migrants

VATICAN CITY — Pope Leo XIV has called for “deep reflection” in the United States about the treatment of migrants held in detention, saying that “many people who have lived for years and years and years, never causing problems, have been deeply affected by what is going on right now.”

The Chicago-born pope was responding Tuesday to a variety of geopolitical questions from reporters outside the papal retreat at Castel Gandolfo, including what kind of spiritual rights migrants in U.S. custody should have, U.S. military attacks on suspected drug traffickers off Venezuela and the fragile ceasefire in the Middle East.

Leo underlined that scripture emphasizes the question that will be posed at the end of the world: “How did you receive the foreigner, did you receive him and welcome him, or not? I think there is a deep reflection that needs to be made about what is happening.”

He said “the spiritual rights of people who have been detained should also be considered,’’ and he called on authorities to allow pastoral workers access to the detained migrants. “Many times they’ve been separated from their families. No one knows what’s happening, but their own spiritual needs should be attended to,’’ Leo said.

Leo last month urged labor union leaders visiting from Chicago to advocate for immigrants and welcome minorities into their ranks.

Asked about the lethal attacks on suspected drug traffickers off Venezuela, the pontiff said the military action was “increasing tension,’’ noting that they were coming even closer to the coastline.

“The thing is to seek dialogue,’’ the pope said.

On the Middle East, Leo acknowledged that the first phase of the peace accord between Israel and Hamas remains “very fragile,’’ and said that the parties need to find a way forward on future governance “and how you can guarantee the rights of all peoples.’’

Asked about Israeli settler attacks on Palestinians in the West Bank, the pope described the settlement issue as “complex,’’ adding: “Israel has said one thing, then it’s done another sometimes. We need to try to work together for justice for all peoples.’’

Pope Leo will receive Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas at the Vatican on Thursday. At the end of November he will make his first trip as Pope to Turkey and Lebanon.

Russian President Vladimir Putin, in a speech delivered on October 23rd, launched family support initiatives aimed at boosting Russia’s population. Essentially, the initiatives are not new ideas, but reiterating them demonstrates the Kremlin’s unprecedented and renewed commitment to the earlier promises of reversing population decline within the framework of creating investment opportunities and working for economic growth.

Putin, attending the first meeting of the Council for the Implementation of State Demographic and Family Policy, made several points, including the following:

– outlined concretely comprehensive steps and created conditions that enable the birth of as many children as possible in Russia. A family with three or more children should be considered as a minimum standard. At the same time, it is also essential to encourage students in the system of higher education to combine studies with family life.

– suggested, without delay, providing financial support for families as an underlying factor for strengthening the demographic policy. It is necessary to work on incentives such as maternity capital, preferential loans, flat-rate benefits for low-income families, and low-interest mortgages.

– trashed side, in absolute terms, migration to replace the native population, which often sacrifices national identity and culture, and, importantly, could cause internal political instability.

– advocated strongly for addressing the demographic challenge by supporting large family traditions and preserving genuine Russian family values.

It is important to regularly analyze the effectiveness of the measures in the sphere of family policy, improving the system of social support to make it as transparent as possible, understandable, and convenient for families with children. This approach guarantees the future, preserves the ethno-cultural balance in Russian society, and strengthens Russia’s sovereignty.

Demographic complexities and implications

There are several complications in Russia’s demography policy, although officials and demographers keep analyzing family support measures currently in effect and identifying and scaling up the most effective of them. At least, for the past decade, Russia’s approach has simply not been working perfectly well as expected. Accurate statistics and population surveys reflecting the realities are needed for correct managerial decisions.

There is a constant temptation to use maternity capital to resolve various other issues. Naturally, families with children always face many of them; they are endless. Considerable efforts have been taken to raise the level of population, but with little results. Russia’s population figures are seriously staggering, with researchers and demographers pegging it at approximately 142 million. 

In the first place, Russia has a relatively high death rate, influenced by health issues and lifestyle factors. In the second place, the birth rate has been declining over the years, contributing to a natural decrease in population. Third, emigration, especially among young professionals and specialists, is due to a lust for better economic and living conditions outside the Russian Federation.  

Moscow, the capital city of Russia, is currently under reconstruction. Alternatively, the city periphery (outskirts), the new micro-region where residential apartment blocks are undergoing construction, needs serious migrant labor. Moscow city mayor Sergey Sobyanin reiterated that the municipal administration needed 250,000 (a quarter of a million) to work on the construction sites (fields). In addition, many are required for tidying up the city. Sobyanin complained that there was a shortage of labor. St. Petersburg, the second largest city, and other major cities are constantly complaining and stuck with new construction projects.

On one hand, Putin, in his October 23rd speech, indicated categorically his opposition to raising population by naturalizing citizens from the Central Asian republics. On the other hand, Putin, during the second Russia–Central Asia Summit, held in Tajikistan’s capital, Dushanbe, considered aspects of agreements encompassing migration of Central Asian citizens to Russia as a logical continuation of the close partnership within the framework of regional collaboration. 

Regrettably, legalizing 1.5 million (the majority from former Soviet republics) and transferring them to the Arctic and Far East regions to boost employment and systematically engage this labor in the production spheres is extremely hard for the Russian government. A well-coordinated and controlled ‘immigration’ could be one of the surest ways to allow population growth and comprehensive sustainable development and economic growth. 

Russia’s Logical Decision

In Putin’s candid views: “Different countries respond to this demographic challenge in various ways, including encouraging uncontrolled and even chaotic migration to replace the native population.” As a result, nations often sacrifice national identity, culture, and internal political stability.

Therefore, Russia opposes migrants replacing the native population, as contained in the speech by Russian President Vladimir Putin. It was explicitly made clear that offsetting falling birth rates with immigration is destructive to internal stability and national identity. There stands the only option: Russia will support family values as the foundation of its society, rather than following in the footsteps of countries that try to solve demographic issues by replacing their native populations with “chaotic migration,” according to Russian President Vladimir Putin.

Oct. 24 (UPI) — A 41-year-old Guatemalan man was extradited to the United States on charges related to a December 2021 crash in Mexico that killed 55 and injured 105 people who were smuggled.

Daniel Zavala Ramos was arrested on Aug. 7 in Boqueron, Guatemala, according to the U.S. Department of Justice.

The crash took place on Dec. 9, when a tractor-trailer hit a pedestrian bridge, collided with a truck and overturned in the Mexican state of Chiapas, near the border with Guatemala. There were survivors.

On the third anniversary of the crash in 2024, Zavala Ramos and five others were charged with human smuggling. Among them, Jorge Agapito Ventura was arrested at his home in Cleveland, with one later in custody last May and three in September.

Zavala Ramos’ name in the indictment was blacked out.

If convicted, they face up to life in prison and a maximum $250,000 fine.

The case was certified as complex.

The six face charges of conspiracy to bring illegal aliens into the U.S, placing life in jeopardy, causing serious bodily harm and resulting in deaths.

“The Justice Department is holding accountable the individuals who we allege preyed on vulnerable migrants and are responsible for this heinous crime that resulted in the deaths of over 50 people and injured over 100 more,” Attorney General Merrick Garland said. “Human smugglers should heed these charges and arrests as a warning: you will be held accountable for your deadly crimes.”

Zavala Ramas surrendered to U.S. authorities on Tuesday and made his initial court appearance in Laredo, Texas, on Thursday.

From October 2021 to February 203, DOJ said they worked with others smugglers to transport people from Guatemala through Mexico into the United States.

“They allegedly recruited them, collected payment and arranged travel by foot, microbuses, cattle trucks and tractor-trailers,” DOJ said in a news release.

Unaccompanied children were smuggled, DOJ said.

Those being transported were given instructions on what to say if apprehended, authorities said.

Conducting the joint investigation were Immigration and Customs Enforcement with Homeland Security Investigations.

“This DOJ is investigating and prosecuting human smuggling more aggressively than ever before, and Joint Task Force Alpha is the tip of the spear,” Attorney General Pamela Bondi said in September. “We will not rest until those who profit from the suffering of vulnerable people — including many unaccompanied children — face severe, comprehensive justice.”

The investigation was part of Operation Take Back America, a nationwide initiative utilizing the full resources of the DOJ to prevent illegal immigration and eliminate cartels and transnational criminal organizations in an effort to “protect our communities from the perpetrators of violent crime,” DOJ said.

Oct. 15 (UPI) — U.S. border officials said Wednesday that more than a dozen undocumented migrants via Russia and former Soviet satellite states were taken into custody near Puerto Rico.

Border authorities intercepted a 41-foot sailboat carrying 13 migrants near Combate Beach on Puerto Rico’s west coast Sunday afternoon, officials said. Air and Marine Operations, part of U.S. Customs and Border Protection, tracked the vessel as it approached the shoreline with assistance from the U.S. Coast Guard and the Puerto Rican Police’s Fuerzas Unidas de Rapida Accion unit.

“This successful interdiction demonstrates the unwavering commitment and vigilance of the Michel O. Maceda Marine Unit in protecting our nation’s borders,” Christopher Hunter, director of the Caribbean Air and Marine Branch, said in a statement.

Agents found 13 people aboard that included 10 unidentified men from Uzbekistan, a woman from Kyrgyzstan and two Russian men.

None of the undocumented suspects had official papers allowing legal entry to the United States.

Agents escorted the small yacht to the Michel O. Maceda Marine Unit for inspection, and the migrants were taken into custody and transferred to Homeland Security Investigations for processing, officials noted, “in good condition.”

Officials at America’s border agency added that the operation highlights ongoing efforts by CBP and the Caribbean Border Interagency Group to prevent illegal maritime activity and strengthen border security in the Caribbean region.

TORIES will promise to introduce a US-style immigration force to deport up to 150,000 people a year.

Leader Kemi Badenoch will unveil the Conservatives’ toughest border policies yet at her first party conference.

3

3

The plan is part of a policy blitz as the Tories try to stop haemorrhaging support to Reform UK.

Ms Badenoch will pledge to create a £1.6billion removals force like the hardline US Immigration and Customs Enforcement agency.

Since President Donald Trump’s second term started in January, it has seen more than two million illegal immigrants either leave the US voluntarily or be removed.

As the party faithful gathered in Manchester, Ms Badenoch — who turned up hand-in-hand with husband Hamish — said: “We must tackle the scourge of illegal immigration to Britain and secure our borders.

“That is why the Conservatives are setting out a serious and comprehensive new plan to end this crisis.

“Labour offer failed gimmicks like ‘one thousand in, one out’.

“Reform have nothing but announcements that fall apart on arrival.”

The plan — if the Conservatives win the next election — would see all new illegal migrants deported within a week of arrival.

The “Removals Force” would be handed sweeping powers like facial recognition to spot them.

Police will have to conduct immigration checks on everyone they stop.

Illegal migrants would be banned from claiming asylum and refugee status will be for only those whose government is trying to kill them.

Immigration tribunals would be abolished and legal aid denied.

Ms Badenoch has committed to taking the UK out of the European Convention on Human Rights — used to argue against deportations.

But she has been accused of mimicking Nigel Farage’s Reform policies with tougher stances on borders and net zero.

Insiders claim Tory MPs are holding on to letters calling for Ms Badenoch to quit so they can use them when she can be challenged after a year in office — on November 3.

But others expect a move would be more likely after May’s local elections.

Asked if they will topple Ms Badenoch after another bad performance at the ballot box, Shadow Energy Secretary Claire Coutinho told The Sun on Sunday: “Kemi’s had one of the toughest jobs in politics.

“If you’re someone who takes over a party after it’s lost an election, it’s a pretty rough ride.

“We’re now taking on energy and you’ll see even more from us on immigration.

“Those are the things that I think the public care about.”

But on the eve of the Conference, London Assembly member Keith Prince became the latest Tory to jump ship to Reform.

A Labour Party spokesperson insisted: “The Conservatives’ message on immigration is; we got everything wrong, we won’t apologise, now trust us.

“It won’t wash.”

3

Oct. 3 (UPI) — The Trump administration will pay $2,500 to some unaccompanied migrant children ages 14 to 17 years old to self-deport from the United States to their home countries.

The U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement on Friday confirmed to Politico and The Washington Post that the agency, along with the Department of Health and Human Services’ Office of Refugees and Resettlement, are offering the “strictly voluntary” program.

It is called the “Family Assistance Reintegration,” and money will be given after an immigration judge grants their request. Those first offered will be 17-year-olds.

DHS is touting the plan as a way to help children return to their families.

“Many of these had no choice when they were dangerously smuggled into this country,” DHS posted on X. “ICE and the Office of Refugee and Resettlement at HHS are offering a strictly voluntary option to return home to their families.”

The payment will be offered to those who came to the U.S. by themself. They are in detention centers or placed with sponsor relatives or foster families.

Shelters were asked on Friday to notify the teens.

They will receive the payment in exchange for waiving their rights to pursue immigration relief as part of a law that protects victims of human trafficking and smuggling.

Under federal law, they can apply for protection, including asylum or a special visa for neglected or abandoned children. Those proceedings can take several years.

Immigration advocates and lawyers dispute calling the new program voluntary because some children may be scared into self-deporting.

An official with the American Immigration Council said U.S. authorities could threaten to arrest the person’s family with trafficking their children or threaten them with deportation once they turn 18.

“Those financial incentives have often been coercive, and they’ve often been presented as the only way for people to avoid punitive and terrorizing consequences even if they have legitimate claims to legal status in the United States,” said Nayna Gupta, policy director at the American Immigration Council advocacy group in Washington, told Politico. “Does failure to take the money and return to a place you fled mean that you will be detained once you age out of the unaccompanied minors status?”

“Safe voluntary departure requires legal counsel — not government marketing or what amounts to cash bribes for kids,” Melissa Adamson, senior attorney at the National Center for Youth Law told The Washington Post. “This administration’s actions again prove it cannot be trusted to protect children.”

The new program is being called Freaky Friday by opponents.

An ICE spokesperson told Politico that critics are trying to “instill fear and spread misinformation that drives the increased violence occurring against federal law enforcement.”

When Joe Biden was president, tens of thousands of unaccompanied children reached the United States, at times with the help of smugglers.

The Biden and Trump administrations have attempted to reduce the number of children in the custody of the HHS. The number in custody since Trump became president is lower with 2,000 minors in shelters in August.

When Trump was first president, more than 4,000 migrant children were separated from their parents after they crossed the border illegally.

The Home Office has been refused permission to appeal against a temporary injunction blocking an Eritrean man from being removed to France as part of the “one in, one out” agreement between the two countries.

Last week, the 25-year-old, who arrived in the UK on a small boat, was due to be among the first people sent to France under the pilot scheme.

However, in a last-minute reprieve, the High Court in London gave him at least 14 days to make representations to support his claim that he was a victim of modern slavery.

The government had argued the order risked undermining the new returns policy, but the Court of Appeal refused Home Office lawyers permission to appeal against that decision.

The “one in, one out” scheme was announced by Prime Minister Keir Starmer and French President Emmanuel Macron in July.

Under the treaty, France agreed to take back migrants who had travelled to the UK by small boat and had their asylum claim withdrawn or declared inadmissible.

For each person returned to France, the UK will accept someone with a case for protection as a refugee who has not attempted to cross the Channel.

Lawyers for the Home Office had argued that Mr Justice Sheldon, the High Court judge that granted the last-minute order halting the removal, had made a mistake when he did so.

“The judge’s decision to grant interim relief, and for such a significant period in the context of this policy, causes real damage to the public interest and undermines a central policy objective,” Kate Grange KC said on behalf of the Home Office.

Sonali Naik KC, who represented the asylum seeker, said the judge was “entitled to grant the order in the urgent circumstances he did, for the reasons he gave and for the period he did”.

Ms Naik said the man’s case “should be considered in its own context and on its own facts”, adding that it did not have wider significance for others whom the government might seek to remove as part of the returns pilot scheme.

In their judgement on Tuesday, Court of Appeal judges said the lower court had been “correct to hold that there was a serious issue to be tried on the question of whether the Secretary of state was acting unlawfully” by seeking to remove the man in those circumstances.

A federal judge ruled that terminating Temporary Protected Status for Venezuelans violates laws on government conduct.

The United States government has, for a second time, asked the Supreme Court to issue an emergency order allowing it to strip legal protections from more than 300,000 Venezuelan migrants.

The Department of Justice on Friday submitted an emergency application asking the nation’s top court to overturn a federal judge’s ruling that Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem did not have the authority to end Temporary Protected Status (TPS) for the migrants.

“So long as the district court’s order is in effect, the Secretary must permit over 300,000 Venezuelan nationals to remain in the country, notwithstanding her reasoned determination that doing so even temporarily is ‘contrary to the national interest’,” the Justice Department argued in its filing to the court.

In May, the Supreme Court sided with the Donald Trump White House, overturning a temporary order from US District Judge Edward Chen in San Francisco that had blocked the termination of TPS while the case moved through the courts.

On September 5, Chen issued his final ruling, concluding that Secretary Noem’s decision violated a federal law regulating the conduct of government agencies.

“This case is familiar to the court and involves the increasingly familiar and untenable phenomenon of lower courts disregarding this court’s orders on the emergency docket,” the Justice Department told the Supreme Court.

“This court’s orders are binding on litigants and lower courts. Whether those orders span one sentence or many pages, disregarding them – as the lower courts did here – is unacceptable.”

Millions of people have fled Venezuela in recent years due to political repression and a crippling economic crisis spurred in part by US sanctions against the government of President Nicolas Maduro.

Before leaving office, the administration of former US President Joe Biden had extended TPS for about 600,000 Venezuelans through October 2026.

TPS, created by the US Congress in 1990, grants people living in the US relief from deportation if their home country is affected by extraordinary circumstances such as armed conflict or environmental disasters.

An individual who is granted TPS cannot be deported, can obtain an employment authorisation document and may be given travel authorisation. A TPS holder cannot be detained by the US over their immigration status.

A WOMAN armed with three knives threatened to kill migrants after watching far-right videos, a court heard.

Drunk and stoned Nina Manley, 51, got a taxi to a Premier Inn hotel — but it was the wrong one as there were no migrants living there.

2

2

Staff at the hotel in North Petherton, Somerset, called cops, in August.

Manley told police: “I’m pissed off and I’m going to f***ing kill someone.”

Recorder Matthew Cannings told her at Taunton crown court: “You watched videos of extreme far-right social media personalities like Nigel Farage and Tommy Robinson.”

Defending, Anjam Arif said Manley came from a military background and lost a brother who was killed while serving in Afghanistan.

“Her actions were born out of bravado rather than a real threat to kill.”

Manley, of Bridgwater, admitted threats to kill and got a 12-month suspended jail sentence.

SIR Keir Starmer was under fresh fire last night after it emerged 3,567 dinghy migrants have arrived since he signed a “one-in, one-out” deal with France — but NONE have been kicked out.

The news overshadowed the Government’s latest attempt to get a grip on the illegal migration crisis.

5

5

5

Yesterday, ministers put a temporary halt on refugees bringing in partners and children.

Sir Keir also said he wanted to bring forward his 2029 deadline for closing asylum hotels because he “completely gets” the public’s anger.

But his positive slant was derailed by the news of the failure of the “one-in, one-out” deal with France’s Emmanuel Macron.

More than 100 people are understood to have been detained — with videos shared by No10 showing people being escorted by staff after arriving across the Channel.

Yet none has actually gone yet, officials confirmed.

The PM and Home Secretary Yvette Cooper had gone on the offensive yesterday after a summer of dismal headlines.

Sir Keir slammed Reform leader Nigel Farage’s sweeping deportation plans.

Speaking to BBC Radio Five, the PM said: “It’s a really serious issue. We have to have control of our borders, and I completely get it.

“I’m determined that whether it’s people crossing in the first place, people in asylum hotels, or it’s returning people, we absolutely have to deal with this.”

Pressed on when illegal migrant hotels will finally shut, Sir Keir replied: “We’ve said we’ll get rid of them by the end of the Parliament. I would like to bring that forward, I think it is a good challenge.”

Nationwide protests over the summer pushed the PM to finally act as public anger over hotel use reached boiling point.

The Home Office currently houses around 32,000 asylum seekers in over 200 hotels across Britain.

Home Secretary Yvette Cooper said accommodation for illegal migrants would be dealt with “not just by shifting individuals from hotels to other sites, but by driving down the numbers in supported accommodation overall”.

Hotels would be “reconfigured” to increase room-sharing and the test for accommodation would be “tightened”.

She said the Home Office would try to “identify alternative cheaper and more appropriate accommodation”.

Last month, Mr Farage unveiled his radical mass deportation blueprint, dubbed “Operation Restoring Justice”, aiming to expel up to 600,000 undocumented migrants over five years.

Scrap ECHR

His plan includes withdrawing from the European Convention on Human Rights and scrapping the 1951 UN Refugee Convention.

He also wants to establish detention centres with compulsory deportations, even for women and children.

Sir Keir said: “The difference here is between an orderly sensible way of actually fixing a problem we inherited from the Tories or fanciful arrangements that are just not going to work.

“Nigel Farage and Reform are just the politics of grievance. They feed on grievance. They don’t want the problem solved because they’ve got no reason to exist if the problems are solved.”

The PM added that Mr Farage’s plan is “not fair to put forward to the public” because it is an idea that “just isn’t going to work”.

It came as Ms Cooper announced refugees will be banned from bringing their families to the UK as part of “radical” asylum reforms announced by the Home Secretary yesterday.

5

The Home Secretary vowed that new immigration rules will temporarily suspend new applications from dependents of refugees already in Britain.

She also said that the controversial Article 8 of the ECHR — which guarantees a right to family life — should be interpreted differently.

Around 20,000 people come to the UK on refugee family reunion visas per year, according to Home Office figures.

Ms Cooper told the House of Commons yesterday: “Our reforms will also address the overly complex system for family migration, including changes to the way Article 8 of the ECHR is interpreted.

“We should be clear that international law is important.

“But we also need the interpretation of international law to keep up with the realities and challenges of today’s world.”

‘Living in a parallel universe’

Shadow Home Secretary Chris Philp accused Ms Cooper of “living in a parallel universe”.

Labour’s own Graham Stringer said the measures “don’t really deal with the fact that many migrants are not coming from war-torn countries, they’re coming from France, which isn’t persecuting them”.

And Reform MP Lee Anderson said: “Starmer continues to open the floodgates for hundreds of illegals each day.”

The Bell Hotel in Epping, Essex, became a flash point for discontent this summer after two of its guests were charged with sexual offences.

Epping Forest District Council won a bid at the High Court to block migrants from being housed at the hotel.

But the Court of Appeal last week overturned the injunction after an Home Office appeal.

Lee Anderson added: “Starmer makes hollow claims while refusing to close Epping. Hypocrite.”

Carpenter Jimmy Hillard, 52, of Loughton, Essex, has been handed an eight-week suspended prison sentence by Chelmsford JPs after admitting assaulting a police officer at a Bell Hotel demo on Friday.

PM’S ‘PRIDE’ IN FLAG

PM SIR Keir Starmer yesterday declared himself a “supporter of flags” — and revealed he still proudly displays a St George’s Cross in his flat.

He dismissed claims that showing off England’s ensign should be seen as racist, telling BBC Five Live: “I am the leader of the Labour Party who put the Union Jack on membership cards.

“I always sit in front of the Union Jack. I’ve been doing it for years, and it attracted a lot of comment when I started doing it.” He said he bought his England flag for last year’s Euros football.

The flag debate reignited after councils in the West Midlands and Tower Hamlets tried to remove the St George’s Cross from lamp posts and motorway bridges over claims they intimidated minorities.

The PM added: “They’re patriotic and a great symbol of our nation. I don’t think they should be devalued and belittled.”

Murder accused can stay

EXCLUSIVE by MIKE SULLIVAN

A CAKE shop owner can remain in Britain despite being wanted for murder in his home country.

Carlos Kassimo Dos Santos, 33, was jailed for 14 years in his absence in 2016 over a gang killing in Portugal.

5

An extradition bid failed when the High Court upheld a decision by a district judge to allow Santos to remain here.

It was deemed Santos, who denies involvement in the 2010 murder, could not be guaranteed a retrial and it could not be proved he fled justice to come here.

He is now co-owner of Kings & Queens Dessert outlet, set up three years ago in Leeds.

It recently won The Best Dessert Shop in West Yorkshire award.

Santos was 18 when he was accused of being part of a group who killed a gang rival near Lisbon.

He then spent two years in the army before coming to Britain, where his dad lives.

He said he was unaware he was jailed and did not know he had to notify authorities of his address change.

He refused to comment when approached.

WASHINGTON — A federal judge has temporarily blocked the Trump administration from carrying out speedy deportations of undocumented migrants detained in the interior of the United States.

The move is a setback for President Trump’s efforts to expand the use of the federal expedited removal statute to quickly remove some undocumented migrants without appearing before a judge first.

Trump promised to engineer a massive deportation operation during his 2024 campaign if voters returned him to the White House. And he set a goal of carrying out 1 million deportations a year in his second term.

But U.S. District Judge Jia Cobb suggested the administration’s expanded use of the expedited removal of migrants is trampling on due process rights.

“In defending this skimpy process, the Government makes a truly startling argument: that those who entered the country illegally are entitled to no process under the Fifth Amendment, but instead must accept whatever grace Congress affords them,” Cobb wrote in a 48-page opinion issued Friday night. “Were that right, not only noncitizens, but everyone would be at risk.”

The Department of Homeland Security announced shortly after Trump came to office in January that it was expanding the use of expedited removal, the fast-track deportation of undocumented migrants who have been in the U.S. less than two years.

The effort has triggered lawsuits by the American Civil Liberties Union and immigrant rights groups.

Homeland Security said in a statement that Cobb’s “ruling ignores the President’s clear authorities under both Article II of the Constitution and the plain language of federal law.” It said Trump “has a mandate to arrest and deport the worst of the worst” and that ”we have the law, facts, and common sense on our side.”

Before the administration’s push to expand such speedy deportations, expedited removal was used only for migrants who were stopped within 100 miles of the border and who had been in the U.S. for less than 14 days.

Cobb, an appointee of President Biden, didn’t question the constitutionality of the expedited removal statute or its application at the border.

“It merely holds that in applying the statute to a huge group of people living in the interior of the country who have not previously been subject to expedited removal, the Government must afford them due process,” she wrote.

She added that “prioritizing speed over all else will inevitably lead the Government to erroneously remove people via this truncated process.”

Cobb earlier this month agreed to temporarily block the administration’s efforts to expand fast-track deportations of immigrants who legally entered the U.S. under a process known as humanitarian parole. The ruling could benefit hundreds of thousands of people.

In that case the judge said Homeland Security exceeded its statutory authority in its effort to expand expedited removal for many immigrants. The judge said those immigrants are facing perils that outweigh any harm from “pressing pause” on the administration’s plans.

Since May, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement officers have positioned themselves in hallways to arrest people after judges accept government requests to dismiss deportation cases. After the arrests, the government renews deportation proceedings but under fast-track authority.

Although fast-track deportations can be put on hold by filing an asylum claim, people may be unaware of that right and, even if they are, can be swiftly removed if they fail an initial screening.

Madhani writes for the Associated Press.

NEW ORLEANS — A federal appeals court has vacated a ruling that a Texas law giving police broad powers to arrest migrants suspected of illegally entering the U.S. was unconstitutional.

The 5th Circuit Court of Appeals on Friday vacated a ruling by a three-judge panel, and now the full court will consider whether the law can take effect.

The Texas Legislature passed Senate Bill 4 in 2023, but a federal judge in Texas ruled the law unconstitutional. Texas appealed that ruling.

Under the proposed law, state law enforcement officers could arrest people suspected of entering the country illegally. Once in custody, detainees could agree to a Texas judge’s order to leave the country or face a misdemeanor charge of entering the U.S. illegally. Migrants who don’t leave after being ordered to do so could be arrested again and charged with a more serious felony.

Texas Gov. Greg Abbott said in a social media post Friday that the court’s decision was a “hopeful sign.”

KAMPALA, Uganda — Uganda has agreed to a deal with the United States to take deported migrants as long as they don’t have criminal records and are not unaccompanied minors, the foreign ministry said Thursday.

The ministry said in a statement that the agreement had been concluded but that terms were still being worked out. It added that Uganda prefers that the migrants sent there be of African nationalities, but did not elaborate on what Uganda might get in return for accepting deportees.

The U.S. Embassy in Uganda declined to comment on what it called “diplomatic negotiations,” but said that diplomats were seeking to uphold President Trump’s “policy of keeping Americans safe.”

The Trump administration has been seeking ways to deter migrants from entering the country illegally and to deport those who already have done so, especially those with criminal records and including those who cannot easily be deported to their home country.

Human rights activists criticized the deportee deal as possibly going against international law.

Henry Okello Oryem, Uganda’s state minister for foreign affairs, on Wednesday had denied that any agreement on deportees had been reached, though he said his government was in discussions about “visas, tariffs, sanctions, and related issues.” He also suggested that his country would draw the line at accepting people associated with criminal groups.

“We are talking about cartels: people who are unwanted in their own countries. How can we integrate them into local communities in Uganda?” he said at the time.

Oryem and other Ugandan government officials declined to comment Thursday.

Opposition lawmaker Muwada Nkunyingi suggested that such a deal with the United States would give the Ugandan government legitimacy ahead of elections, and urged Washington not to turn a blind eye toward what he described as human rights and governance issues in Uganda.

Uganda’s leaders will rush into a deal to “clear their image now that we are heading into the 2026 elections,” Nkunyingi said.

Human rights lawyer Nicholas Opio likened a deportee deal to human trafficking, and said it would leave the status of the deportees unclear. “Are they refugees or prisoners?” he said.

“The proposed deal runs afoul of international law. We are sacrificing human beings for political expediency; in this case because Uganda wants to be in the good books of the United States,” he said. “That I can keep your prisoners if you pay me; how is that different from human trafficking?”

In July, the U.S. deported five men with criminal backgrounds to the southern African kingdom of Eswatini and sent eight more to South Sudan. The men from Cuba, Jamaica, Laos, Yemen and Vietnam sent to Eswatini are being held in solitary confinement until they can be deported to their home countries, which could take up to a year.

A legal challenge in the U.S had halted the deportation process of the eight men in South Sudan but a Supreme Court ruling eventually cleared the way for them to be sent to South Sudan.

Uganda has had challenges with the U.S. after lawmakers passed an anti-homosexuality bill in 2023 that punishes consensual same-sex conduct with penalties including life imprisonment. Washington threatened consequences and the World Bank withheld some funding.

In May 2024, the U.S. imposed sanctions on Uganda’s parliamentary speaker, her husband and several other officials over corruption and serious abuses of human rights.

Appeals court pauses an order that had protected status for Nepalese, Hondurans and Nicaraguans.

A United States appeals court has sided with the Trump administration and halted, for now, a lower court’s order that had kept in place temporary protections for 60,000 migrants from Honduras, Nicaragua and Nepal.

In a decision issued on Wednesday, the 9th US Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco granted an emergency stay pending an appeal. Immigrant rights advocates allege that the administration acted unlawfully in ending Temporary Protected Status (TPS) designations for people from Honduras, Nicaragua and Nepal.

This decision means that the Republican administration can move towards removing an estimated 7,000 people from Nepal whose TPS designations expired on August 5. The TPS designations and legal status of 51,000 Hondurans and 3,000 Nicaraguans are set to expire September 8, at which point they will become eligible for removal.

“The district court’s order granting plaintiffs’ motion to postpone, entered July 31, 2025, is stayed pending further order of this court,” wrote the judges.

In July, a district judge ordered that the termination of the TPS be halted until November, when a hearing on the merits is scheduled. In her ruling, she found that the plaintiffs would suffer “irreparable harm” by the hasty termination, but also noted that the broader public would be impacted both economically and socially by the loss to the labour force and community.

The brief decision issued on Wednesday did not give a reason, and in a statement, UCLA Center for Immigration Law and Policy co-director Ahilan Arulanantham said there appeared to be a lack of due process.

“The court’s failure to provide any reasoning for its decision, including why this was an ‘emergency,’ falls far short of what due process requires and our clients deserve.”

TPS allows nationals from countries facing conflict, natural disaster or other extraordinary circumstances to temporarily remain in the US. It also gives them the right to work and travel.

The Trump administration has aggressively sought to remove the protection, thus making more people eligible for removal. It is part of a wider effort by the administration to carry out mass deportations of immigrants.

Since taking office, the administration has sought to remove protections for Afghans, Haitians, Venezuelans and Cameroonians – despite troubling conditions in their home countries.

CONGRATULATIONS, Sir Keir! The number of people arriving here in small boats from France has reached 50,000 since your magnificent government took office.

That’s something to be proud of, isn’t it? The way things are going, you might make it 100,000 by the end of the year.

4

Smashing the gangs was the plan you announced upon taking office.

It was about as much use as howling at the moon. And although you deny it, the policy seems to have been quietly shelved.

Nor will the one-in, one-out deal work. A pilot scheme which was only ever going to deal with one in 20 of the illegal migrants.

You scrapped the Rwanda plan. That at least provided SOME deterrent.

And so, like almost every other thing you turn your hand to, you’ve made things worse and worse.

So here’s my ten-point plan to stop what seems to be an unstoppable tide. It’s not really unstoppable, if you really want to do it.

1: Let it be known that anyone arriving here illegally automatically loses their right to live in the UK, in perpetuity. Cost of this? Nil.

Deterrence effect? Very high. No place to live, no permit to work, no schooling, no health care.

2: No more hotels. As Tory leader Kemi Badenoch has suggested, house the migrants who arrive in tents.

Empty every hotel which has migrants in them, immediately. Cost of this? Rather less than the hotels, I would reckon.

3: No grants for swimming lessons, gym workouts and hair extensions. No grants for anything except a ticket home.

4: Withdraw from the European Convention on Human Rights and all other supranational jurisdiction which stops us from solving our own problems in our own ways. They are well past their sell-by dates, anyway.

5: Abolish the immigration tribunals, immediately. They are all presided over by judges who spend most of their lives advocating the causes of asylum seekers. The legal issue is clear: Arriving illegally means no entry.

6: In complex cases, where it is either not clear where the migrant comes from, or the country of origin refuses to have them back, send them for processing at a place under British jurisdiction.

Such as St Helena — a windswept island in the middle of the Atlantic. Or South Georgia. Or, for the really devious ones, Rockall.

7. For those who have already arrived and are currently going through the appeals process, let it be made clear that by arriving illegally they have automatically lost their right to stay here. Also, abolish all legal aid for those who have arrived.

4

8: Offer those who have been here for some time £1,000 to leave the country, never to return. You could throw in some free bags of Monster Munch, and one of those neck cushions, for the flight.

9: Strike a deal with the French to allow British policemen or soldiers to puncture the boats before they leave France.

Or otherwise hole them below the waterline. It is obvious we can’t trust the French to do this.

10: Start taking things seriously, Starmer. Begin with the conviction that all who arrive illegally must go. Including those who have already arrived. And if the Left moans, so be it.

Boring tunes Taylor-made for kids

4

GOT your pre-order in for the new Taylor Swift album?

Nope, me neither. But I suppose million upon million will.

Her music is bloodless and boring, written by a committee. The lyrics are naff. But she is a consummate saleswoman.

She’s already been giving teasing hints as to what’s on the new album.

It includes a cover of a George Michael song, for example. Which is, for me, another reason to stay well away from it.

Ah well, she’s what a certain section of the kids want now and I suppose I am not necessarily her target audience.

But couldn’t the kids fall in love with something a little more exciting, and dangerous, and full of adventure?

UK IN A RIGHTS MESS

4

WHEN friends make constructive criticisms, we should listen.

The US State Department has just investigated human rights in the UK – something the Vice President JD Vance has been banging on about.

It says our human rights worsened last year. And it claimed there were “credible reports of serious restrictions on freedom of expression”, as well as “crimes, violence, or threats of violence motivated by antisemitism”.

That seems to me pretty much bang on.

Over the last 15 years our freedom to express ourselves has diminished and diminished.

And that trend hastened last year with the advent of a Labour government which really hates the idea that people should express themselves freely.

GOOD luck to all our readers who are about to open their A-level results today.

It’s always a fun time of year, isn’t it?

But it doesn’t really matter in the end, believe me.

And here’s a bit of advice to anyone who got lower than As and Bs.

Don’t go to university. It’s not worth the bother.

Instead, get yourself an apprenticeship and learn something useful which will keep you in work.

Soon you will be earning a decent income while the debt-laden students slum it on awful courses.

High flyer? What do you take me for?

NOW I really have heard it all. A trolley dolly has just won a discrimination case against British Airways.

Jennifer Clifford said she was too scared to fly. Being up in the air in one of those planes made her kind of stressy, you see. So she shouldn’t have been given the boot.

Do you ever get the impression that, much as the Fun Boy Three suggested all those years ago, the lunatics really have taken over the asylum?

Aug. 8 (UPI) — The Justice Department filed a lawsuit this week challenging an Oklahoma law that provides eligible undocumented migrants with in-state tuition benefits, the latest litigation targeting migrants’ access to higher education amid the Trump administration’s crackdown on immigration.

Though announced Thursday, the lawsuit was filed Tuesday in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Oklahoma.

The law, approved by the state’s legislature in 2007, offers in-state tuition at the 25 state-run colleges and universities to anyone — including undocumented migrants — who graduated from an Oklahoma high school and resided in the state with a parent or legal guardian while attending the state high school for at least two years before graduation.

The lawsuit argues the rule violates two of President Donald Trump‘s executive orders on immigration — one signed Feb. 19 directing federal departments and agencies to ensure no taxpayer-funded benefits go to “unqualified aliens,” and one April 28 ordering “appropriate” actions to end enforcement of laws and practices “favoring aliens over any groups of American citizens,” including those in-state tuition to undocumented migrants.

The Justice Department sayd that the law favors undocumented migrants over out-of-state Americans, calling it “unequal treatment,” and argues it violates the Supremacy Clause of the Constitution, which holds federal law takes precedence precedence over state laws.

Prosecutors are asking the court to declare the law unconstitutional and issue a permanent injunction against its enforcement.

The state’s Republican attorney general, Gentner Drummond, has filed a motion in support of the Trump administration lawsuit, saying Tuesday marked “the end of a longstanding exploitation of Oklahoma taxpayers.”

“Rewarding foreign nationals who are in our country illegally with lower tuition costs that are not made available to out-of-state American citizens is not only wrong — it is discriminatory and unlawful,” Drummond said in a statement.

Since returning to the White House in January, Trump has led a renewed crackdown on immigration, seeking to conduct mass deportations and limiting the protections of migrants already in the country.

This is the fourth lawsuit since since June challenging state laws offering in-state tuition or tuition benefits to migrants that are unavailable to out-of-state-Americans.

In early June, the Justice Department filed a lawsuit against a similar Texas law. As in Oklahoma, the Republican-led state sided with the Trump administration, and the two reached an agreement to halt its enforcement.

Similar lawsuits have also been filed in Kentucky and Minnesota.

Florida ended in-state tuition for undocumented migrants in February.

According to the Higher Ed Immigration Portal, 23 states and Washington, D.C., provide in-state tuition to undocumented students. Of those, 18 and D.C. provide access to state financial aid.

Aug. 7 (UPI) — A landmark Anglo-French “one-in, one-out” migrant agreement saw the first small boat arrivals on the British coast taken into custody in preparation for being returned to France, the government said Thursday.

The detentions got underway on Wednesday with migrants who had crossed the Channel “illegally” held in secure immigration centers pending their removal to France, which was expected to take place in a matter of weeks, according to a Home Office news release.

It pledged full transparency, saying detainees would be briefed on the process for returning them to France and kept updated on their progress through the system on an individual basis.

For each migrant sent back, Britain will take in one pre-approved to claim asylum who has not previously attempted to enter the country and who has completed a formal application and security clearance process in France that is only open to those with a passport or identity document.

Pre-checked individuals, or family groups, will then journey safely from France via scheduled rail, ferry or airline services.

Home Secretary Yvette Cooper declined to say how many migrants had been detained but vowed to fight any challenge launched in the courts in an attempt to block them from being sent back to France.

“The transfers to immigration removal centers are underway as we speak, so we won’t provide operational details at this point that criminal gangs can simply use and exploit. But no one should be in any doubt: anyone who arrives from now on is eligible for immediate detention and return,” she said.

Cooper added that it was the very early stages of a pilot that would take time to scale up, but stressed, given that France was a safe country for all, including migrants, the government would “robustly defend against any legal challenge that people try.”

However, Home Office sources told The Guardian that the scheme inked last month during a state visit to Britain by French President Emmanuel Macron would initially only involve about 50 asylum seekers.

Immigration lawyers warned that the ambiguous terms of the treaty left it open to legal challenge by individuals trying to prevent their removal from the country.

At least one charity cautioned that the scheme shut out people fleeing war or famine in countries including Eritrea or Sudan because they were unlikely to meet the criteria for official identification.

“This week in Calais, we spoke with many people from Eritrea and almost none of them have copies of their Eritrean passports because they were never able to obtain one,” said a spokesperson for Refugee Legal Support.

The spokesperson said the largest group making the journey across the Channel so far this year were Eritreans, 86% of whom had their refugee claims upheld once they reached Britain — but virtually all of them would never get that chance under the scheme.

The deal, marking the first time Britain has been able to return migrants who arrive from France, came as the number of people crossing the Channel in small boats in the first seven months of 2025 topped a record 25,436.

Under the treaty, Britain is responsible for the costs of transporting migrants in both directions, and France is entitled to refuse to accept returnees it believes pose “a threat to public policy, internal security, public health or the international relations of any of the Schengen states.”

Schengen states refer to the borderless, free travel area comprising 25 of 27 member countries of the European Union plus Iceland, Liechtenstein, Norway and Switzerland.

MIGRANTS arriving in Britain by small boat were immediately detained yesterday under the new “one in, one out” deal with France.

The first to be held under the pilot scheme were picked up in Dover on Wednesday – just hours after the new treaty kicked in.

1

Photos showed arrivals in life jackets being led off Border Force vessels at the Western Jet Foil facility.

An unspecified number were held on the spot and taken to immigration removal centres — with swift deportation to France now expected.

Home Secretary Yvette Cooper said: “Yesterday, under the terms of this groundbreaking new treaty, the first group of people to cross the Channel were detained after their arrival at Western Jet Foil and will now be held in detention until they can be returned to France.

“That sends a message to every migrant currently thinking of paying organised crime gangs to go to the UK that they will be risking their lives and throwing away their money if they get into a small boat.”

The Home Office says it will not be disclosing figures at this stage for fear it would be exploited by smugglers.

But just around 50 people a week are expected to be returned under the deal,  a tiny number compared to the 25,436 who have already crossed this year.

Aug. 5 (UPI) — Rwanda on Tuesday agreed to accept hundreds of U.S.-deported migrants as part of a broad effort by the Trump administration to get African nations to take in deportees.

“Rwanda has agreed with the United States to accept up to 250 migrants, in part because nearly every Rwandan family has experienced the hardships of displacement,” Rwandan government spokesperson Yolande Makolo told Politico and The New York Times.

Rwanda’s societal values, Makolo claimed in a statement, were “founded on reintegration and rehabilitation.”

Rwanda’s foreign minister Olivier J.P. Nduhungirehe initially confirmed the talks in May.

Its notorious 1994 genocide that killed over 800,000 Tutsi and Hutu peoples and later recovery made the small African country stand on its own in the eyes of the global community.

The Trump administration issued requests to at least 15 African nations, including South Sudan and Eswatini, to accept illegal migrants supposedly unable to return to their native country.

A second Rwandan government official told said the United States will provide funding but declined to outline a figure.

Last month, an internal memo out of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement indicated the federal agency intended to expand its effort to deport immigrants to other countries abroad where they do not hold citizenship.

The White House previously signed off on a $6 million infusion of U.S. dollars to El Salvador to imprison Venezuelan and Salvadoran citizens.

Meanwhile, Rwandan officials said the U.S.-infused money will support further work and training programs by its immigration authority.

The Rwandan official granted anonymity indicated its government agreed to demands as an opportunity to form closer ties to Washington.

In early July, President Donald Trump met at the White House with the leaders of Senegal, Liberia, Guinea-Bissau, Mauritania and Gabon to talk over trade. Within days the U.S. Supreme Court ruled the administration was permitted to deport eight migrants to war-torn South Sudan held at a U.S. military base in neighboring Djibouti.

The anonymous Rwandan government official said Tuesday that as a small country, “any time you can find a way consistent with your own policies and values, to be able to talk to a major country about something that it is interested in and not just asking them to take an interest in your issues,” that it creates a “more productive” and a “more balanced” diplomatic relationship “that’s good for both sides.”

However, the official did state that it’s an “obviously not equal” relationship.