Immigration

Home Immigration

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.

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.

Florida Attorney General Held In Contempt After Defending Trump Immigration Agenda

3

A federal judge has found that Florida Attorney General James Uthmeier was in civil contempt of court over her ruling to pause a new state law making it a crime for people living in the U.S. illegally to enter the state.

U.S. District Judge Kathleen Williams ordered on April 29 that Uthmeier show cause on “why he should not be held in contempt or sanctioned” for violating a temporary restraining order (TRO) from the court, though Williams ultimately decided he was unable to convince her otherwise.

“If being held in contempt is what it costs to defend the rule of law and stand firmly behind President Trump’s agenda on illegal immigration, so be it,” Uthmeier said Tuesday in a post on X.

Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis signed legislation into law in February that made it a misdemeanor for illegal immigrants to enter the state as part of President Donald Trump’s push to crack down on illegal immigration.

But on April 4, Williams issued a 14-day TRO in response to the law, following a lawsuit filed by the Florida Immigrant Coalition and other groups. She then extended the TRO another 11 days after learning the Florida Highway Patrol had arrested over a dozen people, including a U.S. citizen.

The court said on April 18 that Florida law enforcement officers were bound by the TRO, preventing them from enforcing the criminal immigration law.

The court also ordered the attorney general to provide notice to all law enforcement officers, which Uthmeier initially complied with.

On April 23, he sent a follow-up letter telling the law enforcement community that “no judicial order…properly restrains you from” enforcing the immigration law, adding that “no lawful, legitimate order currently impedes your agencies from continuing to enforce” the statute.

As a result, the court required Uthmeier to show cause as to why he should not be held in contempt for violating the TRO.

Following his response, the court opined that litigants cannot change the meaning of words as it suits them, ruling that Uthmeier was in contempt of the court’s April 18 order to provide the TRO to law enforcement officers regarding the enforcement of the immigration law.

As such, the court ordered Uthmeier to file bi-weekly reports detailing arrests, detentions or law enforcement actions when it comes to the immigration law prohibiting undocumented immigrants from entering the state of Florida, with the first being filed by July 1.

New Poll Reveals Shocking Opposition To Trump’s Tariff Plan

5
The White House, Public domain, via Wikimedia Commons

Slightly more than half of voters in the U.S. oppose President-elect Trump’s plan to tariff proposal.

The poll, released Wednesday, comes as Trump has threatened to impose 25 percent tariffs on all goods from Canada and Mexico and increase tariffs on China.

While 51 percent of respondents opposed Trump’s tariff plan, 38 percent supported it, the survey showed.

The majority of Democrats, 89 percent, Republicans, 76 percent, and independents, 53 percent, also opposed the plan, the poll found.

More independents, 34 percent, supported Trump’s tariff plan than Republicans, 12 percent, and Democrats, 7 percent, the survey showed.

Trump’s tariff threats have been met with a mix of reactions from global leaders, especially those from two of America’s top trading partners, Canada and Mexico. Canadian Finance Minister Chrystia Freeland resigned earlier this week, citing Trump’s tariff plans in her resignation letter.

“Our country today faces a grave challenge,” Chrystia Freeland said in a letter addressed to Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau. “The incoming administration in the United States is pursuing a policy of aggressive economic nationalism, including a threat of 25 per cent tariffs.”

“We need to take that threat extremely seriously,” she added. “That means keeping our fiscal powder dry today, so we have the reserves we may need for a coming tariff war. That means eschewing costly political gimmicks, which we can ill afford and which make Canadians doubt that we recognize the gravity of the moment.”

In her letter, Freeland argued for “pushing back against ‘America First’ economic nationalism with a determined effort to fight for capital and investment and the jobs they bring.”

“That means working in good faith and humility with the Premiers of the provinces and territories of our great and diverse country, and building a true Team Canada response,” she added. 

Trump hit back at Freeland’s “toxic” behavior.

“The Great State of Canada is stunned as the Finance Minister resigns, or was fired, from her position by Governor Justin Trudeau,” Trump wrote in a Monday night post on Truth Social while mocking, again, the Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau as “governor.” 

“Her behavior was totally toxic, and not at all conducive to making deals which are good for the very unhappy citizens of Canada,” he added. “She will not be missed!!!” 

Pro-Trump Mayor Accused Of Illegally Voting As A Noncitizen

4
Missvain, CC BY 4.0 via Wikimedia Commons

A small-town Kansas mayor who has supported President Donald Trump for years is now facing serious felony charges after state prosecutors allege he voted in multiple elections despite not being a U.S. citizen.

The New York Times this week highlighted the case of Joe Ceballos, the recently re-elected mayor of Coldwater, Kansas — a rural community of just 687 residents — who is now charged with multiple counts of voter fraud-related crimes.

Ceballos, 55, is facing three counts of election perjury and three counts of voting without being qualified under Kansas law. Prosecutors say he illegally cast ballots while holding permanent resident status rather than full citizenship.

“Nobody ever told me that I couldn’t vote or register to vote,” Ceballos told The Times. “And so, as a young man, yeah, I did it. I registered.”

A Case Raising Broader Questions About Election Integrity

The case arrives at a time when election security and voter eligibility remain central concerns for many Americans, particularly Republicans who argue that citizenship requirements must be enforced to protect the integrity of U.S. elections.

While instances of noncitizen voting are considered rare, conservatives have long maintained that even isolated cases undermine trust in the system — and that laws already on the books should be applied consistently.

Ceballos was born in Mexico and moved to the United States at age four, according to the report. He later obtained a green card in 1990. Ceballos said he believed that being a lawful permanent resident allowed him to vote.

“His defense, essentially, is that he did not understand that being a permanent resident should have precluded him from voting and holding office, and that no one ever told him he was not eligible,” the paper wrote.

Citizenship Application Triggered Investigation

Ceballos said his legal troubles began last year when he applied to become a U.S. citizen. During the process, he admitted to a federal official that he had previously voted.

“His eyes got real big, and I was like, ‘Boy, did I do something wrong?’” Ceballos recalled.

That admission reportedly halted his citizenship application and alerted Kansas officials, setting off the investigation that ultimately led to criminal charges.

If convicted, Ceballos could face up to 68 months in prison and a $200,000 fine.

“This alien committed a felony by voting in American elections,” DHS spokeswoman Tricia McLaughlin said about Ceballos.

Trump Supporter Says He Doesn’t Belong in “Criminal” Category

Ceballos acknowledged voting for Trump in 2016, 2020, and 2024, and said he still supports much of the president’s immigration agenda — particularly efforts to remove violent criminals from the country.

“I still strongly believe in Trump’s immigration laws about, ‘Let’s get the bad guys out of here,’” he said. “You know, they’re murderers, they killed people, they molested people, let’s get them out of here.

“But I feel like I don’t fit that category,” he added. “And I feel like that’s how they’re treating me.”

His comments reflect a broader debate within the immigration discussion: Republicans often emphasize the difference between legal immigrants who follow the process and those who break the law — while also insisting that voting is a right reserved only for American citizens.

Small Town Residents Rally Around Mayor

Coldwater residents told The Times they view the prosecution as a “personal attack on a pillar of the town.” Ceballos was overwhelmingly re-elected last year by a margin of 101 votes to 20.

Supporters argue the case is a tragic example of confusion over complex immigration and election laws, while critics say citizenship rules are clear and must be upheld regardless of intent.

SAVE Act and Growing Push for Proof of Citizenship

The case comes as Trump has backed the SAVE Act, legislation that would require proof of U.S. citizenship to vote in federal elections — a measure Republicans argue is common sense and necessary to restore confidence in elections.

Democrats such as Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-NY) have criticized the proposal, calling it discriminatory, but polling consistently shows strong public support for voter identification requirements.

CNN data analyst Harry Enten noted that surveys dating back to 2018 show at least 75% of Americans support voter ID laws, including a 2024 figure showing 83% approval.

“Normally, you might expect… a big divide by party,” Enten said. “But not really here.”

Sen. Susan Collins recently became the 50th lawmaker to signal support for the bill.

In an exclusive comment to The Maine Wire, Sen. Collins said she supports the current version of the SAVE Act.

Collins said she will support the version of the SAVE Act that has now cleared the House, calling it a “simple reform” aimed at strengthening confidence in federal elections.

“The law is clear that in this country only American citizens are eligible to vote in federal elections. In addition, having people provide an ID at the polls, just as they have to do before boarding an airplane, checking into a hotel, or buying an alcoholic beverage, is a simple reform that will improve the security of our federal elections and will help give people more confidence in the results,” she said.

Collins said that her support hinges on changes made to the legislation. She said she previously opposed an earlier draft that would have required voters to prove their citizenship each time they cast a ballot.

“Requiring voters to produce passports or birth certificates on election day — as opposed to just a state-issued ID — would have placed an unnecessary burden on the voters. That provision is no longer in the bill and dropping this requirement was key to getting my support.”

First Judge Approves Trump’s Use Of Alien Enemies Act For Venezuelan Deportations

0
Image via Pixabay

On Tuesday afternoon, U.S. District Judge Stephanie Haines ruled that President Trump’s invocation of the Alien Enemies Act to deport alleged illegal immigrant gang members complies with the law.

Haines, a Trump appointee with a background as a prosecutor in Pennsylvania, ruled that Trump’s use of the Alien Enemies Act (AEA) of 1798 to deport Tren de Aragua (TdA) gang members is legally valid, citing TdA’s actions as a “predatory incursion” under the law.

As The Hill reports:

Haines, a Trump appointee, emphasized her “unflagging obligation is to apply the law as written.” 

“Having done its job, the Court now leaves it to the Political Branches of the government, and ultimately to the people who elect those individuals, to decide whether the laws and those executing them continue to reflect their will,” Haines wrote in her 43-page ruling. 

The new split comes as the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), which has filed a wave of lawsuits across the country challenging Trump’s use of the AEA, calls on the Supreme Court to immediately take up the issue and swiftly provide a nationwide resolution.

“The Alien Enemies Act — historically invoked during wartime, including World War II — empowers the president to detain or deport nationals of enemy nations. Trump’s application of the law targets TdA, a Venezuelan transnational gang designated as a Foreign Terrorist Organization during his second administration, despite ongoing legal debate over whether gang activity constitutes an “invasion” or “incursion.”

Tuesday’s ruling contrasts with other federal judges’ decisions, such as Judge Fernando Rodriguez’s May 1, 2025, injunction against the AEA’s use, highlighting a judicial split that may lead to a Supreme Court challenge.

Report: Trump Admin Sends Over 100 Iranians Back To Tehran In Rare Deal

2
By United States Government - https://x.com/PressSec/status/1882759560613527770, Public Domain, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=159931598

The Trump administration has reportedly deported a planeload of more than 100 Iranians under a deal struck with the Iranian government.

Iranian officials confirmed to The New York Times that the planeload of migrants took off from Louisiana on Monday night and was expected to arrive in Iran via Qatar on Tuesday. A U.S. official also reportedly confirmed the plan to the outlet.

Monday’s round of deportations is the first step in a larger plan to deport approximately 400 Iranian nationals.

“The Trump Administration is committed to fulfilling President Trump’s promise to carry out the largest mass deportation operation of illegal aliens in history, using all the tools at our disposal,” White House spokesperson Abigail Jackson told Fox News on Tuesday.

The deal marks a rare instance of cooperation between Tehran and the US, which saw heightened tensions in the wake of this summer’s strikes on Iran’s nuclear facilities.

Iranian officials told The Times that the deportation deal came about after months of discussions between the two nations.

The identities of the Iranian deportees are unknown, but The Times reported that the group included men and women, some of whom were couples. The outlet also noted, citing Iranian officials, that some of the deportees volunteered to leave the U.S. after spending time in detention centers, while others were not going voluntarily.

Iranian officials also told The Times that in almost every case, the deportees either had asylum requests denied or had yet to appear before a judge for a hearing on their requests.

“We have urged the American government to respect the rights of Iranian migrants and their citizenship rights under international law. They must not be denied consular services, fair judicial process, or the principles enshrined in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights,” Noushabadi told Tasnim news agency.

Another official told the news agency that the individuals being deported had left Iran legally, but how they entered the U.S. was “another matter.” For decades, the U.S. had granted refuge to Iranians fleeing political repression due to the regime’s reputation for brutal human rights abuses.

READ NEXT: New York Man Charged With Murdering Parents After Stunning TV Interview Confession

Federal Judge Temporarily Blocks Trump Admin. From Deporting Migrants To Guantanamo Bay

7

A federal court on Sunday issued a temporary restraining order blocking the Trump administration from sending three Venezuelan immigrants held in New Mexico to the Guantánamo Bay, Cuba, detention camp.

Lawyers for the trio said in a legal filing that the detainees “fit the profile of those the administration has prioritized for detention in Guantánamo, i.e. Venezuelan men detained in the El Paso area with (false) charges of connections with the Tren de Aragua gang.”

In the filing, the lawyers asked a U.S. District Court in New Mexico for a temporary restraining order to block the administration from flying them to the U.S. military base. The lawyers noted that “the mere uncertainty the government has created surrounding the availability of legal process and counsel access is sufficient to authorize the modest injunction.”

The filing came as part of a lawsuit on behalf of the three men filed by the Center for Constitutional Rights, the American Civil Liberties Union of New Mexico and Las Americas Immigrant Advisory Center.

Judge Kenneth J. Gonzales granted the temporary restraining order, according to attorney Jessica Vosburgh, who represents the three men.

“It’s short term. This will get revisited and further fleshed out in the weeks to come,” Vosburgh told The Associated Press.

Last week, Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem and White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt separately said that flights carrying detained illegal immigrants had been sent to Guantánamo.

Immigrant rights groups sent a letter on Friday demanding access to people who are now being held at the U.S. naval station, arguing that the base should not be used as a “legal black hole.” Guantánamo has been criticized around the world for its inhumane abuse and torture of detainees, including interrogation tactics.

The immigrants are being held in the Guantánamo detention camp that was set up for detainees in the aftermath of 9/11. The immigrants are separated from the 15 detainees who were already there, including planners in the 2001 terrorist attack.

Trump has promised to expand the detention camp to hold up to 30,000 “criminal illegal aliens.”

Trump Administration Moves To Deport Kilmar Abrego Garcia – To Uganda

Gage Skidmore Flickr

New court filings reveal that the Trump administration is threatening to deport Kilmar Abrego Garcia to Uganda — a move his attorneys describe as coercive. Abrego, a Salvadoran man mistakenly deported to El Salvador earlier this year, declined a plea deal tied to human smuggling charges. In response, prosecutors withdrew an offer that would have allowed him to enter Costa Rica — a safe, Spanish-speaking country where he’d face no detention after serving time — and instead pursued deportation to Uganda.

His attorneys argue immigration authorities are essentially offering a forced choice: accept guilt and a path to Costa Rica, or refuse and risk being sent to Uganda, where his safety — and legal protections — are uncertain at best.

As The Hill reports:

Federal prosecutors on Thursday offered Abrego Garcia the option to “live freely” with refugee or residency status in Costa Rica after serving prison time for federal human smuggling charges in exchange for a guilty plea, per his lawyers in the Saturday filings.

Abrego Garcia, who was mistakenly deported to a notorious prison in his native El Salvador, declined the offer on Friday to instead return to his family in Maryland. He had been imprisoned in a Tennessee jail.

After his return to Maryland, Abrego Garcia’s attorneys were notified later in the day that he must report to an Immigration and Custom Enforcement (ICE) field office in Baltimore on Monday — and that the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) intends to deport him to Uganda.

“The only thing that happened between Thursday—Costa Rica—and Friday—Uganda— was Mr. Abrego’s exercise of his legal entitlement to release under the Bail Reform Act and the Fifth Amendment…,” Abrego Garcia’s defense team wrote.

Saturday’s revelations mark a significant escalation, as Uganda recently entered into a U.S. agreement to accept third-country deportees— but explicitly excluding individuals with criminal records or unaccompanied minors. Abrego’s legal team contends that his criminal charges make such deportation both inappropriate and potentially dangerous.

READ NEXT: Dem Forced To Eat Words After Defending Alleged Criminal

Judge Rebuked Twice By Supreme Court Deals New Blow To Trump Immigration Agenda

A federal judge already twice rebuked by the Supreme Court is back at it—this time blocking the Trump administration from ending legal protections for thousands of Ethiopian migrants.

Judge Brian Murphy, a Biden appointee in Massachusetts, temporarily halted the administration’s plan to strip temporary protected status (TPS) from more than 5,000 Ethiopians—a move that would have made them deportable within 60 days.

Murphy said the Department of Homeland Security didn’t follow the law when it pulled the plug on the program.

That ruling lands right in the middle of the administration’s broader push to shrink TPS and tighten immigration enforcement.

But it also lands on a judge with a track record.

Murphy has repeatedly tried to block Trump-era deportation policies—especially efforts to send migrants to third countries. The Supreme Court has stepped in twice to reverse him, even issuing a rare 7–2 clarification saying he ignored its orders. An appeals court also shut down one of his more recent rulings just last month.

Critics say this is more of the same.

“This rogue judge lacks the subject matter jurisdiction to issue this order,” Sen. Eric Schmitt said. “The assault on the rule of law continues.”

Legal analyst Jonathan Turley piled on, warning that “this system cannot function with such rogue operators at the trial level.”

Iowa Solicitor General Eric Wessan pointed to what he sees as a fundamental problem: the law itself.

“One big problem for Murphy is the statute: It explains TPS determinations aren’t reviewable. Another is the Supreme Court, which has stopped similar orders twice,” Wessan said. “He finds neither statute nor SCOTUS stops him. I’m unconvinced.”

Murphy, for his part, insists he’s not defying the high court. He noted that the Supreme Court hasn’t fully explained its recent TPS-related rulings—and hasn’t stepped in on every similar case.

“There is no reason to assume” the justices have settled the issue, he wrote.

The lawsuit behind the ruling claims the administration’s TPS rollback isn’t just procedural—it’s discriminatory. Lawyers for the plaintiffs argue the policy is aimed at reducing non-white immigration, writing that the effort targets “the nationals of majority Black countries” in particular.

The Justice Department is expected to appeal, setting up yet another round in a growing legal fight between the Trump administration and a judge who keeps standing in its way.