Latest news with #DueProcess
CBS News
4 days ago
- Politics
- CBS News
Afghan ally detained by ICE after attending immigration court hearing
An Afghan man who worked alongside U.S. troops in Afghanistan was detained by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement officers last week in San Diego. In a video obtained by CBS News, two unidentified ICE agents put Sayed Naser in handcuffs and escorted him from the federal courthouse in downtown San Diego after he attended a mandatory immigration hearing on Wednesday, June 11. "For more than three years I worked for the U.S. military back in my home country," Naser said in the video as the masked officers took him into custody. "I came here to make a better life. I didn't know this was going to happen like this for me." An Afghan ally who served alongside U.S. forces was legally paroled into the U.S. and showed up for his first hearing.@DHSGov detained him anyway—using a vague 'improvidently issued' excuse. He followed the rules. We have the video. This must stop.#AfghanEvac #DueProcess — #AfghanEvac (@afghanevac) June 13, 2025 Naser was legally paroled into the U.S in 2024, according to his lawyer, Brian McGoldrick. In addition to an active asylum case, he has a pending Special Immigrant Visa (SIV) case because of his long history supporting the U.S. military. SIVs are provided to foreign nationals who worked with U.S. military forces in war zones including Iraq, Syria and Afghanistan. Naser has no criminal record in the U.S. or Afghanistan, according to court records reviewed by CBS News. "This man served with our troops. He came through the front door. He followed every rule. And we locked him up anyway," said Shawn VanDiver, executive director for #AfghanEvac, a nonprofit that advocates for U.S. wartime allies. He said it's unknown how many Afghan allies have been detained by ICE officials. The Department for Homeland Security and ICE did not respond to a request for comment. Naser served as a civilian interpreter for the U.S. military in Afghanistan from 2015 to 2018. He and his brothers also co-owned a logistics company that provided anti-mining support to American troops, according to employment records viewed by CBS News. "This individual was an important part of our Company commitment to provide the best possible service for our clients, who were the United States Military in Afghanistan," says one employment document submitted as part of Naser's SIV application. But after the U.S. withdrew from the country in August 2021, his partnership with American forces put targets on the backs of Naser and his family. In 2023, Taliban fighters killed his brother and abducted his father at a family wedding. The attack drove Naser out of the country and forced his wife and children to flee their home. "I cannot return to Afghanistan under any circumstances because I am accused of collaborating with U.S. forces. From the Taliban's perspective, anyone who worked with foreign forces during the past 20 years is a spy, an infidel, and must be killed," Naser wrote in his asylum declaration. His family remains in hiding outside of Afghanistan. After his brother was killed, Naser fled to Brazil, where he was granted a humanitarian visa. He then made the more than 6,000 mile journey on foot through the Darién Gap before reaching Mexico. In 2024, he set up an appointment with U.S. Customs and Border Protection through the app formerly known as CBP One — which allowed migrants to schedule appointments at legal ports of entry — where he was granted lawful parole into the U.S. As part of his asylum process, Naser was required to attend an in-person hearing last week in front of a judge and a lawyer from the Department of Homeland Security. But when Naser showed up to court, the DHS lawyer said that his case was "'improvidently issued." "Nobody knows what that means," said McGoldrick, who tried to dispute the ruling. When pressed, the DHS lawyer refused to clarify further. "'Improvidently issued' is becoming ICE's new catch-all — a vague, unchallengeable justification being used to clear dockets and meet removal and detention quotas," said VanDiver. "It's being weaponized to put lawful, parole-compliant asylum-seekers in cells." When Naser left the courtroom after his hearing ended, he was immediately detained by ICE agents. Sayed Naser, an Afghan man who worked with U.S. troops in Afghanistan, is taken into custody by ICE officers at a courthouse in San Diego, California, on June 11, 2025. Image from video/@AfghanEvac Naser is now being held in the Otay Mesa Detention Center in San Diego. According to McGoldrick, he could be kept there for up to three months while his asylum case is adjudicated. If he is denied asylum, Naser will be put on an expedited removal list and likely deported. His lawyer does not know where he would be deported to, and DHS did not respond to our request for more information. "He's still in shock. He cannot believe this is happening to him," McGoldrick said. Naser's wife, who remains in hiding with their children, found out about her husband's detention when she saw the video of his detainment on social media. Increase in arrests in courthouses The last few weeks have seen an increase in ICE arrests outside of immigration hearings in courthouses around major American cities. In May, CBS News reported that the Trump administration was launching an operation to expedite the deportation of certain migrants by dismissing their cases and subsequently arresting them at courthouses around the country. The move shocked immigration advocates, as their clients are legally required to show up at their hearings. Public arrests outside courts in Los Angeles led to more than a week of demonstrations as protesters faced off against thousands of law enforcement officials, including the National Guard. On Sunday, Mr. Trump called on ICE to increase arrests in order to achieve his goal of the "largest Mass Deportation Operation of Illegal Aliens in History," according to a post on Truth Social, the social media platforms he owns. Reports from within the administration say that White House deputy chief of staff Stephen Miller and Secretary of Homeland Security Kristi Noem have been pushing agencies since late May to meet a higher quota of deportations — including as much as 3,000 immigration-related arrests per day. Typically, ICE agents need probable cause in order to detain someone to check their immigration status. This requires a higher standard of evidence pointing to an individual's alleged violation of immigration law. It's not clear in Naser's case what evidence there is that he was violating the law, his lawyer said. ICE provided a warrant for Naser's arrest to his attorney outside the courtroom after he was detained. "It's really shocking what's happening in courthouses in San Diego and around the country," said McGoldrick. "You walk down the hall and it's like you're walking down executioner's row. There's all these armed personnel just eyeballing everybody as we come down. It's just so intimidating that our clients are terrorized." Uncertain future for thousands of Afghans The Trump administration has demonstrated a sharp turn away from supporting Afghans who worked with the U.S. government in the military's two-decade-long conflict with the Taliban. In May, Noem announced that the administration was terminating Temporary Protected Status for Afghans. TPS is an immigration designation that allows people from countries deemed dangerous by the U.S. to live and work in the United States without being detained by DHS. Nearly 11,000 Afghans who are in the U.S. under TPS will be at risk of deportation when the change in policy comes into effect in mid-July, said VanDiver. Earlier this month, the Trump administration also instituted a travel ban on nationals from Afghanistan and 11 other countries, citing a need to address security concerns. Ahead of this announcement, over 100,000 Afghan wartime allies and their families had been vetted and cleared to enter the U.S., says #AfghanEvac. They are now unable to travel to the U.S. unless they are granted an SIV visa and can fund their own travel, without government support. Many live in danger of retribution from the Taliban. "Afghanistan remains under the control of the Taliban. There are still assassinations, arbitrary arrests, and ongoing human rights abuses, especially against women and ethnic minorities," said VanDiver. "The United States cannot abandon its allies and call that immigration policy."
Boston Globe
29-05-2025
- Politics
- Boston Globe
Harvard says fallout from Trump ban on international students already taking a toll
And on Thursday morning, US District Judge Allison D. Burroughs will hear arguments over Harvard's request for a preliminary injunction that would continue to prohibit the Department of Homeland Security from revoking the school's ability to enroll international students while a Harvard officials argued in court records that the short window during which the directive went into effect before the temporary restraining order was granted underscored the harm that Harvard and its students will face if it's allowed to stand. Advertisement As of Wednesday, it didn't appear that any of the students denied visas at the embassies last week Advertisement Students and faculty 'have expressed profound fear, concern and confusion,' Martin wrote. She said too many international students to count have inquired about the possibility of transferring to another school. And at least a half dozen foreign consulates in the U.S. have reached out to Harvard for information about how the proposed revocation affects the welfare of students and scholars from their countries. Dozens of incoming international students have asked about deferring their admission or obtaining Harvard's assistance in enrolling elsewhere, according to Martin. Burroughs, who will oversee Thursday's hearing, is the same judge who issued the temporary restraining order last Friday, the same day Harvard filed its suit against the government and a day after Secretary of Homeland Security Kristi Noem announced that Harvard's certification to enroll student visa holders was revoked 'effective immediately.' Noem said the directive means that international students already attending the school would have to transfer or lose their legal status to remain in the country. Noem accused Harvard of failing to provide information the administration had demanded about the criminality and misconduct of foreign students, and also of 'fostering violence, antisemitism, and coordinatiing with the Chinese Communist Party on its campus.' However, in its lawsuit, Harvard called it 'the latest act by the government in clear retaliation for Harvard exercising its First Amendment rights to reject the government's demands to control Harvard's governance, curriculum, and the 'ideology' of its faculty and students.' The suit alleges that the administration demanded an unprecedented amount of information related to international students, then claimed Harvard's response was 'insufficient,' without explaining why or citing any regulation that Harvard had failed to comply with. Advertisement Harvard alleges that the revocation of its ability to enroll international students is 'a blatant violation' of its First Amendment and Due Process rights and argues it would have an immediate and devastating impact on the university and more than 7,000 visa holders. 'With the stroke of a pen — and without any legal justification — the government has sought to erase a quarter of Harvard's student body,' Harvard's attorneys wrote. 'Without those students, Harvard is not Harvard.' On Wednesday, Massachusetts Attorney General Andrea Joy Campbell filed an amicus brief in federal court supporting Harvard's request for a preliminary injunction, citing vital contributions that international students make to the state. 'It's clear that by revoking Harvard's ability to enroll international students — and by threatening the legal status of current students — the Trump Administration is seeking political retribution against an institution that rightly refuses to give up its academic independence,' Campbell said in a statement. In her brief, Campbell wrote, 'The Trump Administration's actions targeting international students and academics sends a chilling message to talented students and academics around the world: that they risk an end to their academic career in the United States (and potentially also risk detention and deportation) at the whims of the federal government. This message weakens the Commonwealth's position in the global competition for talent and is antithetical to American values.' In court filings, Harvard wrote that it has admitted thousands more international students who are scheduled to come to campus for the upcoming summer and fall terms. 'By forbidding Harvard from enrolling foreign students and arbitrarily terminating the ability of existing students to complete coursework and degrees, the government does long-lasting harm to Harvard's 'goodwill and reputation,'' Harvard's lawyers wrote. 'Moreover, the government's action will immediately cripple Harvard's day-to-day functioning and ability to both advance academic inquiry and provide an excellent education.' Advertisement Shelley Murphy can be reached at
Boston Globe
28-05-2025
- Politics
- Boston Globe
What's the status of Harvard's lawsuits against the Trump administration?
On Thursday, both sides are Advertisement US District Judge Allison D. Burroughs issued an emergency order last Friday temporarily blocking the government from removing Harvard from the Student and Exchange Visitor Program, which allows universities to enroll student visa holders. Get Starting Point A guide through the most important stories of the morning, delivered Monday through Friday. Enter Email Sign Up The order was issued the same day Harvard filed its suit against the government and a day after Secretary of Homeland Security Kristi Noem announced that Harvard's certification to enroll student visa holders was revoked 'effective immediately.' She said it means that international students already attending the school would have to transfer or lose their legal status to remain in the country. Noem said the punishment was in response to Harvard's failure to provide information the administration had demanded on April 16 about the criminality and misconduct of foreign students on its campus. Advertisement ' This administration is Noem accused Harvard's leadership of creating 'an unsafe campus environment by permitting anti-American, pro-terrorist agitators to harass and physically assault individuals, including many Jewish students, and otherwise obstruct its once-venerable learning environment.' However, in its lawsuit, Harvard called it 'the latest act by the government in clear retaliation for Harvard exercising its First Amendment rights to reject the government's demands to control Harvard's governance, curriculum, and the 'ideology' of its faculty and students.' The suit alleges that the administration demanded an unprecedented amount of information related to international students, then claimed Harvard's response was 'insufficient,' without explaining why or citing any regulation that Harvard had failed to comply with. Harvard alleges that the revocation of its ability to enroll international students is 'a blatant violation' of its First Amendment and Due Process rights and argues it would have an immediate and devastating impact on the university and more than 7,000 visa holders. The visa programs, which allow international students to enter the United States and attend Harvard and thousands of other schools, 'have boosted America's academic, scientific, and economic success and its global standing,' the suit says. The loss of visa holders at Harvard would impact countless academic programs, research laboratories, clinics, and courses supported by international students, the suit says. 'Without its international students, Harvard is not Harvard,' the suit says. In issuing the temporary restraining order last week, Burroughs ruled that Harvard had shown it could suffer 'immediate and irreparable injury' if it lost its ability to enroll international students. Advertisement What about the other case? Burroughs is also presiding over a case involving a separate lawsuit Harvard filed last month alleging the Trump administration The Trump administration said it was freezing Harvard's grants — much of them for medical and scientific research — because the university violated Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 by f Harvard alleges the action came without notice or explanation. It also argues the administration's goal is to exert improper influence over the school as part of a sweeping crackdown on elite universities to squelch ideological dissent, a violation of schools' First Amendment rights. In its suit, Harvard said it has been taking steps Those demands included cutting diversity programs and submitting to an audit assessing the 'viewpoint diversity' of its faculty, student body, staff, and leadership. Shelley Murphy can be reached at
New York Times
16-05-2025
- Politics
- New York Times
Justices Extended Block on Deportations Under Wartime Law
The Trump administration will not be allowed to deport a group of Venezuelan migrants accused of being members of a violent gang under a centuries-old wartime law while the matter is litigated in the courts, the Supreme Court announced this afternoon. The ruling suggested that a majority of the justices were skeptical of whether the migrants had been afforded enough due process protections. Two of the court's most conservative justices, Samuel Alito and Clarence Thomas, dissented. The justices sent the case back to an appeals court, which they directed to examine claims by the migrants that they could not be legally deported under the Alien Enemies Act. The justices also called for the lower court to consider how much notice the government should be required to provide migrants so they have an opportunity to challenge their deportations. Republicans' megabill was blocked by party's right flank Five Republicans on the House Budget Committee voted today to block their own party's major domestic policy bill. Most of the holdouts were conservative hard-liners who insisted on deeper budget cuts in the legislation, which was designed to enact President Trump's policy agenda. The failed vote underscored the treacherous balancing act that Speaker Mike Johnson is trying to pull off with a narrow majority: Changes to win the backing of conservatives could alienate the more moderate Republicans. The legislation as currently written would cut taxes, while providing the biggest savings to the wealthy, and steer more money to the military and immigration enforcement, while cutting health, nutrition and education to pay for it. In other news from Washington: Transit strike in New Jersey left commuters scrambling New Jersey Transit's rail network, which ferries tens of thousands of riders into and back out of New York City every weekday, shut down this morning after locomotive engineers walked off their jobs. Some commuters showed up to their train stations unaware of the shutdown; others rushed to find different modes of transportation. It was the first statewide transit strike in more than 40 years, and it began after contract negotiations between the union and the transit agency broke down last night. The union said that its members were pushing for parity in wages with their counterparts who work for other local railroads. For those stuck in the chaos: Our New York City transportation reporter has tips for getting around. Russia and Ukraine agreed to a prisoner swap Ukrainian and Russian negotiators met today in Istanbul for their first direct peace talks since the war started more than three years ago. As expected, the two sides failed to agree on a cease-fire, which Ukraine had demanded as a precondition for negotiations. Moscow said that if Kyiv wanted a cease-fire, it should withdraw entirely from the four regions in eastern Ukraine that Moscow annexed in late 2022. But Ukraine and Russia did agree to exchange 1,000 prisoners each in the near future — the largest swap of the war so far. For more: Latvia's authorities advised residents on how to spot Russian spies. More top news What to expect at Eurovision This year's Eurovision Song Contest — the world's biggest, buzziest and most extravagant live music show — concludes tomorrow in Basel, Switzerland. You can watch the finale from pretty much anywhere. We asked Alex Marshall, our culture reporter in London, about who the favorites are. 'The bookmakers always think Sweden is going to win Eurovision. This year's entry is KAJ, with a song about saunas. It's fun and catchy, but the field's quite open,' Alex said. 'I'm hoping someone this year has something just so bonkers it makes the entirety of Europe, and much of the rest of the world, go, 'Oh my god, what the hell was that?'' For more: Alex wrote about the seven easy steps to win the Eurovision contest. One tip: Set something on fire. Just not the piano. The W.N.B.A. is back and bigger than before The 29th W.N.B.A. season begins tonight. This year, coming off a record-breaking season and an explosion into the national consciousness, the league decided to add a new team for the first time since 2008. Check out our viewing guide for the opening weekend. Here's what to watch for: The New York Liberty are still the team to beat; Paige Bueckers, the former University of Connecticut guard now on the Dallas Wings, is expected to be a breakout star; and Caitlin Clark is aiming for nothing less than a championship. Dinner table topics Cook: It's surprisingly easy to make colorful, candied tanghulu at home. Watch: Here are the movies are critics are talking about. Read: 'How to Be Well' is one of the best new books to check out. Decorate: Finding high-end furniture can feel like a treasure hunt. We have advice. Relax: These are Wirecutter's favorite sandals to enjoy the warm weather in. Learn: Nurses shared insider tips for your next hospital visit. Compete: Take this week's news quiz. Play: Here are today's Spelling Bee, Wordle and Mini Crossword. Find all our games here. Meet China's first police corgi Fu Zai doesn't look like other police dogs: He's a corgi with adorably short legs. But a police bureau in the Chinese city of Weifang nevertheless enrolled Fu Zai as a sniffer dog last year because of his most recognizable personality trait: He will do anything for food. Fu Zai's drive for treats helped him quickly learn how to detect explosives. And his tiny legs meant it was easier for him to fit in tight spaces. Sometimes, however, food has proved too irresistible: Fu Zai was caught on camera recently grabbing a bite of a sausage in a child's hand during a street patrol. Have a cute weekend. Thanks for reading. I'll be back on Monday. — Matthew Sean Kawasaki-Culligan was our photo editor. We welcome your feedback. Write to us at evening@
Yahoo
06-05-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Supreme Court lets transgender military service ban take effect while litigation continues
Yahoo is using AI to generate takeaways from this article. This means the info may not always match what's in the article. Reporting mistakes helps us improve the experience. Yahoo is using AI to generate takeaways from this article. This means the info may not always match what's in the article. Reporting mistakes helps us improve the experience. Yahoo is using AI to generate takeaways from this article. This means the info may not always match what's in the article. Reporting mistakes helps us improve the experience. Generate Key Takeaways The Supreme Court granted the Trump administration's request to enforce a ban on transgender people serving in the military, after a federal trial judge blocked the ban nationwide. The court's three Democratic-appointed justices dissented from the majority's decision to halt the trial court order as litigation continues. The high court's brief, unexplained order on Tuesday came as a federal appeals court in Washington, D.C., is poised to rule on the issue in a separate case. In this case, U.S. District Judge Benjamin Settle, a George W. Bush appointee in Washington state, ruled in March that transgender plaintiffs who sued over the ban raised 'serious questions going to their Equal Protection, Due Process, and First Amendment rights.' Settle said they faced 'not only loss of employment, income, and reputation, but also a career dedicated to military service.' A federal appellate panel refused to block the trial court ruling, and the administration appealed to the high court. 'In this case, the district court issued a universal injunction usurping the Executive Branch's authority to determine who may serve in the Nation's armed forces,' U.S. Solicitor General John Sauer wrote, sounding a familiar plea from the administration in seeking relief from lower court judges unduly meddling with executive power. The Supreme Court has so far agreed with the administration in some but not all cases. Sauer said that if Settle's nationwide halt isn't paused while the government appeals, that would be 'a period far too long for the military to be forced to maintain a policy that it has determined, in its professional judgment, to be contrary to military readiness and the Nation's interests.' He asked the justices to at least limit the injunction to the individual plaintiffs while litigation continues. Opposing the government's application were seven transgender service members, one transgender person who wants to join the military and a nonprofit association with transgender members who are service members or want to join. They argued to the justices that the government didn't meet the high standard for halting a ruling pending appeal. 'The record is clear and indubitable,' they wrote in opposition to the administration: 'equal service by openly transgender servicemembers has improved our military's readiness, lethality, and unit cohesion, while discharging transgender servicemembers from our Armed Forces would harm all three, as well as the public fisc.' Subscribe to the Deadline: Legal Newsletter for expert analysis on the top legal stories of the week, including updates from the Supreme Court and developments in the Trump administration's legal cases. This article was originally published on
