Immigration

Home Immigration

Trump Announces ‘Permanent Pause’ On Migration From ‘Third World Countries’ After DC Shooting

President Donald Trump signs Executive Orders, Thursday, April 17, 2025, in the Oval Office. (Official White House Photo by Molly Riley)

President Donald J. Trump announced Thursday that he will “permanently pause migration from all Third World Countries” after two members of the West Virginia National Guard were shot in Washington, D.C., earlier this week. “I will permanently pause migration from all Third World Countries to allow the U.S. system to fully recover,” he wrote on his social-media platform.

Earlier on Thursday, the administration revealed plans to re-examine green cards issued to immigrants from 19 countries. The June memo lists these countries — including Afghanistan, Burma, Cuba, Somalia, Venezuela and others — as of concern.

The sharper policy response comes after the suspect in this week’s attack was identified as Rahmanullah Lakanwal, a 29-year-old Afghan national. He entered the U.S. in 2021 under the humanitarian resettlement program launched following the U.S. withdrawal from Afghanistan.

The Washington, D.C. Shooting: What Happened

On Wednesday afternoon near the White House, Lakanwal allegedly ambushed two West Virginia National Guard members. The victims, 20-year-old Specialist Sarah Beckstrom and 24-year-old Staff Sergeant Andrew Wolfe, were shot during what prosecutors are calling a “brazen, targeted attack.”

Beckstrom died from her injuries late Thanksgiving Day, President Trump said. Wolfe remains in critical condition.

According to prosecutors, Lakanwal drove cross-country from Washington state for the sole purpose of carrying out the ambush. He allegedly fired 10–15 rounds from a .357 Smith & Wesson revolver, striking one Guardsman, then leaning over to shoot a second time, and then firing on the other. Authorities said the remaining National Guard member then returned fire, and Lakanwal was apprehended.

This horrific attack unfolded while hundreds of National Guard troops remain deployed across D.C., under Mr. Trump’s 2025 strategy to restore public safety in the capital.

Administration Response: Immigration Crackdown

In response to the ambush, President Trump not only called for a complete halt to migration from unspecified “Third World Countries,” but late Thursday the administration also announced an indefinite pause on Afghan immigration. Officials said they would conduct a sweeping review of green card approvals tied to the 19 countries flagged in June.

In his statement, Trump did not list which additional countries would be subject to the pause — though the 19-country list already includes several nations the administration deemed high risk.

Why This Matters — and What It Signals for National Security

Supporters of the president’s crackdown argue that the D.C. ambush underscores the danger of lax vetting under previous administrations. The suspect in this case reportedly worked in a CIA-backed unit during the U.S. war in Afghanistan, then obtained resettlement under a program from the prior administration.

Appeals Court Allows Trump Administration to Continue Third-Country Deportations

A federal appeals court ruled Monday that the Trump administration may continue swiftly deporting migrants while a legal challenge to the policy proceeds.

In a 2–1 decision, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 1st Circuit allowed the deportations to continue and moved to speed up the timeline for the next stage of the case. The panel issued its order without an accompanying explanation.

The Trump administration has expanded the use of “third-country removals” as part of its broader immigration crackdown, deporting migrants to nations other than their countries of origin. The administration has reached agreements with several countries — including Cameroon, South Sudan and Eswatini — to accept deportees.

The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) has defended the policy as a way to remove individuals it describes as particularly dangerous.

In court filings, the administration has also argued that federal judges lack the authority to intervene in how immigration enforcement policies are carried out.

The majority on the three-judge panel included Judge Jeffrey Howard, nominated by former President George W. Bush, and Judge Seth Aframe, a nominee of former President Joe Biden. Judge Lara Montecalvo, also nominated by Biden, dissented.

The ruling lifts limits imposed by U.S. District Judge Brian Murphy, another Biden nominee, who is overseeing a class-action lawsuit filed last year by four noncitizens challenging the deportation policy.

Murphy ruled last month that the administration could not deport migrants to third countries without first attempting to send them to their country of citizenship or another country with which they have ties.

“It is not fine, nor is it legal,” Murphy wrote in his decision.

His order required immigration authorities to first attempt deportation to a migrant’s country of citizenship or the country normally designated for removal. If that effort failed, Murphy said migrants must be given a “meaningful opportunity” to challenge their deportation once a third country is selected.

Murphy delayed the implementation of his ruling to allow the appeals court time to weigh in. The 1st Circuit’s order keeps his decision on hold while the appeal moves forward.

Trina Realmuto, executive director of the National Immigration Litigation Alliance, which represents the migrants, said the group welcomed the expedited timeline.

“While the order unfortunately delays implementation of the decision, we appreciate that the First Circuit ordered a swift resolution of the merits of the government’s appeal,” Realmuto said.

The dispute has already reached the Supreme Court once. Last year, the Trump administration successfully appealed to the high court after Murphy imposed earlier limits on the policy.

In a statement following Monday’s ruling, a DHS spokesperson said the court’s decision supports the administration’s position.

“The Biden Administration allowed millions of illegal aliens to flood our country, and the Trump Administration has the authority to remove these criminal illegal aliens and clean up this national security nightmare,” the spokesperson said. “If these activist judges had their way, aliens who are so uniquely barbaric that their own countries won’t take them back, including convicted murderers, child rapists and drug traffickers, would walk free on American streets.”

Trump Border Czar Warns California Officials Can Be Arrested If They Disrupt ICE Raids

By Gage Skidmore from Surprise, AZ, United States of America - Thomas Homan, CC BY-SA 2.0,

Things are escalating…

On Sunday, Border czar Tom Homan warned California officials could face arrest and prosecution if they “cross the line” following President Trump’s deployment of National Guard troops in Los Angeles to quell ongoing immigration protests.

Trump ordered at least 2,000 National Guard members to assist Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents after two days of clashes with demonstrators, despite state and city leaders saying they had not asked for assistance.

Homan said Trump’s order was not only to protect law enforcement officers but also to “protect this community.”

“The rhetoric is so high against ICE officers in this city that it’s a matter of time before someone gets seriously hurt,” Homan told NBC News’s Jacob Soboroff in an interview slated for broadcast Sunday night. “We’ve got help coming, and we’re going to do our job, and we’re going to continue doing that job.”

On Sunday morning, Newsom, in a post on the social platform X, claimed the federal government is “taking over the California National Guard” because “they want a spectacle.”

“Don’t give them one. Never use violence. Speak out peacefully,” he added.

In the NBC News interview, Homan bashed Newsom’s comments and called him “an embarrassment for the state.”

“I have absolutely no respect for this governor,” Homan said. “Criminal aliens are walking in this state every day because of his government policy. I don’t care what the governor thinks of me. I’m not running a popularity contest.”

IRS, DHS Reach Game-Changing Agreement For Trump Immigration Agenda

1
Illegal Immigration in the United State via Wikimedia Commons

History in the making…

The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and Internal Revenue Service (IRS) have reportedly come to an agreement to allow ICE to access taxpayer information to locate illegal immigrants subject to deportation.

According to Fox News, the Trump administration filed a memorandum of understanding late Monday with a court to create guardrails and a process for ICE requests to the IRS to further investigations of criminal illegal immigrants who have failed or refuse to leave the United States 90 days after a judge has issued a final order of removal. 

“The Internal Revenue Service and the Immigration and Customs Enforcement have entered into a memorandum of understanding to establish a clear and secure process to support law enforcement’s efforts to combat illegal immigration,” a Treasury Department spokesperson told Fox News Digital in a statement. 

“The bases for this MOU are founded in longstanding authorities granted by Congress, which serve to protect the privacy of law-abiding Americans while streamlining the ability to pursue criminals,” the statement said. “After four years of Joe Biden flooding the nation with illegal aliens, President Trump’s highest priority is to ensure the safety of the American people.”

A senior Treasury Department official said the illegal immigrants have been given due process but have overstayed 90 days post a judge’s removal order. 

The MOU outlines a process to ensure that sensitive taxpayer data information is protected while allowing law enforcement to pursue criminal violations, the official said. 

A draft agreement reported last month by the Washington Post said it would limit ICE to confirm the addresses of illegal immigrants who have final removal orders.

The deal would allow ICE to submit the names and addresses of illegal immigrants to the IRS, who could then cross-check those immigrants’ tax records and provide the immigration agency with current address information.

The significant step forward comes amid the Trump Administration’s crackdown on illegal immigration.

On Monday, Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts temporarily paused a lower court’s order requiring the Trump administration to return Kilmar Abrego Garcia, a Maryland resident who was mistakenly deported to El Salvador. This pause delays the midnight deadline previously set for Abrego Garcia’s return.

U.S. District Judge Paula Xinis had earlier mandated the administration to “facilitate and effectuate” Abrego Garcia’s return by midnight, emphasizing that his deportation was an “administrative error.” The Department of Justice (DOJ) acknowledged the mistake but argued that the court’s injunction was “patently unlawful,” asserting that the government lacks the authority to retrieve him from El Salvador.

Trump Puts Sanctuary Cities On Notice With New Executive Order

1
Trump at the border wall via Wikimedia Commons

President Donald Trump signed an executive order earlier this week to crack down on sanctuary jurisdictions impeding federal immigration enforcement.

The directive requires the Justice Department to compile a list of all sanctuary city jurisdictions and then take action to cut off or suspend federal funding to those places. Under Trump, cities across the country, like Boston, have already made it difficult for Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents to apprehend illegal immigrants.

“This invasion at the southern border requires the Federal Government to take measures to fulfill its obligation to the States,” Trump wrote in the executive order. “Yet some State and local officials nevertheless continue to use their authority to violate, obstruct, and defy the enforcement of Federal immigration laws. This is a lawless insurrection against the supremacy of Federal law and the Federal Government’s obligation to defend the territorial sovereignty of the United States.”

After the list of sanctuary jurisdictions is published, those entities would be given the chance to comply with federal law. If they don’t comply, they could lose federal funding.

The executive order also directs the Justice Department and Homeland Security to ensure that federal benefits are not provided to illegals in sanctuary jurisdictions and to “take appropriate action to stop the enforcement of State and local laws, regulations, policies, and practices favoring aliens over any groups of American citizens that are unlawful, preempted by Federal law, or otherwise unenforceable.”

Earlier this month, Trump called sanctuary jurisdictions “death traps” and promised to cut off federal funding.

“No more Sanctuary Cities! They protect the Criminals, not the Victims. They are disgracing our Country and are being mocked all over the World,” he posted on Truth Social. “Working on papers to withhold all Federal Funding for any City or State that allows these Death Traps to exist!!!”

While contrasting the Biden and Trump administrations, border czar Homan said that between 11,000-15,000 people were crossing the border illegally per day this time of the year under Biden, while under Trump, just 178 had crossed in the last 24 hours. During the same time, he said there were 1,800 known “gotaways” under Biden, compared to just 38 under Trump. Homan added that from January 20 to April 1, 2024, Biden released 184,000 illegals out of federal custody into the country. The Trump administration has only released nine total, including four so they could testify in criminal cases and four with extreme medical conditions.

In total, Homan said that there have been 139,000 deportations under Trump. He added that the administration was prioritizing the estimated 700,000 illegals who have been charged with crimes.

ICE Tracking App Maker Sues Over Trump Administration Pressure

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.

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.

Federal Judge Blocks Trump Birthright Citizenship Order

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.

Republican Warns Stephen Miller Will Cost GOP Midterms

1

Florida state Sen. Ileana Garcia (R), a longtime supporter of former President Trump and co-founder of Latinas for Trump, is publicly criticizing the tone and tactics surrounding the administration’s latest immigration crackdown—warning that internal divisions and inflammatory rhetoric could cost Republicans in the midterms.

“I do think that he will lose the midterms because of Stephen Miller,” Garcia told The New York Times in an interview published Tuesday, referring to Trump’s White House deputy chief of staff and one of the architects of the administration’s hard-line immigration strategy.

Garcia, who has consistently supported strong border enforcement and backed Trump’s efforts to regain control of the southern border, stressed that her concern is not with securing the border itself, but with how the policy is being communicated and executed. She placed particular blame on Miller for what she described as unnecessarily aggressive rhetoric that risks alienating persuadable voters—including Hispanic Republicans who favor border security but reject what they see as dehumanizing language.

The comments follow a volatile weekend in Minneapolis, where federal agents shot and killed 37-year-old Alex Pretti during a protest tied to the administration’s immigration actions. The incident came just weeks after another fatal shooting involving federal authorities in the same city, when ICE officers shot and killed 37-year-old Renee Good earlier this month.

Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem said Pretti “attacked” federal law enforcement officers, while Miller went further, describing Pretti as “a would-be assassin” who “tried to murder federal law enforcement.”

White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt later sought to distance President Trump from Miller’s remarks, telling reporters Monday that she had not heard the president “characterize Mr. Pretti in that way” and emphasizing that the incident remains under investigation.

Garcia pushed back sharply on Miller’s framing in a post Monday on X.

“Distorting, politicizing, slandering – justifying what happened to Alex Pretti contradicts the American values the administration campaigned on. He was neither a domestic terrorist nor an assassin,” Garcia wrote.

“Allowing individuals like Stephen Miller, among others, who represent the government and make hard-line decisions, to make such comments will have long-term consequences. … This is not what I voted for!” she added.

Garcia’s criticism carries weight within Republican circles. She helped rally Latina voters for Trump during his 2016 campaign and later served in the Department of Homeland Security during his first term. While she has consistently supported deportations of criminal illegal immigrants and stronger border controls, she has previously warned against what she called “inhumane” tactics used to meet deportation quotas, arguing that they undermine public trust and conservative messaging on law and order.

Her remarks highlight a broader debate within the GOP as Republicans campaign on border security ahead of November’s high-stakes midterms. While voters continue to rank immigration and public safety among their top concerns, some party leaders are increasingly wary that overheated rhetoric—especially following deadly confrontations—could distract from Republicans’ core argument: restoring order at the border, enforcing the law, and keeping communities safe.

As fallout from the Minnesota shootings continues, political observers warn that how Republicans handle immigration enforcement—and how they talk about it—may prove just as important as the policies themselves in determining control of Congress this fall.

Florida In Talks With Trump Admin To Shutter Alligator Alcatraz

3

Florida officials are reportedly in talks with the Trump administration about shutting down the controversial migrant detention center nicknamed “Alligator Alcatraz” after the Department of Homeland Security concluded the massive facility may be too costly to keep running.

According to a Thursday report from The New York Times, the detention center — which opened in July 2025 with strong backing from President Donald Trump and Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis — has already cost the state hundreds of millions of dollars to operate.

The facility became a national flashpoint almost immediately after opening.

Just days before detainees arrived, Trump toured the site alongside then-Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem and DeSantis, praising Florida’s aggressive crackdown on illegal immigration and taking a swipe at former President Joe Biden.

During the visit, Trump joked that Biden “probably wanted to put me in there,” while admiring the heavy-duty detention setup designed to house illegal migrants deep in the Florida Everglades.

But the project quickly ran into legal and political trouble.

A federal judge ordered the facility shut down in August after environmental groups and a local Native American tribe sued over concerns about the impact on nearby land and wildlife. An appeals court later blocked the shutdown order, allowing operations to continue while the legal fight played out.

The center has also faced criticism from immigrant advocacy groups and detainees, who alleged poor conditions inside the facility, including claims of maggot-infested food, withheld medication, and overcrowded living quarters.

Despite the backlash, supporters argued the facility symbolized the tougher immigration enforcement policies championed by Trump and embraced by Republican leaders frustrated with years of border chaos under Biden-era policies.

Now, with costs reportedly spiraling, Florida and federal officials appear to be reconsidering whether “Alligator Alcatraz” is sustainable long term.