Duncan Lock, Dflock, CC BY-SA 3.0 via Wikimedia Commons
On Monday, the Supreme Court lifted an injunction against the Trump administration, allowing it to move ahead with its plans to end protections for hundreds of thousands of migrants in the U.S.
The decision is a victory for the Trump administration, allowing it to move forward with its plans to terminate Temporary Protected Status (TPS) protections for hundreds of thousands of people who came to the U.S. through parole processes for Cubans, Haitians, Nicaraguans, and Venezuelans.
The TPS program provides legal status and work permits for these individuals.
🚨BREAKING: The Supreme Court has cleared the Trump administration to revoke legal status from 500,000+ criminal aliens flown in under the Biden regime.
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.”
See my letter to the Prime Minister below // Veuillez trouver ma lettre au Premier ministre ci-dessous pic.twitter.com/NMMMcXUh7A
“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!!!”
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.
It doesn’t matter if you’re a judge, a member of Congress, or a protestor in Los Angeles:
If you obstruct or assault a law enforcement officer, this Department of Justice will prosecute you.
— Attorney General Pamela Bondi (@AGPamBondi) June 7, 2025
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.
🚨 WHY IS THIS GUY NOT BEING ARRESTED?
He is OPENLY ATTEMPTING TO KlLL federal agents in Los Angeles
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.”
Trump is sending 2,000 National Guard troops into LA County — not to meet an unmet need, but to manufacture a crisis.
He’s hoping for chaos so he can justify more crackdowns, more fear, more control.
“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.”
You have no say in this at all. Federal law is supreme and federal law will be enforced. https://t.co/N53UBl3UM4
Illegal Immigration in the United State via Wikimedia Commons
According to new reports, White House Deputy Chief of Staff Stephen Miller delivered a blunt ultimatum to Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) leadership in mid-May: ramp up arrests to 3,000 per day or face personnel changes.
During a tense meeting at ICE headquarters in Washington, D.C., Miller reportedly warned that regional offices failing to meet the target would see their leadership replaced. Sources familiar with the meeting said Miller left no room for interpretation — improved numbers weren’t encouraged, they were mandatory. (RELATED: Legal Battle May Reveal Big Payouts Tied To Biden’s Border Policies)
Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem, also in attendance, struck a more measured tone. Still, the message was clear, according to NBC News: immigration enforcement efforts must intensify and take precedence:
Misdemeanor cases for border crossings are regularly appearing in federal court, a rarity in recent years. Justice Department teams focused on other issues are being disbanded, with members being dispersed to teams focused on immigration and other administration priorities.
And prosecutors say cases without immigration components have stalled or are moving more slowly, according to documents seen by NBC News and conversations with six current and former prosecutors and a senior FBI official, who described how immigration is now a central part of discussions around whether to pursue cases.
U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, Public domain, via Wikimedia Commons
“Immigration status is now question No. 1 in terms of charging decisions,” an assistant U.S. attorney said. “Is this person a documented immigrant? Is this person an undocumented immigrant? Is this person a citizen? Are they somehow deportable? What is their immigration status? And the answer to that question is now largely driving our charging decisions.”
At least one U.S. attorney’s office abandoned a potential federal prosecution of someone who prosecutors felt was dangerous because the case against the person lacked an immigration component, an email obtained by NBC News showed. The office instead left the case to state prosecutors.
Mobilizing National Resources
Following the confrontation, ICE launched “Operation At Large,” a coast-to-coast initiative designed to supercharge apprehensions. The scale is unprecedented. Over 21,000 National Guard troops and 250 IRS agents have been folded into the effort, alongside thousands of ICE and federal law enforcement personnel. (RELATED: Police Case That Fueled 2020 Protests Returns To Supreme Court)
The operation’s reach has required coordination across agencies, pulling FBI and DOJ resources away from their usual focus areas and toward immigration-related priorities.
The Daily Mailhas more on Miller’s dramatic call to action:
He then reportedly gave them an open challenge and asked: ‘Why aren’t you at Home Depot? Why aren’t you at 7-Eleven?’
Miller further pushed, getting into what an official called a ‘p***ing contest,’ saying: ‘What do you mean you’re going after criminals?’
Gage Skidmore from Surprise, AZ, United States of America, CC BY-SA 2.0 , via Wikimedia Commons
In a statement to the Examiner, ICE deputy assistant director of media affairs Laszlo Baksay said the descriptions were ‘inaccurate.’
However, the conservative-leaning outlet cited sources within ICE and DHS who claimed Miller’s remarks further eroded morale among rank-and-file agents, which was already low.
“He had nothing positive to say about anybody,” one official told the paper, describing the mood following Miller’s visit.
Another source painted a darker picture of the internal climate confronting ICE agents:
“They’ve been threatened, told they’re watching their emails and texts and Signals. That’s what is horrible about things right now. It’s a fearful environment. Everybody in leadership is afraid. There’s no morale. Everybody is demoralized.”
Despite the backlash, Miller defended the administration’s approach during an appearance with Sean Hannity, insisting the 3,000-arrest-per-day quota is only a temporary benchmark — and warning that agents should be prepared for that figure to rise.
Localized operations have revealed just how expansive the crackdown has become since Miller and Noem appeared at Potomac Center Plaza in Southwest D.C. Across the nation, agents have ramped up early-morning sweeps and workplace raids, often coordinated with minimal local notification. In Florida, a weeklong action labeled “Operation Tidal Wave” resulted in 1,120 arrests — the largest ICE enforcement action ever recorded in a single state.
Tennessee saw similar efforts, with 196 arrests in the Nashville area. The local response was sharply critical. Nashville’s mayor denounced the operation as out of step with the city’s values and implemented policies limiting cooperation with ICE. Republicans in Congress are now investigating whether the mayor’s office leaked information about ICE agents — a serious charge with national implications.
Focus on Career Criminals — But Collateral Arrests Are Rising
Officially, the crackdown targets individuals with criminal records or prior deportation orders. But internal ICE guidance reportedly encourages officers to make “collateral arrests” — detaining illegal immigrants encountered in the field, even if they weren’t the original target and have no criminal history.
U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, Flickr, https://www.flickr.com/photos/us_icegov/54295293536/in/photostream/, Creative Commons Attribution-Public Domain Mark 1.0 Universal (CC BY-NC-SA 1.0)
The broader approach has raised legal and logistical concerns, as well as fears of potential overreach, according to immigrant advocacy groups.
Leadership Purge Signals Internal Pressure
It also hasn’t come without fallout inside ICE. Two senior officials — Kenneth Genalo and Robert Hammer — have been removed from their posts in recent weeks. Sources say the firings reflect internal friction over how aggressively to pursue the administration’s ambitious targets. They also serve as a warning to others who might be perceived as resistant to the push.
White House: Fulfilling the Mandate, Critics Question the Cost
The administration stands by the operation. Officials say it delivers on President Trump’s second-term promise: to secure the border and remove criminal illegal aliens.
Still, questions remain. Legal scholars are raising red flags over the breadth of federal involvement, and local-federal cooperation is growing more strained. As the operation continues, so does the debate — over strategy, law, and the real-world impact on communities nationwide.
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.
U.S. judge Kathleen Williams finds AG James Uthmeier in contempt of court after he disobeyed her court order blocking a new state immigration law. She quotes Humpty Dumpty. pic.twitter.com/QZWXki0uiV
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.
It’s time to push back against these corrupt judges! They have no legitimate authority to enforce unconstitutional orders!
Florida Attorney General James Uthmeier told a corrupt Obama judge that he will not order state authorities to halt enforcement of immigration law.
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.
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.”
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
