immigration enforcement

WASHINGTON — President Trump spent much of last week railing against the courts. The courts, in turn, spent it ruling against him.

While Trump made history as the first sitting president to attend oral arguments at the Supreme Court, where he stared down justices as they questioned his bid to end birthright citizenship, quieter courtrooms across the country were challenging his agenda.

The challenges came in on immigration, on his White House ballroom project, on his own liability in the run-up to Jan. 6.

“Dumb Judges and Justices will not a great Country make!” he wrote on Truth Social on Monday.

By Friday, judges had served him loss after loss, each finding the administration had taken executive authority too far, too fast.

Immigration rulings

On immigration, the keystone of Trump’s policy platform, he faced a number of setbacks.

On Monday, a federal judge in California took a step that would allow a class-action lawsuit against the administration’s handling of certain asylum claims. The case concerns thousands of asylum seekers who had made appointments with immigration officials by using a Biden administration phone app called CBP One.

In many cases, migrants from around the world had waited months in Mexico for their turn to speak with border agents after securing appointments through the app.

Those appointments were suddenly canceled after Trump took office. The judge certified those asylum seekers as a class that can challenge the administration’s action in court.

In a similar case, a federal judge in Boston ruled Tuesday that the administration had unlawfully terminated the temporary legal status of as many as 900,000 immigrants who entered the country after using the phone app. Tens of thousands of those told by the administration to leave the U.S. “immediately” have since left or been deported.

The judge ordered the administration to reinstate the legal status and work authorization of those remaining.

“Today’s ruling is a clear rejection of an administration that has tried to erase lawful status for hundreds of thousands of people with the click of a button,” said Skye Perryman, president and CEO of Democracy Forward, a legal organization that represented the migrants.

Sanctuary laws

Also Tuesday, a federal judge threw out a Justice Department lawsuit that accused Denver and Colorado of interfering with immigration enforcement and claimed that the city and state’s “sanctuary” laws violated the Constitution.

The ruling found that the federal government had not shown it could override state and local decisions about how to use their own resources. The Constitution, the judge said, does not let Washington commandeer local governments.

“Colorado gets to make a choice: How will our law enforcement operate in Colorado. The federal government, they don’t get to make that choice for us,” Colorado Atty. Gen. Phil Weiser said.

Birthright citizenship

The next day, the Supreme Court justices appeared skeptical of Trump’s claim that birthright citizenship doesn’t apply to babies born in the U.S. to parents who are here unlawfully or temporarily.

Conservative and liberal judges alike questioned the arguments of Solicitor Gen. John Sauer, who represented the administration, saying he relied on “some pretty obscure sources,” including precedents that dated back to Roman law.

Trump, sitting feet from the proceedings, left the Supreme Court building halfway through.

“We are the only Country in the World STUPID enough to allow ‘Birthright’ Citizenship!” he wrote shortly after departing.

Austin Kocher, a Syracuse University professor who studies immigration enforcement, wrote on Substack after the Supreme Court hearing that, on immigration policy, there is always a gap between what an administration says it will do and what the government can actually deliver. That gap, he argued, is particularly evident in the second Trump administration.

“The White House has built its political identity around the promise of mass deportation, and the rhetoric has been relentless: record arrests, expanded detention, military flights, the spectacle of enforcement as governance,” Kocher wrote.

“But over the past several days,” he added, “developments from multiple fronts suggests that the operational foundations of the mass deportation campaign are more fragile than the administration would like anyone to believe.”

Defying judicial orders

In some cases, the Trump administration has been undeterred by judicial orders to stop certain practices. In a March ruling unsealed Thursday, a federal judge found that Border Patrol agents had continued making illegal arrests in California’s Central Valley without reasonable suspicion.

The government’s explanations for the arrests, wrote Judge Jennifer Thurston in Fresno, “rely on unsupported assumptions, hunches and generalizations about the relationship between a person’s apparent status as a day laborer and their immigration status.”

White House ballroom

Trump had kicked the week off March 29 by touting his 90,000-square-foot ballroom project, showing designs to reporters on Air Force One.

“I think it’ll be the greatest ballroom anywhere in the world,” he said. Two days later, U.S. District Judge Richard Leon ordered a temporary halt to construction.

Leon stated that the president is the “steward” of the White House, not its “owner,” and ruled that he cannot proceed with such a massive structural change without express authorization from Congress.

In response, Trump raged on Truth Social: “In the Ballroom case, the Judge said we have to get Congressional approval. He is WRONG! Congressional approval has never been given on anything, in these circumstances, big or small, having to do with construction at the White House.”

His administration filed a motion Friday to block the judge’s ruling.

Jan 6. liability

On the same day, a judge ruled that Trump remains personally liable in a civil lawsuit tied to the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the Capitol, allowing those claims to move forward.

It is among the most consequential legal threats he faces.

Trump entered the presidency on the heels of a major Supreme Court win that found former presidents have criminal and civil immunity for official acts during their term.

But Tuesday, U.S. District Judge Amit Mehta deemed Trump’s Jan. 6 speech — in which he directed supporters to march to the Capitol and “fight like hell” — was a political act, not a presidential one, and therefore not shielded by immunity.

“President Trump has not shown that the speech reasonably can be understood as falling within the outer perimeter of his Presidential duties. The content of the ellipse speech confirms that it is not covered by official-acts immunity,” Mehta wrote.

The week ended with yet another setback for Trump when a federal judge on Friday blocked the administration from forcing universities to submit extensive data on applicants and students to prove they don’t illegally consider race in admissions.

Reading the losses

For Adam Winkler, a constitutional law professor at UCLA who has tracked the administration’s legal battles closely, the losing streak had a clear through line.

“It was an awful week for Donald Trump,” he said. “It’s not that the courts are anti-Trump. In fact, he wins a lot. It’s really that he takes such an aggressive approach to policy making that he runs afoul of existing precedents.”

Taken together, last week’s rulings signaled that the courts are insisting that the president is as accountable for his actions as anyone, and that states have constitutional powers he alone cannot override.

“The Trump administration’s recent court losses illustrate that there is still much that the other branches of government can do — in connection with civil society — to uphold the rule of law and mitigate the harms of the administration’s destructive agenda,” said Monika Langarica, deputy legal director at the Center for Human Rights and Constitutional Law.

“They are one more reminder,” she added, “that the administration will not always have the last word with respect to its unlawful and unconstitutional actions.”

WASHINGTON — Two-thirds of California voters disapprove of President Trump’s immigration policies and a majority believe those policies are discriminating against Latinos, according to a new poll.

Nearly half of the voters said they were concerned that they, a family member or a close friend could be detained because of Trump’s immigration policies.

The findings of the UC Berkeley Institute of Governmental Studies poll, released Wednesday, show that most Californians haven’t budged on their thoughts about the president’s approach to immigration since he returned to office. A poll last August similarly showed strong disapproval of the Trump administration’s approach to immigration enforcement.

The poll, which was conducted for the Los Angeles Times, showed the usual division along party lines when voters were asked whether they trust the U.S. Border Patrol and Immigration and Customs Enforcement, whether agents should wear masks while on duty, and whether Latinos are being discriminated against.

“This suggests that a significant number of voters see ICE infringement on the individual rights of the undocumented as also potentially leading to broader infringements on citizens’ rights,” said G. Cristina Mora, co-director of the institute and a sociology professor at UC Berkeley who studies race and immigration.

“Latino voters also seem to particularly worry about the way that racism is motivating current immigration practices,” she said, which is likely tied to the Supreme Court’s approval of immigration agents detaining people on the basis of their perceived race, ethnicity, language or occupation.

The overall disapproval among voters of Trump’s immigration policies — 64% — was down a bit from the August poll, in which 69% of respondents said they disapproved of how immigration enforcement was being carried out in California.

Republicans appear to be more approving of immigration policies now, with 86% saying they approve of Trump’s immigration policies — up from 79% approval of enforcement in California last August.

Mora said the tilt among California Republicans toward the Trump administration could be due, in part, to the framing of the question, which asked about “President Trump’s immigration policies.”

Any time Trump’s name is included, Republicans are more likely to agree with him, she said. The same effect is seen when asking about other issues, such as the economy.

Another factor could be the timing, Mora said. Last summer, federal agents conducted widespread raids in Los Angeles before moving on to target other cities, such as Chicago and Minneapolis.

Now that the administration has shifted away from some tactics that resulted in escalations of violence, Republicans are “falling in line” again with the administration, she said.

“My hunch is it was shocking,” Mora said of the immigration raids last summer. “Things have normalized because the tension is somewhere else.”

Seeking to de-escalate after two protesters were shot and killed by federal agents in Minneapolis, the president tapped his border advisor Tom Homan to take control of the immigration enforcement operation there.

Republican strategist Ford O’Connell said that’s why voters are more supportive.

“Tom Homan being in charge and publicly taking a much lighter touch and appearing reasonable to the average voter is why you’re seeing this turnaround,” he said.

But Democratic strategist Maria Cardona said that that’s wishful thinking and that ICE’s approach hasn’t substantially changed.

“It only went down five points,” she said, referring to the disapproval of Trump’s policies. “That’s not the American people being on the side of the administration — it’s that they’re not seeing American citizens murdered on their screens every day.”

One question saw strong division among Republicans: Should immigration agents be allowed to enter the homes of suspected undocumented immigrants without a judge-approved search warrant?

Among California Republicans, 45% said no, 38% said yes, and 17% said they have no opinion.

O’Connell said that’s because Republicans strongly value civil liberties, especially around property.

Republicans were more strongly in favor of a different policy, allowing ICE agents to wear masks while on duty. While 91% of Democrats opposed the policy, 68% of Republicans favored it.

In the August poll, 45% of Republicans said federal agents should be required to show clear identification when carrying out their work. That desire for identification doesn’t appear to extend to being fully identifiable by face.

O’Connell said Republicans understand the concern over agents increasingly being doxxed.

“The administration wants to find a happy medium there, whether it’s a nameplate or a badge number,” he said. “There is wiggle room.”

Nearly 7 in 10 respondents said they want state and local authorities to intervene when they witness unlawful detentions or excessive use of force by federal immigration agents.

Voters were also asked about their level of concern that they, a family member or a close friend could be detained because of Trump’s immigration policies. While 85% of Republicans said they are not too concerned or not concerned at all, 63% of Democrats said they are somewhat or very concerned.

Overall, nearly half of the respondents, 45%, said they are somewhat or very concerned. Among racial and ethnic groups, 62% of Latino voters, 46% of Black voters and 43% of Asian or Pacific Islander voters said they are somewhat or very concerned.

“The Latino community has always wanted to think the best of this country and they still do,” Cardona said. “Our positivism, our optimism, our hope in a better future is second to none. I think that’s what you’re seeing in those numbers, even as our community feels totally attacked.”

Mora said the high concern among Black residents is notable because, while most Black Californians aren’t immigrants themselves, Los Angeles has one of the largest concentrations of Blaxicans — the children of one Black parent and one Latino parent.

Beyond intermarriages, Black residents in California are also likely to have immigrant friends or neighbors, she said.

O’Connell took a different view: “I don’t think we can glean anything from it other than how one party focuses more on identity politics than the other.”

The Institute of Governmental Studies poll was completed online in English and Spanish from March 9 to 15 by 5,109 registered voters in California.

After weeks of chaos in U.S. airports, the Transportation Safety Administration said the first paychecks in weeks are being sent as early as Monday to its workers, giving the beleaguered aviation system a boost of optimism.

Wait times at some TSA security bottlenecks, such as the airport checkpoints in Atlanta and Houston, improved significantly Monday morning.

But how long it will take for long security lines to consistently return to normal — and how long federal immigration officers will stay in airports — remains unknown as the busy spring break travel season continues.

The DHS shutdown has resulted in not only travel delays but also warnings of airport closures as TSA workers missing paychecks stopped going to work. Those workers were just recovering financially since last fall’s extended government shutdown.

Wait times still pushed beyond two hours at New York’s LaGuardia Airport Monday morning. Baltimore-Washington International Airport had minimal wait-times Monday morning, but continued to advise travelers to arrive three hours before their scheduled departure.

President Trump on Friday ordered the Department of Homeland Security to pay TSA officers immediately to ease the lines plaguing airports. The move came after Trump rejected bipartisan congressional efforts to fund the TSA while negotiations continue with Democrats, who have refused to approve more funding without restraints on Trump’s immigration enforcement and mass deportation operations.

Democrats are demanding better identification for the officers, judicial warrants in some cases and for agents to refrain from conducting raids around schools, churches or other sensitive places. Republicans and the White House have been willing to negotiate on some points, but the sides have yet to reach a final agreement.

On Monday, there were few signs of progress on Capitol Hill, where the Senate held a short session without considering the House bill and resumed its two-week break. GOP Sen. John Hoeven of North Dakota said afterward that Senate Republicans are talking with Democrats and also the House as they try to find a way to funding DHS.

TSA employees had gone without pay since DHS funding lapsed in February. The department’s shutdown reached 44 days on Sunday, eclipsing the record 43-day shutdown last fall that affected all of the federal government.

The DHS shutdown has resulted in not only travel delays but also warnings of airport closures as TSA workers missing paychecks stopped going to work. Those workers had already endured the nation’s longest government shutdown last fall. Multiple airports experienced greater than 40% callout rates, and nearly 500 of the agency’s nearly 50,000 transportation security officers quit during the shutdown.

Trump deployed Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents to some airports a week ago to help with security as TSA callouts rose nationwide. How long they stay, White House border czar Tom Homan said, depends on how quickly TSA employees return to work. A TSA statement said the agency “has immediately begun the process of paying its workforce,” with paychecks arriving “as early as Monday.”

The overall absentee rate among TSA officers scheduled to work dipped slightly on Sunday, according to DHS. The highest were concentrated at major airports that have seen consistently elevated absences lately.

Those included BWI, both of Houston’s main airports; Louis Armstrong International Airport in New Orleans; Atlanta’s Hartsfield-Jackson International Airport; and John F. Kennedy International Airport in New York.

Funk and Seewer write for the Associated Press. AP reporters Rio Yamat in Las Vegas and Mary Clare Jalonick in Washington contributed to this report.

WASHINGTON — The Senate early Friday morning approved Homeland Security funds to pay Transportation Security Administration agents and most other agencies, but not the immigration enforcement operations at the heart of the budget impasse that has jammed airports, disrupted travel and imposed financial hardship on workers.

The deal, which the Senate approved unanimously without a roll call, next goes to the House, which is expected to consider it Friday.

“We can get at least a lot of the government opened up again and then we’ll go from there,” said Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D. “Obviously, we’ll still have some work ahead of us.”

With pressure mounting to resolve the 42-day stalemate over funding for the Department of Homeland Security, the endgame emerged in the final hours before TSA workers miss another paycheck Friday. President Donald Trump said he would sign an order to immediately pay the TSA agents, saying he wanted to quickly stop the “Chaos at the Airports.” The deal did not include any of the restraints Democrats have demanded as they sought to rein in Trump’s mass deportation agenda.

Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer said the outcome could have been reached weeks ago, and vowed that his party would continue fighting to ensure Trump’s “rogue” immigration operation “does not get more funding without serious reform.”

What’s in and out of the funding package

Senators worked through the night on the deal that would fund much of the rest of the department, including the Federal Emergency Management Agency, the Coast Guard and TSA, but without funding for Immigration and Customs Enforcement. Customs was funded, but Border Protection was not.

The package puts no new limits on immigration enforcement, which has remained largely uninterrupted by the shutdown. The GOP’s big tax cuts bill that Trump signed into law last year funneled billions in extra funds to DHS, including $75 billion for ICE operations, ensuring the immigration officers are still being paid despite the lapse.

Next steps in the House, where Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., holds a slim majority, are uncertain. Passage will almost certainly require bipartisan support, as lawmakers on the left and right flanks revolt.

Conservative Republicans have panned their own party’s proposals, demanding full funding for immigration operations. Many have vowed to ensure ICE has the resources it needs in the next budget package to carry out Trump’s agenda.

“We will fully fund ICE. That is what this fight is about,” Sen. Eric Schmitt, R-Mo., said as he tried to offer legislation to fund the agency. “The border is closing. The next task is deportation.”

On-again, off-again talks collapsed

Earlier Thursday, Thune announced he had given a “last and final” offer to the Democrats. But as the day dragged on, action stalled out.

Democrats argued the GOP proposals have not gone far enough at putting guardrails on officers from ICE, Customs and Border Protection, and other federal agencies who are engaged in the immigration sweeps, particularly after the deaths of two Americans protesting the actions in Minneapolis.

They want federal agents to wear identification, remove their face masks and refrain from conducting raids around schools, churches or other sensitive places. Democrats have also pushed for an end of administrative warrants, insisting that judges sign off before agents search people’s homes or private spaces — something new Homeland Security Secretary Markwayne Mullin has said he is open to considering.

Trump had largely left the issue to Congress, but warned he was ready to take action, threatening to send the National Guard to airports in addition to his deployment of ICE agents who are now checking travelers’ IDs.

The White House had floated the extraordinary move of invoking a national emergency to pay the TSA agents, a politically and legally fraught approach. Instead, Trump’s order would pay TSA agents using money from his 2025 tax bill, according to a senior administration official who spoke on condition of anonymity because they weren’t authorized to discuss it publicly.

If the Senate package is approved by the House and signed it into law, the action Trump announced to pay TSA agents may be temporary or unneeded.

Airport lines grow as TSA workers endure hardships

The funding shutdown has resulted in travel delays and even warnings of airport closures as TSA workers missing paychecks stop coming to work.

Multiple airports are experiencing greater than 40% callout rates of TSA workers and nearly 500 of the agency’s nearly 50,000 transportation security officers have quit during the shutdown. Nationwide on Wednesday, more than 11% of the TSA employees on the schedule missed work, according to DHS. That is more than 3,120 callouts.

Everett Kelley, the president of the American Federation of Government Employees, said the union is grateful the TSA workers will be paid, but said Congress must stay in session to pass a deal “that funds DHS, pays all DHS workers, and keeps these vital agencies running.”

At George Bush Intercontinental Airport in Houston, Melissa Gates said she would not make her flight to Baton Rouge, Louisiana, after waiting more than 2½ hours and still not reaching the security checkpoint. She said no other flights were available until Friday.

“I should have just driven, right?” Gates said. “Five hours would have been hilarious next to this.”

Associated Press writers Joey Cappelletti, Kevin Freking, Rebecca Santana, Collin Binkley and Ben Finley in Washington, Lekan Oyekanmi in Houston, Wyatte Grantham-Philips in New York, Rio Yamat in Las Vegas, Russ Bynum in Savannah, Georgia, and Gabriela Aoun Angueira in San Diego contributed to this report.

Mascaro and Jalonick write for the Associated Press.

WASHINGTON — The Transportation Security Administration may have to shut down operations at some airports as travelers are experiencing record wait times, the agency’s acting head said Wednesday, as the latest offer to end a funding impasse and put restraints on President Trump’s mass deportation agenda met fierce resistance in Congress.

The TSA’s Ha Nguyen McNeill described the mounting hardships facing unpaid airport workers — bills and eviction notices piling up and even plasma donations to make ends meet — and warned that lawmakers must ensure “this never happens again.”

“This is a dire situation,” she testified at a House hearing, warning of potential airport closures. “At this point, we have to look at all options on the table. And that does require us to, at some point, make very difficult choices as to which airports we might try to keep open and which ones we might have to shut down as our callout rates increase.”

Yet on the 40th day of the standoff involving the Department of Homeland Security, there was no easy way out in sight. Neither Republican senators, who made the latest offer, nor Democrats, who are demanding more changes in immigration enforcement, appeared closer to a compromise.

Trump, who initially appeared to have given his nod to the deal, has declined to lend it his full support or put his political weight behind making sure it is approved.

Top officials at agencies under the Homeland Security umbrella spoke for more than three hours before the House Homeland Security Committee about the potential risks of security lapses unless the partial government shutdown comes to an end.

A deal teeters on collapse

Homeland Security has gone without routine funding since mid-February. Democrats are insisting on changes to the Trump administration’s immigration enforcement and mass deportation operations after the killings of two U.S. citizens in Minneapolis by federal officers during protests.

The latest proposal would fund most of Homeland Security except for the enforcement and removal operations of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement that have been central to the debate. The plan would cover other aspects of ICE as well as Customs and Border Protection.

Although the offer added some new restraints on immigration officers, including the use of body cameras, it excluded other policies that Democrats have demanded.

Senate Democratic leader Chuck Schumer of New York said they needed to see real changes. House Democratic leader Hakeem Jeffries of New York pressed for “bold” changes at ICE.

Republican leaders said Democrats are putting the country at risk.

“They know this is crazy,” said House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.).

But conservative Republicans also panned the proposal, demanding full funding for immigration operations and skeptical of the promise from GOP leaders that they would address Trump’s proof-of-citizenship voting bill in a subsequent legislative package.

Airport lines grow as TSA workers endure hardships

McNeill, the acting TSA administrator, told lawmakers that multiple airports are experiencing greater than 40% callout rates and more than 480 transportation security officers have quit during the shutdown.

She cited the growing financial strain on the TSA workforce.

“Some are sleeping in their cars, selling their blood and plasma, and taking on second jobs to make ends meet, all while being expected to perform at the highest level when in uniform to protect the traveling public,” she said.

McNeil also said TSA officers working at the nation’s airports have experienced a more than 500% increase in the frequency of assaults since the shutdown began.

“This is unacceptable and it will not be tolerated,” she said.

The top executive overseeing Houston’s airport said security lines that left travelers waiting four hours or more could get longer if the political impasse was not soon settled.

Lines that twist and turn across multiple floors at George Bush Intercontinental Airport have been the result of TSA being able to staff only one-third to half the usual number of checkpoint lines, said Jim Szczesniak, aviation director for Houston’s airport system.

Trump’s decision to send ICE agents to the airports risks inflaming the situation, lawmakers have said. Video of federal officers detaining a crying woman at San Francisco International Airport drew outrage Monday from local officials, although it was unrelated to Trump’s order to deploy immigration officers.

FEMA also at risk

The Federal Emergency Management Agency’s Disaster Relief Fund is “rapidly depleting,” Victoria Barton, a FEMA external affairs official, told lawmakers.

FEMA is able to continue its disaster response and recovery work as long as that fund has money, and about 10,000 of its disaster workers continue to be paid through it.

Mascaro and Freking write for the Associated Press. AP writers Wyatte Grantham-Philips in New York, Rio Yamat in Las Vegas, Russ Bynum in Houston and Gabriela Aoun Angueira in San Diego contributed to this report.

WASHINGTON  — The Trump administration urged the Supreme Court on Tuesday to rule that it may block migrants from applying for asylum at ports of entry along the southern border.

The administration’s lawyers argued that the right to asylum, which arose in response to Nazi Germany and the Holocaust, does not extend to those who are stopped just short of a border post in California, Arizona or Texas.

They pointed to part of the immigration law that says a non-citizen who “arrives in the United States … may apply for asylum.”

“You can’t arrive in the United States while you’re still standing in Mexico. That should be the end of this case,” Vivek Suri, a Justice Department attorney, told the court.

Immigration rights advocates called this claim “perverse” and illogical. They said such a rule would encourage migrants to cross the border illegally rather than present themselves legally at a border post.

The justices sounded divided and a bit uncertain over how to proceed. But the conservative majority is nonetheless likely to uphold the administration’s broad power over immigration enforcement.

Several of the justices noted, however, the Trump administration is not currently enforcing a “remain in Mexico” policy.

Liberal Justices Sonia Sotomayor and Ketanji Brown Jackson questioned why the court would make a major decision on immigration and asylum with no immediate, practical impact.

The case posed a fundamental clash between the government’s need to manage surges at the border and the moral and historic right to offer asylum to those fleeing persecution.

In 1939, more than 900 Jewish refugees who were fleeing Nazi Germany aboard the MS St. Louis were turned away by Cuba and the United States. They were forced to return to Europe and more than 250 of them died in the Holocaust.

The worldwide moral reckoning spurred many nations, including the United States, to adopt new laws which offer protection to those fleeing persecution.

In the Refugee Act of 1980, Congress said that non-citizens either “physically present in the United States” or “at a land border or port of entry” may apply for asylum.

To be eligible for asylum, a non-citizen had to demonstrate a well-founded fear of persecution in their home country due to their race, religion, nationality, membership in a particular social group, or political opinion.

Only a small percentage of applicants win their asylum claims, and only after years of litigation.

But faced with overwhelming surge of migrants, the Obama administration in 2016 adopted a “metering” policy that required people to wait on the Mexican side of the border.

The Trump and Biden administrations maintained such policies for a time.

Immigrant rights advocates sued, contending the metering policy was illegal. They won before a federal judge in San Diego who ruled the migrants had a right to claim asylum.

In a 2-1 decision, the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals agreed in 2024.

“To ‘arrive’ means ‘to reach a destination,’” Judge Michelle Friedland wrote for the appeals court. “A person who presents herself to an official at the border has ‘arrived.’”

The Trump administration appealed.

Solicitor Gen. D. John Sauer said the “ordinary meaning of ‘arrives in’ refers to entering a specific place, not just coming close to it. An alien who is stopped in Mexico does not arrive in the United States.”

On Tuesday, the Justice Department attorney said the court should reverse the 9th Circuit and uphold the government’s broad power to block migrants approaching the border.

“I can’t predict the next border surge,” Suri said.

“For more than 45 years, Congress has guaranteed people arriving at our borders the right to seek asylum, consistent with our international treaty obligations,” said Kelsi Corkran, Supreme Court director of the Institute for Constitutional Advocacy and Protection, who argued the case. “Yet this administration believes that Congress gave it discretion to completely ignore those requirements, and turn back those who are seeking refuge from persecution at its whim.”

“The people turned away at our border are fleeing rape, torture, kidnapping, and death threats. You cannot tell families running for their lives to go back and wait in danger because their suffering is inconvenient,” said Nicole Elizabeth Ramos, border rights project directo at Al Otro Lado which was the plaintiff in the case. “We brought this case because the United States made a legal and moral commitment to protect people fleeing persecution.”

WASHINGTON — The Senate is on track to confirm Markwayne Mullin as Department of Homeland Security secretary, President Trump’s nominee to take over the embattled department after firing Kristi Noem amid a public backlash over the administration’s immigration enforcement and mass deportation operations.

Mullin, a Republican senator from Oklahoma known for his close friendship with Trump, has tried to present himself as a steady hand, saying that his goal as secretary would be to get the department off the front page of the news. But Mullin tangled with Republican Sen. Rand Paul of Kentucky, the chairman of the Homeland Security Committee, who questioned Mullin’s character and temperament during last week’s combative confirmation hearing.

Senators advanced Mullin’s nomination on Sunday during a rare weekend session on a largely party-line vote, and confirmation is expected late Monday.

He would take the helm of the department at a difficult time. The department’s routine funding has been shut down, leading to long waits at U.S. airports during the busy spring break travel season, as Democrats demand changes in immigration enforcement operations after the deaths of two U.S. citizens during protests this year in Minneapolis.

Trump announced over the weekend he’s ordering immigration officers to help Transportation Security Administration agents, which lawmakers and others warned could escalate tensions at crowded airports.
Although the senator comes to the position after more than a dozen years in Congress, and with the management experience of running an expanding family plumbing business in Oklahoma, he has not been seen as a key force in immigration issues.

A former mixed martial arts fighter and collegiate wrestler who has led early-morning workout sessions in the members-only House gym, he became close with members of both parties and is often seen as a negotiator in partisan Washington.

It is his loyalty to Trump that landed him the job, and he’s not expected to sway from the president’s approach. Mullin was a strong supporter of Trump’s immigration agenda and ICE officers before being tapped for the Homeland Security job.

“I can have different opinions with everybody in this room, but as secretary of homeland I’ll be protecting everybody,” Mullin said during his confirmation hearing.

Santana writes for the Associated Press.

WASHINGTON — Republican and Democratic senators vented their frustrations with the lack of progress in funding the Department of Homeland Security, which is resulting in more Americans enduring long lines at airports around the country. It’s a problem that is expected to intensify as the impasse enters its fourth week.

Democrats stressed they were willing to fund some of Homeland Security, but not Immigration and Customs Enforcement as well as Customs and Border Protection, without changes in their operations. Republicans made clear that some of the Democratic demands were a non-starter. The result was that each party blocked the other’s proposal for temporarily resolving the standoff during an hours-long debate Wednesday on the Senate floor.

The stark divide over a shutdown that began on Feb. 14 was acknowledged by members on both sides of the political aisle.

“We are in a negotiation. However, we are not close,” Sen. Brian Schatz (D-Hawaii) said at one point. “You may think this is some issue that we think we’re going to turn to our political advantage, but I promise you, when we saw Renee Good and Alex Pretti killed, this became an issue that was beyond politics.”

“And there are a lot of us who are not going to provide resources to this agency that is acting in such a ways that makes citizens of the United States so unsafe.”

Some Republicans were just as adamant that they oppose some of the changes Democrats are seeking to make.

“Let me be clear, we are going to do nothing — nothing — that kneecaps ICE’s ability to enforce our immigration laws,” said Sen. Eric Schmitt (R-Mo.).

Following the longest federal shutdown in the country’s history last year, Congress completed work on 11 of this year’s 12 appropriations bills. Only the bill for Homeland Security remains outstanding.

Democrats are seeking several changes at the department that include prohibiting ICE enforcement operations at sensitive locations like schools and churches, allowing independent investigations into alleged wrongdoing, requiring warrants to be signed by judges before federal agents can forcibly enter private homes or other nonpublic spaces without consent, and requiring agents to wear identification and remove their masks.

A push for more talks

Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-S.D.) said his side has made repeated overtures to Democrats on a funding bill. He said the last offer on Homeland Security funding came from the White House nearly two weeks ago and there has been no response from the Democrats.

“Usually, around here, in order to get a deal, there has to be a negotiation where the two sides sit down together,” Thune said. “And my understanding is that has been completely rebuffed by the senator from Washington.”

The senator Thune was referring to, Sen. Patty Murray, the lead Democrat on the Senate Appropriations Committee, said she’s continued to talk with Republican colleagues, but those aren’t “real negotiations.” The White House needs to be at the table for that to occur. She said she needed assurance that Stephen Miller, the influential White House deputy chief of staff, would not upend any agreements that senators reach.

“I am willing to talk to people, but I’m not willing to sit in a room, have coffee, give away a few things and have Stephen Miller override whatever we all agree to,” Murray said. “ … We need to know the White House is serious.”

Homeland Security has been central to President Trump’s sweeping changes in immigration enforcement. Under Trump, the number of people ICE arrests and detains each month has climbed dramatically. The tactics that ICE has employed have generated alarm among Democrats, and some Republicans have also called for a more “strategic” approach.

During bipartisan negotiations earlier this year, appropriators agreed to a Homeland Security funding bill that did include more resources for de-escalation training and $20 million to outfit immigration enforcement agents with body-worn cameras. But that deal unraveled after the Pretti shooting in Minneapolis.

“My side was not going to stand down and say, ‘oh well, nothing happened,’” Murray said.

For the second time in two weeks, Murray offered a proposal to fund all of Homeland Security except for ICE and Customs and Border Protection, but Republicans objected.

Similarly, Sen. Katie Britt (R-Ala.) offered a proposal to fund all of Homeland Security for two weeks so that federal workers could get paid and government operations could continue while the two sides negotiate their differences on immigration enforcement. This time, Democrats objected.

The result was the standoff continues, but lawmakers were at least talking to each other, perhaps one small sign of progress.

Shutdown strains air travel

The large majority of the more than 260,000 employees at Homeland Security continue to work but are going unpaid. It’s the second time in recent months they’ve had to work without pay after last fall’s record, 43-day shutdown. The most visible sign of the shutdown has been a shortage of Transportation Security Administration screeners at airports.

Houston’s secondary airport weathered the worst problems, with lines consistently lasting over three hours for much of Sunday and Monday. Passengers also had to wait more than an hour to get through security at several other airports, including in New Orleans and Atlanta.

Homeland Security in a social media post Wednesday blamed Democrats for a shutdown that “has led to HOURS long security lines at airports across the country, leading Americans to miss their spring break flights.”

Trade groups are also worried about the economic impact of the travel delays. The U.S. Chamber of Commerce called on Congress to quickly approve a funding bill and end the department’s shutdown.

“Blocking operational funding and paychecks for those who help us travel safely is wrong and strains the air travel system,” said Neil Bradley, the business group’s executive vice president and chief policy officer.

Freking writes for the Associated Press.