deportation

The administration of United States President Donald Trump has filed an extraordinary lawsuit against the Maryland district court system and its federal judges, accusing them of having “used and abused” their powers to stymie deportations.

The complaint was lodged late on Tuesday. In its 22 pages, the administration accuses Maryland’s federal courts of “unlawful, anti-democratic” behaviour for placing limits on Trump’s deportation policies.

Fifteen district judges are named among the defendants, as is a clerk of court, one of the administrative officials in the court system.

The complaint advances an argument that Trump and his allies have long made publicly: that the president has a mandate from voters to carry out his campaign of mass deportation — and that the courts are standing in the way.

“Injunctions against the Executive Branch are particularly extraordinary because they interfere with that democratically accountable branch’s exercise of its constitutional powers,” the lawsuit reads.

It seeks an immediate injunction against a recent ruling from Chief Judge George Russell III, who was appointed by former President Barack Obama.

Russell had issued a standing order that would automatically take effect each time an immigrant files a petition for habeas corpus — in other words, a petition contesting their detention.

The chief judge’s order prevents the Trump administration from deporting the immigrant in question for a period of two business days after the petition is filed. That time frame, Russell added, can be extended at the discretion of the court.

The idea is to protect an immigrant’s right to due process — their right to a fair hearing in the legal system — so that they have the time to appeal their deportation if necessary.

But the Trump administration said that Russell’s order, and other orders from federal judges in Maryland, do little more than subvert the president’s power to exercise his authority over immigration policy.

“Every unlawful order entered by the district courts robs the Executive Branch of its most scarce resource: time to put its policies into effect,” the lawsuit argued.

Trump’s immigration policies have faced hundreds of legal challenges since the president took office for his second term in January.

Tuesday’s lawsuit admits as much, citing that fact as evidence of judicial bias against Trump’s immigration agenda.

“In the first 100 days of President Trump’s current term, district courts have entered more nationwide injunctions than in the 100 years from 1900 to 2000, requiring the Supreme Court to intervene again and again in recent weeks,” the lawsuit said.

The Supreme Court has upheld the right to due process, writing in recent cases like JGG v Trump that immigrants must be able to seek judicial review for their cases.

But critics have argued that other recent decisions have undermined that commitment. Earlier this week, for instance, the Supreme Court lifted a lower court’s ruling that barred the US government from deporting immigrants to third-party countries without prior notice.

Tuesday’s lawsuit against the Maryland federal court system appears poised to test whether the judicial branch can continue to serve as a check against the executive branch’s powers, at least as far as immigration is concerned.

The lawsuit attacks Maryland’s immigration-related court orders on several fronts. For example, it questions whether “immediate and irreparable injury” is likely in the deportation cases. It also asserts that the federal courts are impeding immigration courts — which fall under the authority of the executive branch — from greenlighting deportations.

But the complaint also emphasises the need for speed in executing the removals of immigrants from the US.

“Removals can take months of sensitive diplomacy to arrange and often do not completely come together until the last minute,” the Trump administration’s lawsuit said.

“A delay can undo all of those arrangements and require months of additional work before removal can be attempted again.”

Maryland is a reliably Democratic-leaning state, and the Trump administration has been dealt some significant setbacks in its federal courts.

That, in turn, has led the president and his allies to denounce the courts for “judicial overreach”, a theme reprised in Tuesday’s court filing.

One of the most prominent immigration cases unfolding in the US is that of Kilmar Abrego Garcia, a Salvadoran immigrant and resident of Maryland who was deported despite a protection order allowing him to remain in the country. His lawyers have maintained he fled El Salvador to escape gang violence.

His deportation was challenged before District Judge Paula Xinis, one of the judges named in Tuesday’s complaint.

Xinis ruled in early April that the US must “facilitate and effectuate” Abrego Garcia’s return from the El Salvador prison where he was being held, and the Supreme Court upheld that decision — though it struck the word “effectuate” for being unclear.

The Maryland judge then ordered the Trump administration to provide updates about the steps it was taking to return Abrego Garcia to the US. She has since indicated the administration could be held in contempt of court for failing to do so.

Abrego Garcia was abruptly returned to the US on June 6, after more than two and a half months imprisoned in El Salvador. The Trump administration said it brought him back to face criminal charges for human trafficking in Tennessee. That case is currently ongoing, and Abrego Garcia has denied the charges against him.

That legal proceeding, and Xinis’s orders, were not explicitly named in Tuesday’s lawsuit. But the complaint offered a broad critique of orders like hers.

“Defendants’ lawless standing orders are nothing more than a particularly egregious example of judicial overreach interfering with Executive Branch prerogatives,” the lawsuit argued, “and thus undermining the democratic process.”

Donald Trump campaigned on a promise to wage war on illegal immigration the likes of which the United States has never seen. His first big campaign — launched against Los Angeles and its surrounding communities, of course — has proceeded with predictably disastrous results.

Parts of Southern California are under occupation by the National Guard and Marines, as Trump and his allies try to paint the protests against deportations as an insurrection fueled by Mexican “invaders”. The 9th Circuit Court of Appeal will listen today to administration lawyers argue that deploying the National Guard over the objections of a sitting governor is constitutional.

On social media Sunday, Trump cawed that he has “directed my entire Administration” to concentrate on identifying and removing as many illegal immigrants as possible as quickly as possible. He vowed especially to crack down on sanctuary cities across the country to supposedly “reverse the tide of Mass Destruction Migration that has turned once Idyllic Towns into scenes of Third World Dystopia.” (His Restoration-era capitalization, not mine).

Yet in the president’s social media blathering last week came something shocking: an admission that deportations don’t really work.

On June 12, Trump wrote that farmers, hoteliers and people in the leisure industry “have been stating that our very aggressive policy on immigration is taking very good, long time workers away from them, with those jobs being almost impossible to replace.”

Ya think?

For decades, study after study across the political spectrum have shown that illegal immigrants not only don’t take jobs away from native-born U.S. citizens or depress their wages, but that removing them usually makes the economy worse.

There’s the liberal-leaning American Immigration Council, which predicted last year that a decadelong campaign to achieve Trump’s goal of booting 1 million illegal immigrants a year would shave off at least 4.2% from the U.S. gross domestic product. That number is on par with the Great Recession of 2008.

There’s the 618-page tome released in 2017 by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering and Medicine and overseen by 14 professors. It concluded that “immigration has an overall positive impact on long-run economic growth in the U.S.” and also noted that “the rate of unemployment for native workers decline” with “larger immigration flows.”

The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office projected last year that the surge in migration during the Biden administration would at first depress wages of native-born workers and legal immigrants but eventually help them increase over a decade.

Center for Immigration Studies director of research Steven Camarota — a man whose whole public persona is arguing that too much immigration of any kind is detrimental to the U.S. — claimed in prepared remarks before Congress last year that his group had “good evidence that immigration reduces wages and employment for some U.S.-born workers.” But he also admitted that parsing out how illegal immigration impacts the job market “is difficult.”

A 2024 survey by the Carsey School of Public Policy at the University of New Hampshire examined previous research into three infamous removals of legal and illegal immigrants from the U.S. workforce: the repatriation during the Great Depression of at least half a million people of Mexican descent, the 1964 end of the bracero program, and the removal of nearly half a million illegal immigrants during the Obama administration. The survey concluded that “deportation policies have not benefited U.S.- born residents.”

Meanwhile, a 2024 Brookings Institute paper found that three of the five professions with the highest number of illegal immigrants were in the hospitality, agricultural and restaurant industry and that U.S. citizens don’t work in those fields at the rate undocumented people do.

No wonder that later in the day after Trump’s social media about-face, the New York Times reported that a memo went out to ICE regional leaders urging them to “hold on all work site enforcement investigations/operations on agriculture (including aquaculture and meat packing plants), restaurants and operating hotels.”

So why pursue mass deportations at all if there’s mucho evidence that they negatively effect American-born workers, a group Trump claims he wants to restore to greatness?

There’s really only one explanation: terror.

White House Deputy Chief of Staff Stephen Miller speaks with the media outside the White House.

(Saul Loeb / AFP via Getty Images)

Trump’s main adviser on all things immigration is Deputy Chief of Staff Stephen Miller, who has long advocated for a scorched-earth campaign and dressed down ICE agents just last month for not nabbing and deporting people faster, damn the cost.

The Santa Monica native absorbed this apocalyptic vision from conservative activists in California, who cast the fight against illegal immigration while he was growing up in the 1990s and 2000s not just in economic terms but cultural ones. Xenophobia has always colored this nation’s past crackdowns on immigration legal and not, but the Golden State became a noxious cauldron whose anti-immigrant fumes have infested Americans in a way not seen in a century.

That’s what makes Trump’s campaign so dangerous. His seeming softening against farmers, restaurateurs and hoteliers shows that he knows the country can’t weather the disruptions that deportations cause to important sectors of our economy. If he just took a dollars-and-cents approach to illegal immigration and stopped the language about “Migrant Invasion” destroying big cities, Trump wouldn’t get such righteous pushback from so many.

But that’s not who he is. He inveighs the way he does because he wants undocumented people and the people who care for them to live in fear, to see him as a potentate who can deport people or leave them alone at his mercy and whim.

The historical precedent that Trump wants la migra to follow is Operation Wetback, an Eisenhower administration program the immigration authorities claimed back then deported 1.3 million illegal immigrants in 1954 alone and improved the economic conditions of Americans. Then and now, authorities said people without papers were ruining it for citizens, were causing too much crime and that our southern border was out of control.

The only book-length study of the campaign remains Juan Ramón García’s 1980 “Operation Wetback: The Mass Deportation of Mexican Undocumented Workers in 1954.” The professor went through newspaper clippings, congressional testimony and government reports to paint a picture of a government hell-bent on splashy headlines to scare Mexican migrants into returning to their homeland and deterring others from making the trek to el Norte.

Garcia found that government officials had exaggerated their claims because “they realized that the more impressive the figures, the better congressional response might be to requests for increased budgetary support.”

A 1954 photograph of undocumented Mexican workers (identified as “wetbacks” in a handwritten notation on the negative) awaiting deportation by U.S. authorities to Mexico.

(Los Angeles Times)

Operation Wetback didn’t usher in a new era of American worker prosperity but rather emboldened employers to exploit legal immigrants and citizens who filled in the jobs that illegal immigrants once occupied, Garcia found. It also “helped to strengthen feelings of alienation from U.S. society and to cause further mistrust of the government” for Mexican Americans. You’re seeing that play out right now, as young Latinos wave the flags of Mexico and other Latin American countries and U.S. citizens are being detained by la migra.

Most damningly, the book concluded that Operation Wetback didn’t stop illegal immigration at all — a fact borne out by the fact that here we are arguing about the subject 71 years later. The mass deportations were just a “stopgap measure, doomed to go the way of most stopgap measures,” Garcia wrote, because this country can never quit “the seemingly insatiable appetite for cheap labor” that it’s always had.

Someone tell that to Trump so he stops this madness once and for all.

June 4 (UPI) — A federal judge on Wednesday temporarily blocked the deportation of family members of the Egyptian national charged in the anti-Semitic attack in Boulder, Colo.

In the U.S. District Court in Denver, Judge Gordon P. Gallagher directed the federal government to stop the deportation proceedings of Mohamed Soliman‘s 41-year-old wife, Hayem El Gamal, and their five children.

On Tuesday, they were taken into U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement custody in Florence, Colo., about 40 miles from their home in Colorado Springs. Federal immigration records show they are being held at a federal detention center in Dilley, Texas, designed to house families with minors, CBS News reported.

The White House posted Tuesday on X: “THEY COULD BE DEPORTED AS EARLY AS TONIGHT.”

“Defendants SHALL NOT REMOVE” the five undocumented migrants from Colorado or the United States “unless or until this Court or the Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit vacates this order,” Gallagher wrote in his order.

“Moreover, the Court finds that deportation without process could work irreparable harm and an order must (be) issue(d) without notice due to the urgency this situation presents.”

He set a hearing for June 13 for a request on a temporary restraining order.

The Washington Post reported the family was held “incommunicado and without access to a lawyer” after they were placed in ICE custody on Tuesday, their lawyers said in court records.

By applying for asylum, the Trump administration can’t legally speed up their deportation, the legal representative said.

“Punishing individuals – including children as young as four-years-old – for the purported actions of their relatives is a feature of medieval justice systems or police state dictatorships, not democracies,” family attorney Eric Lee said Wednesday in a statement to CNN. “The detention and attempted removal of this family is an assault on core democratic principles and must provoke widespread opposition in the population, immigrant and non-immigrant alike.”

In the court filing obtained by The New York Times, the suspect’s wife “was shocked to learn” that her husband “was arrested for having committed a violent act against a peaceful gathering of individuals commemorating Israeli hostages.”

After his arrest, Soliman told detectives “no one” knew about his attack plans,” including his wife or children, according to the affidavit for his arrest filed Sunday.

“We are investigating to what extent his family knew about this heinous attack, if they had knowledge of it, or if they provided support to it. I am continuing to pray for the victims of this attack and their families. Justice will be served,” Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem posted on X on Tuesday.

The children are an 18-year-old daughter, two girls and two boys.

They are Egyptian citizens, according to the Department of Homeland Security.

El Gamal, 41, is a network engineer with a pending EB-2 visa for professionals with advanced degrees.

The eldest daughter, identified as Habiba Soliman, recently graduated from high school in Colorado Springs. An article in the Colorado Springs Gazette on April 25 said she had won a scholarship and planned to study medicine.

In August 2022, they were initially granted entry until February 2023, DHS said in a Wednesday statement. Soliman applied for asylum in September 2022 in Denver, the agency said.

In 2023, Soliman received a two-year work authorization that expired in March, a DHS official told CNN.

Authorities say Soliman yelled “Free Palestine” and used a flamethrower to ignite molotov cocktails and threw them into the crowd where a pro-Israeli group, Run for Their Lives, was seeking the release of Israeli hostages in Gaza.

A federal court says removing the wife and children of Mohamed Soliman without due process could cause ‘irreparable harm’.

A United States judge has temporarily blocked the deportation of family members related to a suspect accused of throwing Molotov cocktails at a pro-Israel rally in Boulder, Colorado.

The ruling on Wednesday came after the administration of President Donald Trump arrested the wife of Mohamed Soliman and their five children in an effort to deport them.

Judge Gordon Gallagher wrote that Soliman’s wife, Hayam El Gamal, and her children cannot be removed from the country as long as his order stands.

“Moreover, the Court finds that deportation without process could work irreparable harm,” the judge said.

El Gamal, who has not been charged with a crime, had filed a legal petition for her release.

Soliman, meanwhile, has been charged with a federal hate crime over the attack on Sunday, which injured 12 people.

It is unclear if the Trump administration has any evidence that Soliman’s relatives committed wrongdoing, or if they were simply targeted for their association with him. Authorities have indicated that Soliman appears to have acted alone in the attack.

Still, Trump officials signalled they would take an aggressive approach to investigating and deporting individuals they perceived to be linked to “terrorism”.

“In light of yesterday’s horrific attack, all terrorists, their family members, and terrorist sympathizers here on a visa should know that under the Trump Administration we will find you, revoke your visa, and deport you,” Secretary of State Marco Rubio said in a social media post on Monday.

The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) confirmed on Tuesday the detention of Elgamal, her three daughters and her two sons, four of whom are minors.

“We are investigating to what extent his family knew about this heinous attack, if they had knowledge of it, or if they provided support to it,” Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem said in a video posted online. “Justice will be served.”

According to DHS, Soliman and his family arrived in the US on temporary visas in 2022 before applying for asylum.

Soliman’s visa expired in 2023. Media reports indicate that El Gamal, meanwhile, applied for an employment visa: She has a background as a network engineer.

Critics say the tactic of penalising the relatives of a criminal suspect is a form of unlawful collective punishment.

In the West Bank, for instance, human rights groups have denounced Israeli operations that demolished the homes of Palestinians related to suspects in armed attacks.

The attack in Colorado has been linked to Israel’s war on Gaza, which United Nations experts have described as a genocide. The suspect allegedly yelled “Free Palestine” during the fire-bombing.

The Washington-backed war has also sparked other violent incidents on US soil. The incident in Colorado followed the killing of two Israeli Embassy staff members in Washington, DC, last month.

In October 2023, a six-year-old Palestinian boy was stabbed to death in the Chicago area in another crime linked to the war. The 73-year-old suspect reportedly told the boy’s mother that Muslims “must die” as he attacked them. He was sentenced to 53 years after being convicted of murder and hate crimes.

Weeks later, three Palestinian American students were shot and severely wounded in Vermont.

The war on Gaza has killed at least 54,607 Palestinians, according to health officials.

BOULDER, Colo. — A federal judge issued an order Wednesday to prevent the deportation of the wife and five children of an Egyptian man charged in a firebombing attack in Boulder, Colo.

U.S. District Judge Gordon P. Gallagher granted a request from the family of Mohamed Sabry Soliman to halt deportation proceedings of his wife and five children who were taken into federal custody Tuesday by U.S. immigration officials.

The family members have not been charged in the attack on a group demonstrating for the release of Israeli hostages in Gaza. Soliman faces federal hate crime charges and state charges of attempted murder in the Sunday attack in downtown Boulder.

U.S. Secretary of Homeland Security Kristi Noem said Wednesday that they are being processed for removal proceedings. It’s rare that family members of a person accused of a crime are detained and threatened with deportation.

Soliman’s wife, 18-year-old daughter, two minor sons and two minor daughters all are Egyptian citizens, the Department of Homeland Security said in a statement.

“We are investigating to what extent his family knew about this heinous attack, if they had knowledge of it, or if they provided support to it,” Noem said in a statement.

Noem also said federal authorities will immediately crack down on people who overstay their visas in response to the Boulder attack.

Soliman told authorities that no one, including his family, knew about his planned attack, according to court documents that, at times, spelled his name as “Mohammed.”

Earlier Wednesday, authorities raised the number of victims in the attack from 12 to 15, plus a dog.

Boulder County officials who provided updates on the number of victims said in a news release they include eight women and seven men, ranging in age from 25 to 88. The Associated Press left an email message Wednesday with prosecutors seeking more details on the newly identified victims and the dog.

Mohamed Sabry Soliman, 45, had planned to kill all of the roughly 20 participants in Sunday’s demonstration at the popular Pearl Street pedestrian mall, but he threw just two of his 18 Molotov cocktails while yelling “Free Palestine,” police said. Soliman, an Egyptian man who federal authorities say has been living in the U.S. illegally, didn’t carry out his full plan “because he got scared and had never hurt anyone before,” police wrote in an affidavit.

His wife and five children were taken into custody Tuesday by U.S. immigration officials, and the White House said they could be swiftly deported. It’s rare that family members of a person accused of a crime are detained and threatened with deportation in this way.

“Anyone who thinks they can come to America and advocate for antisemitic violence and terrorism — think again,” Noem said in a statement. “You are not welcome here. We will find you, deport you and prosecute you to the fullest extent of the law.

Soliman told authorities that no one, including his family, knew about his plans for the attack, according to court documents that, at times, spelled his name as “Mohammed.”

According to an FBI affidavit, Soliman told police he was driven by a desire “to kill all Zionist people” — a reference to the movement to establish and protect a Jewish state in Israel. Authorities said he expressed no remorse about the attack.

A vigil was scheduled for Wednesday evening at the local Jewish community center to support those affected by the attack.

Defendant’s immigration status

Soliman was born in el-Motamedia, an Egyptian farming village in the Nile Delta province of Gharbia that’s located about 75 miles north of Cairo, according to an Egyptian security official who spoke on the condition of anonymity because he wasn’t authorized to talk to the media.

Before moving to Colorado Springs three years ago, he spent 17 years in Kuwait, according to court documents.

He has been living in the U.S. illegally, having arrived in August 2022 on a tourist visa that expired in February 2023, Department of Homeland Security Assistant Secretary Tricia McLaughlin said in a post on X. She said Soliman filed for asylum in September 2022 and was granted a work authorization in March 2023, but that it also expired.

DHS did not respond to requests for additional information about the immigration status of his wife and children and the U.S. State Department said that visa records are confidential. The New York Times, citing McLaughlin, said his family’s visas have since been revoked and they were arrested Tuesday by ICE.

Hundreds of thousands of people overstay their visas each year in the United States, according to Homeland Security Department reports.

The case against Soliman

Soliman told authorities that he had been planning the attack for a year and was waiting for his daughter to graduate before carrying it out, the affidavit said.

A newspaper in Colorado Springs that profiled one of Soliman’s children in April noted the family’s journey from Egypt to Kuwait and then to the U.S. It said after initially struggling in school, she landed academic honors and volunteered at a local hospital.

Soliman currently faces federal hate crime charges and attempted murder charges at the state level, but authorities say additional charges could be brought. He’s being held in a county jail on a $10-million bond and is scheduled to make an appearance in state court on Thursday.

His attorney, Kathryn Herold, declined to comment after a state court hearing Monday.

Witnesses and police have said Soliman threw two incendiary devices, catching himself on fire as he hurled the second. Authorities said they believe Soliman acted alone. Although they did not elaborate on the nature of his injuries, a booking photo showed him with a large bandage over one ear.

The attack unfolded against the backdrop of the Israel-Hamas war, which continues to inflame global tensions and has contributed to a spike in antisemitic violence in the United States. The attack happened at the beginning of the Jewish holiday of Shavuot and barely a week after a man who also yelled “Free Palestine” was charged with fatally shooting two Israeli Embassy staffers outside a Jewish museum in Washington.

Six victims hospitalized

The victims ranged in age from 25 to 88, and the nature of some of their injuries spanned from serious to minor, officials said. They were members of the volunteer group called Run For Their Lives who were holding their weekly demonstration.

Three victims were still hospitalized Tuesday at the UCHealth University of Colorado Hospital, spokesperson Kelli Christensen said.

One of the 15 victims was a child when her family fled the Nazis during the Holocaust, said Ginger Delgado of the Arapahoe County Sheriff’s Office, who is acting as a spokesperson for the family of the woman, who doesn’t want her name used.

Slevin, Bedayn and Santana write for the Associated Press. AP reporters Eric Tucker in Washington; Heather Hollingsworth in Kansas City, Mo.; Samy Magdy in Cairo; Sean Murphy in Oklahoma City; and Hallie Golden in Seattle contributed to this report.

Washington, DC – There were shackles at her wrists. Her waist. Her ankles.

The memory of being bound still haunts 19-year-old Ximena Arias Cristobal even after her release from Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) custody.

Nearly a month after her arrest, the Georgia college student said she is still grappling with how her life has been transformed. One day in early May, she was pulled over for a minor traffic stop: turning right on a red light. The next thing she knew, she was in a detention centre, facing a court date for her deportation.

“That experience is something I’ll never forget. It left a mark on me, emotionally and mentally,” Arias Cristobal said during a news conference on Tuesday, recounting her time at the Stewart Detention Center in Lumpkin, Georgia.

“What hurts more,” she added, “is knowing that millions of others have gone through and are still going through the same kind of pain”.

Rights advocates say her story has become emblematic of a “dragnet” deportation policy in the United States, one that targets immigrants of all backgrounds, regardless of whether they have a criminal record.

President Donald Trump had campaigned for a second term on the pledge that he would expel “criminals” who were in the country “illegally”.

But as he ramps up his “mass deportation” campaign from the White House, critics say immigration agents are targeting immigrants from a variety of backgrounds — no matter how little risk they pose.

“The quotas that they are pushing for [are] creating this situation on the ground where ICE is literally just trying to go after anybody that they can catch,” said Vanessa Cardenas, the executive director of America’s Voice, an immigration advocacy group.

She explained that young, undocumented immigrants, known as Dreamers, are among the most vulnerable populations.

“In the dragnet, we’re getting long-established, deeply rooted Dreamers and other folks that have been in the United States for a long time,” Cardenas explained.

A vulnerable group

An avid runner who studies finance and economics at Dalton State College, Arias Cristobal is one of the 3.6 million people known as Dreamers. Many were sent to the US as children, sometimes accompanied by family members, others alone.

For decades, the US government has struggled with how to handle those young, undocumented arrivals to the country.

In 2012, then-President Barack Obama announced a new executive policy, the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA). It provided temporary protection from deportation for younger immigrants who had lived in the US since June 2007.

About 530,000 Dreamers are protected by their DACA status. But Gaby Pacheco, the leader of the immigration group TheDream.US, said that number represents a small proportion of the total population of young immigrants facing possible deportation.

Some arrived after the cut-off date of June 15, 2007, while others have been unable to apply: Processing for new applications has been paused in recent years. Legal challenges over DACA also continue to wind their way through the federal court system.

“Sadly, in recent months multiple Dream.US scholars and alumni have either been arrested, detained and even deported,” Pacheco said.

She noted that 90 percent of the Dreamers that her organisation is supporting during their first year of higher education have no protections under DACA or other programmes.

All told, she said, the last few months have revealed a “painful truth”: that “Dreamers are under attack”.

Setting quotas

But advocates like Pacheco warn that the first months of the Trump administration may be only a harbinger of what is to come.

Last week, Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem and White House Deputy Chief of Staff Stephen Miller informed ICE agents that the Trump administration had increased its daily quota for immigration arrests, from 1,000 per day to 3,000.

The current draft of Trump’s budget legislation — known as the One Big Beautiful Bill — would also surge an estimated $150bn in government funds towards deportation and other immigration-related activities. The bill narrowly passed the House of Representatives and is likely to be taken up in the Senate in the coming weeks.

Both actions could mean a significant scale-up in immigration enforcement, even as advocates argue that Trump’s portrayal of the US as a country overrun with foreign criminals is starkly out of step with reality.

Studies have repeatedly shown that undocumented immigrants commit fewer crimes — including violent crimes — than US-born citizens.

Available data also calls into question Trump’s claims that there are large numbers of undocumented criminal offenders in the country.

The rate of arrests and deportations has remained more or less the same as when Trump’s predecessor, former President Joe Biden, was in office, according to a report by the TRAC research project.

From January 26 to May 3, during the first four months of Trump’s second term, his administration made an average of 778 immigration arrests per day. That is just 2 percent higher than the average during the final months of Biden’s presidency, which numbered about 759.

The number of daily removals or deportations under Trump was actually 1 percentage point lower than Biden’s daily rate.

‘More and more pushback’

All told, Pacheco and Cardenas warned that the pressure to increase arrests and deportations could lead to increasingly desperate tactics.

The administration has already rolled back a policy prohibiting immigration enforcement in sensitive areas, like churches and schools. It has also sought to use a 1798 wartime law to swiftly deport alleged gang members without due process, and revoked temporary protections that allowed some foreign nationals to remain in the country legally.

In an effort to increase immigration arrests, the Trump administration has also pressured local officials to coordinate with ICE. Drawing on section 287(g) of the Immigration and Nationality Act, the administration has even delegated certain immigration powers to local law enforcement, including the right to make immigration arrests and screen people for deportation.

In one instance in early May, the Tennessee Highway Patrol coordinated with ICE in a sweep of traffic stops that led to nearly 100 immigration arrests. Another large-scale operation in Massachusetts in early June saw ICE make 1,500 arrests.

Swept up in that mass arrest was Marcelo Gomes Da Silva, an 18-year-old high school student on his way to volleyball practice. His arrest sparked protest and condemnation in Gomes Da Silva’s hometown of Milford, Massachusetts.

Cardenas pointed to those demonstrations, as well as the outpouring of support for Arias Cristobal, as evidence of a growing rejection of Trump’s immigration policies.

“I think we are going to see more and more pushback from Americans,” she said.

“Having said that, it is my belief that this administration has all the intention to implement their plans… And if Congress gives them more money, they’re going to go after our communities.”

WASHINGTON — The family of a 4-year-old Bakersfield girl with a rare medical condition has been granted humanitarian protection from deportation, allowing her to continue receiving lifesaving treatment in the United States.

The plight of the girl, who The Times has identified by her initials, S.G.V., drew public outrage and galvanized dozens of lawmakers to advocate on her behalf. The girl and her parents, who are from Mexico, originally received temporary permission to enter the U.S. legally through Tijuana in 2023.

The Trump administration had rescinded the legal protections of S.G.V. and her parents, leaving them vulnerable to deportation. Her doctor at Children’s Hospital Los Angeles said she could die within days of losing her medical care for short bowel syndrome, a condition that prevents her body from completely absorbing nutrients from food.

Last week, 38 congressional Democrats, including California Sens. Alex Padilla and Adam Schiff, condemned the termination of the family’s status and urged the Department of Homeland Security to reinstate it.

“Without action, S.G.V. will die,” the lawmakers wrote May 29 to DHS Secretary Kristi Noem. “We urge a prompt response from your Department and a swift decision to extend this family’s legal status in the U.S.” The lawmakers wrote that the family’s situation “clearly meets the need for humanitarian aid.”

In a letter Monday to the family and their attorney, acting field office director Carmen Paniagua of U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services wrote: “This is to advise you that effective June 2, 2025, you have been granted Humanitarian Parole for a period of one year.”

In April, the girl’s mother, Deysi Vargas, received notice from the federal government that their humanitarian protections and permission to work legally had been terminated. The notice told them to leave voluntarily or else “the federal government will find you.”

An online fundraiser for S.G.V.’s care amassed more than $40,000 as of Tuesday.

WASHINGTON — Lawmakers this week condemned the Trump administration’s termination of humanitarian protections that have left a 4-year-old girl who is receiving critical medical treatment in Los Angeles vulnerable to deportation and death.

On Tuesday, The Times published the story of S.G.V., who has short bowel syndrome — a rare condition that prevents her body from completely absorbing nutrients. She and her parents received temporary permission to enter the U.S. legally through Tijuana in 2023.

In a letter Thursday to Department of Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem, 38 congressional Democrats, including California Sens. Alex Padilla and Adam Schiff, urged her to reconsider the termination of the family’s legal status.

“We believe this family’s situation clearly meets the need for humanitarian aid and urge you and this Administration to reconsider its decision,” the lawmakers wrote. “It is our duty to protect the sick, vulnerable, and defenseless.”

Last month, S.G.V.’s family, who now live in Bakersfield, received notice from U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services that their status had been terminated and that they had to leave the country immediately. Earlier this month, they applied again for humanitarian protections.

Tricia McLaughlin, assistant secretary in the Department of Homeland Security, said in a statement that the family is not actively in the deportation process and that their application is still being considered.

The girl’s physician, Dr. John Arsenault of Children’s Hospital Los Angeles, wrote in a letter requested by her family that any interruption in her daily nutrition system “could be fatal within a matter of days.”

The story about S.G.V. drew swift public outcry. An online fundraiser for the girl’s care had amassed nearly $26,000 as of Thursday morning.

The letter to Noem was led by Reps. Luz Rivas (D-North Hollywood) and Sydney Kamlager-Dove (D-Los Angeles). Rivas said state legislators and constituents messaged her about the family, asking what she could do to help.

While the family lives outside of Rivas’ district, which encompasses the north-central San Fernando Valley, she said it is her role as a California Democrat and a member of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus to speak up for immigrant constituents in districts where Republican representatives may not do so.

“That’s why we’re organizing as members of Congress,” Rivas said. “Without action from Secretary Noem and this administration, this little girl will die within days.”

In a post on X, Rep. Judy Chu (D-Monterey Park) called the situation “heartbreaking.” Seeking to deport the girl despite her medical condition is “cruel and inexcusable,” Chu added.

In another X post, Rep. Greg Casar (D-Texas) wrote: “Trump wants to deport a four-year-old who could die from a life-threatening medical condition if her treatment is interrupted. How does this cruelty make us a stronger nation?”

The family and their attorneys held a news conference Wednesday at the Koreatown office of the pro bono firm, Public Counsel. The lawyers explained that the equipment administered by the hospital to S.G.V. for home use is not available outside the U.S.

“If they deport us and they take away my daughter’s access to specialized medical care, she will die,” said Deysi Vargas.

Attorneys for the family noted that S.G.V. is not the only child affected in recent months by the Trump administration’s immigration policies. In an attempt to speed up arrests and deportations, they said, children are needlessly being swept up in the process.

Gina Amato Lough, directing attorney at Public Counsel, said the girl’s case “is a symbol of the recklessness of this administration’s deportation policies.”

“We’re seeing a pattern of cruelty and a violation of our most treasured rights and values,” said Amato Lough. “These are people coming to us for protection, and instead we’re sending them to die. That’s not justice, and it doesn’t make us any safer.”

Avelo Airlines, a struggling, Houston, Texas-based budget carrier, has faced weeks of backlash after taking a contract with the United States government to use its planes to deport migrants, the first commercial airline to do so.

Avelo, which started the deportation flights in mid-May, defended the move in an April 3 letter to employees, saying its partnership with the Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agency is “too valuable not to pursue”.

Founded in 2021, the airline has been in financial turmoil and was projected to have only about $2m in cash on hand by June, the trade publication Airline Observer reported last month. An Avelo spokesperson told Al Jazeera that that reporting is outdated.

The airline has not disclosed the terms of the deal with ICE but is said to be using three of its Boeing 737 aircraft for the flights. Avelo has 20 aircraft in its fleet.

At the beginning of 2024, Avelo reported its first profitable quarter since its founding but hasn’t released any financial results since then. Because it is not a publicly traded company, Avelo is not legally obligated to regularly disclose its financial status to the public.

Avelo’s deal was brokered through a third-party contractor, CSI Aviation, which received $262.9m in federal contracts, mostly through ICE, for the 2025 fiscal year. While CSI Aviation did not confirm to Al Jazeera the specifics of its deal with Avelo, federal spending records show the company was awarded a new contract in March and received $97.5m in April when the Avelo flights were announced.

April’s contract marks the biggest for CSI Aviation since it began receiving federal contracts in 2008. Until now, CSI Aviation’s highest payouts had come more frequently during Democratic administrations. In October under former President Joe Biden, the federal government paid out more than $75m to CSI Aviation.

CEO Andrew Levy has said Avelo operated similar flights under the Biden administration but the public outcry against Avelo this time is because of how Republican President Donald Trump’s administration has conducted deportations.

“In the past, the deportees were afforded due process,” aviation journalist and New Hampshire state lawmaker Seth Miller said. “[They were] not snatched off the street, moved multiple times to evade the judicial process and put on planes before they could appeal. In the past, they were returned to their country of origin, not a third country. In the past, they were not shipped to a labour camp from which no one is ever released.”

“These are, to me, not the same deportations as in the past, and any company signing on in April 2025 to operate those flights knows that,” Miller told Al Jazeera.

The US government has awarded CSI Aviation $165m for deportation charter flights so far in the current year until August 31, and that could be extended to February 26. The data does not specify how much goes to each subcontractor. However, the March 1 $165m contract was modified on March 25 with an additional $33.7m tacked onto it just days before Avelo announced its deal.

Al Jazeera was unable to confirm the specific dollar amount for the Avelo contract.

CSI Aviation did not respond to Al Jazeera’s request for comment.

Avelo, led by Levy – an industry veteran who previously served as CEO of another US-based budget airline, Allegiant, and as chief financial officer for United Airlines – has stood by the deal despite the public outcry.

“We realize this is a sensitive and complicated topic. After significant deliberations, we determined that charter flying will provide us with the stability to continue expanding our core scheduled passenger service and keep our more than 1,100 Crewmembers employed for years to come,” Levy said in a statement to Al Jazeera, comments the company had also provided to other publications.

Connecticut Attorney General William Tong pressed the airline for the terms of the deal. Avelo responded by instructing Tong to file a  Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request. FOIA requests typically take several months to process. Connecticut is home to one of Avelo’s biggest hubs in New Haven.

Avelo declined Al Jazeera’s request for information on the terms of its agreement with CSI Aviation, saying in an email that it was not “authorised to share the details of the contract”.

Al Jazeera has submitted a FOIA request for the contract terms. ICE denied our expedited request for the contract terms, saying our request lacked “an urgency to inform the public about an actual or alleged federal government activity, if made by a person primarily engaged in disseminating information”. The phone number ICE gave to challenge the request through its public liaison did not work when called.

“For reasons of operational security, US Immigration and Customs Enforcement does not release information about future removal flights or schedules in advance. However, the removal of illegal aliens who are unlawfully present in the United States is a core responsibility of ICE and is regularly carried out by ICE Air Operations,” a spokesperson for ICE told Al Jazeera.

Several lawmakers, including Senator Alex Padilla of California and Senator Richard Blumenthal of Connecticut, have voiced concerns over these flights.

“Given the Trump Administration’s mission to indiscriminately deport our nation’s immigrants – without due process, in violation of the Constitution and federal immigration law, and, in some cases, in defiance of court orders – it is deeply disturbing that Avelo has determined that its partnership with ICE is ‘too valuable not to pursue,’” Padilla’s office said in a news release.

Flight attendants have also raised safety concerns, saying there is no safe plan in the event of an emergency and it is only a matter of time before a tragic incident occurs.

As first reported by ProPublica, ICE Air detainees have soiled themselves because they did not have access to bathrooms while being transported to prisons without due process.

ICE has denied allegations that detainees lacked access to bathrooms during flights.

Are financiers concerned?

Avelo’s largest investor is Morgan Stanley Tactical Value, whose managing director, Tom Cahill, sits on Avelo’s board. Morgan Stanley’s fund invested an undisclosed amount in the airline’s Series A funding round, the first major investment stage for a company.

That round raised $125m in January 2020, weeks before the COVID-19 pandemic was declared a US and global emergency. A subsequent Series B round in 2022 brought in an additional $42m, $30m of which came from Morgan Stanley.

Morgan Stanley Tactical Value remains Avelo’s largest shareholder. Cahill, who has been with Morgan Stanley since 1990, has not publicly commented on the deal. He did not respond to Al Jazeera’s request for comment. Morgan Stanley declined to comment.

Avelo has also hired Jefferies Financial Group, an investment bank and financial services company, to raise additional capital in a new investment round, reportedly aiming to raise $100m, according to the Airline Observer, information that Avelo said is outdated.

Jefferies did not respond to Al Jazeera’s request for comment.

A public image problem

Avelo’s involvement in the deportation programme has sparked intense public backlash. Upon the launch of the flights, protests erupted at airports in Burbank, California; Mesa, Arizona; and New Haven, Connecticut.

A Change.org petition calling for a boycott of the airline has garnered more than 38,000 signatures. Avelo did not comment on the petition.

“From a reputational perspective, someone in a boardroom somewhere made the decision that the hit to reputation wasn’t as important as staying alive,” said Hannah Mooney Mack, an independent strategic communications consultant.

Miller has taken action to raise awareness about the airline’s recent contract, funding two billboards near Tweed New Haven Airport that criticise Avelo’s participation in deportation flights. The signs read: “Does your vacation support their deportation? Just say AvelNO!”

“I love almost all of the things that aviation does in helping bring people together and connect communities and things like that. This is decidedly not that. And it rubbed me the wrong way,” the congressman told Al Jazeera.

“I certainly understand that from a financial perspective there may be a need. I happen to disagree with it from a moral perspective and think it’s abhorrent.”

Miller said he spent $7,000 on the billboards and 96 people contributed to the effort. Avelo reportedly convinced billboard operator Lamar Advertising to take down the ads, citing copyright concerns. Miller has since sued Avelo on First Amendment grounds. He said he’s fighting because he thinks people need to know about Avelo’s contract.

“I don’t like that this is happening, and I think other people should not fly Avelo as long as they are running these deportation flights.”

WASHINGTON — A federal judge suggested the Trump administration was “manufacturing” chaos and said he hoped that “reason can get the better of rhetoric” in a scathing order in a case about government efforts to deport a handful of migrants from various countries to South Sudan.

In the order published Monday evening, Judge Brian Murphy wrote that he had given the Trump administration “remarkable flexibility with minimal oversight” in the case and emphasized the numerous times he attempted to work with the government.

“From the course of conduct, it is hard to come to any conclusion other than that Defendants invite a lack of clarity as a means of evasion,” the Boston-based Murphy wrote in the 17-page order.

Murphy oversees a case in which immigration advocates are attempting to prevent the Trump administration from sending migrants they’re trying to deport from the U.S. to countries that they’re not from without giving them a meaningful chance to protest their removal.

The judge said the men couldn’t advocate for themselves

In a hearing last week called to address reports that eight immigrants had been sent to South Sudan, Murphy said the men hadn’t been able to argue that the deportation could put them in danger.

But instead of ordering the government to return the men to the U.S. for hearings — as the plaintiffs wanted — he gave the government the option of holding the hearings in Djibouti where the plane had flown on its way to South Sudan as long as the men remained in U.S. government custody. Days later, the Trump administration filed another motion saying that Murphy was requiring them to hold “dangerous criminals in a sensitive location.”

But in his order Monday he emphasized repeatedly that it was the government’s “own suggestion” that they be allowed to process the men’s claims while they were still abroad.

“It turns out that having immigration proceedings on another continent is harder and more logistically cumbersome than Defendants anticipated,” Murphy wrote.

The government has argued that the men had a history with the immigration system, giving them prior opportunities to express a fear of being deported to a country outside their homeland. And the Trump administration has said that the men’s home — Cuba, Laos, Mexico, Myanmar, Vietnam and South Sudan — would not take them back.

The administration has also repeatedly emphasized the men’s criminal histories in the U.S. and portrayed them as national security threats.

The administration is relying on third countries

The Trump administration has increasingly relied on third countries to take immigrants who cannot be sent to their home countries for various reasons. Some countries simply refuse to take back their citizens being deported while others take back some but not all of their citizens. And some cannot be sent to their home countries because of concerns they’ll be tortured or harmed.

Historically that has meant that immigration enforcement officials have had to release people into the U.S. that it wants to deport but can’t.

But the Trump administration has leaned on other countries to take them. In the Western Hemisphere, El Salvador, Costa Rica and Panama have all agreed to take some people being removed from the U.S., with El Salvador being the most controversial example because it is holding people deported from the U.S. in a notorious prison.

The Trump administration has said it’s exploring other third countries for deportations.

Murphy said in his order that the eight men were initially told May 19 they’d be going to South Africa and then later that same day were told they were going to South Sudan. He noted that the U.S. government “has issued stark warnings regarding South Sudan.”

He said the men had fewer than 16 hours between being told they were going to be removed and going to the airport “most of which were non-waking hours” and “limited, if any” ability to talk to family or a lawyer. “Given the totality of the circumstances, it is hard to take seriously the idea that Defendants intended these individuals to have any real opportunity to make a valid claim,” the judge wrote.

Santana writes for the Associated Press.

Deysi Vargas’ daughter was nearly 2½ when she took her first steps.

The girl was a year delayed because she had spent most of her short life in a hospital in Playa del Carmen, Mexico, tethered to feeding tubes 24 hours a day. She has short bowel syndrome, a rare condition that prevents her body from completely absorbing the nutrients of regular food.

Vargas and her husband were desperate to get their daughter, whom The Times is identifying by her initials, S.G.V., better medical care. In 2023, they received temporary humanitarian permission to enter the U.S. legally through Tijuana.

Now in Bakersfield, the family received notice last month that their legal status had been terminated. The letter warned them: “It is in your best interest to avoid deportation and leave the United States of your own accord.”

But doing so would put S.G.V., now a bubbly 4-year-old, at immediate risk of death.

“This is a textbook example of medical need,” said the family’s attorney, Rebecca Brown, of the pro bono legal firm Public Counsel. “This child will die and there’s no sense for that to happen. It would just be a cruel sacrifice.”

A spokesperson for U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services declined to comment.

S.G.V.’s medication is stored in a small refrigerator.

Children’s Hospital Los Angeles, where the girl regularly receives treatment, declined to comment. But in a letter requested by the family, Dr. John Arsenault of CHLA wrote that he sees the girl every six weeks.

If there is an interruption in her daily nutrition system, called Total Parenteral Nutrition (TPN), the doctor wrote, “this could be fatal within a matter of days.”

“As such, patients on home TPN are not allowed to leave the country because the infrastructure to provide TPN or provide immediate intervention if there is a problem with IV access depends on our program’s utilization of U.S.-based healthcare resources and does not transfer across borders,” Arsenault wrote.

Vargas, 28, is from the Mexican state of Oaxaca; her husband, 34, is from Colombia. They met in Cancun, where they were working. Just before S.G.V. was born, the couple moved to nearby Playa del Carmen so her husband could work as an Uber driver.

The girl was born a month premature and quickly taken to intensive care. After doctors discovered her condition, she underwent six surgeries to fix an intestinal blockage. But Vargas said the doctors cut out too much, and the girl was left with short bowels. She experienced repeated blood infections, including one that nearly killed her.

The girl’s weight fluctuated severely. One month, she would look emaciated, her tiny limbs and bulging stomach incongruous with the family’s relative access to resources. Another month, she was as round-cheeked as any other baby.

When S.G.V. was 7 months old, a doctor suggested that the family relocate to Mexico City, where pediatric care for short bowel syndrome was the best in the country. But although her condition initially improved, the blood infections continued.

Unable to work, Vargas spent all day, every day, at the hospital with her daughter. Some days, she said, nurses would mistakenly administer the wrong medication to S.G.V. Other days, Vargas would arrive to find that her daughter had thrown up on herself overnight and no one had cleaned her up.

As part of her daily routine, Deysi Vargas runs a saline solution through her daughter’s intravenous line.

Vargas tried to keep a watchful eye over her daughter. Even so, she said a nurse once mistakenly sped up S.G.V.’s nutrition system, causing her to quickly pee it out. The girl became dehydrated and her glucose levels skyrocketed before doctors whisked her to intensive care, where her condition stabilized.

S.G.V. as a baby, taken in Mexico before treatment for short bowel syndrome.

(Deysi Vargas)

Vargas had read about children similar to her daughter going on to have normal lives in other countries. In Mexico, her daughter was being kept alive — but at 2, her condition had not improved.

So when Vargas learned that the Biden administration had begun offering migrants appointments with border agents through a phone application called CBP One, she signed up. Those let in received two-year protection from deportation and work permits.

With the appointment set for July 31, 2023, Vargas and her family set out for Tijuana two days earlier. She carefully carried her daughter out of the hospital, her nutrition bags still connected intravenously.

Her husband told agents that he had once been kidnapped by cartel members in Mexico who extorted money and threatened to kill him. They also looked at the girl, whose vulnerable condition was obvious.

“God knew she needed better treatment,” Vargas said. “When we got to the entrance, they saw her and asked us if we needed medical help.”

By that afternoon, the family had been whisked to Rady Children’s Hospital-San Diego.

S.G.V. quickly improved. Although she once was hooked up 24 hours a day to the feeding system that delivered nutrients directly into the bloodstream, doctors began weaning her off as her intestines got stronger.

The Trump administration has revoked the family’s humanitarian parole that they received in 2023 to treat the 4-year-old girl’s short bowel syndrome. Doctors say she could die within days without treatment.

A year later, doctors referred her to Children’s Hospital Los Angeles, which has one of the top-ranked gastroenterology programs in the country.

Both of her parents worked, holding down odd jobs, and by September 2024, the family had settled in Bakersfield and S.G.V. was discharged from the hospital.

For the first time, S.G.V. experienced the outside world. At Walmart, her eyes widened from the shopping cart and she and her mom strolled the aisles.

“It was incredible,” Vargas said. “I had waited so long for doctors to tell me, ‘Ma’am, your daughter is OK now. She can go home.’”

Now, the girl spends 14 hours each night hooked up to the intravenous feeding system. She wears a backpack to take it on the go.

Four times a day, for an hour, her mom administers a different type of nutrition that goes straight into her stomach through a gastric tube. When the girl goes to preschool, she takes a larger backpack containing the milky fluid, and the school nurse administers her noon feeding.

Before S.G.V. takes a shower, Vargas unplugs her IV tubes, flushes them with saline and tapes a plastic sheet over her chest to keep water from getting in and infecting the area.

On a recent morning, Vargas dressed the girl in pink leggings, a Hello Kitty T-shirt and black Puma sneakers. As they left hand-in-hand for preschool, S.G.V.’s curly black hair was still wet and the adult-size backpack dangled behind her knees as she walked.

S.G.V.’s care is covered through Medi-Cal. But life in the U.S. isn’t cheap.

Their modest living room contains little more than a hot plate on a folding table, a mini-fridge, a single chair and an IV bag stand. With no full kitchen, Vargas mostly makes sandwiches or soups. The fridge is filled with S.G.V.’s nutrition packs.

Vargas recently found steady work cleaning a restaurant. Finally, she thought, the family was achieving a sense of stability.

Then in April she received the notice from immigration authorities. This month, she received a notice terminating her employment authorization.

Vargas said she and her husband sometimes eat just once a day after paying rent and utilities, as well as for diapers and other necessities. Her husband is currently unemployed because of an injury, and she fears that losing her income could leave them homeless.

The thought of being forced by immigration agents to return to Mexico terrifies Vargas.

“I know the treatment they have there for her is not adequate, because we already lived it,” she said. “Those were bad times. Here she is living the most normal life possible.”

If not for her daughter’s medical condition, Vargas said, they probably would still be in Mexico. They want to stay only for as long as the girl needs treatment. Exactly how long that could be is unclear, but the couple are hopeful that their child’s condition will improve enough that she stops requiring supplemental nutrition.

Brown, their lawyer, submitted a petition for a continuation of their temporary humanitarian legal status based on S.G.V.’s medical condition. She believes the family’s legal status was prematurely terminated by mistake.

President Trump lambasted Biden over his broad expansion of programs allowing humanitarian entry, known as parole. On his first day in office, Trump issued an executive order to ensure that the discretionary authority be “exercised on only a case-by-case basis” for urgent humanitarian reasons or a significant public benefit.

Deysi Vargas and her daughter, S.G.V., walk about 15 minutes to the child’s preschool.

“This is the intended purpose — to help the most vulnerable who need attention here,” Brown said. “We can avoid having harmed the child and the family.”

Although Trump said on the campaign trail that he would target criminals for deportation, his administration quickly began revoking the legal status of immigrants who have no criminal history.

The Trump administration has stripped humanitarian protections from hundreds of thousands of immigrants who entered the U.S. under various Biden-era programs. Thousands of people who similarly entered the country using the CBP One app received notices from the federal government around the same time Vargas did, ordering them to leave voluntarily or face criminal prosecution and other legal actions.

The same phone app that Vargas used to enter the country has since been turned into CBP Home, to help immigrants such as her self-deport. If not, it says, “the federal government will find you.”

Times staff photographer Myung J. Chun in Bakersfield contributed to this report.

A federal judge in the United States has told the administration of President Donald Trump that an alleged effort to deport migrants to South Sudan was “unquestionably violative” of his court injunction.

The announcement from US District Judge Brian Murphy on Wednesday tees up yet another judicial battle for the Trump administration, which has faced repeated criticism that it is ignoring court orders.

Judge Murphy, who is based in Boston, Massachusetts, has yet to announce what he plans to do about the apparent violation. He left that question to another day.

But he indicated that the people on board Tuesday’s flight had not been given enough time to challenge their deportations, in violation of their right to due process — and also in violation of Murphy’s April 18 injunction.

Murphy had ruled that migrants facing removal to a third-party country besides their own had the right to a reasonable amount of time to challenge their deportations.

But the Trump administration has repeatedly dismissed claims that it refuses to abide by decisions unfavourable to its policies, instead blasting judges like Murphy as “activist”.

During Wednesday’s court hearing, a lawyer for Trump’s Justice Department, Elainis Perez, refused to confirm where the deportation flight had landed, saying that divulging the information raised “very serious operational and safety concerns”.

Separately, Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) held a news conference addressing the issue and defending the deportation flight.

Acting ICE Director Todd Lyons said the people on board had been accused of murder, armed robbery, rape and sexual assault.

In the case of one migrant, Lyons said, “his country would not take him back.” He called such countries “recalcitrant”.

Tricia McLaughlin, a spokesperson for the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), also framed the removals as a “diplomatic and military security operation”.

Standing in front of photos representing eight migrants, she said they were deported alone for safety reasons and confirmed they remain in DHS custody, although they had indeed left the US.

“We cannot tell you what the final destination for these individuals will be,” she added, again citing security issues.

But she did address the possibility that they might currently be in South Sudan, as their lawyers indicated in court filings.

“I would caution you to make the assumption that their final destination is South Sudan,” she said, later clarifying that the flight may make multiple stops: “We’re confirming the fact that that’s not their final destination.”

In Tuesday’s court filings, lawyers for the migrants said their clients hail from Myanmar, Vietnam and other countries. They also explained that their clients speak little English but were provided no translator to understand their removal notices.

They allegedly were deported with less than 24 hours’ notice. On Tuesday morning, as one lawyer tried to locate her client, she said she was informed he had been removed to South Sudan, a country with a turbulent history and a record of human rights abuses.

Judge Murphy had previously ordered the migrants to be given at least 15 days to challenge their removals on the grounds that they could face dangers in the countries they were deported to.

In the wake of Tuesday’s flight, he has also ruled that the US government must keep the migrants in its custody and ensure their safety while hearings proceed.

McLaughlin, however, accused the “activist judge” of “trying to protect” the migrants, which she described as “some of the most barbaric, violent individuals”.

“While we are fully compliant with the law and court orders, it is absolutely absurd for a district judge to try to dictate the foreign policy and national security of the United States of America,” she said.

McLaughlin and the other officials also argued that the Trump administration was exercising its right to find “safe third countries” to remove these individuals to.

“No country on earth wanted to accept them because their crimes are so uniquely monstrous and barbaric,” she said.

“Thanks to the courageous work of the State Department and ICE and the president’s national security team, we found a nation that was willing to accept custody of these vicious illegal aliens.”

The Trump administration has been accused of amping up fears of criminality among immigration populations, as part of its justification for its “mass deportation” campaign.

Police in South Sudan have told The Associated Press news agency that no migrants from the US have arrived in the country so far. The New York Times has reported that the plane is believed to have landed in the East African country of Djibouti.

WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court ruled Monday that the Trump administration may seek to deport nearly 350,000 Venezuelans who were granted “temporary protected status” under the Biden administration to live and work in the United States.

In a brief order, the justices granted a fast-track appeal from Trump’s lawyers and set aside the decision of a federal judge in San Francisco who had blocked the repeal announced by Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem.

Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson voted to deny the appeal.

Trump’s lawyers said the law gave the Biden administration the discretion to grant temporary protection to Venezuelans, but also gave the new administration the same discretion to end it.

The court’s decision does not involve the several hundred Venezuelans who were held in Texas and targeted for speedy deportation to El Salvador because they were alleged to be gang members. The justices blocked their deportation until they were offered a hearing.

But it will strip away the legal protection for an estimated 350,000 Venezuelans who arrived by 2023 and could not return home because of the “severe humanitarian” crisis created by the regime of Nicolas Maduro. An additional 250,000 Venezuelans who arrived by 2021 remain protected until September.

“This is an abuse of the emergency docket,” said Ahilan Arulanantham, a UCLA law professor who is representing the Venezuelan beneficiaries of the temporary protected status, or TPS.

He added: “It would be preposterous to suggest there’s something urgent about the need to strip immigration status of several hundred thousand people who have lived here for years.”

It was one of two special authorities used by the Biden administration that face possible repeal now.

Last week, Trump’s lawyers asked the Supreme Court to also revoke the special “grant of parole” that allowed 532,000 immigrants from Cuba, Haiti, Nicaragua and Venezuela to legally enter the United States on personally financed flights.

A judge in Boston blocked Noem’s repeal of the parole authority.

The Biden administration granted the TPS under a 1990 law. It said the U.S. government may extend relief to immigrants who cannot return home because of an armed conflict, natural disaster or other “extraordinary and temporary conditions.”

Shortly before leaving office, Alejandro Mayorkas, Biden’s Homeland Security secretary, extended the TPS for the Venezuelans for 18 months.

While nationals from 17 countries qualify for TPS, the largest number from any country are Venezuelans.

The Trump administration moved quickly to reverse course.

“As its name suggests,” TPS provides “temporary — not permanent — relief to aliens who cannot safely return to their homes,” Solicitor Gen. D. John Sauer wrote in his appeal last week.

Shortly after she was confirmed, Noem said the special protection for the Venezuelans was “contrary to the national interest.”

She referred to them as “dirtbags.” In a TV interview, she also claimed that “Venezuela purposely emptied out their prisons, emptied out their mental health facilities and sent them to the United States of America.”

The ACLU Foundations of Northern and Southern California and the Center for Immigration Law and Policy at the UCLA School of Law filed suit in San Francisco. Their lawyers argued the conditions in Venezuela remain extremely dangerous.

U.S. District Judge Edward Chen agreed and blocked Noem’s repeal order from taking effect nationwide. He said the “unprecedented action of vacating existing TPS” was a “step never taken by any administration.”

He ruled Noem’s order was “arbitrary and capricious” in violation of the Administrative Procedure Act because it did not offer a reasoned explanation for the change in regulations. It was also “motivated by unconstitutional animus,” he said.

The judge also found that tens of thousands of American children could be separated from their parents if the adults’ temporary protected status were repealed.

When the 9th Circuit Court refused to lift the judge’s temporary order, the solicitor general appealed to the Supreme Court on May 1.

Last week, the State Department reissued an “extreme danger” travel advisory for Venezuela, urging Americans to leave the country immediately or to “prepare a will and designate appropriate insurance beneficiaries and/or power of attorney.”

“Do not travel to or remain in Venezuela due to the high risk of wrongful detention, torture in detention, terrorism, kidnapping, arbitrary enforcement of local laws, crime, civil unrest, and poor health infrastructure,” the advisory states.

Trump’s lawyers downplayed the impact of a ruling lifting TPS. They told the justices that none of the plaintiffs is facing immediate deportation.

Each of them “will have the ability to challenge on an individual basis whether removal is proper — or seek to stay, withhold or otherwise obtain relief from any order of removal — through ordinary” immigration courts, he said.

Arulanantham said the effect will be substantial. Many of the beneficiaries have no other protection from deportation. Some have pending applications, such as for asylum. But immigration authorities have begun detaining those with pending asylum claims. Others, who entered within the last two years, could be subject to expedited deportation.

Economic harm would be felt even more immediately, Arulanantham said. Once work permits provided through TPS are invalidated, employers would be forced to let workers go. That means families would be unable to pay rent or feed their children, as well as result in economic losses felt in communities across the country.

WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court on Friday told conservative judges in Texas they must offer a hearing to detained Venezuelans whom the Trump administration wants to send to a prison in El Salvador.

The justices, over two dissents, rebuked Texas judges and Trump’s lawyers for moving quickly and secretly on a weekend in mid-April to put these men on planes.

That led to a post-midnight order from the high court that told the administration it may “not remove any member of the putative class of detainees.” The administration had argued it had the authority to deport the men as “alien enemies” under a wartime law adopted in 1798.

On Friday, the court issued an unusual eight-page order to explain their earlier decision. In doing so, the justices faulted a federal judge in Lubbock, Texas, and the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals for taking no action to protect the due process rights of the detained men.

The order carries a clear message that the justices are troubled by the Trump administration’s pressure to fast-track deportations and by the unwillingness of some judges to protect the rights to due process of law.

On a Saturday in mid-March, Trump’s immigration officials sent three planeloads of detainees from Texas to the maximum-security prison in El Salvador before a federal judge in Washington could intervene. The prisoners included Kilmar Abrego Garcia, a Maryland man who had an immigration order that was supposed to protect him from being sent back to his native El Salvador.

Afterward, Trump officials said the detained men, including Abrego Garcia, could not be returned to this country. They did so even though the Supreme Court had said they had a duty to “facilitate” Abrego Garcia’s return.

The same scenario was nearly repeated in mid-April, but from a different prison in Texas.

ACLU lawyers rushed to file an emergency appeal with U.S. District Judge James Hendrix. They said some of the detained men were on buses headed for the airport. They argued they deserved a hearing because many of them said they were not members of a crime gang.

The judge denied the appeals for all but two of the detained men.

The 5th Circuit Court upheld the judge’s lack of action and blamed the detainees, saying they gave the judge “only 42 minutes to act.”

The Supreme Court disagreed with both on Friday and overturned a decision of the 5th Circuit.

“A district court’s inaction in the face of extreme urgency and a high risk of serious, perhaps irreparable consequences” for the detained men, the justices wrote. “Here, the district court’s inaction — not for 42 minutes but for 14 hours and 28 minutes — had the practical effect of refusing an injunction to detainees facing an imminent threat of severe, irreparable harm.”

“The 5th Amendment entitles aliens to due process of law in the context of removal proceedings. Procedural due process rules are meant to protect” against “the mistaken or unjustified deprivation of life, liberty, or property,” the majority said. “We have long held that no person shall be removed from the United States without opportunity, at some time, to be heard.”

Justices Samuel A. Alito and Clarence Thomas dissented last month, and they did the same on Friday.

Avelo Airlines, a Texas-based budget carrier, is facing backlash from both customers and employees over its decision to operate deportation flights under a new contract with the Trump administration.

Avelo, which has been struggling financially, signed a contract with the United States Department of Homeland Security (DHS) last month to transport migrants to detention centres inside and outside the US, according to an internal company memo reviewed by the Reuters news agency.

On Monday, the airline flew its first flight under the deal from Arizona to Louisiana, data from flight-tracking services FlightAware and Flightradar24 showed.

Avelo plans to dedicate three aircraft to deportation operations and has established a charter-only base in Mesa, Arizona, specifically for these flights, according to the company memo.

The union representing Avelo’s flight attendants called the contract “bad for the airline”, and one customer has helped organise a petition urging travellers to boycott the airline.

US President Donald Trump has launched a hardline crackdown on undocumented immigration, including the deportation of Venezuelan migrants he accuses of being gang members to a maximum-security prison in El Salvador. Immigration authorities also detained and moved to deport some legal permanent US residents. Trump’s policies have triggered a rash of lawsuits and protests.

Tricia McLaughlin, assistant secretary for public affairs at DHS, said Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) was deporting illegal aliens who broke the country’s laws. She called the protests “nothing more than a tired tactic to abolish ICE by proxy”.

“Avelo Airlines is a sub-carrier on a government contract to assist with deportation flights,” McLaughlin said in a statement. “Attacks and demonization of ICE and our partners is wrong.”

On defence

The airline on Wednesday confirmed its long-term agreement with ICE and said it was vital to Avelo’s financial stability. It also shared a statement from CEO Andrew Levy acknowledging that it is a “sensitive and complicated topic”, but saying that the decision on the contract came “after significant deliberations”.

The statement added that the deal would keep the airline’s “more than 1,100 crewmembers employed for years to come”.

Avelo said it will use three Boeing 737-800 planes in Mesa, Arizona.

“Flights will be both domestic and international,” the company said, declining to share more details of the agreement.

Avelo, which launched in 2021, was forced to suspend its most recent fundraising round after reporting its worst quarterly performance in two years.

In a message to employees last month, Levy said the airline was spending more than it earned from its customers, forcing it to seek repeated infusions of capital from investors.

“I realize some may view the decision to fly for DHS as controversial,” Levy wrote in the staff memo, which was reviewed by Reuters, but said the opportunity was “too valuable not to pursue”.

Widespread backlash

The Association of Flight Attendants-CWA, which represents Avelo’s crew, has urged the company to reconsider its decision, which it said would be “bad for the airline”.

“Having an entire flight of people handcuffed and shackled would hinder any evacuation and risk injury or death,” the union said. “We cannot do our jobs in these conditions.”

The Trump administration has deported hundreds of migrants labelled as Venezuelan gang members to El Salvador. Photos and videos have shown deportees in handcuffs and shackles.

Customers have also expressed outrage. Anne Watkins, a New Haven, Connecticut, resident, said she has stopped flying with Avelo. She and her co-members at the New Haven Immigrants Coalition have launched an online petition urging travellers to boycott the airline until it ends its ICE flight operations. The petition has garnered more than 38,000 signatures.

Watkins, 55, said the coalition also organised a vigil on Monday to mark the launch of Avelo’s deportation flights.

“Companies can decide to operate in wholly ethical and transparent ways,” she said. “Avelo is not choosing to do that right now.”

Connecticut Attorney General William Tong, a Democrat, has threatened to review the state’s incentives for Avelo, which has received more than $2m in subsidies and tax breaks.

In California, Los Angeles resident Nancy K has co-founded a campaign called “Mothers Against Avelo”. She plans to lead weekly protests every Sunday in May at Hollywood Burbank airport, one of Avelo’s six operating bases.

When I think about the gleeful cruelty the Trump administration is showing toward illegal immigrants — including unlawfully deporting planeloads of them, seeking to suspend habeas corpus in order to kick out folks faster and wearing fancy Rolex watches while visiting a Salvadoran super prison — I think of Jose Toscano.

The Mexico City native came to Los Angeles as a 13-year-old and enrolled at St. Turibius School near the Fashion District, working at Magee’s Kitchen in the Farmers Market to pay his tuition, room and board. “I had this dream to come to the United States for education,” Toscano told The Times in May 1953. “Not for the dollars, not to work in the camps for 65 cents an hour.”

Why was The Times profiling a 16-year-old Mexican immigrant? Because he was about to get deported. Politicians, the press and private citizens had been railing against “illegal immigration” and pushing President Eisenhower for mass deportations. Officers received a tip that Toscano was in the country illegally.

This young migrant’s story struck a chord in Southern California in a way that’s unimaginable today

Newspaper accounts noted that immigration authorities — struck by Toscano’s pluck and drive — made sure that his deportation didn’t go on his record so he could legally return one day. A Van Nuys News and Valley Green Sheet columnist wrote, “We must have immigration laws — but they’re not designed for folks like Joe.”

Meanwhile, The Times’ editorial board — not exactly known back then for its kind attitude toward Mexican Americans — argued that Toscano shouldn’t be deported, making the case that laws “should perhaps be tempered a trifle in the face of principles and actions which are of such sterling worth as to be beyond the object of the law itself.”

Toscano legally returned to Los Angeles three months later, living with a white family in Whittier that sponsored him and enrolling at Cathedral High. “As I continue to study the history of your country in school,” he wrote to The Times that September, “I shall remember that what you did for me is one of the things that makes this country of yours so great.”

His story was such a feel-good tale that it appeared in Reader’s Digest and the local press checked in on Toscano for years. The Mirror, The Times’ afternoon sister paper, reported on his 1954 wedding, the same year that immigration officials deported over a million Mexican nationals under Operation Wetback, a program that President Trump and his supporters say they want to emulate today.

Two years later, The Times covered Toscano’s graduation from Fairfax High, where he told the crowd as the commencement speaker that he wanted to become an American citizen “so that I, too, can help build a greater America.”

After a three-year stint in the Marines, Toscano did just that in 1959, changing his legal name from Jose to Joseph because he felt “it’s more American that way,” he told the Mirror. He told the paper he had dreams of attending UCLA Law School, but life didn’t work out that way.

Lessons for today

The last clipping I found of Toscano in The Times is a 1980 Farmers Market ad, which noted that he was a widower with two daughters still working at Magee’s but had advanced from washing dishes to chief carver.

“He’s a happy man who likes his work,” the ad said, “and it shows.”

Rereading the clips about Toscano, I’m reminded of Kilmar Abrego Garcia, the Salvadoran national who established a life for himself in this country before he was deported in March despite a judge’s order that he be allowed to remain in the United States.

This time around, immigration officials and the Trump White House have insisted Abrego Garcia deserved his fate, sliming him as a terrorist and MS-13 member despite no evidence to back up their assertions.

Toscano’s story shows that the story can have a different ending — if only immigration officials have a heart.

Today’s top stories

People enjoy pleasant spring weather while sailing in Newport Harbor. Orange County is one of three SoCal counties where single earners with six-figure salaries could soon be considered “low income.”

(Allen J. Schaben / Los Angeles Times)

‘Low income’ but making $100,000 per year

Newsom walks back free healthcare for eligible undocumented immigrants

• The governor’s office said his spending plan, which will be released later this morning, calls for requiring all undocumented adults to pay $100 monthly premiums to receive Medi-Cal coverage and for blocking all new adult applications to the program as of Jan. 1.
• The cost of coverage for immigrants has exceeded state estimates by billions of dollars.

California joins another lawsuit against Trump

• California Atty. Gen. Rob Bonta filed two lawsuits Tuesday challenging a Trump administration policy that would deny the state billions of dollars in transportation grants unless it follows the administration’s lead on immigration enforcement.
• California sued Trump 15 times in his first 100 days in office. Here’s where those cases stand.

California’s ethnic studies mandate is at risk

• California became a national pioneer four years ago by passing a law to make ethnic studies a high school graduation requirement.
• But only months before the policy is to take effect, Gov. Gavin Newsom is withholding state funding — delaying the mandate as the course comes under renewed fire.

What else is going on

Commentary and opinions

• Four months into insurance claim delays and disputes, a new blow to fire victims: A rate hike, writes columnist Steve Lopez.
• My neighborhood, Skid Row, is not exactly what you think it is, argues guest columnist Amelia Rayno.
• The Endangered Species Act is facing its own existential threat, contributor Marcy Houle says.

This morning’s must reads

Other must reads

For your downtime

(Marie Doazan for The Times)

Going out

Staying in

A question for you: What is your go-to karaoke song?

Stephen says: “Anything by Jim Croce.”
Alan says: “‘In My Life’ by The Beatles.”

Email us at [email protected], and your response might appear in the newsletter this week.

And finally … your photo of the day

Alice Weddle, 88, poses for a portrait before the Queens Tour at Kia Forum on Sunday in Inglewood.

(Juliana Yamada / Los Angeles Times)

Today’s great photo is from Times photographer Juliana Yamada at the Kia Forum where fans flocked to see legendary singers Chaka Khan, Patti LaBelle, Stephanie Mills and Gladys Knight perform their greatest hits.

Have a great day, from the Essential California team

Gustavo Arellano, California columnist
Kevinisha Walker, multiplatform editor
Karim Doumar, head of newsletters

How can we make this newsletter more useful? Send comments to [email protected].

May 12 (UPI) — A federal judge ruled Monday that the Internal Revenue Service can share taxpayer data with immigration authorities to locate undocumented immigrants for deportation.

District Judge Dabney Friedrich, an appointee from President Donald Trump‘s first term, denied a preliminary injunction filed by immigrant rights groups, who argued sharing information violated taxpayer confidentiality laws.

“Plaintiffs Centro de Trabajadores Unidos, Immigrant Solidarity DuPage, Somos Un Pueblo Unido and Inclusive Action for the City bring this action seeking declaratory and injunctive relief to prevent the Internal Revenue Service from sharing personal tax information with the Department of Homeland Security for immigration enforcement purposes,” Friedrich wrote, adding “the court will deny the motion.”

The ruling is a win for the Trump administration and the president’s immigration agenda.

Last month, Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent and Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem agreed to allow U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement to submit names of immigrants for cross-verification of tax records. Under the data-sharing deal, DHS can ask the IRS to confirm the addresses of suspected undocumented immigrants in the United States.

Friedrich said sharing information between federal agencies to enforce immigration laws does not violate confidentiality laws.

“At its core, this case presents a narrow legal issue: Does the Memorandum of Understanding between the IRS and DHS violate the Internal Revenue Code? It does not,” according to Friedrich’s order.

Last month, acting IRS Commissioner Melanie Kraus resigned over the data-sharing deal. Former acting IRS Commissioner Doug O’Donnell also refused to sign the agreement in February, before he retired.

While the IRS can share data to help in criminal investigations, the tax agency can not share data on civil issues or to help with deportations.

According to the Justice Department, the data-sharing agreement complies with the law because requests for IRS information will target only those under criminal investigation.

“Requesting and receiving information for civil enforcement purposes would constitute a cognizable injury, but none of the organizations have established that such an injury is imminent,” Friedrich wrote.

“The Memorandum only allows sharing information for criminal investigations … On this limited record, the court cannot assume that DHS intends to use the shared information to facilitate civil rather than criminal proceedings.”