Latest news with #AlienEnemiesAct
Time of India
17 hours ago
- Politics
- Time of India
Kristi Noem's job at stake? Bombshell report reveals why DHS Secretary is facing the wrath
Days after Democratic US Senator Alex Padilla was forcibly removed from a news conference held by Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem , Senate Democrats have called on Noem to testify at a Capitol Hill. The Democrats want her to testify on the forcible removal of Padilla of California from a news conference she was holding last week, reports New York Times. In a letter addressed to the Republican chair of the Senate Judiciary Committee, the committee's Democratic members requested an opportunity to question her about the Trump administration's immigration enforcement practices. Their concerns included the use of masked agents during arrests, possible defiance of court orders by immigration officials, and the legal basis for mass deportations under the Alien Enemies Act. ALSO READ: Amid VA policy change row, employees receive 'wild' email and asked to report waste, abuse by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Victoria Principal Is Almost 75, See Her Now Reportingly Undo Kristi Noem's job at stake? Seven Senate Democrats who had voted to confirm Kristi Noem to lead the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) at the time of Donald Trump's inauguration now say they regret their votes, reports NBC News. "I'm very disappointed. I'm very disappointed in her," Sen. Tim Kaine, D-Va., told NBC News this week. "If I were voting on her today, I definitely wouldn't vote for her." ALSO READ: Kristi Noem's hospitalisation linked to her visit with RFK Jr to a controversial biohazard lab for Ebola, SARS-CoV-2? Live Events Similar sentiments were echoed by Freshman Sen. Andy Kim, D-N.J, who said he would vote differently and oppose her nomination if he could do it again. "She's weaponizing the Department of Homeland Security. She is taking so many actions right now that are making us less safe and going against a lot of the things that she said that she was going to focus on," Kim said Wednesday. "So I have no confidence in her leadership right now." The five other Democrats who voted to confirm Noem were Sens. Elissa Slotkin and Gary Peters, both of Michigan; Maggie Hassan and Jeanne Shaheen, both of New Hampshire; and John Fetterman of Pennsylvania. "She has, frankly, not been in much control of policy. I see her more as a bystander, often, to policy — especially what's going on right now," Slotkin told NBC News. "And you know, we've been urging our committee to take more accountability on her." ALSO READ: Amazon's 30-day deadline to employees amid mass layoff fear: Resign in 60 days or... Kristi Noem-a key Trump official Trump made immigration control as a key pillar of his second term with Kristi Noem at the helm of DHS. Noem, 53, heads a sprawling department with roughly 260,000 employees handling immigration enforcement, airport security, disaster response and other matters. She has been among the more high-profile members of President Donald Trump's cabinet, traveling extensively and maintaining a robust social media presence. She is often the public face of his mass deportation effort, frequently goes out on immigration enforcement operations and has appeared in commercials encouraging immigrants in the country illegally to voluntarily leave the US. ALSO READ: Trump vs Tulsi Gabbard: Is US President planning to fire US spy chief over provocative anti-war video? Now, things have taken a turn as several Democrats are finding it difficult to find their way forward on the issue of immigration enforcement, which is largely run by DHS, following Trump's election victory. The Trump's administration's aggressive crackdown on immigrants, their deportation agenda, and moves to target green card holders and international students have compelled Democrats to think. Sen. Adam Schiff, D-Calif., who voted against Noem, tore into her performance. "It's really hard to imagine someone doing a worse job as the secretary of homeland security," Schiff said in an interview. "The draconian, inconsistent, inflammatory immigration policies; the lawlessness; the rendering of people outside the country to maximum-security prisons; the arrest of U.S. citizens; the constant, bizarre spectacle of her doing dress-up outside of a maximum-security prison; or in her various cosplay. It's embarrassing, and it takes the focus off of what should be the heart of that job, and that is protecting our homeland security."
Newsweek
a day ago
- Politics
- Newsweek
Donald Trump Suffers Double Legal Blow Within Hours
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. President Donald Trump has suffered two legal blows to his deportation agenda in the courts within hours of each other. One legal blow came from Judge Stephanie Haines, a Trump appointee in Pennsylvania, who told the White House they could not give people a seven-day warning prior to deportation. They must give at least 21 days' notice. The other came from Judge Orlando Garcia who ruled that the Trump administration cannot immediately deport the family of Mohamed Sabry Soliman, the man accused of attacking a march for Israeli hostages in Boulder, Colorado. An attorney for Soliman's family has been contacted via email for comment. A federal agent wears a badge of Immigration and Customs Enforcement outside an immigration courtroom at the Jacob K. Javits Federal Building in New York, Tuesday, June 10, 2025. A federal agent wears a badge of Immigration and Customs Enforcement outside an immigration courtroom at the Jacob K. Javits Federal Building in New York, Tuesday, June 10, 2025. Yuki Iwamura/AP Photo Why It Matters The Trump administration's sweeping agenda has found itself subject to hundreds of court cases, and much of the president's tentpole agenda has been slowed or halted by judges since he took office. What To Know The case in Pennsylvania revolved around the invocation of the Alien Enemies Act, a declaration made by the president to facilitate mass deportations under the claim that there was a national immigration emergency. In May, Haines ruled that the president can invoke the Alien Enemies Act in regard to Venezuelan migrants, due to what she referred to as an "incursion" of members of the Tren de Aragua gang. However, in the same ruling, Haines stated that all people subject to deportation still have the right to due process. Now, she is upholding that previous judgment by saying the Trump administration is still not allowing enough time for people subject to deportation to see a judge. The Trump administration had said in this case that the plaintiff, a Venezuelan man slated for deportation, should be deported within seven days. Haines ruled that seven days is not enough time to get a court hearing, therefore being deported within seven days would violate someone's right to due process. The case in Texas involves the family of the accused Boulder fire bomber who has been granted another temporary restraining order to prevent their impending deportation from the U.S. According to the Trump administration, Soliman and his family immigrated to the U.S. in 2022 and he overstayed his visa while applying for asylum status. He is now in jail awaiting trial, and his wife and five children were taken from their Colorado home to a detention facility in Texas, which his wife, Hayam El Gamal, described as a "jail in Texas, where you can't be human. Where you are always being watched. Where you are woken up in the middle of the night by guards and given food fit for animals." El Gamal has said she and her children are being punished in a facility in response to their father's alleged crime which they knew nothing about. In a public statement made via her lawyer, she said: "But why punish me? Why punish my 4-year-old children? Why punish any of us, who did nothing wrong?" She and her children's potential deportations have been stalled for at least 14 days by Garcia. What People Are Saying Judge Stephanie Haines ruling: "Having considered the Supreme Court's long-standing holding that "'no person shall be' removed from the United States 'without opportunity at some point to be heard[,]' and after again weighing the realities of ICE removal proceedings, the risk of errant removals, and the burden upon the Government, the court reaffirms its finding that the Due Process Clause mandates the notice requirements that this court articulated in A.S.R, regardless of the contours of the distinguishable expedited-removal process." Hayam El Gamal's public statement: "All [my children] want is to be home, to be in school, to have privacy, to sleep in their own beds, to have their mother make them a home-cooked meal, to help them grieve and get through these terrible weeks." 1st public statement from Hayam El Gamal, wife of alleged Boulder attacker, speaking fr Dilley Family Detention Ctr where she & 5 children have been detained for 2 weeks. Just now, a fed'l judge extended a temporary restraining order barring Trump from deporting the family. 1/2 — Eric Lee (@EricLeeAtty) June 18, 2025 What Happens Next Whether the Trump administration will abide by rulings over giving undocumented people 21 days' notice prior to potential deportation remains to be seen. Soliman's family will stay in ICE detention for at least two more weeks and may be granted another temporary restraining order at the end of this two-week period. They will have a hearing prior to the expiration of the order.
Yahoo
6 days ago
- Politics
- Yahoo
Federal prosecutors now charging immigrants who don't submit fingerprints under dormant 1940s law
Federal officials have begun carrying out President Donald Trump's orders to enforce a World War II-era criminal law that requires virtually all non-citizens in the country to register with and submit fingerprints to the government. Since April, law enforcement in Louisiana, Arizona, Montana, Alabama, Texas and Washington, D.C., have charged people with willful 'failure to register' under the Alien Registration Act, an offense most career federal public defenders have never encountered before. Many of those charged were already in jail and in ongoing deportation proceedings when prosecutors presented judges with the new charges against them. The registration provision in the law, which was passed in 1940 amid widespread public fear about immigrants' loyalty to the U.S., had been dormant for 75 years, but it is still on the books. Failure to register is considered a 'petty offense' — a misdemeanor with maximum penalties of six months imprisonment or a $1,000 fine. In reviving the law, the Trump administration may put undocumented immigrants in a catch-22. If they register, they must hand over detailed, incriminating information to the federal government — including how and when they entered the country. But knowingly refusing to register is also a crime, punishable by arrest or prosecution, on top of the ever-present threat of deportation. 'The sort of obvious reason to bring back registration in the first place is the hope that people will register, and therefore give themselves up effectively to the government because they already confessed illegal entry,' said Jonathan Weinberg, a Wayne State University law professor who has studied the registration law. But the Trump administration also has another goal. It says one purpose of the registration regime is to provoke undocumented immigrants to choose a third option: leave the country voluntarily, or, in the words of the Department of Homeland Security, compulsory 'mass self-deportation.' Those efforts, alongside the administration's invocation of the Alien Enemies Act and a more aggressive approach to immigration raids, are meant to achieve a broader, overarching campaign promise: the largest deportation program in the history of America. 'For decades, this law has been ignored — not anymore,' the department said in a February announcement that it would enforce the law. The department called 'mass self-deportation' a 'safer path for aliens and law enforcement,' and said it saves U.S. taxpayer dollars. The Department of Homeland Security did not answer questions about its enforcement policies. The Alien Registration Act was passed in 1940, amid fears about immigrants' loyalties. A separate provision of the statute criminalizes advocacy for overthrowing the government. For about two decades, that provision was used to prosecute people who were accused of being either pro-fascist or pro-Communist. The registration provision, though, remained largely dormant, and had not been enforced in 75 years. It applies to non-citizens, regardless of legal status, who are in the U.S. for 30 days or longer. Certain categories of legal immigrants have already met the requirement. Immigrants who have filed applications to become permanent residents are considered registered by DHS, for example. And even some undocumented U.S. residents are already registered: U.S. residents who have received 'parole' — a form of humanitarian protection from deportation — are also considered registered. Still, DHS estimates that up to 3.2 million immigrants are currently unregistered and are affected by the new enforcement regime. The administration has created a new seven-page form that non-citizens must use. The form requires people, under penalty of perjury, to provide biographical details, contact information, details about any criminal history and the circumstances of how they entered the U.S. After DHS issued regulations to enforce the registration requirement in April, the administration announced that 47,000 undocumented immigrants had registered using the new form. The Coalition for Humane Immigrant Rights and other advocacy groups filed a lawsuit challenging Trump's move to revive the registration requirement in March. U.S. District Judge Trevor McFadden, a Trump appointee, initially expressed skepticism toward the administration, saying in a recent hearing that officials had pulled a 'big switcheroo' on undocumented immigrants. But McFadden in April refused the plaintiffs' request to temporarily block the policy, saying the Coalition likely lacks the legal standing to sue because it has not shown that it would be harmed by the policy. The group has appealed McFadden's decision. In the meantime, the administration has begun to prosecute people for failure to register for the first time in seven decades. The prosecutions so far have stumbled. On May 19, a federal magistrate judge in Louisiana consolidated and dismissed five of the criminal cases, saying prosecutors had no probable cause to believe the defendants had intentionally refused to register. Judge Michael North wrote that the Alien Registration Act requires 'some level of subjective knowledge or bad intent' behind the choice not to register. The prosecutions, the judge wrote, are impermissible because most people are simply unaware of the law, and the government 'did not provide these Defendants — as well as millions of similarly situated individuals here without government permission — with a way to register' since 1950. But North also pointed out that the government may have an easier path to proving probable cause in the future, given that DHS created a new registration form in April. And government attorneys have appealed the five dismissed cases. The Justice Department and the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Eastern District of Louisiana declined to comment on recent charges filed under the law. A spokesperson for the U.S. Attorney's Office for the District of Columbia said the office 'is aggressively pursuing criminals in the district and will use all criminal justice resources available to make D.C. safe and to carry out President Trump's and Attorney General Bondi's direction to support immigration enforcement." The other federal district attorneys whose offices filed charges did not respond to a request for comment. Michelle LaPointe, legal director at the American Immigration Council, an immigrants' rights advocacy group, said these initial cases are the 'tip of the iceberg.' LaPointe is among the attorneys representing the Coalition in its lawsuit against the administration. 'I don't expect them to abate just because there were some dismissals,' LaPointe said, pointing to North's statements about future charges. 'They have already stated that they intend to make prosecution of the few immigration-related criminal statutes a priority for DOJ, and it's very easy for them to at least charge, even if they're not always gonna be able to sustain their burden to secure a conviction.' Weinberg, the Wayne State law professor, agreed that the administration will likely continue attempting broad enforcement. 'If they bring a whole lot of prosecutions and end up losing all, they may step back,' Weinberg said. 'If they bring a whole lot and win a few, they'll say, 'Well, that's the basis on which we can move further'' and appeal — potentially all the way to the Supreme Court, he noted.
Politico
6 days ago
- Politics
- Politico
Federal prosecutors now charging immigrants who don't submit fingerprints under dormant 1940s law
Federal officials have begun carrying out President Donald Trump's orders to enforce a World War II-era criminal law that requires virtually all non-citizens in the country to register with and submit fingerprints to the government. Since April, law enforcement in Louisiana, Arizona, Montana, Alabama, Texas and Washington, D.C., have charged people with willful 'failure to register' under the Alien Registration Act, an offense most career federal public defenders have never encountered before. Many of those charged were already in jail and in ongoing deportation proceedings when prosecutors presented judges with the new charges against them. The registration provision in the law, which was passed in 1940 amid widespread public fear about immigrants' loyalty to the U.S., had been dormant for 75 years, but it is still on the books. Failure to register is considered a 'petty offense' — a misdemeanor with maximum penalties of six months imprisonment or a $1,000 fine. In reviving the law, the Trump administration may put undocumented immigrants in a catch-22. If they register, they must hand over detailed, incriminating information to the federal government — including how and when they entered the country. But knowingly refusing to register is also a crime, punishable by arrest or prosecution, on top of the ever-present threat of deportation. 'The sort of obvious reason to bring back registration in the first place is the hope that people will register, and therefore give themselves up effectively to the government because they already confessed illegal entry,' said Jonathan Weinberg, a Wayne State University law professor who has studied the registration law. But the Trump administration also has another goal. It says one purpose of the registration regime is to provoke undocumented immigrants to choose a third option: leave the country voluntarily, or, in the words of the Department of Homeland Security, compulsory 'mass self-deportation.' Those efforts, alongside the administration's invocation of the Alien Enemies Act and a more aggressive approach to immigration raids, are meant to achieve a broader, overarching campaign promise: the largest deportation program in the history of America. 'For decades, this law has been ignored — not anymore,' the department said in a February announcement that it would enforce the law. The department called 'mass self-deportation' a 'safer path for aliens and law enforcement,' and said it saves U.S. taxpayer dollars. The Department of Homeland Security did not answer questions about its enforcement policies. The Alien Registration Act was passed in 1940, amid fears about immigrants' loyalties. A separate provision of the statute criminalizes advocacy for overthrowing the government. For about two decades, that provision was used to prosecute people who were accused of being either pro-fascist or pro-Communist. The registration provision, though, remained largely dormant, and had not been enforced in 75 years. It applies to non-citizens, regardless of legal status, who are in the U.S. for 30 days or longer. Certain categories of legal immigrants have already met the requirement. Immigrants who have filed applications to become permanent residents are considered registered by DHS, for example. And even some undocumented U.S. residents are already registered: U.S. residents who have received 'parole' — a form of humanitarian protection from deportation — are also considered registered. Still, DHS estimates that up to 3.2 million immigrants are currently unregistered and are affected by the new enforcement regime. The administration has created a new seven-page form that non-citizens must use. The form requires people, under penalty of perjury, to provide biographical details, contact information, details about any criminal history and the circumstances of how they entered the U.S. After DHS issued regulations to enforce the registration requirement in April, the administration announced that 47,000 undocumented immigrants had registered using the new form. The Coalition for Humane Immigrant Rights and other advocacy groups filed a lawsuit challenging Trump's move to revive the registration requirement in March. U.S. District Judge Trevor McFadden, a Trump appointee, initially expressed skepticism toward the administration, saying in a recent hearing that officials had pulled a 'big switcheroo' on undocumented immigrants. But McFadden in April refused the plaintiffs' request to temporarily block the policy, saying the Coalition likely lacks the legal standing to sue because it has not shown that it would be harmed by the policy. The group has appealed McFadden's decision. In the meantime, the administration has begun to prosecute people for failure to register for the first time in seven decades. The prosecutions so far have stumbled. On May 19, a federal magistrate judge in Louisiana consolidated and dismissed five of the criminal cases, saying prosecutors had no probable cause to believe the defendants had intentionally refused to register. Judge Michael North wrote that the Alien Registration Act requires 'some level of subjective knowledge or bad intent' behind the choice not to register. The prosecutions, the judge wrote, are impermissible because most people are simply unaware of the law, and the government 'did not provide these Defendants — as well as millions of similarly situated individuals here without government permission — with a way to register' since 1950. But North also pointed out that the government may have an easier path to proving probable cause in the future, given that DHS created a new registration form in April. And government attorneys have appealed the five dismissed cases. The Justice Department and the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Eastern District of Louisiana declined to comment on recent charges filed under the law. A spokesperson for the U.S. Attorney's Office for the District of Columbia said the office 'is aggressively pursuing criminals in the district and will use all criminal justice resources available to make D.C. safe and to carry out President Trump's and Attorney General Bondi's direction to support immigration enforcement.' The other federal district attorneys whose offices filed charges did not respond to a request for comment. Michelle LaPointe, legal director at the American Immigration Council, an immigrants' rights advocacy group, said these initial cases are the 'tip of the iceberg.' LaPointe is among the attorneys representing the Coalition in its lawsuit against the administration. 'I don't expect them to abate just because there were some dismissals,' LaPointe said, pointing to North's statements about future charges. 'They have already stated that they intend to make prosecution of the few immigration-related criminal statutes a priority for DOJ, and it's very easy for them to at least charge, even if they're not always gonna be able to sustain their burden to secure a conviction.' Weinberg, the Wayne State law professor, agreed that the administration will likely continue attempting broad enforcement. 'If they bring a whole lot of prosecutions and end up losing all, they may step back,' Weinberg said. 'If they bring a whole lot and win a few, they'll say, 'Well, that's the basis on which we can move further'' and appeal — potentially all the way to the Supreme Court, he noted.
Newsweek
12-06-2025
- Politics
- Newsweek
Targeting Immigrants Won't Make America Safer
President Donald Trump deployed California National Guard troops to Los Angeles this week, without request from local authorities, in response to protests against recent Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) raids. The decision represents a dangerous escalation in the Trump administration's ongoing assault on immigrants and political dissent. Through mass deportations, expulsions, unlawful detention, and erosion of freedom of expression, it is using authoritarian practices to silence opposition to its agenda. It's putting all of us at risk. The Trump administration's treatment of our immigrant neighbors is not just cruel; it's a calculated effort to weaponize federal power against all of us, especially the most marginalized. This isn't about law and order; it's about fear and control. That effort is on display from Los Angeles to Washington, D.C. This week, as the Senate works on its version of the reconciliation bill, we're calling on lawmakers in both chambers to reject Trump's budget bill, which would fund a machinery of cruel and mass deportations. We also urge Congress to take immediate action to ensure constitutional and human rights apply to all people in the U.S., regardless of immigration status, by revoking the Alien Enemies Act, protecting the right to protest without fear of detention or deportation, returning those who were wrongly removed from the U.S., and fully restoring the right to seek asylum. The stakes are too high for silence or inaction. The raids, mass deportations, family separations, disappearances, and retaliation against student protesters are not isolated incidents. They form a deeply concerning pattern of authoritarian practices, which include sending immigrants to a prison in El Salvador without due process; retaliating against cities and states that protect their immigrant communities; detaining and deporting U.S. citizens; locking protesters up and threatening deportation; and allowing ICE agents into schools, churches, and hospitals. All of these actions send a chilling message to immigrant communities and U.S. citizens alike: no one in the U.S. is safe from state-sanctioned harm. Immigrants and dissenters must not be used as pawns in the game of politics. Human rights—such as the right to a fair trial, access to asylum, legal representation, and protection from torture or forcible removal to a country where a person may face harm—are guaranteed under both U.S. and international law. When the executive strips these rights from some of us, it sets a precedent that puts all of our rights at risk. The next target could be any of us. The administration's recent use of the Alien Enemies Act to disappear more than 200 people to El Salvador's Centro de Confinamiento Contra del Terrorismo, a facility widely criticized for its violent and inhumane conditions, raises serious legal and human rights concerns. Families and attorneys have been unable to contact their loved ones who are being detained. Disappearing people to a prison in a country that is not their own, without due process or legal recourse, is a blatant human rights violation. This dangerous precedent should alarm anyone who believes the rule of law must serve justice rather than entrench systemic inequality. LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA - JUNE 11: Protesters continue to march and chant in an approximately one-square mile area of downtown Los Angeles in response to a series of immigration raids, on June 11, 2025 in... LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA - JUNE 11: Protesters continue to march and chant in an approximately one-square mile area of downtown Los Angeles in response to a series of immigration raids, on June 11, 2025 in Los Angeles, California. MoreUnder the Trump administration, even holding U.S. citizenship or lawful immigration status does not shield anyone from being detained and expelled. A clear example is the case of Mahmoud Khalil, a lawful permanent resident who was targeted after participating in peaceful protests for Palestinian rights and has been jailed in an ICE processing center since early March. Make no mistake: organizing and participating in protests is not a crime. Freedom of speech and assembly are protected rights, and using immigration enforcement to silence dissent threatens each and every one of us. ICE has become increasingly brazen in its tactics. It uses agents in masks and plain clothes to terrorize communities and arrest our neighbors, detains people in overcrowded and cruel detention centers, targets activists, violates due process, and tramples on other human rights. The system that is now targeting and brutalizing immigrants of color has a long history of targeting and brutalizing Black, brown, and Indigenous communities across this country. Even the term "invasion," which the Trump administration uses to stoke fear and justify inhumane policies, evokes the white supremacist great replacement theory. As long as the government continues to prioritize militarization, incarceration, and deportation while relying on racist policing and targeting immigrants, communities across the U.S. will not be safe. We must prioritize human dignity and public safety. We need long-term, transformative solutions to our predatory immigration system which currently promotes brutality, surveillance, and incarceration. We call on the White House to end the deployment of the National Guard; change course on its immigration policy; stop its fear-mongering, racist, and xenophobic rhetoric; and bring an immediate end to its attacks on basic human rights. In addition to requesting that the U.S. government immediately return the people it illegally removed to El Salvador and revoke the invocation of the Alien Enemies Act, we also demand that lawmakers comply with the decisions of the U.S. Judiciary by immediately halting all plans for mass detentions and deportations, and reestablishing the right to seek asylum at the United States' southern border. Instead of investing hundreds of billions of taxpayer dollars into cruel policies, Congress should invest in solutions that uplift all of our communities. The Senate must vote no on President Trump's "One Big Beautiful Bill," which would gut life-saving and essential programs like Medicaid, Social Security, food assistance for families, and student loans in favor of Trump's deportation machine. Immigrants and people seeking safety make our communities safer, richer, and more vibrant. Now is the time to stand in solidarity with our immigrant family members, friends, and neighbors to uphold human dignity and the principles of justice and fairness for all. Judith Browne Dianis is Executive Director of Advancement Project. Paul O'Brien is the Executive Director at Amnesty International USA. The views expressed in this article are the writers' own.
