Immigration

Home Immigration

Canadian Woman Who Slapped Teen Over Trump Merch Deported

8
Image via Pixabay

A Canadian woman who admitted slapping a teenage girl during a confrontation over patriotic clothing at the Jersey Shore has been ordered deported after pleading guilty to a reduced assault charge.

Kaitlyn Tracey, 33, had overstayed her visa and was living in the United States illegally when the July 3 clash erupted on the Point Pleasant Beach boardwalk.

An immigration judge in Texas ordered Tracey removed from the country Tuesday, shortly before she entered a guilty plea in the New Jersey criminal case.

Tracey appeared by phone from an Immigration and Customs Enforcement detention facility in Texas for the proceeding in Ocean County.

Guilty Plea Ends Viral Assault Case

Under a plea agreement, Tracey pleaded guilty to one count of simple assault.

Prosecutors dismissed the remaining charges, which included endangering the welfare of a child, harassment and obstruction.

Tracey received a one-day jail sentence with credit for time served. She had already spent several weeks in the Ocean County Jail before being transferred to federal immigration custody.

The criminal case may be over, but its consequences are not. Tracey now faces removal to Canada and is expected to be barred from legally returning to the United States for an extended period.

Patriotic Shirt Sparked Boardwalk Confrontation

The altercation unfolded on the evening of July 3, when Tracey approached a group of four teenagers at Point Pleasant Beach.

Authorities said the dispute escalated after she confronted one of the teens, who was wearing a “USA 250” tank top marking America’s approaching 250th anniversary.

Video that quickly spread across social media appeared to show Tracey slapping the girl across the face during the argument.

The footage drew national attention and prompted action from local police and federal immigration authorities.

After Tracey’s arrest, the Department of Homeland Security confirmed that she had remained in the country after her visa expired. The agency later dubbed her the “Maple Leaf Menace” in public statements.

Defense Calls Clash “Unfortunate”

Defense attorney Francis Hodgson told the court that Tracey had otherwise been a productive, law-abiding resident.

“She arrived here on a passport some years ago. She met her husband and didn’t leave, but while she was here, she maintained employment and was a productive member of society,” Hodgson said.

He called the confrontation “unfortunate” and said Tracey had accepted responsibility for her actions.

“[Tracey has] taken responsibility for her role in it, and this is a reasonable judgment … consistent with other similar-type matters that happen every day during the summer on this boardwalk,” Hodgson told the court.

Victim’s Family: “Thank Goodness For Cameras”

Prosecutors said the victim’s family supported the plea agreement.

The teen’s parent attended the hearing remotely but did not speak publicly. Judge Guy P. Ryan instead read portions of the family’s victim impact statement into the record.

“The parents recite that, ‘Thank goodness for cameras and cell phones to have documented this incident,’” Ryan said.

The judge said the family came from an immigrant background and described themselves as proud Americans who had been celebrating Independence Day when the confrontation occurred.

“The notoriety and publicity of this matter has indicated that they’re proud of their country, love their country, they have core values and refer to the history of their family,” Ryan said.

He added that the victim and her parents “look forward to justice being served” and were grateful to the agencies involved in the case.

Deportation Now Looms

Following her arrest, Tracey was initially held at the Delaney Hall immigration detention facility in Newark. She was later transferred to an ICE processing center in Laredo, Texas, as her immigration proceedings continued.

Officials have not announced when she will be removed to Canada.

Ryan said during sentencing that the deportation order is expected to prevent Tracey from legally returning to the United States for “a very long time.”

Husband’s Anti-Trump Posts Resurface

The case has also brought new scrutiny to Tracey’s husband, Matt Geroni, who did not attend Tuesday’s hearing.

Geroni previously posted TikTok videos criticizing conditions at Delaney Hall and asking supporters to help secure his wife’s release, even if that meant her deportation to Canada.

His own social media history later became part of the controversy. Resurfaced posts appeared to show Geroni wishing death on President Donald Trump and members of Trump’s family.

In one post, Geroni wrote that he was “praying the entire Trump family gets cancer,” including the president’s children. After an attempted assassination of Trump, he wrote in another post: “Praying the next assassination attempt works.”

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.”

Report: Impeachment Articles Officially Hit Federal Judge

7
By The White House - https://www.flickr.com/photos/202101414@N05/54325633746/, Public Domain, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=159707159

On Tuesday, A house Republican filed articles of impeachment against U.S. District Judge James Boasberg, who recently ordered the Trump administration to stop deportation flights being conducted under the Alien Enemies Act.

“For the past several weeks, we’ve seen several rogue activist judges try to impede the president from exercising, not only the mandate voters gave him, but his democratic and constitutional authority to keep the American people safe,” Rep. Brandon Gill, R-Texas, told Fox News Digital. “This is another example of a rogue judge overstepping his…authority.”

Gill’s resolution, first obtained by Fox News Digital, accused U.S. District Court Judge James Boasberg of abusing his power in levying an emergency pause on the Trump administration’s plans to deport illegal immigrants under a wartime authority first issued in 1798, which President Donald Trump recently invoked to get members of the criminal Venezuelan gang Tren de Aragua out of the U.S.

“Chief Judge Boasberg required President Trump to turn around planes midair that had aliens associated with Tren De Aragua, a designated Foreign Terrorist Organization,” the resolution said. “This conduct jeopardizes the safety of the nation, represents an abuse of judicial power, and is detrimental to the orderly functioning of the judiciary. Using the powers of his office, Chief Judge Boasberg has attempted to seize power from the Executive Branch and interfere with the will of the American people.”

In a brief interview with Fox News Digital shortly before filing his resolution, Gill suggested he wanted the matter to go through the House in traditional form – which would first put the resolution in front of the House Judiciary Committee, where Gill is a member.

“I’ll be talking to [Chairman Jim Jordan, R-Ohio] about it,” Gill said. “I think the best way to do this…is to go through the judiciary committee, which is where impeachment of judges runs through. I think the more we can stick with that plan, the better.”

Read:

This is a breaking news story. Please check back for updates.

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!!!” 

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.

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.

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.

Supreme Court Rules Trump May Rescind Biden-era Immigration Policy

1
Duncan Lock, Dflock, CC BY-SA 3.0 via Wikimedia Commons

The Supreme Court handed the Trump administration a significant immigration win on Friday…

The Supreme Court on Friday stayed a lower court order that blocked the Trump administration from deporting roughly 500,000 migrants from Cuba, Nicaragua, and Venezuela. 

Fox News reports:

The Supreme Court decision stays, for now, a lower court ruling that halted Trump’s plans to terminate Temporary Protected Status (TPS) protections for some migrants living in the U.S., which allows individuals to live and work in the U.S. legally if they cannot work safely in their home country due to a disaster, armed conflict or other “extraordinary and temporary conditions.” 

Justices Sonia Sotomayor and Ketanji Brown Jackson dissented.

U.S. Solicitor General John Sauer asked justices earlier this month to allow the administration to proceed with its decision to revoke the status for the migrants, accusing U.S. District Judge Edward Chen of improperly intruding on the executive branch’s authority over immigration policy.

“The district court’s reasoning is untenable,” Sauer told the high court, adding that the program “implicates particularly discretionary, sensitive, and foreign-policy-laden judgments of the Executive Branch regarding immigration policy.”

This is a breaking news story. Please check back for updates.

Kilmar Abrego Garcia Taken Into Custody By ICE

1
Arrest image via Pixabay

Kilmar Abrego Garcia, the immigrant deported to El Salvador who became a political flashpoint for the Trump administration’s immigration crackdown, was detained again on Monday

Speaking to reporters outside the ICE Field Office in Baltimore after Abrego Garcia was detained, his lawyer, Simon Sandoval-Moshenberg, said ICE officials had declined to tell them where they were detaining Abrego Garcia prior to his removal, or tell them why they were arresting him. 

“As of the last five minutes, Mr. Abrego Garcia has filed a new lawsuit in the federal district court for the District of Maryland challenging his confinement and challenging his deportation to Uganda, or to any other country unless and until he’s had a fair trial— as in, an immigration court, as well as his full appeal rights,,” Sandoval-Moshenberg sad.

The habeas petition, filed in the U.S. District Court of Maryland, was assigned to U.S. District Judge Paula Xinis, who has presided since March over his civil case.

Abrego Garcia, who fled El Salvador as a teenager and lived in Maryland, addressed supporters before entering his appointment.

“My name is Kilmar Abrego Garcia, and I want you to remember this, remember that I am free and I was able to be reunited with my family,” he said. “This was a miracle. Thank you to God and thank you to the community. I want to thank each and every one of you who marched, lift your voices, never stop praying, and continue to fight in my name.”

Abrego Garcia’s legal fight for months has dominated U.S. headlines, after he was deported by the Trump administration to El Salvador in violation of a 2019 court order. He faces a possible second deportation, this time to Uganda.

Shortly before his arrival Monday morning, immigration advocates, faith leaders, and other community members massed outside the field office at sunrise for a vigil, organized by two immigration advocacy groups.

The Trump administration returned him to the U.S. months after sending him to El Salvador, under orders from a federal judge and from the Supreme Court.

He was arrested upon return to the U.S. on human smuggling charges stemming from a 2022 traffic stop in Tennesee. He remained in federal detention until Friday, when he was released from U.S. custody and ordered to return to Maryland, where a judge said he could remain under electronic surveillance and under ICE supervision while awaiting trial.

ICE officials notified Abrego Garcia’s attorneys shortly after his release on Friday that they planned to deport him to Uganda.

The notice, sent by ICE’s Office of the Principal Legal Adviser, said it was intended to “serve as notice that DHS may remove your client, Kilmar Armando Abrego Garcia, to Uganda no earlier than 72 hours from now (absent weekends).”

Trump’s border czar Tom Homan told Fox News in an interview Sunday night that Abrego Garcia was “absolutely” going to be deported from the U.S, and said Uganda is “on the table” as the third country of removal. 

“We have an agreement with them. It’s on a table, absolutely,” Homan said in an interview on “The Big Weekend Show” Sunday evening.

“He is absolutely going to be deported,” Homan reiterated. 

For now, he said, Abrego Garcia “can enjoy the little time he has with his family. And for the person who says we’re not going to separate family, his family can go with him, because he’s leaving.”

Trump Administration Suffers Major Court Defeat In Sanctuary Cities Fight

4

The Trump administration suffered a significant legal setback on Wednesday after a federal judge dismissed the Department of Justice’s lawsuit challenging “sanctuary” immigration policies in four New Jersey cities, ruling the federal government lacks standing to bring the case.

U.S. District Judge Evelyn Padin threw out the DOJ’s lawsuit against Newark, Jersey City, Paterson, and Hoboken, concluding that even if the administration prevailed, New Jersey’s statewide immigration restrictions would remain in effect, meaning the court could not provide the relief the federal government was seeking. The case was dismissed without prejudice, leaving open the possibility that the DOJ could refile if it establishes standing.

The Justice Department filed the lawsuit in May 2025, arguing that the four cities’ policies unlawfully obstruct federal immigration enforcement and violate the Constitution’s Supremacy Clause.

The complaint described the municipal policies as “a frontal assault on the federal immigration laws and the federal authorities that administer them,” arguing they prevent willing local law enforcement agencies from assisting Immigration and Customs Enforcement.

According to Politico, Padin said the administration’s argument ignored a critical legal reality.

“The Federal Government’s case has a fundamental flaw—it treats the Challenged Policies as though they operate in isolation. They do not,” Padin wrote.

The judge noted that New Jersey’s statewide Immigrant Trust Directive independently limits how state and local law enforcement cooperate with federal civil immigration authorities. Because that directive would remain in force regardless of what happened to the four cities’ individual policies, striking down the local ordinances would not remedy the federal government’s alleged injury.

The Immigrant Trust Directive, originally issued in 2018 under then-Gov. Phil Murphy’s administration, was codified into state law earlier this year by Gov. Mikie Sherrill. It sharply limits voluntary cooperation between local police and federal immigration authorities except where required by law. The directive has already survived multiple legal challenges, including lawsuits brought by Republican-led counties that were rejected by both the U.S. District Court and the Third Circuit Court of Appeals.

The DOJ argued that portions of Newark’s, Jersey City’s, and Hoboken’s local policies went further than the statewide directive and therefore could be challenged independently. Padin disagreed, finding those differences either too minor or too speculative to justify continuing the case.

The ruling marks the latest courtroom setback for the Trump administration’s aggressive campaign against sanctuary jurisdictions. Earlier this week, another federal judge dismissed the DOJ’s lawsuit challenging Los Angeles’ sanctuary city ordinance, dealing another blow to the administration’s effort to compel greater local cooperation with federal immigration enforcement.

Neither President Donald Trump nor the White House has publicly commented on the ruling.