The peaceful traffic stop in Florida turned violent after immigration officers arrived and used chokeholds and a stun gun to make arrests.

Immigration officers were caught on video celebrating proudly after using chokeholds and a stun gun to arrest two undocumented immigrants in Florida. The owner of the video, an 18-year-old American citizen, was threatened and charged after he refused to delete the footage revealing the harsh tactics used by immigration authorities to meet the Trump administration’s mass deportation goals.

Kenny Laynez-Ambrosio was on his way to work on the morning of May 2 with his mother and two other men in North Palm Beach, Florida, when the vehicle was pulled over by a Florida Highway Patrol (FHP) officer, reported The Guardian. The initial reason for the stop is unclear, but after the FHP called in Customs and Border Protection (CBP) officers, the peaceful traffic stop quickly turned violent.

Laynez-Ambrosio began recording when CBP agents arrived, and a female officer can be heard asking if anyone in the car is an undocumented immigrant. One of Laynez-Ambrosio’s friends answered that he was. “That’s when they said, ‘OK, let’s go,'” Laynez-Ambrosio told The Guardian. Before anyone was able to exit the vehicle, CBP officers became aggressive. “[One officer] put his hand inside the window,” he said, “popped the door open, grabbed my friend by the neck and had him in a chokehold.”

In the video, he can be heard telling the officers, “You can’t grab me like that,” while three officers pull the second man from the van, and tell him to “get your fucking head down, on the ground.” When the man lands on his feet while being pulled from the vehicle, officers push him to the ground and then pull him back to his feet while one officer keeps him in a headlock. Laynez-Ambrosio, who was also forced to the ground, can be heard yelling, “That’s not how you arrest people. If y’all going to arrest people, y’all have to arrest people regular.” He then tells his friend, in Spanish, “Don’t resist. Don’t resist.” The commotion ends when an officer uses his stun gun on Laynez-Ambrosio’s friend, who falls to the ground, crying out in pain. 

“You’re scaring the dude,” Laynez-Ambrosio says to an officer shortly after. “That’s not how you arrest people.” “Why?” an officer callously responds. After asserting his “rights to talk,” an officer tells Laynez-Ambrosio, “You’ve got no rights here. You’re a migo, brother.” 

The recording continues after the three men are in custody and captures the officers’ candid remarks. A couple of officers can be heard cracking jokes about how one man smells and bragging about the stun gun use. One officer remarks on how “they’re starting to resist more now.” Another responds, “We’re going to end up shooting some of them… because they’re going to start fighting.” 

“Just remember, you can smell that [inaudible] with a $30,000 bonus,” one officer says amidst post-arrest celebrations. 

After his arrest and six-hour detention at a CBP station, Laynez-Ambrosio told The Guardian he was threatened with charges if he didn’t delete the exposing video. When he refused, he was charged with obstruction without violence for having allegedly interfered with CBP officers’ arrest—a first-degree misdemeanor punishable by up to a $1,000 fine and one year of incarceration. He was ultimately sentenced to 10 hours of community service and a four-hour anger management course. The two undocumented men were transferred to the Krome detention center in Miami. Laynez-Ambrosio “believes they were released on bail and are awaiting a court hearing, but said it has been difficult to stay in touch with them.”

Florida has led the nation in cooperation with federal immigration authorities, sparking privacy and civil liberty concerns for both undocumented immigrants and American citizens alike. But rather than change course, the Trump administration has doubled down on mass deportation goals and recently appropriated nearly $75 billion to dramatically increase immigration detention capacity and immigration arrests to reach 3,000 arrests per day. The appropriation includes funding for hiring, retention, and performance bonuses for federal immigration officers.

“The federal government has imposed quotas for the arrest of immigrants,” Laynez-Ambrosio’s attorney, Jack Scarola, told The Guardian. “Any time law enforcement is compelled to work towards a quota, it poses a significant risk to other rights.” 

Scarola’s warning appears to be right. The Department of Homeland Security posted on Monday that it will “stop at nothing to hunt [undocumented immigrants] down.” The brutal tactics used by federal officers under the Trump administration, against mostly nonviolent immigrants—including people on their way to work and who pose no threat to public safety—will only serve to degrade constitutional protections and subject more people to the government’s abuse of power.

https://reason.com/2025/07/29/this-u-s-citizen-recorded-an-immigration-arrest-officers-told-him-to-delete-it-or-face-charges

The move follows other efforts by Trump to turn government institutions into vehicles to further his personal agenda

Four-star general candidates will meet with President Donald Trump before their confirmation is finalized, according to the White House. The new procedure comes as a break from past practice, one that critics say appears as a possible attempt to treat military leaders as political appointees based on their loyalty to the president.

“President Trump wants to ensure our military is the greatest and most lethal fighting force in history, which is why he meets with four-star-general nominees directly to ensure they are war fighters first – not bureaucrats,” White House spokesperson Anna Kelly said in a statement to several outlets.

Kelly said the intent of the meetings is for Trump to ensure the military retains its superiority and that its leaders are focused not on politics, but on fighting wars. The New York Times, which was the first to report on the procedure, said Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth first initiated it.

The recent move to personally oversee the political involvement of militarly leaders is not the first time the president has leveraged the armed forces in furtherance of partisan goals, according to The Associated Press. In June, during the height of the largely peaceful protests in Los Angeles against ICE raids, Trump mobilized the National Guard and the Marines.

He sent hundreds of troops into the streets of the California city against the objections of Gov. Gavin Newsom, a Democrat who has vocally opposed Trump on several occasions. Trump contended Newsom had “totally lost control of the situation.” Newsom said the president was “behaving like a tyrant.”

It was the first time the Guard has been used without a governor’s consent since then-President Lyndon B. Johnson sent troops to Alabama in 1965 to ensure compliance with civil rights laws.

Trump followed up with a campaign-style rally at Fort Bragg in North Carolina, where uniformed soldiers cheered as he criticized former President Joe Biden, Newsom and other Democrats, raising concerns that Trump was using the military as a political prop.

Sen. Tom Cotton, an Army veteran and Republican member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, called the meetings “very welcome reform.”

“I’ve long advocated for presidents to meet with 4-star nominees. President Trump’s most important responsibility is commander-in-chief,” Cotton wrote in a post on X.

“The military-service chiefs and combatant commanders are hugely consequential jobs” and “I commend President Trump and Secretary Hegseth for treating these jobs with the seriousness they deserve.”

On July 14, Trump hosted a military parade in Washington, D.C., to celebrate both the Army’s 250th anniversary and his own 79th birthday. The parade featured troops marching in formation, military vehicles and product advertisements. It came as one of the most visible ways Trump has tried to turn government institutions into vehicles to implement his personal agenda, according to The Associated Press.

“As many lengths as Army leaders have gone through to depoliticize the parade, it’s very difficult for casual observers of the news to see this as anything other than a political use of the military,” said Carrie Ann Lee, a senior fellow at the German Marshall Fund who also taught at the U.S. Army War College.

Trump has wanted a military parade since his first term, but senior commanders balked, worrying it would be more like a spectacle one would see in authoritarian countries such as North Korea or Russia than something befitting the United States. After returning to the White House, Trump fired the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, replaced him with his own pick and dismissed several other top military leaders.

“We don’t want military forces who work as an armed wing of a political party,” Lee said.

King Donald is turning flag-rank appointments into political appointees. This is an extremely bad idea.

https://www.the-express.com/news/us-news/178958/trump-breaks-centuries-old-us-tradition

Another crack in the foundation of American democracy.

Earlier this week, the Justice Department escalated its fight with the judiciary by filing an ethics complaint against Judge James Boasberg, the chief U.S. district judge in Washington, D.C. Boasberg is overseeing the case challenging the Trump administration’s deportation of alleged Venezuelan gang members to a Salvadoran prison without due process. The new complaint, signed by Attorney General Pam [Bimbo #3] Bondi’s chief of staff, accuses Boasberg of making improper comments about President Donald Trump.

Only those wearing MAGA-tinted glasses could fail to see this complaint for what it is: another brazen attack on the rule of law and the constitutional separation of powers, and another crack in the foundation of American democracy.

The controversy began March 15, when five Venezuelans sued Trump and other administration officials to block their imminent deportation under a 2025 presidential proclamation invoking the Alien Enemies Act. That 1798 law allows the removal of foreign citizens when there is a “declared war … or any invasion or predatory incursion” by a foreign nation against the United States. The plaintiffs were among hundreds being deported to a country other than their homeland. They were not given an opportunity to challenge the legality of their deportation, or even to contest the government’s allegations that they were gang members. Comparing the situation to a Kafka-esque nightmare, Boasberg ordered the administration to stop the deportations.

In April, the case went to the Supreme Court, which ruled for the administration on a legal technicality regarding the proper mechanism and jurisdiction for the suit. At the same time, the court unanimously affirmed that those facing deportation must be allowed to bring a legal challenge before removal. The case was sent back to Boasberg and remains ongoing.

Shortly after the Supreme Court’s ruling, Boasberg also found that the government had likely committed criminal contempt of court by willfully disobeying his order to stop deportations. He offered the government a chance to correct its contempt before referring the case for prosecution, but in April a three-judge panel from the D.C. appellate court paused the contempt proceedings without addressing the merits. Curiously, the pause has lasted for months, leaving the contempt action in limbo.

Then came Monday. The Justice Department formally accused Boasberg of committing misconduct during a national judicial conference held March 11 — before the deportation case began. The complaint alleges Boasberg “attempted to improperly influence Chief Justice [John] Roberts and roughly two dozen other federal judges” by expressing “his belief that the Trump Administration would ‘disregard rulings of federal courts’ and trigger ‘a constitutional crisis.’” In the AEA case, then, Boasberg “began acting on his preconceived belief that the Trump Administration would not follow court orders.” The DOJ argues that Boasberg’s “words and deeds” harmed “public confidence in the integrity and impartiality of the judiciary.”

To begin with, the DOJ’s complaint is misleading: The memo it cites, summarizing the conference, says Boasberg “raised his colleagues’ concerns,” not his own. But no matter who raised the concerns, they would be right on the mark. Trump’s record of contempt for the judiciary is well established. Throughout his first term, he repeatedly criticized judges who ruled against the administration. While out of office, Trump repeatedly leveled personal attacks against not only the judges presiding over his criminal and civil cases, but even court staff and their family members. And Trump specifically called for Boasberg’s impeachment in March after the judge ordered a temporary pause in deportations.

Although Trump has publicly said that he would follow court orders, his administration’s track record on respecting judicial authority suggests otherwise. For example, in early July, the Justice Department filed an unprecedented lawsuit against the entire bench of federal judges in Maryland, challenging an administrative order issued by their chief judge regarding deportation cases. Disturbingly, there is also evidence that Emil Bove, whom the Senate confirmed Tuesday to an appellate judgeship, told DOJ prosecutors that, if necessary, they should ignore court orders that stop deportations.

Given this track record, for the Trump administration to accuse Boasberg of undermining public confidence in the judiciary is the pinnacle of hypocrisy. In truth, the complaint against Boasberg is an obvious stunt. The administration is following the old legal adage: When the facts and the law are against you, “pound the table and yell like hell.”

No matter where this complaint goes from here, it is likely to have a chilling effect on judicial independence. Judges routinely discuss their constitutional approach or emerging legal trends in public, including during Senate confirmation hearings. This complaint puts a target on the backs of judges who speak out against executive overreach or comment on other broad legal issues that could be perceived as contrary to administration policy.

It will threaten judicial independence, undermine judicial legitimacy, and ultimately show that, for this administration, legal authority depends on political loyalty rather than adherence to the rule of law.

The justices of the Supreme Court appear to at least understand this in principle. Speaking at a judicial ceremony in May, Chief Justice John Roberts emphasized judicial independence is “crucial” to “check the excesses of the Congress or the executive.” Against the backdrop of Trump’s attacks on the federal judiciary, Roberts reiterated the familiar simile that judges are like umpires, responsible for calling balls and strikes fairly and impartially.

It’s less clear whether Roberts and his colleagues are prepared to fight for that ideal. After all, when a manager’s antics — like kicking dirt at the umpire’s feet or screaming in his face — begin to undermine the integrity of the game itself, eventually even the most restrained umpire must be prepared to eject him. Without that implicit threat, the game will collapse under the bullying of any manager who is unwilling to follow the rules everyone else plays by.

No one should tolerate that: not in a sporting event and certainly not in an arena when our nation and democracy are at stake.

https://www.msnbc.com/opinion/msnbc-opinion/justice-department-pam-bondi-judge-boasberg-rcna222067

The Trump administration advised Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) recipients to self-deport and warned that they are “not automatically protected from deportation.”

Tricia McLaughlin, assistant secretary of Homeland Security, told Newsweek the warning is “not new or news.”

“Illegal aliens who claim to be recipients of Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals [DACA] are not automatically protected from deportations,” she said. “DACA does not confer any form of legal status in this country. Any illegal alien who is a DACA recipient may be subject to arrest and deportation for a number of reasons, including if they’ve committed a crime.”

Diana Crofts-Pelayo, a spokesperson for California Governor Gavin Newsom, whose state contains the highest number of DACA recipients, told Newsweek the move “highlights the Trump administration’s hypocrisy” and shows that “they do not want to detain and deport the worst of the worst.”

“Their chaos campaign is all about detaining and deporting as many people as possible without a regard to people’s legal rights, including intercepting Americans, Dreamers, kids, people with legal protections and those following immigration rules and even U.S.-born citizens into their indiscriminate dragnet.,” she said. “It’s dangerous precedent when deportations matter more than basic rights or a functional U.S. immigration system.”

Why It Matters

President Donald Trump pledged to undertake the largest mass deportation effort in U.S. history on the campaign trail and quickly moved to increase immigration enforcement upon his return to the White House. However, he has offered mixed signals on DACA.

Although Trump sought to end DACA during his first term, he told NBC News’ Meet the Press last December that he wanted to find a way to allow DACA recipients to stay in the United States.

Former President Barack Obama introduced the DACA program in 2012. It offered protections and work authorization for undocumented immigrants who arrived in the U.S. as children. But its legal status has remained in limbo for years, and the latest comments from the administration reflect the challenges faced by DACA recipients, commonly referred to as “Dreamers.”

What To Know

McLaughlin first warned that DACA recipients should self-deport in a statement provided to NPR earlier this week.

She told Newsweek on Thursday that undocumented migrants can “take control of their departure with the CBP Home App.”

“The United States is offering illegal aliens $1,000 and a free flight to self-deport now,” she said. “We encourage every person here illegally to take advantage of this offer and reserve the chance to come back to the U.S. the right legal way to live American dream.”

The administration has not outright ended DACA, but the statement reflects a shift in policy toward these migrants from President Joe Biden‘s administration, which was more supportive of protections for Dreamers.

Reports have emerged of DACA recipients being detained by Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents.

Erick Hernandez Rodriguez, 34, is among the DACA recipients facing deportation. DHS said he was arrested for allegedly trying to illegally cross the southern border after allegedly self-deporting. His attorney, Valerie Sigamani, said he did not self-deport and made a wrong turn while completing a ride-share trip in San Ysidro, just north of the U.S.-Mexico border.

He has been in the U.S. for 20 years. His wife, Nancy Rivera, is a U.S. citizen, and the couple has a daughter together and is expecting a son. He had begun the process for permanent legal resident status.

DACA recipients are required to receive advance parole before leaving the U.S. to avoid loss of protection and deportation risk. There are more than 500,000 DACA recipients living in the U.S., according to U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS).

What People Are Saying

President Donald Trump told Meet the Press in December: “The Democrats have made it very, very difficult to do anything. Republicans are very open to the dreamers. The dreamers, we’re talking many years ago, they were brought into this country. Many years ago. Some of them are no longer young people. And in many cases, they’ve become successful. They have great jobs. In some cases, they have small businesses. Some cases they might have large businesses. And we’re going to have to do something with them.”

Anabel Mendoza, communications director for United We Dream, told NPR: “We’ve known that DACA remains a program that has been temporary. We’ve sounded the alarms over that. What we are seeing now is that DACA is being chipped away at.”

What Happens Next

DACA’s future remains in limbo, with legal challenges ongoing in federal courts and the administration continuing to enforce strict immigration statutes.

https://www.newsweek.com/trump-admin-daca-recipients-self-deport-2106991

Questions about the death of Marie Blaise at a South Florida ICE detention center have lingered since she collapsed in April.

A woman who died of a heart attack in a federal immigration detention facility in South Florida told her son over the phone on the day she died that staff refused to let her see a physician for chest pains, her son told a county investigator.

Marie Ange Blaise, a 44-year-old Haitian national, died on April 25 at the Broward Transitional Center (BTC)—a privately run facility in Pompano Beach, Florida, that contracts with Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE). A medical examiner’s report obtained by Reason through a public records request concluded that she died of natural causes from cardiovascular disease.

An investigator for the Broward County Medical Examiner’s Office interviewed Blaise’s son, Kervens Blaise, who said his mother reported being denied medical care.

“I asked Kervens when he last spoke with his mother and said on Friday, 4/25/25 at 2:54 pm (California time),” the investigator wrote in the report. “At that time, did his mother complained of any health issues and he states she complained of having chest pains and abdominal cramps, and when she asked the detention staff to see a physician, they refused her. Kervens states his mother has been experiencing the chest pains for about a month now.”

Blaise also reportedly told several other detainees that she wasn’t feeling well that day.

Blaise was first detained by ICE on February 14 and was transferred to several different ICE detention centers before being sent to BTC in early April.

An official ICE narrative of Blaise’s medical history during her detention states that she had a history of high blood pressure and kidney disease, and that she repeatedly refused to take prescribed medication. According to the ICE report, Blaise saw medical providers three times between her arrival at BTC on April 5 and her death on April 25.

However, BTC detainees who witnessed Blaise collapse said there was also a slow staff response. 

In a report on inhumane conditions at South Florida ICE detention centers recently published by several human rights and legal aid groups, a former BTC detainee identified only as “Rosa” told researchers that she heard a scream from a nearby cell and saw Blaise kneeling on the ground.

“We started yelling for help, but the guards ignored us,” Rosa told the report authors. “Finally, one officer approached slowly, looked at her without intervening, and then walked away. After that, it took eight minutes for the medical provider to arrive, and then another 15 or 20 before the rescue team came. By then, she was not moving.”

Lawyers and detainees have repeatedly alleged medical neglect by staff at ICE facilities in South Florida, including BTC, the Krome Detention Center, and the Federal Detention Center Miami. 

Harpinder Chauhan, a British entrepreneur who was detained by ICE this spring and eventually deported, told the report’s researchers that BTC staff regularly refused to give him his insulin. 

Chauhan eventually collapsed while standing in the dinner line at BTC, leading to him being hospitalized for three days. Chauhan’s son said that hospital and ICE staff would not give him any information on his father’s condition, and he eventually learned his father had been registered under a false name.

A former detainee, whose lawyer requested that he only be identified as “A.S.,” tells Reason he spent four days in an overcrowded holding cell with 50 to 60 other people at the Krome Detention Center.

“There was a dude, he passed out. He was crying for his medicine for like two or three days,” A.S. says. “They didn’t give him his medicine until he finally passed out, right before they were gonna put him on the plane.”

Another man detained at Krome told the report’s authors that the only way he could get guards to believe he was suffering from an excruciating hernia was to throw himself on the floor. Prison staff eventually wheeled him to the medical team, where the doctor on duty told him he “likely just had gas” and offered him “a Pepto-Bismol and two Tylenols.” The detainee refused to leave until the doctor eventually agreed to send him to a hospital, where he received a CAT scan that found he had a strangulated abdominal wall hernia. “The doctor [at the hospital] told me that if I had not come in then, my intestines would have likely ruptured,” the man said.

Blaise’s death led to condemnations and calls for investigations from Florida Democrats, such as Rep. Frederica Wilson (D–Miami Gardens).

“Marie is just an example of what is going to continue to happen,” Wilson said after touring BTC in May. “This is something we’re going to continue to see. It’s going to get more crowded. It’s going to continue to have more deaths. It’s going to continue to have more children without their parents.”

https://reason.com/2025/07/30/woman-who-died-of-heart-disease-in-ice-custody-reportedly-told-son-she-wasnt-allowed-to-see-doctor-for-chest-pains

Rodney Taylor is a Liberian-born who was detained by ICE as part of Donald Trump’s immigration crackdown. He was at Georgia‘s Stewart immigration detention center, where he recently spent three days in a “restrictive housing unit,” or so termed by CoerCivic. However, you would be surprised to know why he ended up there. It is because of a very simple complaint.

According to The Guardian, Rodney refused to enter his cell because it was flooded with above an inch of water due to a leak. It is important to note, he didn’t just complain needlessly. The Liberian-born man had battery-powered microprocessor-controlled prosthetic legs, which could have been damaged if they got wet.

“They don’t see you as an individual, but as someone being deported,” Taylor lamented, taking a jab at the Trump administration’s mass deportation policies. His incident shows how ill-prepared the President and his minions are. Even his fiancée, Mildred Pierre, commented on how the administration’s action made his mental health worse during the last six months, calling it “receiving blow after blow.”

Not only the flood incident on April 25, but he has continued to face various incidents over his stay at the detention center, which included the screws of his prosthetic legs coming out. This made him fall several times and caused injury to his hand.

Although he was sent to a clinic, he couldn’t fit new legs as those were delivered without a charger for the battery. His fiancé, Pierre, bought a charger for those. However, at that time, they were asked to wait two months for the clinic appointment, as they were not adept with Taylor’s model of prosthetics.

Pierre, concerned for her fiancé, spent months “trying to figure out – who do I call? who’s going to listen?”

“I am afraid for Rodent,” she wrote to Georgia Senator Jon Ossoff’s office on Saturday, following the flooding incident. However, ultimately, nothing changed, as the guards at the detention center handcuffed him and placed him in solitary confinement. On Tuesday, Stewart’s assistant warden released him.

However, when he was locked up, he was denied any water to drink and was not allowed to charge the battery in his prosthetic legs. The representative for CoerCivic is now saying that Rodney “is being regularly monitored by facility medical staff, with all known medical issues are being addressed, and our staff continuing to accommodate his needs.”

He also denied that the detention center had any solitary confinement, saying it “does not exist.” 

Disabled Man Detained by ICE Allegedly Locked Up in Isolation Without Water and Food—And The Reason is Heartbreaking

Rodney Taylor, a Liberian-born man, became the victim of the immigration crackdown. However, when he complained about flooding in his cell, which could have potentially damaged his prosthetic legs, things turned really harsh for him. He has since criticized the Trump administration’s policy.

Children are supposed to enjoy their formative years through play and conversation with their families and communities, growing up happy and successful in life. However, some of them experience tragic realities at a very young age… a world full of problems and negativity. Kids who are separated due to immigration issues currently face this harsh and confusing reality. To be placed in a cold room full of adults who keep interrogating them can be stressful. What did they do to be there? Are they supposed to be in such a place?

The family thought they were safe. And they even did everything right. Followed every rule, attended every hearing, and filled out papers by memory. Yet, as the mother walked out of the immigration courthouse with her two children, a 6-year-old boy and his 9-year-old sister, the officers (not in uniform) were there, waiting by the door. No warning, no chance to say goodbye, the family was just arrested there on the courthouse steps. They’d been locked up somewhere without any warrant, plus their protection case had been denied. It was a double whammy for the family, and that was just the beginning.

The arrest was just the start. The worst part? The little 6-year-old boy wasn’t just any child, he was fighting a severe form of leukemia, which would be treatable if medicine and treatments were given regularly. But since they were locked in detention, he couldn’t do anything. His treatment eventually stopped, with fewer and fewer chances of beating cancer. According to their mother, his 9-year-old sister then watched as her younger brother got sicker, from crying herself to sleep every night because of extreme stress to sometimes keeping herself awake.

This story isn’t just an isolated case. Imagine babies learning to grow up in cages and toddlers who’ve never even played in real playgrounds. Right now, U.S. immigration centers are holding thousands of children. Some are barely out of diapers…like a 3-year-old kid who spent almost two years in a detention center in Pennsylvania, taking her first steps and learning her first words behind bars instead of in her mother’s arms. These things are now part of those children’s core memories and have left deep scars; they then develop depression and PTSD as they grow older. This pattern questions the humanity of these practices and their impact on young minds.

Behind locked doors is a different kind of tragedy. Families are crowded into dirty rooms like animals in cages, without enough food, or sometimes, a spoiled or cold one. And with the bathrooms smelling bad, the kids would rather hold their pee for hours than use them. No one cares if anyone gets sick. No medicines or even doctors to be found near them. These little ones suffer together, crying constantly, feeling the pain in their bodies as they stay in a strange place. It’s as if their childhood dies a little more each day.

After their release, the mother decided to file a federal lawsuit, saying that the officials violated her family’s constitutional rights by ignoring her son’s need to treat his life-threatening cancer and even detaining them even though they followed all legal immigration requirements. Her lawyers say that the case will show everyone a worrying pattern, that even families who abide by the law can be arrested without any due process. Plus, putting a child’s life at risk and scarring their siblings. Advocates deemed this necessary, despite the fact that the mother speaking out isn’t really well-known, just a simple immigrant trying to pass through their asylum case. They hope that the lawsuit will teach the defendants responsibility and accountability.

After the arrest, and without any notice, the authorities loaded the family onto a transport and drove them from Los Angeles all the way to a remote Texas detention facility, about 1,400 miles away from their so-called home. This destroyed the routines the sick boy relied on. His cancer doctors in California, friends, and family members who might help them were already far, far away from them. While immigration officers claimed that the transfer was necessary for “operational reasons,” it doesn’t hide the fact that the move was deliberately cruel, ripping away the family’s sense of a normal life.

Data shows that 9 out of 10 detained children are locked away longer than federal law allows, with an average of 43 days behind bars. For kids, that feels like an eternity. And even once the gates opened for them, it didn’t erase the scars that were made. Children like the boy and his sister now carry invisible wounds that may never fully heal and will be a part of their lives as adults. Both of them now struggle with how life made them and probably have nightmares during their sleep now and then. Doctors say that trauma can last and shape a person’s life forever.

When the news picked up the family’s story, the public exploded all over social media like a landmine. Protesters gathered outside, and politicians demanded answers. The family was suddenly released within days of the story going viral. No court order, no legal victory, just the public pressure that the immigration office couldn’t ignore. This story proved to be a pivotal point for society, that when people speak up, even the most powerful groups will listen. It wasn’t the legal system that released the family; it was the voice of common people who refused to stay silent.

The case could change how a part of the system operates, including new rules protecting sick children in detention and changes to broken immigration court procedures. Even mental health researchers are demanding immediate policy changes, as there’s no safe way to lock up children. This story may well inspire the agencies to make broader efforts to end or drastically limit family detention policies, pushing for more humane alternatives for countless children and families as they scour through America’s complicated immigration system. Hopes are high for everyone that a new path will be forged through humanity and justice.

ICE Arrested a 6-Year-Old With Leukemia at Immigration Court. Now the Family Is Suing

YouTube – Nigerian Center Children are supposed to enjoy their formative years through play and conversation with their families and communities, growing up happy and successful in life. However, some of them experience tragic realities

A legal expert was taken aback Thursday night after watching President Donald Trump admit he knew of a “grotesque crime” when he talked about his falling out with Jeffrey Epstein.

Ryan Goodman, founding co-editor-in-chief of the legal and policy website Just Security, joined Erin Burnett on CNN’s “OutFront” to weigh in on Trump’s shocking remarks regarding his relationship with Epstein, who died in prison while awaiting trial on sex trafficking allegations.

Burnett noted the White House has offered multiple explanations about the falling out, including over a real estate deal. Trump, however, has instead said their friendship blew up because Epstein hired his spa workers — a claim that, she said, “doesn’t add up, because the hiring-away was two years before Trump was continuing to say wonderful things about Epstein—and seven years before he kicked him out of the club.

“Now they’re saying, and Trump has used this word before, that Epstein was a ‘creep,’ and that the White House says, quote, ‘Trump kicked Jeffrey Epstein out of his club for being a creep to his female employees.’ I mean, does any of this add up legally?

Goodman was floored by the remarks.

“So I think they’ve gotten themselves in more trouble by these references, that the reason for it was that he was a creep or that he was a creep to the —

“It’s hard to say he’s a creep if you said you didn’t know what he was doing,” Burnett interjected.

“Exactly,” replied Goodman. “So if he kicked him out because of sexual predation toward the employees, then it means he had knowledge.”

Goodman said Trump’s timeline “doesn’t make sense.” A Trump Organization attorney has said Epstein was booted from Mar-a-Lago in 2007 due to an arrest a year earlier in Florida. Now, the White House is claiming he took that action over what he knew.

“A year after the arrest for pedophilia. Seven years after Virginia Giuffre is hired—is stolen—seven years after that?” asked Burnett.

“Seven years after that. So it’s not a good look for them, at the least. And that’s about, in some sense, moral culpability, not legal culpability. There would have to be more for that. But it does seem as though he’s admitting to knowledge of a grotesque crime against minors. That’s the problem.”

When Burnett asked whether any recourse is possible for Trump over what he knew at the time, Goodman poured cold water on the idea.

“If it’s just knowledge, there’s only one situation in which there would actually be legal obligations. And that’s if somebody is a mandatory reporter. But to be a mandatory reporter, they’d have to be like a schoolteacher or a medical doctor,” he said.

“Not a rich friend?” Burnett clarified.

“No, not just a friend or anything like that. And that would also be under state law. And there would probably also be a statute of limitations problem for that particular offense. But otherwise, that would chalk up to moral culpability.”

https://www.rawstory.com/trump-epstein-2673797390