mishal Husain he intended to pull back from political giving, only months after spending nearly $300 million to boost Trump's successful campaign for the White House. Sour Taste Behind the scenes, Musk's sojourn through the West Wing left a sour taste for some officials, according to the outside adviser and one person within the administration. The outside adviser particularly noted Musk's brusque treatment of Wiles, who managed Trump's victorious campaign before joining the administration. It was a longtime Wiles ally, Brian Hughes, who was sent to serve as NASA chief of staff, a position from which he could serve as a check in an agency that is central to SpaceX's fortunes. A senior White House official said Wiles and Musk had a cordial and collaborative relationship, and that the chief of staff met weekly with the tech entrepreneuer as he led DOGE. The official said Hughes had long wanted to work at NASA, and that his placement there was not an effort to keep tabs on Musk and SpaceX. A person familiar with SpaceX discounted the chance that bad blood between Musk and Trump would have an immediate negative effect on the company, because it has carved out such a dominant position in the launch business even as corporate rivals have struggled. But the person said there is frustration that the company's brand has been damaged, first with Democrats who were appalled by Musk's embrace of Trump and DOGE's tactics, and now with Trump supporters in Washington, who will likely side with the president over Musk. But Musk's time with Trump has already yielded benefits in other ways, said Myrow, especially in areas where the administration or DOGE pulled the plug on aspects of the regulatory state that had previously tangled with his companies. 'For Musk personally, the SEC stuff went away,' Myrow said, referring to Securities and Exchange Commission investigations. 'And he's long wanted to turn X into an 'everything app,' and now a lot of the regulations that would have inhibited that are going away.' --With assistance from Nancy Cook, Erik Wasson, Annmarie Hordern, Lisa Abramowicz, Michael Shepard and Derek Wallbank. (Updates with Musk, Trump remarks in paragraphs 3, 6; Bannon remarks in paragraphs 12-14) Cavs Owner Dan Gilbert Wants to Donate His Billions—and Walk Again YouTube Is Swallowing TV Whole, and It's Coming for the Sitcom Millions of Americans Are Obsessed With This Japanese Barbecue Sauce Is Elon Musk's Political Capital Spent? Trump Considers Deporting Migrants to Rwanda After the UK Decides Not To ©2025 Bloomberg L.P. 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

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