Latest news with #ProtectingtheAmericanPeopleAgainstInvasion
Time Magazine
26-07-2025
- Politics
- Time Magazine
Trump's Battle With Sanctuary Cities Dealt Major Blow
Donald Trump has been dealt a significant setback in his ongoing battle over sanctuary cities, after a U.S. federal judge threw out the Administration's lawsuit which looked to block legislation in Illinois that limits local law enforcement from cooperating with federal immigration authorities. The Trump Administration argued that existing so-called 'sanctuary laws' in the state run counter to federal laws because they restrict local officials from sharing information with federal agents, stopping immigration officials from identifying people who 'may be subject to removal.' But those concerns were dismissed by Judge Lindsay C. Jenkins, who said finding sanctuary policies as 'impermissible regulation'would run counter to the Tenth Amendment. 'It would allow the federal government to commandeer States under the guise of intergovernmental immunity—the exact type of direct regulation of states barred by the Tenth Amendment,' said the judge. Jenkins, who was appointed by former President Joe Biden, added: 'Because the Tenth Amendment protects defendants' sanctuary policies, those policies cannot be found to discriminate against or regulate the federal government.' Trump's war with sanctuary cities began on day one in office, with an Executive Order, titled 'Protecting the American People Against Invasion.' In the Executive Order, Trump argues that sanctuary jurisdictions 'seek to interfere with the lawful exercise of Federal law enforcement operations,' and calls on the Attorney General and Secretary of Homeland Security to withhold federal funding from these cities. In April, Trump then signed an Executive Order asking Attorney General Pam Bondi and the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) identify cities and states that don't sufficiently comply with Trump's federal immigration laws within a month. It is a continuation of Trump's first term, during which he also signed an Executive Order that looked to ensure sanctuary jurisdictions did not receive federal funding. At the time, though, multiple cities sued Trump, and the courts subsequently upheld the legality of such provisions. Read More: What Are Sanctuary Cities and Why Is Trump Targeting Them? Though Trump's battle might be lost in Illinois, his Administration continues to fight across the country. The day before the lawsuit in Illinois failed, Thursday, the Department of Justice (DOJ) announced new legal action against New York City for its sanctuary laws. Earlier this week, Louisville, Kentucky chose to acquiesce to the administration's immigration policies and cease its designation as a sanctuary city. As human rights organizations argue for the importance of sanctuary and some cities push back against what they view as federal government overreach, the question remains which cities are fighting back against the crackdown. Chicago's and Illinois leadership was very clear in its desire to challenge Trump's immigration policies. Illinois Gov. J.B. Pritzker celebrated the ruling on X, saying that, 'Illinois just beat the Trump Administration in federal court.' 'This ruling affirms what we have long known: that Chicago's Welcoming City Ordinance is lawful and supports public safety,' Chicago's Mayor Brandon Johnson said in a statement responding to the ruling, saying he was 'pleased' with the decision. 'Chicago cannot be compelled to cooperate with the Trump Administration's reckless and inhumane immigration agenda.' Chicago's status as a sanctuary city is just one iteration of the term—though the long-time Democratic city has been designated as such cities that limit information shared with federal immigration officers. Though there is no specific definition for a sanctuary city, the term refers to jurisdictions with a wide range of laws in place to limit their cooperation with federal immigration enforcement. For Chicago in particular, their 'Welcoming City Ordinance,' argues that 'partnering with [Immigrations and Customs Enforcement (ICE)] would go against our mission to make Chicago the most immigrant friendly city in the country and turn ours into a community of fear for immigrants.' The Trump Administration, though, also has ongoing suits against not just New York City but also Los Angeles, Denver, Rochester, and four cities in New Jersey. Tom Homan, President Trump's 'border czar,' also has laid out the administration's plans to continue combat sanctuary cities. Read More: Sanctuary Cities Are Not New 'Sanctuary cities are sanctuaries for criminals—hard stop,' Homan said. 'And President Trump made a commitment a couple weeks ago that we're going to prioritize sanctuary cities.' Simultaneously, certain cities designated 'sanctuary cities' have been less strong in their pushback against the federal Government. Louisville's Department of Corrections will now notify the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) at least 48 hours before an inmate with an immigration detainer is scheduled to be released from custody. The city's mayor, Craig Greenberg cited 'a terrifying increase in raids by ICE, including mass raids' on cities designated as sanctuary cities—claiming that by taking Louisville off the designated sanctuary city list, he prevents risking ' the safety of our broader immigrant community.' While New York City has remained the country's largest sanctuary city, its status as such and Mayor Eric Adams' desire to push back against the federal government has come into question. Even before the latest lawsuit issued by the Trump government, Adams' Administration had been embroiled in a battle with the New York City Council and court system to allow ICE agents into Rikers Island. Though he has said he will 'without a doubt' keep the city's sanctuary status. Adams has called for changes to the city's sanctuary laws after the Justice Department suit, saying that they 'go too far' in some places. 'I think we need to tweak the current laws to allow us to coordinate with the federal government when it comes down to removing those dangerous people from our streets," Adams told CBS New York. Back in February, Adams' cooperation with the federal government came under questioning after the Justice Department ordered federal prosecutors to drop corruption charges against the Mayor, stating that the case was interfering with the Democratic mayor's ability to follow through with the President's agenda to crack down on illegal immigration. The move pushed Gov. Kathy Hochul to consider removing Adams from office.
Time of India
22-07-2025
- Politics
- Time of India
Melting pot bubbling
New polls show majority of Americans are now against harsh action on immigration. That's good news 'Our policy to people born elsewhere should be clear: Enter by the law, or leave,' Trump wrote in his 2000 book, The America We Deserve. He won his second term after promising voters 'the largest deportation programme in American history', and started his presidency by signing an executive order titled 'Protecting the American People Against Invasion'. Trump struck a chord because US does have a major illegal immigration problem. There were over 11mn unauthorised residents by 2022, and roughly 1 in every 15 was Indian. India got a taste of his crackdown in Feb when the first Globemaster with 104 deportees touched down in Amritsar. And such flights have continued, with an average of 14,700 deportations worldwide every month. The number sounds big, but Obama was deporting 36,000 a month in 2013. What's different about Trump, though, is the noise and severity – people shamed and transported in cuffs. And America is sick of it, new polls this month show. A Gallup survey found that only 38% of Americans now support deporting all illegal immigrants, down from 47% last year. In fact, 78% are all for letting them become citizens. Why? Because the ordinary American recognises that the vast majority of illegal immigrants, who have lived for years in America without causing trouble, are useful. Now, a CNN poll also shows the majority of Americans (55%) think Trump has gone too far on deportations. They don't want any more detention centres, and 59% are against detaining illegal immigrants who have lived in America for years. Trump should pay heed to these voices, especially when the mood against immigration in his own Republican camp is changing fast – only 48% now want less immigration, as against 88% last year. Throwing out millions of settled workers would be disruptive for the US economy, and also for their home countries. Indians who have invested their wealth and time to build a life in America, after entering without authorisation, may draw some hope from these developments. So can students and professionals who have been waiting to study and work in America legally. And if Trump relents, America can go back to being the land of opportunity. Facebook Twitter Linkedin Email This piece appeared as an editorial opinion in the print edition of The Times of India.
Miami Herald
17-06-2025
- Politics
- Miami Herald
Trump saves farmworkers, but what about other hardworking immigrants?
Does President Donald Trump even know what he's doing on the immigration issue? Alarmed that his supporters in agriculture and the hospitality industry are getting hit or about to be hit by his mass deportation order, Trump has backed down on social media. 'Our great Farmers and people in the Hotel and Leisure business have been stating that our very aggressive policy on immigration is taking very good, long time workers away from them, with those jobs being almost impossible to replace,' the president posted on Truth Social last Friday. Tatum King, a senior official with federal Immigration and Customs Enforcement, quickly followed orders with a directive. 'Effective today, please hold on all work site enforcement investigations/operations on agriculture (including aquaculture and meat packing plants), restaurants and operating hotels.' That means Trump has granted amnesty for an estimated 2 million undocumented residents, according to an estimate by National Review. The United Farm Workers, however, is skeptical of Trump's abrupt change on immigration enforcement. 'We will believe it when we see it. In the meantime farm workers are defending themselves and their co-workers in real time, every day,' said UFW President Teresa Romero in a statement on Friday. 'If President Trump truly cares, and is actually in charge, these raids would stop today, and everyone taken from the fields of California his week would be released to their families immediately.' He knew farms would get hit When President Donald Trump signed the Protecting the American People Against Invasion executive order on Jan. 20, he should have known his 'greatest deportation in American history' would harm farmers and their field workers. To the president's surprise, the Department of Homeland Security's recent crackdown on undocumented immigrants in the fields has generated pleas of help from farmers who voted for him knowing full well of Trump's intentions. Never mind the business uncertainty swirling around the Trump tariffs. Now Trump wants to tighten the leash on federal agents whose presence in farms has been limited to reported sightings in strawberry fields in Ventura County. As a result, that county's Farm Bureau reports that between 25% and 45% of farmworkers have not shown up for work since the raids began earlier this month. 'When our work force is afraid, fields go unharvested, packinghouses fall behind, and market supply chains, from local grocery stores to national retailers, are affected,' Ventura County Farm Bureau CEO Maureen McGuire told the Los Angeles Times. 'This impacts every American who eats.' It appears that farmers, who should have known better with their vote, have convinced the president that his deportation push is bad for their business. Disruptions like droughts, tariffs and disappearing work force have major impacts. Deporting the 75% of California's field workers who are undocumented would have severe consequences for all county residents. Every $1 generated by ag generates another $3.50 for the local and regional economy, according to the county. That means Fresno County's economy got a $30.1 billion boost from ag in 2023. Why should Trump decide who is protected? We are concerned that Trump gets to choose and pick immigration winners and losers. Why should his amnesty overlook hard workers vital in other industries? The construction industry relies on undocumented roofers, carpenters and cement finishers. About 23% of construction workers lacked legal status in 2021, according to the Center for American Progress. These workers and their families, the center said, pay $12.9 billion in federal taxes and $7.7 billion state and local taxes. Aren't they hard-working individuals and not part of Trump's imagined migrant invasion? If an undocumented resident is working, paying taxes and not committing crimes, they also deserve the right to benefit from Trump's amnesty.
&w=3840&q=100)
Business Standard
22-05-2025
- Politics
- Business Standard
US immigration crackdown: What undocumented teenagers face under Trump
Even 14-year-olds must now register with the US government if they weren't fingerprinted on arrival and are staying in the country for more than 30 days, the United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) said on May 20. The directive is part of tighter rules issued under President Donald Trump's Executive Order 14159, Protecting the American People Against Invasion, signed on January 20, 2025. It directs the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) to enforce section 262 of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA), which requires certain foreign nationals to register and submit biometric data. 'Those aliens who fail to register face civil or criminal action, including fines up to $5,000 or imprisonment for up to six months", USCIS said. The rule requires eligible individuals to register using a newly introduced form and appear for fingerprinting at a government centre. Those who do not comply may face civil or criminal action, including fines and jail time. Under Trump's Executive Order 14159: < DHS was directed to treat failure to register as a civil and criminal enforcement priority. < Those who don't comply may be subject to removal (deportation). < They may lose eligibility to ever legally return to the US, even if they later try to regularise their status. According to a 2022 Pew Research report, around 675,000 undocumented Indian nationals live in the US, making them one of the largest unauthorised groups by country of origin. Indians must note: The Trump administration has warned that those who fail to register and self-deport 'will lose the right to ever return to the States again'. What the law requires As per the INA, any alien aged 14 or over who was not registered and fingerprinted when applying for a visa and remains in the US for over 30 days must register. Children under 14 must be registered by a parent or guardian. Those turning 14 must re-register within 30 days of their birthday. Once registered and fingerprinted, DHS issues a proof of registration document. 'Aliens over the age of 18 must carry and keep it in their personal possession at all times,' USCIS said in a notice on May 19. The USCIS has launched Form G-325R, Biographic Information (Registration), which is now available for download and submission online. It is currently free to file. Who is exempt from registering Foreign nationals who already registered under older regulations or can show proof of past registration are not required to do so again. These include: Green card holders Holders of valid Form I-94 or I-94W Those paroled under INA section 212(d)(5) Individuals in removal proceedings or with employment authorisation Those issued a visa before their most recent arrival Applicants for permanent residence who provided fingerprints, even if denied Holders of border crossing cards How to register Download and complete Form G-325R from the USCIS website Book an appointment at an Application Support Centre (ASC) Attend the appointment to provide biometric data (unless waived) Check your myUSCIS online account for proof of registration Children under 14 and some Canadian nationals may be exempt from fingerprinting. Even registered foreign nationals are required to keep their contact details updated. 'You must comply with ongoing change of address reporting requirements under 8 U.S.C. 1305(a) and 8 CFR 265.1,' USCIS said. Those who fail to register could be prosecuted for a misdemeanour, fined up to $5,000, jailed for up to six months, or both. Officials clarified that registration is not a visa or status. 'It does not create an immigration status, establish employment authorisation, or provide any other right or benefit,' USCIS said. Crackdown fear Trump has made deporting undocumented immigrants a key priority for his second term, after successfully campaigning against an alleged "invasion" by criminals. So far, his administration has deported tens of thousands of migrants, with US courts hearing cases on allegations that the government violated due process in certain cases.
Yahoo
13-05-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Opinion - Trump's DHS is doing ‘self-deportation' all wrong
Department of Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem claims that 'If you are here illegally, self-deportation is the best, safest and most cost-effective way to leave the U.S. to avoid arrest.' The main benefit of voluntary or self-deportation is that it helps deportable immigrants avoid becoming inadmissible as aliens who have been arrested, put in removal proceedings and deported pursuant to a deportation order. But permitting self-deportation doesn't just benefit immigrants — it also provides the government with a cost-effective way to remove deportable immigrants without a hearing. It is not surprising, therefore, that the administration is using the CBP Home program to encourage illegal immigrants to self-deport. But there is an additional step the administration should take to maximize the benefit: Self-deportation through CBP Home should be limited to immigrants who are in the immigration court's backlog, rather than offering it to deportable immigrants generally. The current backlog is so large, at more than 3.6 million cases, that it is severely limiting the administration's ability to put deportable immigrants through removal proceedings. With some exceptions, such proceedings are needed to get necessary deportation orders. A significant reduction in the backlog would facilitate fulfilling Trump's campaign promise of mass deportations. The administration launched the CBP Home self-deportation program on March 10, 2025, to facilitate implementation of Trump's Jan. 20, 2025, Executive Order 14159, 'Protecting the American People Against Invasion.' This order terminated the previous administration's policy of limiting enforcement efforts to undocumented immigrants 'who pose a threat to national security, public safety, and border security.' It declares that 'the immigration laws will be faithfully executed against all inadmissible and removable aliens.' The policy change requires a major increase in deportations, which is facilitated by the CBP Home program's incentives that encourage deportable immigrants to leave on their own volition. On May 5, the administration expanded the program to provide additional incentives, including a $1,000 stipend when the self-deporting immigrant confirms their return through the CBP Home app and, if needed, financial and travel document assistance. Participation deprioritizes enforcement actions for the individual by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, allowing time for the participating immigrant to take care of work, school and personal matters prior to departure. Further, participants can register family members as co-travelers and depart together. It also benefits the administration financially. The average cost to arrest, detain, conduct removal proceedings and deport an immigrant is $17,121; self-deportation under the CBP Home program costs only around $4,500. The American Immigration Law Association claims that, 'The government's recent offer of $1,000 to individuals who voluntarily leave the U.S. is not as simple — or as safe — as it sounds.' The government is not explaining the 'hardship or legal risks' the immigrants will face if they self-deport, the association says, and immigrants shouldn't do anything 'without first obtaining good legal advice.' (Of course, there is no hint that the organization's members will reduce their fees to make such advice available.) Some immigration advocates have expressed doubt about whether the immigrants will receive the $1,000 stipend or be able at some point to apply for legal status. I don't know why they think the administration would fail to give the stipend to participants who confirm that they have returned to their own country. If word gets out that they aren't paying the stipend, it could destroy the program. The advocates are right, however, that leaving voluntarily under this program will not necessarily make it possible for the immigrants in this program to return lawfully. But it could prevent them from becoming inadmissible as immigrants previously removed. It would be wrong to undervalue that benefit. Immigrants who have been removed previously are inadmissible for five, 10, or even 20 years, depending on the circumstances. The administration is depending on the Alien Enemies Act to remove a specified group of immigrants without hearings, and its use is being challenged in court. Even if the administration prevails on that question, it will need to rely on hearings before immigration judges to conduct mass deportations when the supply of immigrants subject to the act is exhausted. The administration should therefore consider limiting the CBP Home program's benefits to the 3,629,627 immigrants on the immigration court's backlog, instead of making it available to deportable immigrants generally. The immigration court could send letters to the immigrants in that backlog, offering them an opportunity to leave voluntarily through the CBP Home program instead of continuing to wait for a hearing. This should appeal to immigrants who do not have a realistic prospect of receiving relief in removal proceedings. Immigrants in the backlog should make sure that the immigration court has their current address. Failure to respond to the CBP Home program letter could result in a second letter giving them notice of a master calendar hearing; failure to appear at a master calendar hearing can result in being ordered deported in absentia (without the immigrant's presence). The CBP Home program is a good idea. It just isn't being implemented properly. Nolan Rappaport was detailed to the House Judiciary Committee as an Executive Branch Immigration Law Expert for three years. He subsequently served as an immigration counsel for the Subcommittee on Immigration, Border Security and Claims for four years. Prior to working on the Judiciary Committee, he wrote decisions for the Board of Immigration Appeals for 20 years. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
