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.
Governor Kathy Hochul and MTA Chair & CEO Janno Lieber make a subway safety announcement at the NYCT Rail Control Center (RCC) on Wednesday, Mar 6, 2024.
(Marc A. Hermann / MTA)
Attorney General Pam Bondi Trump filed a lawsuit Wednesday against the state of New York and its governor, Kathy Hochul, and Attorney General Letitia James, alleging a failure to comply with federal law by shielding illegal immigrants.
Bondi said Democratic Governor Kathy Hochul, New York Attorney General Letitia James, and state DMV head Mark Schroeder treated their state’s residents like second-class citizens.
“We’re here today because we have filed charges against the state of New York,” Bondi said at a 5 p.m. ET news conference. “We have filed charges against Kathy Hochul. We have filed charges against Letitia James and Mark Schroeder, who is with DMV. This is a new DOJ, and we are taking steps to protect Americans – American citizens.”
Bondi invoked a similar suit the DOJ filed against the state of Illinois a week ago and added, “New York didn’t listen. So now, you’re next.”
“If you are a state not complying with federal law, you’re next,” she said. “Get ready. And the great men and women of law enforcement are standing behind me today. We have FBI, DEF, DEA, ATF agents. They put their lives on the line every single day to protect us.”
Bondi alleged New York had given a “green light to any illegal alien in New York where law enforcement officers cannot check their identity if they pull them over.” She concluded:
Law enforcement officers do not have access to their background, and if these great men and women pull over someone and don’t have access to their background, they have no idea who they’re dealing with, and it puts their lives on the line every single day. Violent criminals, gang members, drug traffickers, human smugglers will no longer terrorize the American people, and that is why we are here today. You will be held accountable if you do not follow federal law. It’s over, it ends, and we’re coming after you.
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.
Some Democrats are finally acknowledging they need to course correct on their immigration stance.
A new report from The New York Times revealed some leading Democrat lawmakers have admitted that open borders and immigration are costing the party and
“When you have the most Latino district in the country outside of Puerto Rico vote for Trump, that should be a wake-up call for the Democratic Party,” said Rep. Vicente Gonzalez (D-Texas).
The report highlighted that Gonzalez witnessed President Donald Trump “win every county in his district along the border with Mexico.” Gonzalez’s 34th district in Texas has swung dramatically from voting heavily Democratic in recent presidential elections to going in favor of Trump in 2024.
“This is a Democratic district that’s been blue for over a century,” Gonzalez told the Times.
Sen. Ruben Gallego (D-Ariz.) said the Democrat Party “got led astray by the 2016 and the 2020 elections, and we just never moved back.”
“We looked feckless, we weren’t decisive, we weren’t listening to voters, and the voters decided that we weren’t in the right when it comes to what was happening with the border,” Gallego told the Times.
In May, Gallego released a border security plan that would speed up asylum seekers’ claims and make other countries do their “fair share” in receiving asylum seekers, as well as take action against cartel violence.
The New York Times reported that various Democrats “are pushing for a course correction they see as overdue,” noting a new proposal from the Democratic policy shop and left-wing think tank Center for American Progress. The organization is calling for expanding legal immigration but also for ramping up border security and clamping down on abuse of the nation’s asylum system, the latter two of which are longtime Republican priorities.
Neera Tanden, president and CEO of the Center for American Progress, admitted to the Times that Democrats will have to adopt some level of border security policy.
“I’m happy to argue with Stephen Miller or anyone else about why they are wrong,” Tanden told the New York Times. “But the way we’re going to be able to do that is to also honestly assess that the border has been too insecure, that it allowed too many people to come through and that we need to fix that.”
The Trump administration has ramped up efforts to deport illegal immigrants as well as increase security at the U.S. border. The administration’s efforts have been criticized by progressives and violent anti-ICE protests recently prompted Trump to deploy the National Guard to California.
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.
🚨 BREAKING: President Trump announces he is working on legislation to protect long-time farm and hospitality workers who get "thrown out viciously," presumably referring to immigration raids.
"Radical right people, who I happen to like, may not be quite as happy, but they'll… pic.twitter.com/hH53kLKFSs
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.
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.
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.
President Donald Trump holds a press conference with Attorney General Pam Bondi and Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche in the James S. Brady Press Briefing Room on Friday, June 27, 2025. (Official White House Photo by Molly Riley)
President Trump said he is open to considering investigating and possibly arresting Biden-era Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas.
During a Tuesday press conference in Florida after a tour of a migrant detention center dubbed “Alligator Alcatraz,” Trump held a press conference alongside Florida Governor Ron DeSantis (R) and current Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem. The President was asked about people calling for the arrest of Mayorkas due to his handling of the southern border under former President Joe Biden.
NEW YORK CITY (September 11, 2022) Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas lays flowers for USSS Master Special Officer Craig Miller and participates in the September 11th Anniversary Commemoration Ceremony at Ground Zero in New York City, NY. (DHS photo by Sydney Phoenix)
“I ran into former DHS Secretary Mayorkas and I asked him a couple of questions about his disastrous handling of the border. He didn’t like my questions, but the number one question that I heard from people responding to my video was, ‘Why hasn’t he been arrested yet?’” The Blaze’s Julio Rosas asked the president at Tuesday’s presser.
Trump blasted Biden for the last-minute pardons he handed out before leaving office. However, the President was unaware of whether Mayorkas received a Biden pardon. He did not.
“Was he given a pardon, Mayokas? Was he not?” Trump asked.
“I don’t believe so,” Rosas said.
“Well, I’d take a look at that one because what he did is it’s beyond incompetence. Something had to be done. Now, with that being said, he took orders from other people, and he was really doing the orders. And you could say he was very loyal to them because it must have been very hard for him to stand up and sit up and, you know, talk about what he allowed to happen to this country and be serious about it. So he was given orders. If he wasn’t given a pardon, I could see looking at that,” Trump said.
The president was then reminded that the House of Representatives voted to impeach Mayorkas, though the effort never made it anywhere in the Senate. The vote in the House to impeach Mayorkas was over “willful and systemic refusal to comply with” immigration laws.
“He was impeached, but yeah, it was just a fake impeachment. It was a fake impeachment. But why don’t you take a look at it? I think he was so bad. They were all so bad, look, it was the worst president in the history of our country,” Trump said.
🚨 BREAKING: President Trump just asked the DOJ to look into ARRESTING Alejandro Mayorkas for aiding and abetting an invasion of our country
Trump’s remarks against Mayorkas come hours after the President floated potentially deporting billionaire Elon Musk back to South Africa.
“We’ll have to take a look,” Trump said. “We might have to put DOGE on Elon. You know what DOGE is? DOGE is the monster that might have to go back and eat Elon! Wouldn’t that be terrible?”
Watch:
Reporter: Are you going to deport Elon Musk?
Trump: We'll have to take a look. We might have to put DOGE on Elon. You know what DOGE is? The monster that might have to go back and eat Elon. Wouldn’t that be terrible? He gets a lot of subsidies. pic.twitter.com/6I0OAIv7Js
After a brief ceasefire between the president and his former DOGE lieutenant, the war of words has ratcheted up again over the past 24 hours — with Musk revving up his criticism of the Trump-backed “Big, Beautiful” budget bill. Musk, in a Monday post on X, denounced the legislation and floated the idea of forming a new political party.
It is obvious with the insane spending of this bill, which increases the debt ceiling by a record FIVE TRILLION DOLLARS that we live in a one-party country – the PORKY PIG PARTY!!
Time for a new political party that actually cares about the people.
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.
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 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.
