Bad news for undocumented immigrants! ICE detentions to rise as US President Donald Trump will... Details here
Congress is close to approving a multi-billion-dollar plan that supports President Donald Trump's mass deportation strategy. The proposed funding would increase ICE staffing, enhance enforcement and expand detention efforts. The plan has drawn support and criticism as officials debate its scope and impact on undocumented immigrants, especially those without criminal records.
Tired of too many ads?
Remove Ads
Immigration Remains Key Focus
Supreme Court Ruling
How much ICE Funding is Required?
Tired of too many ads?
Remove Ads
Agencies Struggle to Retain Officers
Deployment of Military in Los Angeles
Focus on Arrests of Non-Criminals
Tired of too many ads?
Remove Ads
Pressure to Detain More Immigrants
Public Opinion and Congressional Debate
Detention of Nonviolent Migrants Raises Concern
FAQs
The US Congress is moving closer to approving a large spending package that would provide billions of dollars for immigration enforcement. This funding would help President Donald Trump carry out his campaign promise of deporting millions of undocumented immigrants living in the United States.Trump's immigration plans have long been a core part of his agenda. The issue was central to his 2024 presidential campaign and continues to be his strongest area of support. According to a recent NBC News poll, 51% of US adults approve of how he handles immigration, while 49% disapprove.Even without completing a border wall, illegal crossings have fallen. Trump and his team highlight this decline as a success of their broader enforcement efforts.The Supreme Court recently made a ruling that allows the Trump administration to continue challenging the 14th Amendment's birthright citizenship guarantees. This ruling, though limited in scope, supports Trump's push for stricter immigration rules.Trump's plan requires major increases in immigration personnel. A House bill includes $8 billion over five years to add 10,000 new Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) employees. This would grow ICE's staff by nearly 50%.An additional $858 million is planned for bonuses to help hire and retain these agents. Border Protection could receive $2 billion more for bonuses, with up to $30,000 per new recruit.Staff turnover has made immigration enforcement more difficult. Former ICE official Chris Musto said many agents have left their posts. He added that investigators trained for complex cases are now being redirected to routine immigration tasks.Trump's administration has also reassigned staff from other federal departments to focus on immigration enforcement.In cities like Los Angeles, local resistance to Trump's policies has led to the deployment of National Guard troops. Federal agents have also received support from US Marines to ensure enforcement activities continue.Critics say the result of new funding and staffing will lead to more public immigration raids and a visible federal presence in communities.While the administration highlights arrests of people with criminal records, most enforcement actions have targeted those without any criminal convictions.Tom Homan, Trump's border policy advisor, says more agents mean more criminals will be removed from the streets. However, recent data shows most ICE arrests involve non-criminals.White House staff have reportedly pressured ICE leaders to increase daily arrests. In May, top advisor Stephen Miller demanded 3,000 detentions per day.This urgency has led to confusion about which undocumented immigrants should be targeted. Trump initially said some workers in industries like farming and hospitality would be exempt, but that position later changed.Polls show divided views. Americans support targeting violent offenders but oppose workplace raids, ending asylum protections and expanding detention centers.Democrats in Congress have largely opposed Trump's plan. Most Republicans support it, but some, like Senator Rand Paul, have called for reduced spending.Paul's draft Senate bill includes less funding than the House version. However, after internal GOP discussions, the Senate plan is expected to match the House's.A recent report showed that 71% of ICE arrests and 67% of detainees had no criminal records. Nearly half of the 55,000 people in ICE detention in late June had no convictions or pending charges.Critics say Trump's enforcement efforts have shifted from targeting serious criminals to focusing on nonviolent individuals.Trump's plan includes hiring thousands of new ICE agents, expanding detention facilities, and conducting wide-scale immigration enforcement, including detaining undocumented immigrants without criminal records.Polls show Americans support deporting violent offenders but oppose workplace raids, expanded detention, and removal of asylum protections. Views on the plan vary by political affiliation.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Mint
43 minutes ago
- Mint
Trump has struck trade deals with 2 countries ahead of July 9; what about the others? What is India's position?
As the July 9 deadline set by the Donald Trump administration approaches soon, officials have struggled to strike trade deals with a lot of countries. In almost three months, the US has been able to sign trade agreements with just two countries, with Trump and his officials hinting that a long pipeline is in place. Countries failing to strike deals with the US within the July 9 deadline will face tariffs as was announced by Trump in April. The President however on Friday indicated that the deadline could be moved forward. 'We can do whatever we want. We could extend it. We could make it shorter. I'd like to make it shorter. I'd like to just send letters out to everybody: Congratulations, you're paying 25 per cent,' he told reporters at the White House. Here's what you need to know about Donald Trump's trade deals. As of now, only two countries — China and UK — have signed trade deals with the US. 'The [Trump] administration and China agreed to an additional understanding for a framework to implement the Geneva agreement,' a White House official said on Thursday. That followed the talks in Geneva in May, where the US and China had agreed to reduce mutual tariffs. US Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick told Bloomberg TV on Thursday that 'they [China] are going to deliver rare earths to us', and once Beijing does that 'we'll take down our countermeasures'. Trump signed an agreement on June 16, formally lowering some tariffs on imports from Britain as the countries continue working toward a formal trade deal. The deal, announced by Trump and British Prime Minister Keir Starmer on the sidelines of the G7 Summit in Canada, reaffirmed quotas and tariff rates on British automobiles and eliminated tariffs on the U.K. aerospace sector, but the issue of steel and aluminum remains unresolved. While UK and China are the only countries that have signed trade deals with the US, Trump on Friday called off discussions with China, calling it a 'difficult country'. Trump abruptly ended the negotiations over its tax targeting US technology firms, saying that it was a "blatant attack" and that he would set a new tariff rate on Canadian goods within the next week. Majority of the trade partners of US, including South Korea, Vietnam and EU countries, are struggling to sign deals with America. Countries like France have rejected the notion of striking a deal that favours the US, and have proposed removal of tariffs altogether. Some EU member states have also rejected the idea of a tit-for-tat tarif, and are preferring a quick deal to a perfect one. India and Japan are considered to be the next countries that could strike trade deals with the US. 'But some of the bigger countries, India, I think we're going to reach a deal where we have the right to go in and trade. Right now, it's restricted. You can't walk in there. You can't even think about it,' Trump told reporters on Friday.
New Indian Express
an hour ago
- New Indian Express
Punjab Congress leaders under vigilance scrutiny fear being targeted by AAP-led govt ahead of 2027 polls
CHANDIGARH: With 19 months left till the 2027 assembly elections, the Punjab Congress leadership is apprehensive that the current AAP-led Punjab government might target party leaders who are facing vigilance inquiries. Such concerns have been raised following the arrest of Shiromani Akali Dal leader Bikram Majithia in a drugs and disproportionate assets case, while former Health Minister and AAP MLA Vijay Singla and his OSD Pradeep Kumar were given a clean chit in a corruption case registered against them in 2022. Sources said that a charge sheet has been filed in cases registered against former Congress MLA Kushaldeep Singh Dhillon and former cabinet minister OP Soni. Other Congress leaders who are facing vigilance inquiries include: Punjab Congress President and Member of Parliament from Ludhiana Amarinder Raja Warring, former Chief Minister and Member of Parliament from Jalandhar Charanjit Singh Channi, former cabinet ministers Sunder Shyam Arora and Vijay Inder Singla, and MLAs Barindemeet Singh Pahra and Pargat Singh. Channi, who himself is under the scrutiny of the vigilance, claimed that those politicians who are vocal against the government are being targeted by the AAP government. "They have already been after me for a long time, several party leaders, including Jalandhar (Cantonment) MLA Pargat Singh, were under the lens of the vigilance bureau. After Bikram Majithia, Pargat Singh might be next target of the government," he said. Ludhiana MP Warring said, "It would be premature to comment at this moment." On the other hand, Punjab Police has given a clean chit to former Health Minister and AAP MLA Vijay Singla and his OSD Pradeep Kumar in corruption case registered against them in 2022 at Phase 8 Police Station in Mohali. The state police have filed a closure report in a court in Mohali recently, citing that no conclusive evidence was found to proceed against the accused. The court will take up the matter on July 14. While thhe complainant in the case, Rajinder Singh, a government engineer on deputation with Punjab Health System Corporation, has agreed with the closure report. It is worth mentioning here that the complainant had submitted that he was summoned to Punjab Bhawan, and a commission of one per cent was demanded from him. Punjab Chief Minister Bhagwant Mann had dismissed Singla from his cabinet.
Hindustan Times
an hour ago
- Hindustan Times
Immigrants scramble for clarity after Supreme Court birthright ruling
* Immigrants scramble for clarity after Supreme Court birthright ruling Supreme Court ruling causes confusion over birthright citizenship * Lawyers and advocates field calls from anxious clients * Uncertainty remains on policy across different states By Ted Hesson and Kristina Cooke WASHINGTON, - The U.S. Supreme Court's ruling tied to birthright citizenship prompted confusion and phone calls to lawyers as people who could be affected tried to process a convoluted legal decision with major humanitarian implications. The court's conservative majority on Friday granted President Donald Trump his request to curb federal judges' power but did not decide the legality of his bid to restrict birthright citizenship. That outcome has raised more questions than answers about a right long understood to be guaranteed under the U.S. Constitution: that anyone born in the United States is considered a citizen at birth, regardless of their parents' citizenship or legal status. Lorena, a 24-year-old Colombian asylum seeker who lives in Houston and is due to give birth in September, pored over media reports on Friday morning. She was looking for details about how her baby might be affected, but said she was left confused and worried. "There are not many specifics," said Lorena, who like others interviewed by Reuters asked to be identified by her first name out of fear for her safety. "I don't understand it well." She is concerned that her baby could end up with no nationality. "I don't know if I can give her mine," she said. "I also don't know how it would work, if I can add her to my asylum case. I don't want her to be adrift with no nationality." Trump, a Republican, issued an order after taking office in January that directed U.S. agencies to refuse to recognize the citizenship of children born in the U.S. who do not have at least one parent who is an American citizen or lawful permanent resident. The order was blocked by three separate U.S. district court judges, sending the case on a path to the Supreme Court. The resulting decision said Trump's policy could go into effect in 30 days but appeared to leave open the possibility of further proceedings in the lower courts that could keep the policy blocked. On Friday afternoon, plaintiffs filed an amended lawsuit in federal court in Maryland seeking to establish a nationwide class of people whose children could be denied citizenship. If they are not blocked nationwide, the restrictions could be applied in the 28 states that did not contest them in court, creating "an extremely confusing patchwork" across the country, according to Kathleen Bush-Joseph, a policy analyst for the non-partisan Migration Policy Institute. "Would individual doctors, individual hospitals be having to try to figure out how to determine the citizenship of babies and their parents?" she said. The drive to restrict birthright citizenship is part of Trump's broader immigration crackdown, and he has framed automatic citizenship as a magnet for people to come to give birth. "Hundreds of thousands of people are pouring into our country under birthright citizenship, and it wasn't meant for that reason," he said during a White House press briefing on Friday. WORRIED CALLS Immigration advocates and lawyers in some Republican-led states said they received calls from a wide range of pregnant immigrants and their partners following the ruling. They were grappling with how to explain it to clients who could be dramatically affected, given all the unknowns of how future litigation would play out or how the executive order would be implemented state by state. Lynn Tramonte, director of the Ohio Immigrant Alliance said she got a call on Friday from an East Asian temporary visa holder with a pregnant wife. He was anxious because Ohio is not one of the plaintiff states and wanted to know how he could protect his child's rights. "He kept stressing that he was very interested in the rights included in the Constitution," she said. Advocates underscored the gravity of Trump's restrictions, which would block an estimated 150,000 children born in the U.S. annually from receiving automatic citizenship. "It really creates different classes of people in the country with different types of rights," said Juliana Macedo do Nascimento, a spokesperson for the immigrant rights organization United We Dream. "That is really chaotic." Adding uncertainty, the Supreme Court ruled that members of two plaintiff groups in the litigation - CASA, an immigrant advocacy service in Maryland, and the Asylum Seeker Advocacy Project - would still be covered by lower court blocks on the policy. Whether someone in a state where Trump's policy could go into effect could join one of the organizations to avoid the restrictions or how state or federal officials would check for membership remained unclear. Betsy, a U.S. citizen who recently graduated from high school in Virginia and a CASA member, said both of her parents came to the U.S. from El Salvador two decades ago and lacked legal status when she was born. "I feel like it targets these innocent kids who haven't even been born," she said, declining to give her last name for concerns over her family's safety. Nivida, a Honduran asylum seeker in Louisiana, is a member of the Asylum Seeker Advocacy Project and recently gave birth. She heard on Friday from a friend without legal status who is pregnant and wonders about the situation under Louisiana's Republican governor, since the state is not one of those fighting Trump's order. "She called me very worried and asked what's going to happen," she said. "If her child is born in Louisiana … is the baby going to be a citizen?" This article was generated from an automated news agency feed without modifications to text.
