SAN FRANCISCO (AP) — A federal judge on Monday paused plans by the Trump administration to end temporary legal protections for hundreds of thousands of Venezuelans, a week before they were scheduled to expire.
The order by U.S. District Judge Edward Chen in San Francisco is a relief for 350,000 Venezuelans whose Temporary Protected Status was scheduled to expire April 7. The lawsuit was filed by lawyers for the National TPS Alliance and TPS holders across the country.
Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem has also announced the end of TPS for an estimated 250,000 additional Venezuelans in September.
Chen said in his ruling that the action by Noem “threatens to: inflict irreparable harm on hundreds of thousands of persons whose lives, families, and livelihoods will be severely disrupted, cost the United States billions in economic activity, and injure public health and safety in communities throughout the United States.”
He said the government had failed to identify any “real countervailing harm in continuing TPS for Venezuelan beneficiaries” and said plaintiffs will likely succeed in showing that Noem’s actions “are unauthorized by law, arbitrary and capricious, and motivated by unconstitutional animus.”
Chen, who was appointed to the bench by President Barack Obama, a Democrat, said his order applies nationally.
He gave the government one week to file notice of an appeal and the plaintiffs one week to file to pause for 500,000 Haitians whose TPS protections are set to expire in August. Alejandro Mayorkas, the previous secretary, had extended protections for all three cohorts into 2026.
The Department of Homeland Security did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
Venezuelan Interior Minister Diosdado Cabello, center, speaks to the press during the arrival of Venezuelan migrants deported from the United States at Simon Bolivar International Airport in Maiquetia, Venezuela, Monday, March 24, 2025. (AP Photo/Ariana Cubillos)
Congress created TPS, as the law is known, in 1990 to prevent deportations to countries suffering from natural disasters or civil strife, giving people authorization to live and work in the U.S. in increments of up to 18 months if the Homeland Security secretary deems conditions in their home countries are unsafe for return.
The reversals are a major about-face from immigration policies under former President Joe Biden, a Democrat, and come as Republican President Donald Trump and his top aides have ratcheted up attacks on judges who rule against them, with immigration being at the forefront of many disagreements.
At a hearing last Monday, lawyers for TPS holders said that Noem has no authority to cancel the protections and that her actions were motivated in part by racism. They asked the judge to pause Noem’s orders, citing the irreparable harm to TPS holders struggling with fear of deportation and potential separation from family members.
Government lawyers for Noem said that Congress gave the secretary clear and broad authority to make determinations related to the TPS program and that the decisions were not subject to judicial review. Plaintiffs have no right to thwart the secretary’s orders from being carried out, they said.
But Chen found the government’s arguments unpersuasive and found that numerous derogatory and false comments by Noem — and by Trump — against Venezuelans as criminals show that racial animus was a motivator in ending protections.
“Acting on the basis of a negative group stereotype and generalizing such stereotype to the entire group is the classic example of racism,” he wrote.
Biden sharply expanded use of TPS and other temporary forms of protection in a strategy to create and expand legal pathways to live in the United States while suspending asylum for those who enter illegally.
Trump has questioned the the impartiality of a federal judge who blocked his plans to deport Venezuelan immigrants to El Salvador, levelling his criticism only hours before his administration asked an appeals court to lift the judge’s order.
The administration has also said it was revoking temporary protections for more than 530,000 Cubans, Haitians, Nicaraguans and Venezuelans who have come to the U.S. since October 2022 through another legal avenue called humanitarian parole, which Biden used more than any other president. Their two-year work permits will expire April 24.
Venezuelan migrants deported from the United States peer through windows of an Eastern Airlines plane upon arriving at Simon Bolivar International Airport in Maiquetia, Venezuela, Sunday, March 30, 2025. (AP Photo/Cristian Hernandez)
WASHINGTON (AP) — The Justice Department is resisting a federal judge’s demand for more information about flights that took deportees to to El Salvador, arguing on Wednesday that the court should end its “continued intrusions” into the authority of the executive branch.
It’s the latest development in a showdown between the Trump administration and the judge who temporarily blocked deportations under an 18th century wartime declaration. President Donald Trump has called for the judge’s impeachment as the Republican escalates his conflict with a judiciary after a series of court setbacks over his executive actions.
U.S. District Judge Jeb Boasberg, who was nominated to the federal bench by Democratic President Barack Obama, had ordered the Trump administration to answer several questions under seal, where the information would not be publicly exposed. There were questions about the planes’ takeoff and landing times, and the number of people deported under Trump’s proclamation.
In court papers filed hours before the deadline to respond Wednesday, the Justice Department said the judge’s questions are “grave encroachments on core aspects of absolute and unreviewable Executive Branch authority relating to national security, foreign relations and foreign policy.” The department said it was considering invoking the “state secrets privilege” to allow the government to withhold some of the information sought by the court.
“The underlying premise of these orders … is that the Judicial Branch is superior to the Executive Branch, particularly on non-legal matters involving foreign affairs and national security. The Government disagrees,” Justice Department lawyers wrote. “The two branches are co-equal, and the Court’s continued intrusions into the prerogatives of the Executive Branch, especially on a non-legal and factually irrelevant matter, should end.”
Trump invoked the Alien Enemies Act, which has only been used three times before in U.S. history, all during congressionally declared wars. and claimed there was an invasion by the Venezuelan gang Tren de Aragua.
Boasberg ordered the administration not to deport, through that 1798 law, anyone in its custody.
Told there were planes in the air headed to El Salvador, Boasberg said Saturday evening that he and the government needed to move fast. “You shall inform your clients of this immediately, and that any plane containing these folks that is going to take off or is in the air needs to be returned to the United States,” Boasberg told the government’s lawyer.
Hours later, El Salvador’s president, Nayib Bukele, said the deportees had arrived in his country. “Oopsie…too late” he said in a social media post, above an article referencing Boasberg’s order.
The administration contends that a judge lacks the authority to tell the president whether he can determine the country is being invaded under the act, or how to defend it.
Boasberg’s new order for answers came after the administration provided limited information in response to a sharp questioning from the judge at a Monday hearing.
The administration said in a filing Tuesday that two planes took off before Boasberg’s order went into effect, and a third plane that took off after the ruling came down did not include anyone deported under the law. The administration declined, however, to provide estimates about the number of people subject to the proclamation.
White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt told reporters during a Monday briefing that about 261 people were deported, including 137 under the law.
FILE – A mega-prison known as Detention Center Against Terrorism (CECOT) stands in Tecoluca, El Salvador, March 5, 2023. (AP Photo/Salvador Melendez, File)
WASHINGTON (AP) — In an extraordinary display of conflict between the executive and judiciary branches, Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts rejected calls for impeaching federal judges shortly after President Donald Trump demanded the removal of a judge who ruled against his deportation plans.
“For more than two centuries, it has been established that impeachment is not an appropriate response to disagreement concerning a judicial decision,” Roberts said in a rare statement. “The normal appellate review process exists for that purpose.”
In a Tuesday morning social media post, Trump described U.S. District Judge James E. Boasberg as an unelected “troublemaker and agitator.” Boasberg recently issued an order blocking deportation flights under wartime authorities from an 18th century law that Trump invoked to carry out his plans.
“HE DIDN’T WIN ANYTHING! I WON FOR MANY REASONS, IN AN OVERWHELMING MANDATE, BUT FIGHTING ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION MAY HAVE BEEN THE NUMBER ONE REASON FOR THIS HISTORIC VICTORY,” Trump wrote on his social media platform, Truth Social. “I’m just doing what the VOTERS wanted me to do. This judge, like many of the Crooked Judges’ I am forced to appear before, should be IMPEACHED!!!”
Trump’s post escalated his conflict with a judiciary that’s been one of the few restraints on his administration’s aggressive agenda.
He has routinely criticized judges, especially as they limit his efforts to expand presidential power and impose his sweeping agenda on the federal government. But his call for impeachment — a rare step that is usually taken only in cases of grave ethical or criminal misconduct — represents an intensifying clash between the judicial and executive branches.
The Alien Enemies Act of 1798 has been used only three times before in U.S. history, all during congressionally declared wars. Trump issued a proclamation that the law was newly in effect due to what he claimed was an invasion by the Venezuelan gang Tren de Aragua. His administration is paying El Salvador to imprison alleged members of the gang.
Boasberg, who was appointed by President Barack Obama, convened a hearing on Monday to discuss what he called “possible defiance” of his order after two deportation flights continued to El Salvador despite his verbal order that they be turned around to the U.S.
Trump administration lawyers defended their actions, saying Boasberg’s written order wasn’t explicit, while an attorney for the American Civil Liberties Union said “I think we’re getting very close” to a constitutional crisis.
The Constitution gives the House of Representatives, where Republicans hold a slim majority, the power to impeach a judge with a simple majority vote. But, like a presidential impeachment, any removal requires a vote from a two-thirds majority from the Senate.
The president’s latest social media post aligns him more with allies like billionaire Elon Musk, who has made similar demands.
“What we are seeing is an attempt by one branch of government to intimidate another branch from performing its constitutional duty. It is a direct threat to judicial independence,” Marin Levy, a Duke University School of Law professor who specializes in the federal courts, said in an email.
Only one day earlier, White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said, “I have not heard the president talk about impeaching judges.”
Just 15 judges have been impeached in the nation’s history, according to the U.S. courts governing body, and just eight have been removed.
The last judicial impeachment was in 2010. G. Thomas Porteous Jr. of New Orleans was impeached on charges he accepted bribes and then lied about it. He was convicted by the Senate and removed from office in December 2010.
Calls to impeach judges have been rising as Trump’s sweeping agenda faces pushback in the courts, and at least two members of Congress have said online they plan to introduce articles of impeachment against Boasberg. House Republicans already have filed articles of impeachment against two other judges, Amir Ali and Paul Engelmayer, over rulings they’ve made in Trump-related lawsuits.
Leavitt is one of three administration officials who face a lawsuit from The Associated Press on First- and Fifth-amendment grounds. The AP says the three are punishing the news agency for editorial decisions they oppose. The White House says the AP is not following an executive order to refer to the Gulf of Mexico as the Gulf of America.
–Reporting by Chris Megerian and Lindsay Whitehurst, Associated Press. Associated Press writer Mark Sherman contributed.
The Trump administration has transferred hundreds of immigrants to El Salvador even as a federal judge issued an order temporarily barring the deportations under an 18th century wartime declaration targeting Venezuelan gang members, officials said Sunday. Flights were in the air at the time of the ruling.
U.S. District Judge James E. Boasberg issued an order Saturday temporarily blocking the deportations, but lawyers told him there were already two planes with immigrants in the air — one headed for El Salvador, the other for Honduras. Boasberg verbally ordered the planes be turned around, but they apparently were not and he did not include the directive in his written order.
White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt, in a statement Sunday, responded to speculation about whether the administration was flouting court orders: “The administration did not ‘refuse to comply’ with a court order. The order, which had no lawful basis, was issued after terrorist TdA aliens had already been removed from U.S. territory.”
The acronym refers to the Tren de Aragua gang, which Trump targeted in his unusual proclamation that was released Saturday
In a court filing Sunday, the Department of Justice, which has appealed Boasberg’s decision, said it would not use the Trump proclamation he blocked for further deportations if his decision is not overturned.
Trump sidestepped a question over whether his administration violated a court order while speaking to reporters aboard Air Force One on Sunday evening.
“I don’t know. You have to speak to the lawyers about that,” he said, although he defended the deportations. “I can tell you this. These were bad people.”
Asked about invoking presidential powers used in times of war, Trump said, “This is a time of war,” describing the influx of criminal migrants as “an invasion.”
Trump’s allies were gleeful over the results.
“Oopsie…Too late,” Salvadoran President Nayib Bukele, who agreed to house about 300 immigrants for a year at a cost of $6 million in his country’s prisons, wrote on the social media site X above an article about Boasberg’s ruling. That post was recirculated by White House communications director Steven Cheung.
Secretary of State Marco Rubio, who negotiated an earlier deal with Bukele to house immigrants, posted on the site: “We sent over 250 alien enemy members of Tren de Aragua which El Salvador has agreed to hold in their very good jails at a fair price that will also save our taxpayer dollars.”
Steve Vladeck, a professor at the Georgetown University Law Center, said that Boasberg’s verbal directive to turn around the planes was not technically part of his final order but that the Trump administration clearly violated the “spirit” of it.
“This just incentivizes future courts to be hyper specific in their orders and not give the government any wiggle room,” Vladeck said.
The immigrants were deported after Trump’s declaration of the Alien Enemies Act of 1798, which has been used only three times in U.S. history.
The law, invoked during the War of 1812 and World Wars I and II, requires a president to declare the United States is at war, giving him extraordinary powers to detain or remove foreigners who otherwise would have protections under immigration or criminal laws. It was last used to justify the detention of Japanese-American civilians during World War II.
Venezuela’s government in a statement Sunday rejected the use of Trump’s declaration of the law, characterizing it as evocative of “the darkest episodes in human history, from slavery to the horror of the Nazi concentration camps.”
Tren de Aragua originated in an infamously lawless prison in the central state of Aragua and accompanied an exodus of millions of Venezuelans, the overwhelming majority of whom were seeking better living conditions after their nation’s economy came undone during the past decade. Trump seized on the gang during his campaign to paint misleading pictures of communities that he contended were “taken over” by what were actually a handful of lawbreakers.
The Trump administration has not identified the immigrants deported, provided any evidence they are in fact members of Tren de Aragua or that they committed any crimes in the United States. It also sent two top members of the Salvadoran MS-13 gang to El Salvador who had been arrested in the United States.
Video released by El Salvador’s government Sunday showed men exiting airplanes onto an airport tarmac lined by officers in riot gear. The men, who had their hands and ankles shackled, struggled to walk as officers pushed their heads down to have them bend down at the waist.
The video also showed the men being transported to prison in a large convoy of buses guarded by police and military vehicles and at least one helicopter. The men were shown kneeling on the ground as their heads were shaved before they changed into the prison’s all-white uniform — knee-length shorts, T-shirt, socks and rubber clogs — and placed in cells.
The immigrants were taken to the notorious CECOT facility, the centerpiece of Bukele’s push to pacify his once violence-wracked country through tough police measures and limits on basic rights
The Trump administration said the president actually signed the proclamation contending Tren de Aragua was invading the United States on Friday night but didn’t announce it until Saturday afternoon. Immigration lawyers said that, late Friday, they noticed Venezuelans who otherwise couldn’t be deported under immigration law being moved to Texas for deportation flights. They began to file lawsuits to halt the transfers.
“Basically any Venezuelan citizen in the US may be removed on pretext of belonging to Tren de Aragua, with no chance at defense,” Adam Isacson of the Washington Office for Latin America, a human rights group, warned on X.
The litigation that led to the hold on deportations was filed on behalf of five Venezuelans held in Texas who lawyers said were concerned they’d be falsely accused of being members of the gang. Once the act is invoked, they warned, Trump could simply declare anyone a Tren de Aragua member and remove them from the country.
Boasberg barred those Venezuelans’ deportations Saturday morning when the suit was filed, but only broadened it to all people in federal custody who could be targeted by the act after his afternoon hearing. He noted that the law has never before been used outside of a congressionally declared war and that plaintiffs may successfully argue Trump exceeded his legal authority in invoking it.
The bar on deportations stands for up to 14 days and the immigrants will remain in federal custody during that time. Boasberg has scheduled a hearing Friday to hear additional arguments in the case.
He said he had to act because the immigrants whose deportations may actually violate the U.S. Constitution deserved a chance to have their pleas heard in court.
“Once they’re out of the country,” Boasberg said, “there’s little I could do.”
–Reporting by Nicholas Riccardi and Regina Garcia Cano, Associated Press.
The American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee (ADC) issued an advisory this week warning people of a possible travel ban by the Trump administration for Arab, Muslim-majority countries and others.
The advisory says nationals from Afghanistan, Cuba, Haiti, Iraq, Iran, Lebanon, Libya, Palestine, Pakistan, Somalia, Sudan, Venezuela or Yemen should not leave the U.S.
If people need to travel, they should check with an immigration attorney before traveling. The advisory also says individualsliving or traveling in one of those countries should return to the U.S. immediately, saying U.S. citizens may be able to reenter but may undergo a vetting process.
People can contact ADC’s legal intake hotline at 844-ADC-9955 for further assistance.
The Michigan Clean Water Corps (MiCorps) is looking for volunteers to join a network that collects and shares surface water quality data throughout Michigan.
Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer says nearly 60,000 students are receiving the Michigan Achievement Scholarship, saving families $252 million in tuition costs.
The charity organization Mercy-USA for Aid and Development is hosting its second annual book drive, Lanterns for Literacy. Last year, 8,000 books were donated to families in Detroit through the program. The organization is looking for book donations, volunteers or financial gifts to create literacy kits.
Do you have a community story we should tell? Let us know in an email at detroiteveningreport@wdet.org.
Trusted, accurate, up-to-date.
WDET strives to make our journalism accessible to everyone. As a public media institution, we maintain our journalistic integrity through independent support from readers like you. If you value WDET as your source of news, music and conversation, please make a gift today.
He overstated the numbers on his immigration crackdown
TRUMP: “Illegal border crossings last month were by far the lowest ever recorded. Ever.”
THE FACTS: Trump wrote in a Truth Social post on Saturday that Border Patrol apprehended 8,326 people on the U.S.-Mexico border last month. But U.S. government data show that Border Patrol routinely averaged below that number in the 1960s.
While February marked the lowest arrest total in decades, Border Patrol averaged less than February 2025 for the first seven years of 1960s. The government website does not track U.S.-Mexico border totals before 1960. Border Patrol’s monthly average was 1,752 arrests in 1961.
He inflated the number of people who entered the U.S. illegally under President Joe Biden
TRUMP: “Over the past four years, 21 million people poured into the United States. Many of them were murderers, human traffickers, gang members.”
THE FACTS: That figure, which Trump cites regularly, is highly inflated. U.S. Customs and Border Protection reported more than 10.8 million arrests for illegal crossings from Mexico from January 2021 through December 2024.
But that’s arrests, not people. Under asylum restrictions during the COVID-19 pandemic, many people crossed more than once until they succeeded because there were no legal consequences for getting turned back to Mexico. So the number of people is lower than the number of arrests.
There is no evidence other countries are sending their criminals or people with mental illness across the border, despite this frequent line from Trump.
Economists differ with Trump on tariffs
TRUMP: “Tariffs are about making America rich again and making America great again. And it’s happening. And it will happen rather quickly. There’ll be a little disturbance, but we’re OK with that. It won’t be much.”
THE FACTS: Trump is banking on the idea that taxing imports is the road to riches for the United States. Most economists say Trump’s tariffs would hurt the country, as they’re tax increases that could raise the costs of goods in ways that could also harm economic growth. Trump suggests that the impact on inflation would be minimal.
When the Yale University Budget Lab looked at the tariffs that Trump imposed Tuesday on Canada, Mexico and China, it found that inflation would increase a full percentage point, growth would fall by half a percentage point and the average household would lose about $1,600 in disposable income.
There’s no evidence Social Security money is being paid to many people over age 100
TRUMP: “Believe it or not, government databases list 4.7 million Social Security members from people aged 100 to 109 years old. It lists 3.6 million people from ages 110 to 119. … 3.47 million people from ages 120 to 129. 3.9 million people from ages 130 to 139. 3.5 million people from ages 140 to 149. And money is being paid to many of them, and we are searching right now.”
THE FACTS: The databases may list those people, but that does not mean they are getting paid benefits.
Part of the confusion comes from Social Security’s software system based on the COBOL programming language, which doesn’t use a specific format for dates. This means that some entries with missing or incomplete birthdates will default to a reference point of more than 150 years ago. The news organization Wired first reported on the use of COBOL programming language at the Social Security Administration.
Additionally, a series of reports from the Social Security Administration’s inspector general in March 2023 and July 2024 state that the agency has not established a new system to properly annotate death information in its database, which included roughly 18.9 million Social Security numbers of people born in 1920 or earlier but were not marked as deceased. This does not mean, however, that these people were receiving benefits.
The agency decided not to update the database because of the cost to do so, which would run upward of $9 million. As of September 2015, the agency automatically stops payments to people who are older than 115 years old.
Trump did not inherit an ‘economic catastrophe’
TRUMP: “Among my very highest priorities is to rescue our economy and get dramatic and immediate relief to working families. As you know, we inherited from the last administration an economic catastrophe and an inflation nightmare.”
THE FACTS: Inflation peaked at 9.1% in 2022 under President Joe Biden, but Trump did not inherit a disastrous economy by any measure. The unemployment rate ticked down to a low 4% in January, the month he took office, while the economy expanded a healthy 2.8% in 2024. Inflation-adjusted incomes have grown steadily since mid-2023. And inflation, while showing signs of stickiness in recent months and still elevated at 3% in January, is down from its 2022 peak.
Trump’s reference to an ‘EV mandate’ is inaccurate
TRUMP: “We ended the last administration’s insane electric vehicle mandate, saving our auto workers and companies from economic destruction.”
THE FACTS: There was no federal mandate to force the purchase of EVs, as Trump has falsely claimed many times before.
Biden had set up a non-binding goal that EVs make up half of new cars sold by 2030. Trump issued an executive order on his first day in office revoking that goal.
Biden’s policies tightened restrictions on pollution from gas-powered cars and trucks in an effort to encourage Americans to buy EVs and car companies to shift from gas-powered vehicles to electric cars.
A closer look at Army recruitment numbers
TRUMP: “I am pleased to report that in January, the U.S. Army had its single best recruiting month in 15 years.”
THE FACTS: Trump has repeatedly claimed that the Army’s recruiting turnaround is tied to his time in office.
In fact, according to Army data, recruiting numbers have been increasing steadily over the past year, with the highest total coming in August 2024 — before the November election. Army officials closely track recruiting numbers.
A significant driver of the recruiting success was the Army’s decision to launch the Future Soldier Prep Course at Fort Jackson, South Carolina, in August 2022. That program gives lower-performing recruits up to 90 days of academic or fitness instruction to help them meet military standards and move on to basic training.
Associated Press writers Melissa Goldin, Matt Daly, Chris Rugaber, Will Weissert, Josh Boak, Rebecca Santana, Becky Bohrer and Elliot Spagat contributed to this report.
President Trump will give a speech to a joint session of Congress on Tuesday, his first address before Congress since returning to office.
The speech comes as the Trump administration is making swift and dramatic cuts to the federal government, while the Republican-led House and Senate have done little to curb them.
According to the White House, Trump is expected to lay out his achievements since returning to office, and appeal to Congress to provide more money to finance his aggressive crackdown on immigration.
“It’s an opportunity for President Trump, as only he can, to lay out the last month of record-setting, record-breaking, unprecedented achievements and accomplishments,” senior adviser Stephen Miller told the Associated Press.
–Associated Press White House Correspondent Zeke Miller contributed to this report.
Trusted, accurate, up-to-date.
WDET strives to make our journalism accessible to everyone. As a public media institution, we maintain our journalistic integrity through independent support from readers like you. If you value WDET as your source of news, music and conversation, please make a gift today.
The two major political parties held their conventions last weekend. On the Democratic side, former state Senator Curtis Hertel will lead the Michigan Democratic Party. He ran unopposed.
The Republican side was a bit more contentious. Former Michigan GOP Co-Chair Meshawn Maddock had gotten the coveted Donald Trump endorsement, but after a couple rounds of voting, it was current state Senator Jim Runestad (R-White Lake) that got the nod for chair.
Runestad has been in the Michigan Legislature since 2015. Before that, the White Lake resident was on the Oakland County Commission.
He tells WDET there’s still some work to be done building bridges between the various factions of the GOP.
“This internal fighting is not helpful to the ultimate goal that we’re all here, and that is winning elections for Republicans,” Runestad says.
For that, Hoesktra was rewarded with an Ambassadorship to Canada by Trump.
With 25 percent tariffs on Canadian goods set to go into effect on Tuesday, relations between the two countries are at a low point. Trump has complained that Canada isn’t doing enough to stop Fentanyl from coming into the U.S.
Runestad believes the potential economic havoc on the state’s economy is worth it.
“What we’re asking [Canadian Prime Minister Justin] Trudeau is simply stop bringing over Fentanyl, stop bringing over criminal cartels, stop bringing over people that should not be here to obey our laws,” Runestad says. “Why would you not do that?”
Last year, U.S. Customs agents seized 43 pounds of Fentanyl at the Canadian border. Most drugs are brought across the border by Americans at lawful ports of entry.
2026 is going to be a wide open election cycle — with Governor, Attorney General, Secretary of State and the state Legislature all up for grabs. That’s on top of a federal midterm election and an open U.S. Senate seat in Michigan.
Typically, the party in power in Washington D.C. loses control of the U.S. House during midterms.
In Michigan, Runestad is hoping to buck that trend by following a different pattern.
“It is almost completely consistent that after eight years of one party, they want a different party in the Governor’s Mansion,” Runestad says. “I mean, it almost every time goes eight years Democrat, eight years Republican.”
Like Governor Gretchen Whitmer, Sen. Runestad is term limited. Big wins for Republicans in 2026 means Runestad likely won’t have to worry about leading his side gig of leading the MIGOP.
Hear the full conversation with Sen. Runestad using the audio player above.
Trusted, accurate, up-to-date.
WDET strives to make our journalism accessible to everyone. As a public media institution, we maintain our journalistic integrity through independent support from readers like you. If you value WDET as your source of news, music and conversation, please make a gift today.
Recent large-scale immigration raids in Colorado — and the potential for more under the new Trump administration — have left Coloradans with questions about how such raids work and what their rights are.
Immigrant rights advocates and lawyers have sounded alarms about potential legal violations in the aftermath of Feb. 5, when federal agents from U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement and other agencies descended on Denver and Aurora to conduct immigration raids in the early morning hours at apartment complexes.
Reports put the number of detained people at around 30, far short of their publicly stated goals. But ICE hasn’t confirmed the size and scope of those operations. It also hasn’t responded to questions about where detainees are being held and whether they had criminal records or ties to the Venezuelan gang Tren de Aragua. Since then, smaller enforcement actions have occurred locally, including near a downtown courthouse, an incident that raised additional legal concerns.
Here’s what you should know about the legal process behind an immigration raid — and immigrants’ rights.
What are the laws ICE is supposed to follow?
John Fabbricatore, a former ICE Denver field office director, described the agency’s intensive training process on immigration law, which takes about 20 weeks. Officers learn constitutional, immigration, visa, removal and naturalization law, he said.
Like other law enforcement agencies, ICE is bound by the U.S. Constitution’s Fourth and Fifth Amendments: the right to protection from unreasonable searches and seizures and the right to remain silent, respectively.
ICE must follow immigration-specific laws and agency regulations, which include those governing the use of force during enforcement activities, said Elizabeth Jordan, a visiting assistant professor at the University of Denver’s Sturm College of Law who directs its immigration clinic. And Hans Meyer, an immigration and criminal defense attorney in Denver, said ICE’s federal statutory obligations set “limits on their authority to be able to conduct certain investigations.”
His example: Agents are prohibited from detaining people if they don’t have reasonable suspicion based on facts learned through an investigation.
“Law enforcement officers — and ICE — cannot use things like race as a justification to detain somebody,” Meyer said. “They can’t use the fact that somebody’s speaking Spanish.”
He points to instances of detaining or arresting people en masse as federally and constitutionally unauthorized without reasonable suspicion that the people are in the country without proper legal status.
Fabbricatore said the development of reasonable suspicion and probable cause applies to all law enforcement officers — not just those at ICE.
During an operation, “they normally would have targets that they’ve already identified as being in the country unlawfully,” he said. And if officers encounter other people on site who they also suspect of lacking legal status, he said, “you have to develop your probable cause through an on-site investigation.”
Determining whether a person is lawfully in the U.S. typically involves conversation, documentation and technology, Fabbricatore added.
What charges does ICE usually use for arrests?
ICE typically investigates and detains people for civil immigration violations.
“Not having (legal) status is a civil matter in the U.S. It’s not a criminal matter,” Meyer said.
But Fabbricatore asserted that ICE has both civil and criminal arrest authority, and the charges depend on how the investigation is structured. A person who is present in the U.S. unlawfully may be subject to a civil charge, particularly if they entered legally first, he said. So overstaying a visa counts as a civil immigration violation.
However, certain cases can be elevated to criminal status. Entering the country illegally, such as by crossing the border undetected, can be considered a misdemeanor. ICE can detain a person for a misdemeanor. Fabbricatore said the law that bars “improper entry by (an) alien” is most often used at the U.S. border, where ICE agents issue that charge and send the person back out of the country.
In some cases, if a person has been deported and reenters the U.S., then it is a felony. Fabbricatore said that would allow the agency to obtain a criminal warrant to arrest the individual.
Federal law enforcement officers conduct an immigration enforcement operation at the Cedar Run Apartments on South Oneida Street in Denver on Feb. 5, 2025. (Photo by Hyoung Chang/The Denver Post)
What role do warrants play in detainment?
A warrant is a document that allows law enforcement officers to arrest a person, perform searches of property or people, and more. A judicial warrant is issued by a judge.
But judicial warrants “very rarely exist in the immigration space,” Meyer said. That’s a key difference between the standard criminal justice system and the immigration system, he added.
“In the immigration space, there are no warrants for arrests really issued by immigration courts because it’s a civil matter,” Meyer said.
Instead, ICE officers collect enough information to justify an administrative warrant. Those are signed by ICE supervisors, Fabbricatore confirmed. But since those warrants aren’t signed by judges — who would have to review them independently — “there’s no checks and balances,” Meyer argued.
An administrative warrant doesn’t grant ICE officers the ability to enter private property like a home or a car. Instead, they must obtain consent.
“What we saw happen, I believe, (on Feb. 5) is ICE showing up in full battle armor with AR-15s and banging down doors and essentially coercing consent for people to open them,” Meyer said of the recent raids.
He described an alternative scenario: “When a person that they’re looking for isn’t there, (they) contact everybody else in that place … and coerce them into speaking, and then use the information against them to justify their arrest.”
Those are referred to as collateral arrests.
Depending on the case, Fabbricatore said ICE can pursue criminal warrants. His example was a prior gang member who committed gun violence and was deported but then reentered the country.
“We would ask for (a warrant) to go looking for any firearms that they may have currently,” he said, “and also for any documentation that they may have in their house on how they entered the country illegally.”
What is a “ruse” used by law enforcement?
A ruse — defined by Meyer as “using a false pretense to … bait somebody into something” — is generally considered a legitimate law enforcement tool, including by undercover cops. ICE is allowed to use ruses, he said.
Fabbricatore explained that he used ruses to lure someone away from a house where children or other family members were present.
However, Meyer said, “when you have officers or law enforcement threatening that ‘If you don’t talk, this is what I’m gonna do to you’ — that’s a different question. That’s where we move into intimidation and coercion, as opposed to a ruse.”
Jordan, the DU visiting professor, pointed to a 2020 federal class action lawsuit filed in California by the ACLU Foundation of Southern California and others related to ICE ruses. It claimed that immigration officers violated the Constitution by misrepresenting themselves as police and probation officers and sometimes trespassing.
What are a person’s constitutional rights?
During an immigration enforcement operation, the Fourth Amendment still stands, regardless of a person’s immigration status.
“We don’t allow the government to engage in unreasonable searches, unreasonable seizures,” Jordan said. “Anybody present in the U.S. enjoys the benefit of the Fourth Amendment.”
During a raid, a person can ask officers to identify themselves through a closed door or window, Meyer said. Officers aren’t constitutionally obligated to respond.
“But generally speaking, when officers are executing a warrant, they need to identify who they are,” Meyer said. “Otherwise, for a person, it feels like they’re being kidnapped.”
A person can also ask if officers have a judicial warrant and if they can see it to confirm their name is on it. If the judicial warrant is valid, then law enforcement officers can make an arrest.
However, if an officer refuses to show the warrant or explain whether it’s judicial or administrative, Meyer said, he would advise “that person probably should not open the door. ICE is not entitled to come in if they do not have a judicial warrant.”
But he said ICE officers may force entry anyway.
Fabbricatore noted that, if federal officers infringe upon a person’s constitutional rights, that individual can file a lawsuit called a Bivens action.
A child with a backpack walks near federal agents conducting an immigration enforcement operation at the Cedar Run Apartments on South Oneida Street in Denver on Wednesday, Feb. 5, 2025. (Photo by Hyoung Chang/The Denver Post)
How have Denver-area raids been carried out?
Jordan referred to the large-scale raids on Feb. 5 as “showy.” The agency’s objective of picking up individuals for civil immigration violations, in her view, did not gel with “the excessiveness of their conduct” that day.
“We don’t often see armored vehicles rolling through the streets of our city,” she said.
Meyer’s opinion is that “it seems like most of the operations that have been conducted by ICE have a kernel of legitimacy to them.” That’s because officers may have obtained a limited judicial warrant to search for one or two people, he said, or documents that allowed them to enter a specific area.
But from there, Meyer said, “they use that pretext to then sort of knock and talk or kick down or force their way into a bunch of other apartment buildings (and) contact a bunch of other people.” At times, he said, he thinks ICE operations “are clearly violating the Fourth and Fifth Amendment protections.”
Fabbricatore, for his part, believes “the operational tempo has been pretty fast lately,” compared to the slower pace for ICE under former President Joe Biden’s administration.
“It’s just going to take a little bit of time for the men and women of ICE to reach that operation tempo that is being required of them at this time,” he said.
Federal law enforcement officers conduct an immigration enforcement operation at the Cedar Run Apartments on South Oneida Street in Denver on Feb. 5, 2025. ICE raids were conducted at multiple apartment buildings across the metro area, including in Aurora. (Photo by Hyoung Chang/The Denver Post)
Just before the 2024 presidential election, Butler County Sheriff Richard Jones said that if former President Donald Trump won, he would get back into the “deportation business.” Now, the suburban Ohio sheriff has set aside 250 to 300 beds for Immigration and Customs Enforcement, or ICE, detainees—around a third of Butler County Jail’s capacity, according to the Cincinnati Enquirer, and a boon to the county’s revenue.
Overwhelming evidence shows immigrants are less likely to commit crime than people born in the U.S. Sheriff Jones himself concedes that immigrants are not more prone to crime. However, he has echoed Trump’s immigration rhetoric and vowed to do his part to enforce Trump’s plans to deport undocumented immigrants. “I believe in American citizens first. People who have blood and sweat into this country have fought for it, them first. These other countries aren’t first. We are,” Jones told WLWT.
The detention part of the “deportation business” could be a profitable one for Butler County, The Marshall Project reports. In 2024, the county made over $6.7 million renting jail beds to other local and federal government agencies, including the U.S. Marshals and the Bureau of Prisons. Even before Trump’s re-election, Butler County budgeted for an increase in that revenue to an estimated $8.5 million in 2025, according to the Journal-News.
A county commissioner offered support for the sheriff’s plans to rent more beds to ICE: “Obviously, the more prisoners we have, the more revenue it produces,” Commissioner Don Dixon said.
Butler County isn’t the only entity that could see revenue rise with the deportation of immigrants.
Cell room doors are seen at the Caroline Detention Facility in Bowling Green, Virginia, on August 13, 2018. (SAUL LOEB // AFP via Getty Images)
The Biden administration has already laid the groundwork for deportations by extending private detention contracts. Still, Trump will face significant financial, legal, and logistical limitations in building or expanding any kind of deportation infrastructure. But even if he only partially delivers on his promises, the financial and human impacts could be significant.
Since the election, there has been a lot of attention on how many for-profit companies, especially private prisons, stand to rake in big profits from mass deportations. Some have already seen their stock prices skyrocket. But local governments may also assist Trump, for both political and financial reasons.
The job of detaining immigrants, though, is where local governments most clearly stand to profit. County jails may rent beds to ICE, expanding detention capacity. Local governments can also sign intergovernmental agreements to provide detention for ICE, and then subcontract to private companies to actually run the jails — essentially acting as middlemen between private jails and the federal government. That allows ICE to bypass rules about documentation and competitive contracting, according to a government report.
Local jails are the most common type of detention facility that ICE uses, according to a recent report from Vera, an advocacy organization working to end mass incarceration. These kinds of agreements already exist under the Biden administration, but could expand under Trump’s deportation plans.
In Louisiana, more than a dozen facilities closed after the state passed laws reducing mandatory minimums and increasing chances for parole. But some buildings were quickly repurposed to house migrants. The complex interplay between state, federal and local governments and also between public and private entities often makes oversight and accountability difficult, according to Bloomberg News. The journalistic investigation looked specifically at Louisiana’s Winn Correctional Center, which is run by the private company LaSalle Corrections.
“The Louisiana Department of Public Safety and Corrections owns the facility,” reporters at Bloomberg wrote. “The Winn Parish Sheriff’s Office leases the property from the state. The sheriff’s office then signs a contract with the federal government to allow the facility to be used for ICE detainees. Finally, LaSalle Corrections is subcontracted to handle day-to-day operations.”
When lawyers with an advocacy organization tried to get records to investigate troubling allegations of abuse, each agency insisted someone else was responsible for keeping them.
While such arrangements may grow under Trump, there is already a long history of local jails playing a role in immigration detention. “The Migrant’s Jail,” a recently published book by Brianna Nofil, shows how these practices stretch back to the 1920’s and ’30s. “By the end of the 20th century, sheriffs are funding city emergency services, buying new police technologies, and eliminating personal property tax off of migrant incarceration revenue,” Nofil told Princeton University Press.
The conditions of those jails were often inhumane. According to Nofil, in 1925, a grand jury found the situation at a Galveston, Texas jail so terrible, it declared it “a crime against humanity.”
Problems with poor conditions continue today. In August, Massachusetts Sens. Elizabeth Warren and Ed Markey wrote a letter to ICE and the Department of Homeland Security, raising concerns about deficient medical care and allegations of staff violence at Plymouth County Correctional Facility. But since then, the county has signed a new contract that more than doubles the jail’s revenue, according to The Boston Globe, “paying the sheriff’s office $215 per detainee per day.”
Some states have taken action to limit how much local governments can contract with ICE, but have met resistance for financial reasons. Illinois passed a law banning ICE detention in 2021, but two counties sued the state. In court records, Kankakee County Sheriff Michael Downey said the county’s contract with ICE generated $16 million over four years, which paid for many aspects of local government. Losing the contract would lead to a need to increase taxes, cut budgets, and lay off staff, the sheriff testified. A federal judge ruled against the counties.
Stacy Suh, Program Director at Detention Watch Network, an advocacy group that opposes immigration detention, told me that these kinds of incentives are perverse. Suh also argued that prisons and jails don’t always deliver the jobs or economic boons towns hope for.
“We’re very concerned that this detention expansion is happening—both through local governments that are struggling with shrinking budgets, or private prison corporations that are looking to profit,” Suh said.
This story was produced byThe Marshall Project, a nonpartisan, nonprofit news organization that seeks to create and sustain a sense of national urgency about the U.S. criminal justice system, and reviewed and distributed by Stacker.
A common area and cell room doors are seen inside the Caroline Detention Facility in Bowling Green, Virginia, on August 13, 2018. – A former regional jail, the facility has been contracted by the US Department of Homeland Security Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) to house undocumented adult immigrant detainees for violations of immigration laws (Photo by SAUL LOEB / AFP) (Photo credit should read SAUL LOEB/AFP via Getty Images)
The Trump administration is issuing a “stop work” order to agencies who provide legal help for unaccompanied immigrant children.
That affects about 26,000 kids nationwide, roughly 800 of them in Michigan.
Some critics say the government-funded legal representation makes it more appealing for children to enter the U.S. illegally.
But the nonprofit Michigan Immigrant Rights Center counters that some of the kids were relocated from Afghanistan or simply fled from dangerous situations in other countries.
The center’s Elinor Jordan says these children often have few options when they face an immigration judge. Jordan spoke with WDET about the stop work order and the ripple effect it will have.
Listen: Michigan group says Trump’s ‘Stop all work’ order puts migrant children at risk
The following interview has been edited for clarity and length.
Elinor Jordan, Michigan Immigrant Rights Center: The bottom line is that this will mean children will be forced to represent themselves in court. This program helps these children reunite with caregivers, helps them access legal protection, helps them seek out protections that are available to trafficking survivors and abuse survivors. And because we’re so specialized, we’re able to provide advocates who are not only legal experts in some of these very complex areas of law but also have the ability to provide the services in a child-centered way. Sometimes that means helping a child understand the concept of a country and a border in the first place. Sometimes that means working with them to identify a stuffed animal that might help them remain calm while they’re being cross-examined. Sometimes that means helping them understand different processes by using cartoon characters to help them see what it looks like. These children shouldn’t be left alone to do this for themselves.
Quinn Klinefelter, WDET News: In your view, is that even possible for children to represent themselves? Especially if they are at a very young age?
EJ: Absolutely not. And unlike in criminal court, in immigration court you’re not provided a lawyer if you can’t afford one. This means individuals must represent themselves, even in what the Supreme Court has identified as some of the most complicated areas of law. It’s challenging enough for adults, let alone children.
QK: Are these children being held somewhere? Are they incarcerated, typically, or are they with families?
EJ: There’s a mix of those. The legal protections that are in the Trafficking Victims Protection and Reauthorization Act require that children be held in the least restrictive setting possible. Sometimes part of our advocacy is ensuring that is the case. And there have been times when part of our advocacy is to ensure that children who have been victimized while being held by the government are able to access the protections they need to heal from sexual abuse while in custody. Part of our role is also to help them reunify with the people that make them feel safest. Maybe it’s a parent, maybe it’s a family member or a community member. But the numbers really bear out that children who are represented by an attorney are able to stay engaged in the legal process and pursue the relief that they’re lawfully eligible for. About 94% of represented children attend their immigration court hearings. So this really supports the process going more smoothly.
QK: Are these typically children that have been in the U.S. for a while or people that have come in more recently?
EJ: At times there are children who have been in the United States and experienced abuse, neglect or something similar. The majority of the children have been encountered near a U.S. border and have been unaccompanied, without any parent or legal guardian, and are placed in the care and custody of the Office of Refugee Resettlement. Some of our work has really been instrumental in reuniting separated families. For example, during the child separation crisis in 2018 we were able to reunify all children who were moved into Michigan after being separated from their parents. That includes a child who was only 10 months old, who was actually the youngest child known to be separated from their parents. Being able to reunite them and stand in that breach is such an honor and something that really must continue to prevent some of the cruelest outcomes in this system.
QK: Your group and all the nonprofits involved were ordered to “stop all work.” But this basically means that they’re freezing the federal funding, right? Are you able to continue on with private funding?
“[The stop all work order puts] us in a very challenging position. It could impact about 80% of our total funding.”
–Elinor Jordan, attorney, Michigan Immigrant Rights Center
EJ: At the moment we are dipping into small reserves of private funding. We are doing our best because we not only have legal obligations but also ethical obligations as attorneys to continue representing our clients. Once we’ve filed paperwork with the court, we can’t simply say, “Oh, I’m not getting paid any longer. I won’t be able to do this.” We will do everything that we possibly can to see that ethical obligation through and uphold the best possible services for our clients. But it does put us in a very challenging position. It could impact about 80% of our total funding.
QK: The Trump administration had charged that the previous Biden administration did not track or protect undocumented children in the U.S, so big changes were necessary to protect migrant children. What’s your view of how this “stop all work” order is going to affect that situation?
EJ: Well, many experts agree that a lawyer is one of the most important protections to avoid children falling through the cracks of the system. We have often intervened to help children who experience abuses while in custody come forward to law enforcement when that occurs. We have often helped address housing needs that come up if they are in a dangerous situation. A lawyer is one of the most critical things to really connect the dots between the various systems that want to prevent abuse of children. Taking away their attorney takes away their voice and allows them to be trafficked, harmed and really intimidated by threats that may or may not have any legal bearing. One of the most common ways that traffickers exert power over their targets is by using fear about the immigration system to intimidate them into silence and prevent them from coming forward to officials. So, taking away a child’s lawyer strengthens the hand of a trafficker.
Trusted, accurate, up-to-date.
WDET strives to make our journalism accessible to everyone. As a public media institution, we maintain our journalistic integrity through independent support from readers like you. If you value WDET as your source of news, music and conversation, please make a gift today.
NEW YORK (AP) — Four top deputies to New York City Mayor Eric Adams are resigning in the latest fallout from the Justice Department’s push to end a corruption case against Adams and ensure his cooperation in President Donald Trump’s immigration crackdown — a bargain that has raised questions about the mayor’s political independence and ability to lead the city.
In a statement Monday, Adams confirmed the departures of First Deputy Mayor Maria Torres-Springer, Deputy Mayor for Operations Meera Joshi, Deputy Mayor for Health and Human Services Anne Williams-Isom and Deputy Mayor for Public Safety Chauncey Parker.
“I am disappointed to see them go, but given the current challenges, I understand their decision and wish them nothing but success in the future,” said Adams, who faces several challengers in June’s Democratic primary. “But let me be crystal clear: New York City will keep moving forward, just as it does every day.”
City Council Speaker Adrienne Adams became the latest Democrat to call on the mayor to resign, saying that with the deputy mayor resignations it’s clear he “has now lost the confidence and trust of his own staff, his colleagues in government, and New Yorkers.”
Speaker Adams is not related to the mayor.
Torres-Springer, Joshi and Williams-Isom told agency heads and staff in a memo that they were exiting because of “the extraordinary events of the last few weeks.”
They did not give a date for their departures, but Adams said they and Parker will remain “for the time being to ensure a seamless transition.”
Adams has faced increasing scrutiny since the Justice Department’s second-in-command ordered federal prosecutors in Manhattan last week to drop the mayor’s corruption case. Acting Deputy Attorney General Emil Bove wrote that the case had “unduly restricted Mayor Adams’ ability to devote full attention and resources to the illegal immigration and violent crime.”
That directive touched off firestorms within the Justice Department and New York political circles, with seven federal prosecutors quitting in protest — including the interim U.S. attorney for Manhattan — and fellow Democrats calling on Adams to resign.
On Friday, after a week of recriminations and resignations, Bove and a pair of Justice Department officials from Washington stepped in and filed paperwork asking Manhattan federal Judge Dale E. Ho to dismiss the case. Ho has yet to take action on the request.
Adams, a former police captain, pleaded not guilty last September to charges that he accepted more than $100,000 in illegal campaign contributions and lavish travel perks from foreign nationals looking to buy his influence while he was Brooklyn borough president campaigning to be mayor.
The Justice Department said in its filing Friday that it was seeking to dismiss Adams’ charges with the option of refiling them later, which critics see as a carrot to ensure his compliance on the Republican president’s objectives. In his memo ordering prosecutors to ditch the case, Bove said the new, permanent U.S. attorney would review the matter after the November election.
“It certainly sounds like President Trump is holding the mayor hostage,” Rev. Al Sharpton, an Adams ally, said Tuesday. “I have supported the mayor, but he has been put in an unfair position — even for him — of essentially political blackmail.”
Political leaders, including Democratic Reps. Alexandria Ocasio Cortez and Nydia Velázquez, and Lt. Gov. Antonio Delgado, have called on Adams to step down. But Democratic Gov. Kathy Hochul has said she’s taking a more deliberative approach.
“The allegations are extremely concerning and serious, but I cannot as the governor of this state have a knee-jerk, politically motivated reaction like a lot of other people are saying right now,” she told MSNBC on Thursday. “I’ve got to do it smart, what’s right and I’m consulting with other leaders in government right now.”
The drama over Adams’ legal case played out as the mayor met with Trump’s border czar in New York on Thursday and announced increased cooperation on the Trump administration’s efforts to remove immigrants, including reestablishing an office for immigration authorities at the city’s notorious Rikers Island jail.
In their memo to staff announcing their exits, Torres-Springer, Joshi and Williams-Isom wrote: “Due to the extraordinary events of the last few weeks and to stay faithful to the oaths we swore to New Yorkers and our families, we have come to the difficult decision to step down from our roles.”
This image provided by Office of the New York Mayor shows New York Mayor Eric Adams as he speaks during an address from City Hall, Tuesday, Feb. 11, 2025. (Ed Reed/Office of the New York Mayor via AP)
By MICHAEL CASEY and MIKE CATALINI, Associated Press
BOSTON (AP) — A federal judge in Boston on Thursday blocked President Donald Trump’s executive order that would end birthright citizenship for the children of parents who are in the U.S. illegally, becoming the fourth judge to do so.
Sorokin said in a 31-page ruling that the “Constitution confers birthright citizenship broadly, including to persons within the categories described” in the president’s executive order.
The Boston case was filed by the Democratic attorneys general of 18 states and is one of at least nine lawsuits challenging the birthright citizenship order.
“President Trump may believe that he is above the law, but today’s preliminary injunction sends a clear message: He is not a king, and he cannot rewrite the Constitution with the stroke of a pen,” the attorneys general said in a statement.
A federal judge in Maryland issued a nationwide pause on the order in a separate but similar case involving immigrants rights groups and pregnant women whose soon-to-be-born children could be affected. The Trump administration said Tuesday that it would appeal that ruling to the 4th Circuit Court of Appeals.
In the Boston case, the attorneys general from 18 states, along with the cities of San Francisco and Washington, D.C., asked Sorokin to issue a preliminary injunction. That means the injunction will likely remain in place while the lawsuit plays out.
They argue that the principle of birthright citizenship is “enshrined in the Constitution,” and that Trump does not have the authority to issue the order, which they called a “flagrantly unlawful attempt to strip hundreds of thousands of American-born children of their citizenship based on their parentage.”
They also argue that Trump’s order would cost states funding they rely on to “provide essential services” — from foster care to health care for low-income children, to “early interventions for infants, toddlers, and students with disabilities.”
At the heart of the lawsuits is the 14th Amendment to the Constitution, which was ratified in 1868 after the Civil War and the Dred Scott Supreme Court decision. That decision found that Scott, an enslaved man, wasn’t a citizen despite having lived in a state where slavery was outlawed.
The Trump administration has asserted that children of noncitizens are not “subject to the jurisdiction” of the United States and therefore not entitled to citizenship.
Attorneys for the states argue that it does and that it has been recognized since the amendment’s adoption, notably in an 1898 U.S. Supreme Court decision. That decision, United States v. Wong Kim Ark, held that the only children who did not automatically receive U.S. citizenship upon being born on U.S. soil were the children of diplomats, who have allegiance to another government; enemies present in the U.S. during hostile occupation; those born on foreign ships; and those born to members of sovereign Native American tribes.
The U.S. is among about 30 countries where birthright citizenship — the principle of jus soli or “right of the soil” — is applied. Most are in the Americas, and Canada and Mexico are among them.
Login
