Random

    Immigration

    Home Immigration

    Trump Administration Suffers Major Court Defeat In Sanctuary Cities Fight

    By
    Madeleine Jackson
    -
    4

    The Trump administration suffered a significant legal setback on Wednesday after a federal judge dismissed the Department of Justice’s lawsuit challenging “sanctuary” immigration policies in four New Jersey cities, ruling the federal government lacks standing to bring the case.

    U.S. District Judge Evelyn Padin threw out the DOJ’s lawsuit against Newark, Jersey City, Paterson, and Hoboken, concluding that even if the administration prevailed, New Jersey’s statewide immigration restrictions would remain in effect, meaning the court could not provide the relief the federal government was seeking. The case was dismissed without prejudice, leaving open the possibility that the DOJ could refile if it establishes standing.

    The Justice Department filed the lawsuit in May 2025, arguing that the four cities’ policies unlawfully obstruct federal immigration enforcement and violate the Constitution’s Supremacy Clause.

    The complaint described the municipal policies as “a frontal assault on the federal immigration laws and the federal authorities that administer them,” arguing they prevent willing local law enforcement agencies from assisting Immigration and Customs Enforcement.

    According to Politico, Padin said the administration’s argument ignored a critical legal reality.

    “The Federal Government’s case has a fundamental flaw—it treats the Challenged Policies as though they operate in isolation. They do not,” Padin wrote.

    The judge noted that New Jersey’s statewide Immigrant Trust Directive independently limits how state and local law enforcement cooperate with federal civil immigration authorities. Because that directive would remain in force regardless of what happened to the four cities’ individual policies, striking down the local ordinances would not remedy the federal government’s alleged injury.

    The Immigrant Trust Directive, originally issued in 2018 under then-Gov. Phil Murphy’s administration, was codified into state law earlier this year by Gov. Mikie Sherrill. It sharply limits voluntary cooperation between local police and federal immigration authorities except where required by law. The directive has already survived multiple legal challenges, including lawsuits brought by Republican-led counties that were rejected by both the U.S. District Court and the Third Circuit Court of Appeals.

    The DOJ argued that portions of Newark’s, Jersey City’s, and Hoboken’s local policies went further than the statewide directive and therefore could be challenged independently. Padin disagreed, finding those differences either too minor or too speculative to justify continuing the case.

    The ruling marks the latest courtroom setback for the Trump administration’s aggressive campaign against sanctuary jurisdictions. Earlier this week, another federal judge dismissed the DOJ’s lawsuit challenging Los Angeles’ sanctuary city ordinance, dealing another blow to the administration’s effort to compel greater local cooperation with federal immigration enforcement.

    Neither President Donald Trump nor the White House has publicly commented on the ruling.

    Have you abandoned MAGA too? Or can Trump still count on you? He needs an answer NOW.

    Latino District Flips To Trump As Democrats Confess ‘Massive Shift’ On Border Policy

    By
    Madeleine Jackson
    -
    3

    Some Democrats are finally acknowledging they need to course correct on their immigration stance.

    A new report from The New York Times revealed some leading Democrat lawmakers have admitted that open borders and immigration are costing the party and

    “When you have the most Latino district in the country outside of Puerto Rico vote for Trump, that should be a wake-up call for the Democratic Party,” said Rep. Vicente Gonzalez (D-Texas).

    The report highlighted that Gonzalez witnessed President Donald Trump “win every county in his district along the border with Mexico.” Gonzalez’s 34th district in Texas has swung dramatically from voting heavily Democratic in recent presidential elections to going in favor of Trump in 2024.

    “This is a Democratic district that’s been blue for over a century,” Gonzalez told the Times.

    Sen. Ruben Gallego (D-Ariz.) said the Democrat Party “got led astray by the 2016 and the 2020 elections, and we just never moved back.” 

    “We looked feckless, we weren’t decisive, we weren’t listening to voters, and the voters decided that we weren’t in the right when it comes to what was happening with the border,” Gallego told the Times. 

    In May, Gallego released a border security plan that would speed up asylum seekers’ claims and make other countries do their “fair share” in receiving asylum seekers, as well as take action against cartel violence.

    The New York Times reported that various Democrats “are pushing for a course correction they see as overdue,” noting a new proposal from the Democratic policy shop and left-wing think tank Center for American Progress. The organization is calling for expanding legal immigration but also for ramping up border security and clamping down on abuse of the nation’s asylum system, the latter two of which are longtime Republican priorities.

    Neera Tanden, president and CEO of the Center for American Progress, admitted to the Times that Democrats will have to adopt some level of border security policy.

    “I’m happy to argue with Stephen Miller or anyone else about why they are wrong,” Tanden told the New York Times. “But the way we’re going to be able to do that is to also honestly assess that the border has been too insecure, that it allowed too many people to come through and that we need to fix that.”

    The Trump administration has ramped up efforts to deport illegal immigrants as well as increase security at the U.S. border. The administration’s efforts have been criticized by progressives and violent anti-ICE protests recently prompted Trump to deploy the National Guard to California.

    This is About More Than Politics. Mike Huckabee Stands With Trump And Israel. Do You?

    VP Vance Says Trump Aims To Complete Border Wall By 2029

    By
    Madeleine Jackson
    -
    2
    Trump at the border wall via Wikimedia Commons

    The Trump Administration is working hard to secure the border.

    During a visit to Eagle Pass, Texas, a reporter asked Vice President Vance how he and the President would define “success” when it comes to the initiative and how much of the border needs to be “walled off” before the end of Trump’s administration.

    “I think the president’s hope is that by the end of the term we build the entire border wall,” the vice president replied.

    “And of course that’s the physical structure — the border wall itself — but we even heard today, there are so many good technological tools, so many great artificial intelligence-enabled technologies that allow us” to guard the southern border, he added.

    The Hill reported that Vance also suggested the administration would employ artificial intelligence (AI) tools to aid with efforts to combat illegal immigration — a top priority for Trump, who promised while on the campaign trail to conduct the largest deportation operation in history. The vice president pointed to AI-enabled cameras that can spot migrants up to 2 miles away from the border, before they cross over.

    “We’re using artificial intelligence to make us better at the job of border enforcement, but we’ve got to make sure that technology is deployed across the entire American southern border,” Vance said.

    “We’re going to do it as much as we can, as broadly as we can, because that’s how we’re going to protect the American people’s security,” he added.

    Building the wall was a centerpiece of Trump’s 2016 presidential campaign. During his first term, his administration reinforced more than 400 miles of the already existing wall and added about 80 miles of barrier to the border.

    Trump administration officials recently told GOP senators that they’re running out of money to secure the border and need Congress to immediately pass $175 billion to complete the U.S.-Mexico border wall and hire more law-enforcement agents.

    GOP Senators Stand Firm Behind Stephen Miller Amid Party Tensions

    By
    Madeleine Jackson
    -
    1

    Republican senators are rallying behind senior White House aide Stephen Miller as some GOP lawmakers privately grumble that his blunt style and hardline immigration messaging could complicate the party’s midterm prospects.

    Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) dismissed the idea that Miller is in trouble inside Trump’s inner circle, calling him a key architect of the administration’s aggressive border agenda.

    “People can disagree with Stephen on rhetoric or policy,” Graham told The Hill, “but the question is, is he in jeopardy in Trump World? Absolutely not.”

    Graham argued Republicans should stop hand-wringing over internal personality clashes and instead focus on going on offense against what he called the failures of the Biden years. He pointed to an upcoming Senate vote targeting sanctuary city policies, saying Miller played a central role in shaping the effort.

    Miller’s defenders say he has been instrumental in delivering on the promises Trump made to voters — from tougher immigration enforcement to cracking down on fentanyl trafficking. Sen. Dave McCormick (R-Pa.), who represents a major battleground state, credited Miller with helping advance priorities that matter to working families.

    Other prominent Republicans, including Senate GOP Conference Chair Tom Cotton (R-Ark.), also praised Miller’s long-standing role in border security and law enforcement policy.

    Still, the controversy highlights growing tension inside the Republican conference as lawmakers head into an election cycle. Some senators, including Thom Tillis (R-N.C.), have criticized Miller’s demeanor and influence, arguing the White House should broaden its circle of advisers.

    The debate comes as Washington faces a looming Homeland Security funding deadline, with Democrats threatening to block extensions unless the administration agrees to restrictions on ICE operations. Democrats have also escalated calls for investigations, impeachments, and removals of Trump officials tied to immigration enforcement — part of a broader effort to portray the administration as extreme.

    Miller has also drawn attention for his unapologetic stance on Greenland and U.S. strategic power in the Arctic, which critics say risks alienating allies. Supporters counter that Trump’s tougher posture has strengthened America’s defensive position and forced long-overdue conversations about national security.

    For many Trump allies, the bottom line is simple: Miller remains one of the president’s most trusted advisers — and Republicans who want to win should focus less on palace intrigue and more on policy fights Democrats are increasingly out of step on.

    As Graham put it, Miller is “Karl Rove to MAGA,” and anyone betting on his downfall, he suggested, doesn’t understand how Trump’s White House works.

    Hero policeman Salvatore Oldrati was named Officer of the Year after stopping an armed suspect and now liberals want to ruin his life. His family is facing an uphill battle and crushing legal bills. Stand with the men and women who protect us. [Help Police Officers HERE]

    Federal Judge Finds Probable Cause To Hold Trump In Contempt

    By
    Madeleine Jackson
    -
    7

    A federal judge said Wednesday that he has found probable cause to hold the Trump administration in contempt for failing to return two planes deporting migrants to El Salvador last month.

    In the 48-page opinion, Judge Boasberg said the court had ultimately determined that the Trump administration’s actions on the March 15 deportation flights, which took place after he issued a bench ruling ordering their immediate return to U.S. soil, demonstrate a “willful disregard” for the court that is sufficient for the government to be found in criminal contempt.”

    U.S. District Judge James Boasberg ordered the Justice Department in a filing Wednesday to answer additional questions by April 23 if they want to “purge” the contempt.

    Fox News reports:

    That would involve identifying the individuals responsible for what he described as “contumacious conduct,” and by “determining whose ‘specific act or omission’ caused the noncompliance,” Boasberg said. 

    The Justice Department could then request that the contempt be prosecuted by an attorney for the government and, should they decline to prosecute the matter, could “appoint another attorney to prosecute the contempt.”

    “The Court does not reach such conclusion lightly or hastily; indeed, it has given Defendants ample opportunity to rectify or explain their actions,” the judge continued. “None of their responses has been satisfactory…”

    “As this Opinion will detail, the Court ultimately determines that the Government’s actions on that day demonstrate a willful disregard for its Order, sufficient for the Court to conclude that probable cause exists to find the Government in criminal contempt,” Boasberg said Wednesday.

    This is a breaking news story. Please check back for updates.

    ICE Tracking App Maker Sues Over Trump Administration Pressure

    By
    Madeleine Jackson
    -
    4
    President Donald J. Trump participates in a roundtable discussion on immigration and border security at the U.S. Border Patrol Calexico Station Friday, April 5, 2019, in Calexico, Calif. (Official White House Photo by Shealah Craighead)

    The creator of ICEBlock—an iPhone app designed to alert users to the presence of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) officers—has filed a lawsuit against the Trump administration, claiming federal officials violated his free-speech rights by urging Apple to pull the app from its store.

    Joshua Aaron, the developer behind the app, contends in his complaint that building, distributing, and promoting ICEBlock is “First Amendment-protected speech.” He alleges that Attorney General Pam Bondi and other administration officials engaged in a coordinated “pressure campaign” to force Apple to remove the app, calling the effort an unlawful act of censorship.

    “We’re basically asking the court to set a precedent and affirm that ICEBlock is, in fact, First Amendment-protected speech and that I did nothing wrong by creating it,” Aaron told The Associated Press on Monday. “And to make sure that they can’t do this same thing again in the future.”

    The lawsuit also asks a federal judge to bar any criminal prosecution of Aaron, citing what he describes as “unlawful threats” from Bondi, Department of Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem, ICE Acting Director Todd M. Lyons, and White House Border Czar Tom Homan—all of whom, according to Aaron, indicated they would investigate him for creating the app.

    He told the AP that one of his motives for suing is “to basically have them stop threatening myself and my family.”

    Why the App Was Removed

    Apple removed ICEBlock and similar apps in October after Bondi publicly warned that the tools endangered federal immigration officers by allowing the public—including individuals seeking to evade law enforcement—to monitor ICE activity in real time.

    Bondi defended the removal in a Fox News interview, arguing that Aaron’s app could compromise officer safety. “He’s giving a message to criminals where our federal officers are. And he cannot do that,” she said. “And we are looking at it, we are looking at him, and he better watch out, because that’s not protected speech.”

    Broader Context: Trump’s Immigration-Enforcement Strategy

    The dispute comes amid the Trump administration’s continued efforts to restore aggressive federal enforcement of immigration law—an agenda that has been a central pillar of the president’s policy platform. ICE has been directed to prioritize arrests of criminal offenders, expand cooperation with local law-enforcement agencies, and counter efforts by progressive “sanctuary” jurisdictions to obstruct federal operations.

    Officials like Noem, Homan, and Bondi have repeatedly emphasized the dangers facing ICE officers on the ground. From hostile sanctuary-city policies to the rapid spread of mobile apps that help individuals avoid lawful apprehension, the administration argues that these challenges make it more difficult to enforce immigration laws and protect communities.

    Turning Point PAC is leading the fight for America First — and they need you NOW. Your support fuels the grassroots army electing real conservative warriors. Donate today to save America one precinct at a time.

    Trump Officially Deports Migrant Influencer

    By
    Madeleine Jackson
    -
    2
    Image via Pixabay

    President Trump has ensured an illegal immigrant from Venezuela who garnered a massive online following by posting videos of him flashing stacks of cash and urging migrants to “invade” American homes and take them over under squatters’ rights laws has been deported.

    Leonel Moreno, 26, told his audience he planned to make a business out of his scams.

    “He has been deported,” the Trump administration announced Friday on its @RapidResponse47 X account.

    In his videos, he mocked U.S. taxpayers and even other immigrants who work for a living, alternately waving stacks of hundred-dollar bills, crying, singing or posing with an infant with mucus running out of his nose.

    “I didn’t cross the Rio Grande to work like a slave,” Moreno said in Spanish, according to a translation of his videos. “I came to the U.S. to mark my territory.”

    He bragged about raking in cash via TikTok as well as entitlement payments from U.S. taxpayers. He claimed that his family had received $350 a week in government handouts since entering the U.S. illegally and that at one point he was raking in as much as $1,000 a week with his viral videos.

    “You’re hurt because I make more than you without much work while you work like slaves, understand?” he said in one of his videos. “That’s the difference between you and me. I’m always going to make lots of money without much work, and you’re always going to be exploited and miserable and insignificant.”

    TikTok eventually shut down his account, which had amassed about 500,000 followers.

    ICE picked him up after his online profile exploded, but he spent months in custody under the Biden administration. 

    Federal Judge Blocks Trump Birthright Citizenship Order

    By
    Madeleine Jackson
    -
    7

    A second federal judge moved to block President Donald Trump’s executive order ending birthright citizenship Wednesday.

    Judge Deborah Boardman, a Biden appointee, ruled that the order is likely unconstitutional. This marks the second time a federal court has blocked the policy. The nationwide injunction is slated to remain in place while the case is adjudicated.

    Boardman said the civil rights group plaintiffs, five pregnant women whose children would not be granted citizenship under the order, were likely to succeed on the merits. The plaintiffs are represented by the CASA and the Asylum Seeker Advocacy Project.

    Trump’s executive order seeks to deny U.S. citizenship to children born in the country unless at least one parent is a U.S. citizen or lawful permanent resident. The administration argues that children of undocumented immigrants and temporary visa holders are not “subject to the jurisdiction” of the United States, a reinterpretation of the 14th Amendment.

    In January, U.S. District Judge John Coughenour temporarily blocked President Donald Trump‘s executive order aimed at ending birthright citizenship, deeming the presidential directive “blatantly unconstitutional.” (RELATED: Republican Attorneys General Back Trump’s Executive Order On Birthright Citizenship)

    Trump signed Executive Order 14156, titled Protecting the Meaning and Value of American Citizenship, on his first day in office. The order seeks to end birthright citizenship for children born in the U.S. to noncitizen parents, but it has already encountered significant legal pushback.

    Judge Coughenour issued a restraining order against its implementation, siding with several states that argued the executive action violates the 14th Amendment and contradicts long-standing Supreme Court rulings.

    The executive order was set to take effect in February, marking a bold attempt to reshape the interpretation of the 14th Amendment, which has guaranteed citizenship to nearly all individuals born on U.S. soil since its ratification in 1868. Many legal experts, however, argue that any effort to alter this constitutional guarantee would require far more than an executive order.

    The Supreme Court decision in United States v. Wong Kim Ark (1898) affirmed that the 14th Amendment grants citizenship to nearly all individuals born in the U.S., regardless of their parents’ nationality. This precedent has formed the legal backbone of birthright citizenship for over a century.

    Trump’s Visa Crackdown Tops 175,000 as State Department Targets Crime, Fraud and Security Threats

    By
    admin
    -
    0
    By United States Government - https://x.com/PressSec/status/1882759560613527770, Public Domain, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=159931598

    WASHINGTON — The State Department has revoked more than 175,000 U.S. visas since President Donald Trump returned to office, according to a new government tally that underscores the rapid expansion of his administration’s immigration-enforcement campaign.

    The department said Monday that the visas belonged to foreign nationals who violated visa terms, committed crimes, called for violence against Americans, engaged in fraud, abused the immigration system or posed national-security concerns.

    “A U.S. visa is a privilege, not a right,” the department said in its Aug. 10 fact sheet, adding that officials would continue to identify and investigate foreign nationals believed to threaten public safety.

    According to the State Department, most of the revocations followed encounters with law enforcement. The leading categories involved assault, driving under the influence, theft and drug offenses. Officials also cited reckless driving, sexual assault, child abuse, fraud and embezzlement among the reasons visas were canceled.

    The department highlighted several serious cases, including one foreign national charged with felony rape and sexual battery involving a mentally disabled victim, and another charged with felony kidnapping, human trafficking and the sexual exploitation of a minor. The government did not identify the individuals or say how those criminal cases were ultimately resolved.

    The new tally also includes more than 100 visas revoked by a U.S. embassy in North Africa from parents accused of using so-called birth tourism to obtain American citizenship for children born in the United States, according to the department.

    Fox News, which first reported the new figure, said the effort is being carried out under Secretary of State Marco Rubio as part of the administration’s broader “America First” approach to immigration and public safety.

    Revocations climbed by at least 75,000 in seven months

    The latest number marks a sharp increase from the more than 100,000 revocations the department reported in January. At that point, the total included roughly 8,000 student visas and 2,500 specialized visas involving people who had encounters with U.S. law enforcement, according to Reuters reporting published by Al-Monitor.

    That means the administration says it revoked at least 75,000 additional visas in roughly seven months.

    In January, State Department deputy spokesperson Tommy Pigott said the first 100,000 revocations represented a 150% increase over 2024. He attributed the leading causes at that stage to visa overstays, DUI offenses, assault and theft. Pigott also said the department had created a Continuous Vetting Center to flag visa holders who may no longer qualify to remain in good standing.

    Monday’s announcement did not provide a new breakdown by visa category or nationality. It also did not specify how many cases involved arrests or charges rather than convictions—a distinction that earlier reporting raised when the administration disclosed thousands of canceled student visas.

    Trump: Foreign visitors who cause trouble are not welcome

    Trump has consistently cast tougher visa screening as a public-safety and national-security measure.

    “We want to have great students here. We just don’t want students that are causing trouble,” Trump said in 2025 remarks later included in a White House fact sheet on foreign student visas.

    In a December 2025 proclamation, Trump wrote that the United States must use “extreme vigilance” during visa and immigration screening to stop foreign nationals who intend to harm Americans or threaten the country’s interests.

    The push traces back to a Jan. 20, 2025 executive order directing federal agencies to strengthen screening for people seeking admission to the United States and to continue vetting certain foreign nationals already in the country.

    The State Department’s own guidance notes that a visa allows a foreign citizen to travel to a U.S. port of entry and request admission; it does not guarantee entry. Revoking one therefore removes the person’s ability to use that visa for future travel, although any separate question involving immigration status or removal from the country can require additional government action.

    With the administration now claiming more than 175,000 revocations, Monday’s announcement makes clear that Trump and Rubio intend to keep visa enforcement at the center of the president’s second-term immigration agenda.

    Take the Voter Verification Questionnaire before the deadline and make sure your records are up to date!

    Report: Appeals Court Blocks Trump Admin’s Deportation Flights

    By
    Madeleine Jackson
    -
    4
    Image via Pixabay

    A federal appellate court declined to issue a stay on a lower court’s orders in a suit challenging the Trump administration‘s authority to deport Venezuelan nationals via a 1798 wartime law. 

    In a 2-1 decision Wednesday, a three-judge panel sided with the plaintiffs in the suit, further blocking the Trump administration’s ability to move forward with its deportation agenda. 

    Judges Karen Henderson, Patricia Millett, and Justin Walker of the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals presided over Monday’s oral arguments, which they agreed to hear last week on an expedited basis. 

    In a concurring opinion of the ruling, Henderson, a Bush appointee, said: “At this early stage, the government has yet to show a likelihood of success on the merits. The equities favor the plaintiffs. And the district court entered the TROs for a quintessentially valid purpose: to protect its remedial authority long enough to consider the parties’ arguments.

    “Accordingly, and for the foregoing reasons, the request to stay the district court’s TROs should be denied.”

    Their decision could ultimately be kicked to the Supreme Court for further review.  

    This is a breaking news story. Please check back for updates.

    123...6Page 1 of 6
    © Great America News Desk 2022