officers

U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement is pitching a plan to help shield local police officers who make immigration arrests from possible financial consequences if they are accused of on-duty misconduct.

The agency is proposing to subsidize liability insurance for state and local officers who are trained and deputized to enforce federal immigration laws, according to a planning document published Friday.

ICE’s partnerships with local departments have soared since President Trump returned to the White House last year and may get an additional boost with liability insurance by removing a hurdle that has made some local police departments reluctant to join. The Associated Press is the first to report on this insurance proposal.

Under the plan, officers would purchase insurance covering up to $500,000 in personal liability, which typically funds legal fees, settlements and judgments. Officers would be reimbursed up to $250 annually — roughly what the insurance is expected to cost.

One prominent critic of ICE’s immigration crackdown said the program would be yet another way for officers to avoid personal accountability for misconduct.

“The concern here is that ICE is going above and beyond to guarantee law enforcement does not have even the slightest risk of liability for violating Americans’ rights while helping ICE arrest people,” said David Bier, director of immigration studies at the Cato Institute, who has called on Congress to make it easier to sue ICE agents for wrongdoing.

ICE outlined the plan in a document informing industry officials that it is considering hiring a contractor to help provide outreach, training and communications support for its so-called 287(g) partnerships with local departments, which are named for a section of a 1996 immigration law. The contractor would hire the insurance vendor and process the reimbursements, among other tasks.

ICE has asked for industry feedback by Thursday. The proposed timeline for launching the program and its estimated cost are unclear.

ICE had no immediate comment on the plan.

Arrests by ICE’s local partners have spiked since last year

During Trump’s second term, ICE has offered generous financial incentives to participating local agencies, increasing the number who have partnered with the federal government, as well as the number of arrests.

Nearly 1,600 agencies in 32 states now have agreements to participate in ICE’s task force model, in which trained local officers can interrogate, arrest and charge people suspected of being in the country illegally, according to ICE data.

Departments qualify for funding to help cover expenses like their officers’ pay, equipment and vehicles. With encouragement from state and local Republican officials, agencies in Florida, Texas, Oklahoma and Georgia have been among the leaders.

Arrests made through such programs jumped to an average of 3,000 per month in the first two months of 2026, according to the most recent ICE data provided to the University of California Berkeley’s Deportation Data Project. That compares to a monthly average of 250 in 2024 under President Biden.

Local departments, officers worried about liability for ICE work

As local officers increasingly carry out federal immigration work, they and their departments have expressed concerns about the civil liability that could result from claims alleging excessive use of force, wrongful arrest and illegal search and seizure, among other things.

That’s because insurance policies that cover their local work may not apply. Pennsylvania’s risk pool, for instance, recently made clear that it would exclude “proactive immigration enforcement activities” from coverage, forcing several participating counties to search for other insurance options.

Butler County Sheriff Michael Slupe said he found insurance to cover his 13 deputies participating in the program at a cost of $20,000 in annual premiums.

“I want to make sure the guys are additionally covered, so we had to spend the money,” he said, adding that federal funding would cover the cost.

Federal officers usually enjoy legal immunities and a government-funded defense when they face lawsuits. But those protections may not always apply to local officers, which has heightened their concerns over liability and the need for insurance.

Although civil lawsuits are the main concern, professional liability insurance typically helps cover legal fees for officers facing criminal investigations as well.

Sheriffs’ group says ICE’s insurance idea sounds promising

Justin Smith, a former Colorado sheriff who is executive director of the National Sheriffs’ Assn., said ICE’s plan sounds promising and that he was eager to speak with ICE about how the plan would work.

Smith said he has shared concerns with ICE that some sheriffs are reluctant to join the partnerships because of the potential liability at a time when immigration enforcement faces intense public protests and media scrutiny. Smith said others who are partnering with ICE have already started facing legal claims tied to their immigration work, which can be costly whether or not deputies are ultimately found to have done anything wrong.

“Right now, any time you are working on immigration there is going to be a much higher potential for there being problems and having suits and issues,” he said. “They’re recognizing that it is a different environment. And I think trying to be good partners with us as best they can.”

Under their agreements, ICE warns local departments that they are responsible for the costs of incidents that give rise to liability. But it seeks to reduce the risk by saying local officers performing ICE-authorized functions are “acting under color of federal authority,” which would bar lawsuits against individual officers.

The agreements also state that local officers who face civil lawsuits can ask the U.S. Department of Justice to represent them, and that ICE will generally support their requests. But the final decision on whether to do so rests with the department.

Foley writes for the Associated Press.

US Department of Homeland Security is expected to buy up to $20m in gloves amid criticism of the president’s immigration crackdown.

The administration of United States President Donald Trump is planning to spend tens of millions of dollars to equip federal immigration agents with gloves capable of delivering electric shocks.

According to a notice posted on Monday, the Department of Homeland Security has estimated it will invest between $10m and $20m in such gloves by the end of March 2027.

The devices are known as the CT-G5 G.L.O.V.E., an acronym that stands for “Generate Low Output Voltage Emitter”. They are currently used by some jails and police departments.

Their manufacturer, Compliant Technologies, says the gloves are used to “quickly distract with small uncomfortable electrical pulses” when applied to a person’s skin. The Department of Homeland Security indicated they would be used for “distraction and de-escalation”.

A user manual states the gloves can deliver a maximum of 380 volts, which “inhibits/distracts the subject from performing coordinated muscle movement”.

The planned purchase has already sparked a backlash among rights advocates, who fear the gloves will be used to harm protesters and immigrants in the department’s custody.

The Department of Homeland Security oversees an array of agencies, including Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), which has led Trump’s campaign of mass deportation.

Monday’s announcement specified that ICE has a requirement to make the purchase and distribute the gloves to agents within Enforcement and Removal Operations, one of its subsidiaries, and Homeland Security Investigations.

But ICE has faced increasing criticism for its tactics, including accusations of racial profiling and excessive force.

At least four people have been shot dead during encounters with ICE agents since the start of this year. Dozens more have died in ICE custody.

On Wednesday, the National Immigration Law Center (NILC) issued a statement criticising the anticipated glove purchase, calling it a path to further violence against vulnerable communities.

It also noted that, in June, the Republican-led Congress passed tens of billions of dollars in ICE spending as part of the Secure America Act.

“This is a rogue agency with an $80 billion slush fund that allows them to concoct and fund new ways to visit cruelty upon our communities,” NILC President Kica Mantos said in the statement. “Arming poorly trained agents with electric shock gloves to inflict pain on our neighbors is disgusting and barbaric.”

The Department of Homeland Security offered no immediate response to The Associated Press news agency, one of the first news outlets to report on the story.

The founder and CEO of Compliant, Jeff Niklaus, told the publication in an email, “Unfortunately, we are unable to speak on this subject.”

Compliant has argued in the past that its devices are “humane” and do not cause injury.

“The technology is safe as it does not penetrate the subject’s body, while also allowing other officers to grab the individual being stimulated with no fear of feedback into their bodies,” the manufacturer says on its website.

However, Compliant recommends avoiding use of the device on “higher risk” individuals, including the elderly, small children, pregnant people and those with severe disabilities. Officers must also complete a course to use the gloves and be recertified every two years, according to the company.

The notice, listed as a no-bid contract, could be published by Friday.

WASHINGTON — The Pentagon issued an apology Tuesday for remarks made by Gen. Carl E. Mundy Jr., commandant of the Marine Corps, who said in a televised interview that black officers and those of other minority groups do not shoot, swim or read compasses as well as whites.

In a statement to reporters, Navy Capt. Michael Doubleday said that Mundy “regrets any offense that may have been taken by his statements,” which were televised Sunday on the CBS program “60 Minutes” as part of a segment on problems minority officers have receiving promotions.

Mundy’s comments on “60 Minutes” marked the third time this year that the commandant has caused a stir. In mid-August, the general abruptly issued orders that would have barred married persons from enlisting in the Marines. He was forced to rescind them immediately after a protest by the President.

Earlier, Mundy angered the Administration by vigorously opposing Clinton’s plan to lift the ban on homosexuals in the military. And he only grudgingly supported the resulting compromise “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy that allows gays to serve but restricts their behavior.

Asked about the latest incident, Doubleday said that top Pentagon officials had no plans to discipline Mundy for his comments but added that, partly as a result, Navy Secretary John H. Dalton had ordered a complete review of minority promotions in the Navy and Marine Corps.

Dalton “would like to see more minorities in positions of leadership” in the Navy and Marine Corps and wants the study “to examine the process and to determine how we can achieve that objective,” Doubleday said.

A spokesman for California Rep. Ronald V. Dellums (D-Oakland), chairman of the House Armed Services Committee, said it was unclear whether the lawmaker would want to meet with Mundy over the incident. Dellums, who is black, plans hearings later this year on racism in the military.

Mundy’s remarks on “60 Minutes” were contained in a transcript provided by the Pentagon. Asked why some minority officers complain that they are not being promoted rapidly, the general said it “has to do with performance.”

“In the military skills, we find that the minority officers do not shoot as well as the non-minorities . . .,” he said. “They don’t swim as well. And when you give them a compass and send them across the terrain at night . . . they don’t do as well at that sort of thing.

“I’m saying that there are problems that we have got to identify that will show us what it is that causes us to promote at a reduced rate,” the general went on, in a brief segment on the program. “It is not intended that we do that.”

Doubleday said Tuesday that Mundy was referring only to the “objective test scores achieved in certain skills during initial entry-level training” and did not mean to suggest that members of minority groups could not do well in the Corps.

“He (Mundy) would like to see more minorities in positions of leadership,” the Pentagon spokesman added.

And the Marines issued a statement saying that, because only part of the interview with Munday was telecast, “it may have sounded . . . that he was implying minorities have less innate ability . . . to fully develop their military capability through training and education.”

“That was not his intent or belief,” the statement went on.

“As an institution, the Marine Corps is totally committed for equal opportunity for all individuals to compete and advance through the ranks, and is aggressively pursuing initiatives to gain balance in our senior officer representation.”

White House officials said Tuesday that they had not been aware of Mundy’s comments but were looking into the matter.

Pentagon figures show that in fiscal 1991, there were 34,200 black enlisted men and women in the Marine Corps–19.7% of the total–and 980 black officers, or 5.1% of the service’s officer corps. Figures for Latinos and other minority groups were not immediately available.

ABBEY Clancy revealed her and Peter Crouch’s daughter Sophia Ruby was nearly arrested while going through airport security.

The model, 40, opened up about her recent family trip to New York with her kids Sophia, 15, Liberty, 11, Johnny, eight and Jack, seven.

But things took a surprise turn when US immigration grilled Sophia when she made a ill-timed joke about a “gun” while entering the US.

Speaking on the latest episode of their podcast The Therapy Crouch, Abbey said: “Sophia nearly got arrested at the airport, we’re landing in New York, it’s kind of security heavy… strict.

“Those immigration officers are not fun. You cannot crack a joke with them.

“Sophia renewed her passport since she last visited the US and she had to do her fingerprints.

READ MORE ON ABBEY CLANCY

HOUSE PROUD

Abbey Clancy & Peter Crouch accused of boasting about wealth amid Portugal move

bedtime story

Abbey Clancy strips topless for new snaps and writhes around in her knickers

“Sophia was like ‘why do I have to do fingerprints? Is that in case there are fingerprints on the gun?’

“They were like ‘sorry Miss, what did you say? What fingerprints on the gun?’ and then she was like ‘there’s guns here and you could have my fingerprints…’ and they were like ‘what? your fingerprints are on a gun?’.”

Abbey was then forced to intervene to explain that her daughter was just making an observation about how they catch criminals.

The mum-of-four continued: “I was like ‘no, my daughter is not saying her fingerprints are on a gun’, she’s saying ‘is that how you catch criminals, if fingerprints are on a gun?’”

But things went from bad to worse when a woman left a bag unattended next to Abbey in a queue, leaving security panicked.

Abbey said: “A lady left her bag and the queue spirals and everyone was going ‘whose is this?’

“At this point she was at the opposite end and I was right near the bag and I was thinking f***ing hell, so this poor woman got accused of leaving a bomb bag.

“She just left it at the end as she didn’t want to keep carrying it.

“So then we got our bags and the driver left us because we were taking too long and I just burst into tears.”

Just last week, Abbey and Peter were accused of boasting about their wealth after moving to Portugal while their £3m UK mansion is renovated.

Peter read out a question from a listener, which asked: “Have you completely relocated to Portugal or are you there while renovating your home?”

Abbey replied: “Obviously, we sold our house, we were looking for a new house, we thought we would try living in Portugal for a bit.

“We’ve absolutely loved it and you know it works perfectly for us because you know we can renovate our new place and all come back and it’ll be done.”

However, some fans thought they were boasting about their wealth and one commented bluntly: “Yeah when you have bagfulls of money, yeah try another country.”

“Bet they’re in Quinta do Lago as it’s very fancy,” added another.

The couple were previously criticised by fans for ‘flaunting’ their enviable £3 million mansion while hosting a lavish Asian-inspired banquet.

The pair were giving a tour of their luxury estate prior to hosting an extravagant dinner party with lavish catering provided by London’s Nobu.

The multi-million pound property featured its own luxury cinema room and a spacious home office for Peter and his trophies.

Fashion-savvy Abbey had her own walk-in wardrobe, while the outside area boasted a ‘magical’ and ‘peaceful’ garden complete with a high-tech BBQ and swimming pool.

One fan commented: “We get it, you’re loaded. Well done.”

A second added: “How they live, we don’t need to know.”

July 20 (Asia Today) — Japan plans to add about 230 immigration officers during the current fiscal year as it strengthens enforcement against unauthorized residency and employment, according to a Japanese media report Monday.

The Immigration Services Agency plans to recruit more than 200 immigration control officers and examiners, the Yomiuri Shimbun reported.

The government could approve revisions to the relevant enforcement ordinance at a Cabinet meeting as early as the end of July.

Adding personnel on this scale in the middle of a fiscal year, rather than through the regular hiring and budget process, is unusual.

The agency plans to add about 50 immigration control officers responsible for locating and investigating people who remain in Japan without authorization.

Many of the additional officers will be assigned to Ibaraki prefecture, where authorities plan to increase investigations into unauthorized employment.

Japan also plans to add about 180 immigration examiners.

The examiners will investigate employment outside the activities permitted under a person’s visa status and process a growing number of residency applications more quickly while maintaining stricter reviews.

The government also plans to strengthen screening at airports and seaports to identify travelers who may be at risk of overstaying their visas.

Japan had 68,488 unauthorized residents as of Jan. 1, down 6,375, or 8.5%, from 74,863 a year earlier, according to the Immigration Services Agency.

The total included 41,067 men and 27,421 women.

Despite the decline, the government concluded that more enforcement personnel were needed to prevent unauthorized employment and the misuse of residency classifications.

The government is expected to formally announce the staffing increase at a ministerial meeting this week on accepting foreign nationals and establishing an orderly, inclusive society.

An expert panel on immigration policy is also expected to be established by the end of July.

The panel is expected to discuss issues including the appropriate size of Japan’s foreign population and programs to teach foreign residents about Japanese culture and rules of daily life.

The initiative reflects Japan’s effort to accept foreign workers needed by its labor market while strengthening enforcement against unauthorized residency and employment.

South Korea faces similar challenges as its foreign population grows.

South Korea had 357,598 unauthorized foreign residents at the end of 2025, accounting for 12.8% of all foreign nationals staying in the country, according to Justice Ministry statistics cited in the report.

The total included 128,813 registered foreign residents, 226,028 short-term visitors and 2,757 people who had filed domestic residence reports.

South Korea had 2,783,247 foreign residents at the end of 2025, representing 5.44% of the population. The total included 594,047 people with employment-related residency status and 308,838 international students.

South Korea’s unauthorized foreign population was about 5.2 times Japan’s, although direct comparisons are limited because the two countries use different residency categories and statistical standards.

Both countries are relying more heavily on foreign labor as low birthrates and aging populations contribute to worker shortages.

The increase has also placed greater demands on the government agencies responsible for visa reviews, unauthorized employment investigations and settlement education.

— Reported by Asia Today; translated by UPI

© Asia Today. Unauthorized reproduction or redistribution prohibited.

Original Korean report: https://www.asiatoday.co.kr/kn/view.php?key=20260720010006942

July 7 (UPI) — Maryland officials said Tuesday that they have declined to charge police officers who fatally shot an autistic man who had called them for help.

Police shot Alex LaMorie, 25, early in the morning of March 1 in Columbia, Md., after he called them to report that he was being harassed and blackmailed.

“After completing its investigation and evaluating all the available evidence, the Office of the Attorney General has determined that the subject officers did not commit a crime under Maryland law,” said the announcement by state Attorney General Anthony G. Brown. “Accordingly, the attorney general has declined to prosecute the subject officers in this case.”

The attorney general’s Independent Investigations division, which is in charge of investigating and prosecuting police-involved incidents, issued the finding. Officials said they would be unable to secure a conviction of the officers for use of force or homicide offenses and that they would not be able to disprove self-defense on the officers’ part.

In their report, investigators said LaMorie refused police orders to drop a knife and moved toward them before they shot him. State police collected 12 cartridge casings from the scene, The Washington Post reported.

Police said LaMorie made suicidal statements on the phone before they arrived. Officers’ body-camera footage showed he did not lift the knife in their direction, The Post reported.

Jill Harrington, LaMorie’s mother, said in a statement to the Post that the officers should have been charged with involuntary manslaughter and that they “treated Alex’s life-threatening behavioral-medical crisis like a crime.”

“It represents a step backward, and risks undermining the state’s committed progress toward a more humane and effective crisis response system,” Harrington said.

LaMorie lived at Patuxent Commons, an inclusive housing community for those with and without disabilities. He’d moved there days before the shooting.

WASHINGTON — After Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth cut nine Navy officers, including all the women, from a promotion list, several female officers say they see the unusual intervention as a sign that their careers now have a ceiling and worry for the future generation of female military leaders.

The Navy had selected 31 sailors to promote from the rank of captain to one-star admiral, but Hegseth recently intervened to strike nine people from the list, including three women and two Black men, according to a Defense official who spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss information not permitted to be released publicly.

As a result, the Navy is not promoting a single woman to the one-star admiral rank this year even though women make up about one-quarter of all Navy officers and nearly one-third of the sea service’s midgrade ranks, according to military data from 2024.

The Associated Press spoke with eight female Navy officers of varying ranks and time in service after Hegseth’s cuts, which were reported earlier by the New York Times, became public. They spoke on condition of anonymity out of fear of retribution from their superiors.

The more junior officers said they saw the development as a sign that their careers would become politicized if they rose too far in the ranks, and some said they felt they now had a limit on how far they could be promoted. Some said it made them feel less valued within the military and wondered whether that wasn’t part of the intent.

The Pentagon has not offered any rationale on why the women, or any of the other six people, were removed from the promotion list.

Sean Parnell, the Pentagon’s top spokesman, said on social media last week that “military promotions are given to those who have earned them” and that the Pentagon “will never consider the color of a service member’s skin or their gender as a factor in promotions.” The Pentagon did not immediately respond to a request seeking further comment.

The Navy’s process for choosing which officers to promote to the one-star rank has been relatively constant and transparent over the years. The service convenes a group of officers, called a promotion board, that examines the records of eligible officers and chooses those deemed to be the most qualified.

The board that selected the initial slate of 31 officers for promotion was directed by then-Navy Secretary John Phelan, an appointee of President Trump, to “recommend for promotion the best qualified officers within their respective competitive category.”

The order from Phelan, who abruptly departed his post in April, said the board should consider an officer’s performance, competence and character, among other traits, as part of those qualifications.

It also said that given China’s prominence in the Trump administration’s National Defense Strategy, “special consideration shall be given to officers who have excelled in their knowledge of the political military affairs and U.S. strategic interests in the Indo-Pacific region, and operational contingency planning for Indo-Pacific war plans.”

Hegseth has long argued, without offering evidence, that women in the military benefit from preferential treatment and are not suited for combat roles.

“For too long, we’ve promoted too many uniformed leaders for the wrong reasons based on their race, based on gender quotas, based on historic so-called firsts,” Hegseth told hundreds of military leaders in September.

The approach, he asserted, made the Pentagon “less capable and less lethal.”

‘A break from tradition’

Phelan’s order said the Navy cannot discriminate based on criteria such as race and sex, and it specifically noted that “this guidance shall not be interpreted as requiring or permitting preferential treatment of any officer or group of officers on the grounds of race, religion, color, sex.”

The full list of 31 people to be promoted was approved by Phelan, other Navy leaders and the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Gen. Dan Caine, before it reached Hegseth, who chose to make the changes, the Defense official said.

While Hegseth is within his rights to intervene in the list, “it’s just not the norm” and is “a break from tradition,” said Katherine Kuzminski, a researcher specializing in military recruiting and retention at the Center for New American Security think tank. She said that promotions historically have been seen as “the services’ business.”

Kuzminski noted that “this is a decision that’s not being made by the Navy — it’s being made by the secretary of Defense,” and she said Hegseth’s growing interference in operational aspects of the military services such as promotions is creating “tension” about what “normal” will look like going forward.

Some of the more senior Navy officers who spoke with the AP expressed concerns about the message it sends to the next generation of young sailors.

In addition to pulling the recent promotions of three women to admiral, Hegseth shortly after he took office fired Adm. Lisa Franchetti, the service’s top officer and the first woman to hold the job. He never explained his rationale.

Since then, he also has fired two other female three-star admirals without explanation.

Some of the officers who spoke to the AP said that while they were encouraging female sailors to stick with the Navy, they acknowledged that message is coming at a difficult time.

Kuzminski said the rhetoric and actions surrounding women in the military “affects individual service member decision-making and it also affects family unit decision-making,” including whether people make a career of the military.

Kuzminski said that following the months-long hold on military promotions by Sen. Tommy Tuberville (R-Ala.) during the Biden administration, surveys showed that partisan politics spilling into the day-to-day lives of troops affected their decision-making.

One officer said this impact was not confined to women.

In conversations with other sailors in her unit, she said that male sailors were hesitant to deal with what appears to be a growing politicization of simply following the orders of previous administrations.

Toropin writes for the Associated Press.