Immigration

Home Immigration

Obama Appointee Blocks Trump Immigration Order

6

This is far from over…

A federal judge on Monday blocked the Trump administration from revoking the legal status and work permits of the more than 530,000 migrants from Cuba, Haiti, Nicaragua, and Venezuela who flew into the United States during former President Joe Biden’s time in office. 

The migrants came to the U.S. under Biden’s controversial CHNV mass humanitarian parole program.

In her order, Judge Indira Talwani, an Obama appointee, wrote that each migrant needs to have an individualized, case-by-case review.

“The Termination of Parole Processes for Cubans, Haitians, Nicaraguans, and Venezuelans, 90 Fed. Reg. 13611 (Mar. 25, 2025), is hereby STAYED pending further court order insofar as it revokes, without case-by-case review, the previously granted parole and work authorization issued to noncitizens paroled into the UnitedStates pursuant to parole programs for noncitizens from Cuba, Haiti, Nicaragua, and Venezuela (the “CHNV parole programs”) prior to the noncitizen’s originally stated parole end date,” she wrote. 

Biden created the CHNV program in 2023 via his executive parole authority. The program was launched in 2022 and initially first applied to Venezuelans before it was expanded to additional countries.

The Biden administration argued that CHNV would help reduce illegal crossings at the southern border and allow better vetting of people entering the country amid an influx of migrants. 

The program was temporarily paused due to widespread fraud.

Officials with the Department of Homeland Security and the Trump administration told Fox News that Talwani essentially ruled that Trump can’t use his own executive authority, the same authority Biden used, to revoke the parole that Biden granted. 

“It is pure lawless tyranny,” a Trump administration official told Fox News. 

In March, the roughly 532,000 migrants under the CHNV program were told to leave the U.S. 

Noem Impeachment Calls Escalate As ICE Shooting Fallout Continues

Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Secretary Kristi Noem receives a tour of the Terrorist Confinement Center CECOT with the Minister of Justice and Public Security Gustavo Villatoro in Tecoluca, El Salvador, March 26, 2025. (DHS photo by Tia Dufour)

Prominent Democrats are escalating calls to remove Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem, accusing her of rushing to defend federal officers involved in two separate fatal shootings — a push that Republicans are likely to view as more partisan pressure on law enforcement than a serious, evidence-based accountability process.

According to Axios, a House Democratic caucus phone call on Sunday “lit up” with demands to impeach Noem after the death of Minneapolis protester Alex Pretti, who was shot and killed by federal agents on Saturday.

Rep. Jared Moskowitz (D-FL) reportedly warned colleagues that if Noem refuses to step down, “we will have no other option but to begin impeachment,” according to anonymous sources cited by Axios.

House Homeland Security Committee ranking member Bennie Thompson (D-MS) — “who was once reticent about impeachment” — also called for Noem to be impeached during the same call, Axios reported.

Outside Washington, New York Gov. Kathy Hochul (D) also demanded Noem’s removal, writing, “@Sec_Noem has forfeited her right to lead. I’m calling on her to resign.”

Hochul went further, adding, “Gregory Bovino must also be fired,” referring to a senior Border Patrol official who publicly defended the shooting at a press conference Sunday.

Democrats point to pattern; Republicans see familiar impeachment politics

Democrats argue Noem is showing a troubling pattern of defending federal officers before facts are fully established, pointing to a similar incident earlier this year.

The article notes that Renee Good was “shot four times and killed” on Jan. 7 by “officer Jonathan Ross,” and that Noem also immediately said the officer acted in self-defense.

Noem’s supporters — and many Republicans — are likely to counter that federal officers operating in volatile environments, including protests and border-related enforcement actions, deserve the presumption that they were responding to a real threat until evidence proves otherwise, especially amid increasingly aggressive anti-police rhetoric.

Republicans have also criticized Democrats for using impeachment as a political weapon in recent years, arguing that removing Cabinet officials should be reserved for clear misconduct, not disputed narratives still under investigation.

Border Patrol official calls Pretti “assaultive,” claims he interfered with federal action

At Sunday’s press conference, Bovino described Pretti as an “assaultive subject” who was “assaulting” officers and interfering with a federal action — language that underscores how federal officials are framing the encounter as a fast-moving confrontation rather than an unprovoked shooting.

Bovino’s comments, however, are now being disputed by Democrats and major media outlets that reviewed video from the scene.

Video review raises questions about the Trump administration’s initial account

Major news organizations, including The Wall Street Journal, reviewed bystander footage and reported that “Bystander footage appears to tell a different story” than the Trump administration’s claims.

The Journal reported: “A frame-by-frame review by The Wall Street Journal shows a federal officer pulling a handgun away from Pretti. Less than a second later, an agent fires several rounds. Pretti died at the scene.”

Both The Journal and The New York Times concluded that “At least 10 shots appear to have been fired within five seconds.”

Political fallout likely to intensify as facts emerge

The dispute is now shifting into familiar political territory: Democrats are pressing for impeachment and firings, while Republicans are likely to insist that the federal government should not allow high-pressure incidents involving officers to be immediately adjudicated by political opponents — especially before investigators have fully reviewed evidence, witness statements, and body camera footage, if available.

Report: Trump Border Czar Homan, DHS Chief Noem Barely Speaking Or Meeting

3
The White House, Public domain, via Wikimedia Commons

A simmering feud between Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem and President Trump’s border czar Tom Homan has grown so strained that the two leaders reportedly barely speak or meet with each other, according to a new Axios report. Despite the tension, neither official is in danger of losing their job, and President Trump continues to stand by both as key figures in his aggressive border-security agenda.

The clash—with roots that appear more personal than ideological—has raised eyebrows inside the Department of Homeland Security (DHS). A White House adviser told Axios that Trump views the competition between Noem and Homan as a healthy dynamic that can improve overall performance. “Kristi’s doing a great job,” Trump reportedly said. “Her and Tom don’t get along, but they’re doing great.”

Personality Clash, Not Policy Collapse

Sources say the feud stems largely from a personality clash and differing leadership styles. While both leaders support tough enforcement of immigration laws, Noem’s backers have criticized Homan for oversaturating conservative media with frequent appearances, especially on Fox News, which they say sometimes carries him past official channels or consultation with DHS communications staff. Homan has appeared on conservative outlets far more than Noem this year, which insiders say has aggravated the divide.

Career Officials Bristle, But Trump Wants Results

Career immigration officials have reportedly bristled at Noem’s leadership style, including her public-facing promotion of policies like the CBP Home self-deportation app and the outsized influence of her senior adviser, Corey Lewandowski, who can only officially serve limited days under federal rules.

At the same time, Noem’s allies say Homan’s media presence sometimes strays into self-promotion, making news on policy pronouncements without coordination. But neither side is backing down, and several White House sources say Trump is satisfied with the job both are doing.

What This Means for Border Security

Despite internal friction, the Trump administration’s border enforcement efforts remain robust. Deportations have reached record levels under this team, and DHS continues to pursue hard-line priorities. That focus on illegal immigration enforcement aligns with what Trump was elected to deliver and remains popular among the president’s base.

In public remarks—such as Noem’s recent testimony before the House Homeland Security Committee—Noem has defended the administration’s approach as strengthening national security and deterring illegal entries, insisting DHS is enforcing the law without selective leniency.

Stephen Miller Reportedly Sidelined By Trump Admin.

By The White House - https://www.flickr.com/photos/202101414@N05/54346096651/, Public Domain, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=160407812

White House Deputy Chief of Staff for Policy Stephen Miller — long viewed as one of the chief architects of President Donald Trump’s hardline immigration agenda — is reportedly losing influence inside the administration as other top officials gain the president’s ear.

According to a new report from The Atlantic journalists Michael Scherer and Nick Miroff, Trump has privately expressed concern that Miller’s aggressive instincts sometimes go too far, marking a notable shift for one of the president’s most loyal and powerful longtime advisers.

The report claims Trump “has also told others in recent weeks that he understands Miller sometimes goes too far.” The alleged change reportedly became more noticeable following unrest in Minneapolis and the death of protester Alex Pretti.

Trump reportedly “recognized immediately after the second killing in Minneapolis, of the protester Alex Pretti, that the policy needed to shift.” Miller, however, took a far more confrontational tone, referring to Pretti as a “domestic terrorist” in the aftermath of the incident.

For years, Miller has been one of the most influential figures in Trump’s orbit. The former Senate aide rose to prominence during Trump’s first campaign in 2016 and quickly became the driving force behind many of the administration’s toughest immigration policies, including travel bans, refugee restrictions, and mass deportation proposals.

Unlike many Trump officials who cycled in and out of the administration, Miller built a uniquely durable relationship with the president. His fiery populist rhetoric and uncompromising stance on immigration made him a hero to many MAGA voters, while critics accused him of pushing excessively punitive policies.

But according to The Atlantic, recent months have revealed growing divisions within the administration over how aggressively to pursue Trump’s immigration crackdown.

The report states that Trump backed away from several Miller-backed initiatives after consulting with border czar Tom Homan and other officials. One major example involved a proposal to slash seasonal worker visas by 50%, a move that reportedly alarmed business interests and other administration figures.

“The new secretary is listening to Tom Homan and Rodney Scott before he is ever listening to Stephen Miller,” one senior administration official told Scherer and Miroff.

Another former official summed up Miller’s changing position bluntly: “The president knows who he is, period.”

The Atlantic also reported that while there have been no known clashes between Homan and Miller, the two men have promoted very different strategies for carrying out Trump’s mass-deportation agenda.

Miller has reportedly pushed for maximizing deportation numbers as quickly as possible, while Homan has favored a more targeted approach focused on illegal immigrants with criminal records.

“There have been no accounts of clashes or tension between Homan and Miller, and the former has even praised the latter as ‘one of the most brilliant people I’ve met in my entire life,’” the report noted.

Still, Homan’s influence appears to be growing.

According to the report, the Department of Homeland Security has quietly reversed several changes Miller pushed earlier in Trump’s second term. One key example involved accelerated training for new ICE recruits.

Miller had reportedly advocated for shortening ICE academy training to roughly eight weeks in an effort to rapidly expand deportation operations. Veteran officers reportedly warned that the abbreviated training created serious concerns, especially as dropout rates surged among recruits.

“In recent weeks, ICE reverted to a four-and-a-half-month training program similar to its former academy course,” the report stated, citing three officials familiar with the matter.

Despite the apparent shift, insiders told The Atlantic that Miller remains deeply embedded in Trump’s inner circle and is not expected to leave the administration anytime soon.

“White House insiders said that Miller remains a top adviser to the president, that he has a singular relationship to Trump built over the past decade, and that his job is not in jeopardy,” Scherer and Miroff reported.

The claims stand in stark contrast to earlier reporting that portrayed Miller as perhaps the single most influential policy figure in Trump’s second administration.

A bombshell report published by The New York Times in March suggested Miller had effectively become the driving force behind major Justice Department priorities.

“It was clear from the start that Mr. Miller, who is not a lawyer, would exercise control inside the department, current and former Trump aides said,” the Times reported at the time.

Whether Miller’s reported decline in influence proves temporary or permanent remains unclear. But the emerging picture suggests that even some of Trump’s most trusted allies are now competing for influence as the administration navigates mounting political and public pressure over immigration enforcement and domestic unrest.

Trump Administration Suffers Major Court Defeat In Sanctuary Cities Fight

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.

Trump Border Czar Defends Hefty Immigration Plan Pricetag

6
Trump at the border wall via Wikimedia Commons

Incoming Trump administration border czar Tom Homan told NewsNation’s Ali Bradley there is no “price tag” for the mass deportations planned by the incoming administration

“What price do you put on national security? I don’t think it has a price tag,” Homan said. “What price do you put on the thousands of American moms and dads who buried their children? You want to talk about family separation; they buried their children because their children were murdered by illegal aliens that weren’t supposed to be here. I don’t put a price on that. I don’t put a price on national security. I don’t put a price on American lives.”

Homan further defended the mass deportations’ $86 billion price tag, saying it would save American taxpayers money in the future.

“This operation would be expensive,” he acknowledged. “However, it’s going to save taxpayers a lot of money in the long run. Right now, we’re spending billions of dollars on free airline tickets, free hotel rooms, free medical care, free meals, the education system.”

Homan, however, said they will also need help from Congress.

“We need more resources; we need funding. We obviously need to buy more detention beds because everybody we arrest, we have to detain to work on those removal efforts and get travel documents, get flight arrangements. So we need more detention beds,” said Homan.

Homan said the Trump administration doesn’t plan on separating families but rather deporting them together. He said the administration is looking into using halfway houses to hold U.S.-born children of undocumented immigrants.

“As far as U.S. children, that’s going to be a difficult situation because we’re not going to change your U.S. citizenship,” he said. “Which means they’re going to be put in a halfway house or they can stay at home and wait for the officers to get the travel arrangements and come back and get the family. You know the best thing to do for a family is to self-deport themselves.”

DeSantis Opens ‘Deportation Depot’ in Florida a Day After Alligator Alcatraz Court Victory

0
Ron DeSantis via Gage Skidmore Flickr

Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis has opened “Deportation Depot” migrant detention center in Florida, a follow-up to the embattled “Alligator Alcatraz.”

“Deportation Depot” is located about 45 miles away from Jacksonville in the community of Sanderson, at the site of the Baker Correctional Institution.

The facility has the capacity for 1,500 detainees, Fox News reported. As of Friday, a little over 100 migrants had been moved there.

DeSantis said last month that he moved to begin work on a new facility to fulfill an urgent need for more shelter for illegal migrants as they’re rounded up by ICE agents throughout the state.

“There is a demand for this,” DeSantis told reporters at the time. “I’m confident that it will be filled.”

The opening of the new facility came a day after the $250 million “Alligator Alcatraz” was granted a rare win by an appeals court.

The detention center was ordered to ship out all detainees and close within 60 days. The ruling by Judge Kathleen M. Williams stemmed from a lawsuit filed by the Friends of the Everglades and the Miccosukee Tribe that accused the Sunshine State of violating the National Environmental Policy Act.

A stay on Williams’ ruling was granted by a three-judge panel in Atlanta on Thursday, pending an appeal. “Alligator Alcatraz” can continue holding detainees for now.

In a video posted on his X account Thursday, DeSantis declared: “The mission continues on immigration enforcement.”

Until yesterday, “Alligator Alcatraz” faced a series of legal and PR losses, with some detainees alleging mistreatment.

Trump Signals Support For Legal Protections For Longtime Migrant Workers

2
Donald Trump via Gage Skidmore Flickr

DES MOINES, Iowa — Speaking at the Iowa State Fairgrounds hours before Independence Day, President Donald Trump said he is drafting legislation to shield long-serving farm and hospitality workers from immigration enforcement actions.

“We’re working on legislation right now,” Trump told the crowd. “Farmers, look, they know better. They work with them for years.”

He referenced cases where immigrant workers had been employed for over a decade before being removed through federal action.

“You had cases… where people have worked for a farm for 14, 15 years, and they get thrown out pretty viciously. And we can’t do it,” Trump said.

The remarks appear to address the impact of immigration raids, such as those reported at California farms, where labor shortages have followed large-scale enforcement. A significant portion of that workforce is made up of illegal immigrants.

Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins, who was present on stage, had initially raised the issue.

After weeks of back-and-forth, Trump ultimately echoed her stance on Thursday night — arguing that those in agriculture and hospitality deserve more authority over who they employ. “We’re going to work with them, and we’re going to work very strong and smart,” he said. “We’re going to put you in charge. We’re going to make you responsible. And I think that’s going to make a lot of people happy.”

Acknowledging that the proposal may not sit well with his party’s immigration hardliners, Trump added: “radical right people, who I also happen to like a lot, they may not be quite as happy. But they’ll understand, won’t they?”

He then turned to Rollins and said, “Do you think they’ll understand that you’re the one that brought this whole situation up?”

The comments signal a more pragmatic tone on immigration from the president, who has long emphasized enforcement but now appears open to reforms aimed at stabilizing the labor force in key sectors.

GOP Senators Stand Firm Behind Stephen Miller Amid Party Tensions

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.

Supreme Court Rules Wrongfully Deported Man Must Return To US

2
Duncan Lock, Dflock, CC BY-SA 3.0 via Wikimedia Commons

The Supreme Court on Thursday ordered the return of Kilmar Abrego Garcia, a Salvadoran national living in Maryland, from an El Salvador prison.

Abrego Garcia, 29, was deported to the El Salvadoran mega-prison last month for being an alleged MS-13 gang member, however, his attorneys maintain he does not have any gang ties. Garcia’s wrongful deportation has triggered an onslaught of criticisms from both sides of the aisle. (RELATED: IRS, DHS Reach Game-Changing Agreement For Trump Immigration Agenda)

The Supreme Court sided with U.S. District Judge Paula Xinis who initially ordered federal officials to coordinate Garcia’s return back to Maryland in a Monday order, calling his deportation “wholly unlawful.”

Fox News reports:

“On March 15, 2025, the United States removed Kilmar Armando Abrego Garcia from the United States to El Salvador, where he is currently detained in the Center for Terrorism Confinement (CECOT),” the order states. “The United States acknowledges that Abrego Garcia was subject to a withholding order forbidding his removal to El Salvador, and that the removal to El Salvador was therefore illegal.” 

Justice Sonia Sotomayor said she “would have declined to intervene in this litigation and denied the application in full.”

“Nevertheless, I agree with the Court’s order that the proper remedy is to provide Abrego Garcia with all the processes to which he would have been entitled had he not been unlawfully removed to El Salvador,” Sotomayor wrote. “That means the Government must comply with its obligation to provide Abrego Garcia with ‘due process of law,’ including notice and an opportunity to be heard, in any future proceedings.”

The Justice Department responded to the order in a statement to Fox News in a statement. 

“As the Supreme Court correctly recognized, it is the exclusive prerogative of the President to conduct foreign affairs,” the statement says. “By directly noting the deference owed to the Executive Branch, this ruling once again illustrates that activist judges do not have the jurisdiction to seize control of the President’s authority to conduct foreign policy.”