Tag Archives: Boston

Washington Post: Democrats are pushing back against crackdown on sanctuary cities

Posted on by
Reply

Some responded with strongly worded letters. Others spoke out publicly, accusing Attorney General Pam Bondi of trying to unlawfully bully governors and mayors.

Democratic state and local officials are forcefully pushing back against threats from Attorney General Pam Bondi that their jurisdictions could be stripped of federal funding or they could face criminal prosecution if they don’t back away from “sanctuary” policies friendly toward suspected undocumented immigrants.

Bondi last week sent a letter to leaders of more than 30 Democratic-led cities, counties and states that accused the jurisdictions of interfering with federal immigration enforcement.

Some responded with their own strongly worded letters. Others seized the moment to speak out in a public show of resistance, accusing Bondi of trying to unlawfully bully governors and mayors amid the political divide over President Donald Trump’s aggressive immigration tactics.

But what happens next remains deeply unclear, according to those Democratic officials, who have described the events of the past week as startling and unprecedented, even against the backdrop of the tumultuous launch of the second Trump term. They are staying mum so far about how much they are coordinating with each other to combat potential actions by the administration.

In Seattle, Mayor Bruce Harrell (D), who is seeking a second term, told The Washington Post that the Aug. 13 letter from Bondi warned that his “jurisdiction” had been “identified as one that engages in sanctuary policies and practices that thwart federal immigration enforcement.” It did not reference his city by name, mention specific local laws or policy, or cite Seattle’s crime rates, which Harrell pointed out are “down in all major categories.”

Days later, he was standing behind Washington Gov. Bob Ferguson (D), who had received a nearly identical letter.

“A letter like this cannot be normalized,” Ferguson said Tuesday, speaking to reporters at the state Capitol in Olympia. He called the attorney general’s threats a “breathtaking” tactic aimed at pressuring elected officials to “bend a knee” to Trump.

Ferguson told Bondi in a letter that his state “will not be bullied or intimidated by threats and legally baseless accusations.”

On the opposite coast, Boston Mayor Michelle Wu (D) stepped onto the plaza outside City Hall for a news conference that quickly took on the feel of an anti-Trump rally.

“Stop attacking our cities to hide your administration’s failures,” said Wu, the daughter of Taiwanese immigrants. “Boston follows the law, and Boston will not back down from who we are and what we stand for.”

The Trump administration’s intensifying efforts to identify and deport suspected undocumented immigrants include the deployment of thousands of Immigration and Customs Enforcement officers in U.S. cities as they seek to meet a directive from White House Deputy Chief of Staff Stephen Miller to make at least 3,000 arrests a day.

Bondi and other Trump administration officials have insisted on cooperation from state and local officials, including access to law enforcement facilities and, in some cases, officers as they seek to step up deportation efforts.

Trump last week ordered the deployment of National Guard troops to D.C. and has sought to expand federal control over D.C. police, claiming the city was not doing enough to stem violent crime. He has indicated that cities like Baltimore, Chicago and New York could be next, likening them to urban hellscapes ruined by crime and lawlessness. All three cities are listed as sanctuary jurisdictions on federal government websites.

On Thursday, Trump reiterated his pledge to pursue similar crime crackdowns in Democratic-led cities.

In an interview last week with Fox News, Bondi suggested a takeover could be on the table for any city the administration deems out of compliance with federal immigration laws. “You better be abiding by our federal policies and with our federal law enforcement, because if you aren’t, we’re going to come after you,” she said.

Numerous city and state officials in their letters to Bondi questioned the legality of the Trump administration’s threats against their jurisdictions, with some pointedly critical of Trump’s actions in D.C. and in Los Angeles, where the president — despite the opposition of state and local officials — activated National Guard troops amid protests over the administration’s immigration arrests.

Responding to a letter sent to Illinois Gov. JB Pritzker (D), Ann Spillane, the governor’s general counsel, noted federal courts had repeatedly upheld an Illinois law that restricts state law enforcement involvement in immigration enforcement. Spillane said that Illinois officers’ primary focus is fighting crime and that they routinely cooperate with federal law enforcement on those issues. “We have not observed that type of coordination with local law enforcement in Washington, D.C. or Los Angeles,” Spillane wrote, according to a copy of the letter obtained by The Post.

Bondi’s letters also arrived at the offices of Colorado Gov. Jared Polis (D) and Denver Mayor Mike Johnston (D). Trump homed in on the state during the presidential race last year, baselessly claiming one of its cities had been overrun by Venezuelan gangs.

Johnston’s city has already lost millions in federal grants intended for migrant shelters, and the Justice Department sued him, Polis, and other state and local officials in May over what it called “disastrous” sanctuary policies. Colorado law bars local police officers from asking a person for their immigration status, arresting someone based only on that status and giving that personal information to federal authorities.

“It is immaterial to whether or not you were doing 55 in a 45, where you were born, and so we don’t ask for that information,” Johnston said. “We don’t have that information.” On Thursday, he remained adamant that Denver had not violated any laws. Bondi’s allegations, he said, are “false and offensiveOn Thursday, Trump reiterated his pledge to pursue similar crime crackdowns in Democratic-led cities.

In an interview last week with Fox News, Bondi suggested a takeover could be on the table for any city the administration deems out of compliance with federal immigration laws. “You better be abiding by our federal policies and with our federal law enforcement, because if you aren’t, we’re going to come after you,” she said.

Numerous city and state officials in their letters to Bondi questioned the legality of the Trump administration’s threats against their jurisdictions, with some pointedly critical of Trump’s actions in D.C. and in Los Angeles, where the president — despite the opposition of state and local officials — activated National Guard troops amid protests over the administration’s immigration arrests.

Responding to a letter sent to Illinois Gov. JB Pritzker (D), Ann Spillane, the governor’s general counsel, noted federal courts had repeatedly upheld an Illinois law that restricts state law enforcement involvement in immigration enforcement. Spillane said that Illinois officers’ primary focus is fighting crime and that they routinely cooperate with federal law enforcement on those issues. “We have not observed that type of coordination with local law enforcement in Washington, D.C. or Los Angeles,” Spillane wrote, according to a copy of the letter obtained by The Post.

Bondi’s letters also arrived at the offices of Colorado Gov. Jared Polis (D) and Denver Mayor Mike Johnston (D). Trump homed in on the state during the presidential race last year, baselessly claiming one of its cities had been overrun by Venezuelan gangs.

Johnston’s city has already lost millions in federal grants intended for migrant shelters, and the Justice Department sued him, Polis, and other state and local officials in May over what it called “disastrous” sanctuary policies. Colorado law bars local police officers from asking a person for their immigration status, arresting someone based only on that status and giving that personal information to federal authorities.

“It is immaterial to whether or not you were doing 55 in a 45, where you were born, and so we don’t ask for that information,” Johnston said. “We don’t have that information.” On Thursday, he remained adamant that Denver had not violated any laws. Bondi’s allegations, he said, are “false and offensive.”

In his letter to Bondi, Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz (D) questioned Bondi’s demand that he identify how he’s working to eliminate laws, policies and practices that she claimed impede federal immigration enforcement.

“In a democracy, governors do not unilaterally ‘eliminate laws.’ The role of the executive is to take care that the laws are faithfully executed, not to pick and choose which to follow,” wrote Walz, the 2024 Democratic nominee for vice president. “In Minnesota, we take pride in following the law.”

New York Mayor Eric Adams, who promised to toughen immigration enforcement in his city after the Trump administration dropped corruption charges against him this spring, did not respond directly to Bondi’s letter. The task was passed on to the city’s corporation counsel, who sent a two-paragraph letter that said the city was not thwarting federal immigration policies but operating under a “system of federalism” that means states and cities do not have to undertake federal mandates.

Kayla Mamelak Altus, a spokeswoman for Adams, said the city was taking Trump’s threat to possibly target New York seriously and preparing for any scenario. But she declined to reveal what that playbook might look like.

In Washington, Ferguson, who previously served as the state’s attorney general before he was elected governor in November, said he had anticipated some dramatic action from the Trump administration. Late last year, before he was sworn into office, Ferguson spoke to state finance officials to determine how the state would fare fiscally if it lost federal funding, which makes up 28 percent of the budget.

But Ferguson did not anticipate Bondi’s threat to potentially prosecute him or any other elected official in the country over differences in policy. As attorney general, he had been the first to file a lawsuit over Trump’s 2017 executive order to ban visitors and refugees from several predominantly Muslim countries.

On Tuesday, Ferguson recalled trying to reassure his 8-year-old daughter at the time, who worried something might happen to him for challenging Trump.

“I remember telling her … ‘We’re lucky to live in a country right where your dad, or any American, can speak out against the president, where your dad can file a lawsuit against the president, say things that are pretty direct about the president, be critical,’” Ferguson recalled.

It was something they shouldn’t take for granted, he told her, because in other countries people could get sent to jail for something like that.

Eight years later, Ferguson said he didn’t know what he would say to his daughter now of that freedom to challenge a president. “Maybe I’m not so sure about that,” the governor said.

Democrats are pushing back against crackdown on sanctuary cities
Some responded with strongly worded letters. Others spoke out publicly, accusing Attorney General Pam Bondi of trying to unlawfully bully governors and mayors.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2025/08/22/sanctuary-cities-bondi

No paywall:

Democrats are pushing back against crackdown on sanctuary cities

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/democrats-are-pushing-back-against-crackdown-on-sanctuary-cities/ar-AA1L119n

Washington Post: Democrats are pushing back against crackdown on sanctuary cities

Posted on by
Reply

Some responded with strongly worded letters. Others spoke out publicly, accusing Attorney General Pam Bondi of trying to unlawfully bully governors and mayors.

Democratic state and local officials are forcefully pushing back against threats from Attorney General Pam Bondi that their jurisdictions could be stripped of federal funding or they could face criminal prosecution if they don’t back away from “sanctuary” policies friendly toward suspected undocumented immigrants.

Bondi last week sent a letter to leaders of more than 30 Democratic-led cities, counties and states that accused the jurisdictions of interfering with federal immigration enforcement.

Some responded with their own strongly worded letters. Others seized the moment to speak out in a public show of resistance, accusing Bondi of trying to unlawfully bully governors and mayors amid the political divide over President Donald Trump’s aggressive immigration tactics.

But what happens next remains deeply unclear, according to those Democratic officials, who have described the events of the past week as startling and unprecedented, even against the backdrop of the tumultuous launch of the second Trump term. They are staying mum so far about how much they are coordinating with each other to combat potential actions by the administration.

In Seattle, Mayor Bruce Harrell (D), who is seeking a second term, told The Washington Post that the Aug. 13 letter from Bondi warned that his “jurisdiction” had been “identified as one that engages in sanctuary policies and practices that thwart federal immigration enforcement.” It did not reference his city by name, mention specific local laws or policy, or cite Seattle’s crime rates, which Harrell pointed out are “down in all major categories.”

Days later, he was standing behind Washington Gov. Bob Ferguson (D), who had received a nearly identical letter.

“A letter like this cannot be normalized,” Ferguson said Tuesday, speaking to reporters at the state Capitol in Olympia. He called the attorney general’s threats a “breathtaking” tactic aimed at pressuring elected officials to “bend a knee” to Trump.

Ferguson told Bondi in a letter that his state “will not be bullied or intimidated by threats and legally baseless accusations.”

On the opposite coast, Boston Mayor Michelle Wu (D) stepped onto the plaza outside City Hall for a news conference that quickly took on the feel of an anti-Trump rally.

“Stop attacking our cities to hide your administration’s failures,” said Wu, the daughter of Taiwanese immigrants. “Boston follows the law, and Boston will not back down from who we are and what we stand for.”

The Trump administration’s intensifying efforts to identify and deport suspected undocumented immigrants include the deployment of thousands of Immigration and Customs Enforcement officers in U.S. cities as they seek to meet a directive from White House Deputy Chief of Staff Stephen Miller to make at least 3,000 arrests a day.

Bondi and other Trump administration officials have insisted on cooperation from state and local officials, including access to law enforcement facilities and, in some cases, officers as they seek to step up deportation efforts.

Trump last week ordered the deployment of National Guard troops to D.C. and has sought to expand federal control over D.C. police, claiming the city was not doing enough to stem violent crime. He has indicated that cities like Baltimore, Chicago and New York could be next, likening them to urban hellscapes ruined by crime and lawlessness. All three cities are listed as sanctuary jurisdictions on federal government websites.

On Thursday, Trump reiterated his pledge to pursue similar crime crackdowns in Democratic-led cities.

In an interview last week with Fox News, Bondi suggested a takeover could be on the table for any city the administration deems out of compliance with federal immigration laws. “You better be abiding by our federal policies and with our federal law enforcement, because if you aren’t, we’re going to come after you,” she said.

Numerous city and state officials in their letters to Bondi questioned the legality of the Trump administration’s threats against their jurisdictions, with some pointedly critical of Trump’s actions in D.C. and in Los Angeles, where the president — despite the opposition of state and local officials — activated National Guard troops amid protests over the administration’s immigration arrests.

Responding to a letter sent to Illinois Gov. JB Pritzker (D), Ann Spillane, the governor’s general counsel, noted federal courts had repeatedly upheld an Illinois law that restricts state law enforcement involvement in immigration enforcement. Spillane said that Illinois officers’ primary focus is fighting crime and that they routinely cooperate with federal law enforcement on those issues. “We have not observed that type of coordination with local law enforcement in Washington, D.C. or Los Angeles,” Spillane wrote, according to a copy of the letter obtained by The Post.

Bondi’s letters also arrived at the offices of Colorado Gov. Jared Polis (D) and Denver Mayor Mike Johnston (D). Trump homed in on the state during the presidential race last year, baselessly claiming one of its cities had been overrun by Venezuelan gangs.

Johnston’s city has already lost millions in federal grants intended for migrant shelters, and the Justice Department sued him, Polis, and other state and local officials in May over what it called “disastrous” sanctuary policies. Colorado law bars local police officers from asking a person for their immigration status, arresting someone based only on that status and giving that personal information to federal authorities.

“It is immaterial to whether or not you were doing 55 in a 45, where you were born, and so we don’t ask for that information,” Johnston said. “We don’t have that information.” On Thursday, he remained adamant that Denver had not violated any laws. Bondi’s allegations, he said, are “false and offensive.”

In his letter to Bondi, Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz (D) questioned Bondi’s demand that he identify how he’s working to eliminate laws, policies and practices that she claimed impede federal immigration enforcement.

“In a democracy, governors do not unilaterally ‘eliminate laws.’ The role of the executive is to take care that the laws are faithfully executed, not to pick and choose which to follow,” wrote Walz, the 2024 Democratic nominee for vice president. “In Minnesota, we take pride in following the law.”

New York Mayor Eric Adams, who promised to toughen immigration enforcement in his city after the Trump administration dropped corruption charges against him this spring, did not respond directly to Bondi’s letter. The task was passed on to the city’s corporation counsel, who sent a two-paragraph letter that said the city was not thwarting federal immigration policies but operating under a “system of federalism” that means states and cities do not have to undertake federal mandates.

Kayla Mamelak Altus, a spokeswoman for Adams, said the city was taking Trump’s threat to possibly target New York seriously and preparing for any scenario. But she declined to reveal what that playbook might look like.

In Washington, Ferguson, who previously served as the state’s attorney general before he was elected governor in November, said he had anticipated some dramatic action from the Trump administration. Late last year, before he was sworn into office, Ferguson spoke to state finance officials to determine how the state would fare fiscally if it lost federal funding, which makes up 28 percent of the budget.

But Ferguson did not anticipate Bondi’s threat to potentially prosecute him or any other elected official in the country over differences in policy. As attorney general, he had been the first to file a lawsuit over Trump’s 2017 executive order to ban visitors and refugees from several predominantly Muslim countries.

On Tuesday, Ferguson recalled trying to reassure his 8-year-old daughter at the time, who worried something might happen to him for challenging Trump.

“I remember telling her … ‘We’re lucky to live in a country right where your dad, or any American, can speak out against the president, where your dad can file a lawsuit against the president, say things that are pretty direct about the president, be critical,’” Ferguson recalled.

It was something they shouldn’t take for granted, he told her, because in other countries people could get sent to jail for something like that.

Eight years later, Ferguson said he didn’t know what he would say to his daughter now of that freedom to challenge a president. “Maybe I’m not so sure about that,” the governor said.

Democrats are pushing back against crackdown on sanctuary cities
Some responded with strongly worded letters. Others spoke out publicly, accusing Attorney General Pam Bondi of trying to unlawfully bully governors and mayors.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2025/08/22/sanctuary-cities-bondi

Also here without the paywall:

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/democrats-are-pushing-back-against-crackdown-on-sanctuary-cities/ar-AA1L119n

Newsweek: Green card holder detained by ICE says food not fit for his dog

Posted on by
Reply

Agreen card holder detained by Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) has told Newsweek that conditions at the Houston Detention Center are harsh, saying the food served is so poor that he wouldn’t even give it to his dog.

Deon Lewis, who has lived in the United States since 1993, was taken into ICE custody on June 17. He has criminal convictions for cocaine possession, firearm offenses, multiple drug-related charges and driving without a license, according to the Department of Homeland Security (DHS).

He has faced serious medical challenges, including sickle cell disease and two lung surgeries due to pneumothorax. Lewis requested to be deported after struggling to live inside the ICE-run facility.

“The conditions in the Houston Detention Center are terrible. From the health care to the food they feed us. This food my dog wouldn’t even eat,” he told Newsweek from inside ICE custody.

The Department of Homeland Security has denied the allegations.

“There is black mold growing in the showers and bathroom floors. The air quality is horrible,” Lewis said.

“Some guards treat us like animals. Not all of them, but I think they try their best to keep us as uncomfortable as they possibly can,” he said.

“These facilities they are holding these people in are not set up correctly for humans to be held in. The conditions are not humane,” he added.

His wife, Roxanne Lewis, told Newsweek, “I have had many nights not being able to sleep from the worry about his health.”

She said that during transfers between detention centers—from Baltimore to New Jersey, Boston, Louisiana and finally Houston—he was denied proper medical attention. She recounted one incident in Louisiana when a nurse allegedly laughed while he vomited on the floor.

President Donald Trump has directed his administration to remove millions of migrants without legal status as he seeks to fulfill his campaign pledge of widespread mass deportations. In addition to people living in the country without legal status, immigrants with valid documentation, including green cards and visas, have been detained.

Lewis has a criminal record dating back to 2002, when he was arrested for cocaine possession, pleaded guilty and was sentenced to probation, according to the Houston Chronicle. In 2020, he faced additional charges, including possession of marijuana and cocaine and carrying a firearm, the outlet reported.

DHS has defended Lewis’ detention, emphasizing his criminal history and ICE’s commitment to providing medical care and maintaining humane conditions for detainees.

“The fake news refuses to report on Americans raped, murdered, and molested by criminal illegal aliens but maintain their 24-7 news cycle peddling false sob stories for dangerous lawbreakers—like Deon Kevon Lewis,” said Tricia McLaughlin, a spokesperson for DHS.

She continued: “Lewis is a 43-year-old convicted DRUG TRAFFICKER from Trinidad and Tobago, with multiple convictions including for cocaine trafficking, being a felon in possession of a firearm, and driving without a license and carrying a loaded firearm in a vehicle.

“ICE provides all detainees access to comprehensive medical, dental and mental health care to include conducting an intake screening within 12 hours of their arrival at each detention facility. DHS takes its commitment to promote safe, secure, humane environments for those in our custody very seriously.”

Despite DHS’s assurances, Lewis said his experience in detention had been painful and disheartening.

“I am still here being detained, praying to be deported back to my birth country. I am paying for a crime I committed 23 years ago. I paid my dues to society, for the wrong I had done & don’t deserve this,” he said.

His wife described the toll the detention has had on the family, saying: “We are all feeling as a family very depressed. Being without Deon has been extremely difficult. He is a loving Father, Husband, Son, & Friend to many. He isn’t the ‘public safety threat’ as they are trying to portray him as. He is always willing to help someone in need.”

Green card holder detained by ICE says food not fit for his dog
“This food my dog wouldn’t even eat,” Deon Lewis told Newsweek from inside ICE custody.

https://www.newsweek.com/green-card-holder-detained-ice-food-2114892

The Hill: [“Bimbo #3”] Bondi ramps up pressure on 32 ‘sanctuary jurisdictions’: Who’s on the list?

Posted on by
Reply

Attorney General Pam [“Bimbo #3”] Bondi said Thursday she was ramping up pressure on 32 “sanctuary jurisdictions,” urging them to comply with federal immigration enforcement efforts.

“I just sent Sanctuary City letters to 32 mayors around the country and multiple governors saying, you better be abiding by our federal policies and with our federal law enforcement, because if you aren’t, we’re going to come after you,” she told a Fox News reporter. 

“And they have, I think, a week to respond to me, so let’s see who responds and how they respond. It starts at the top, and our leaders have to support our law enforcement,” she added. 

The measure comes after an Aug. 5 release from the Justice Department highlighting various states, cities and counties deemed noncompliant with regulations that impede enforcement of federal immigration laws.

“For too long, so-called sanctuary jurisdiction policies have undermined this necessary cooperation and obstructed federal immigration enforcement, giving aliens cover to perpetrate crimes in our communities and evade the immigration consequences that federal law requires,” [“Bimbo #3”] Bondi wrote in the letter to officials across the country. 

“Any sanctuary jurisdiction that continues to put illegal aliens ahead of American citizens can either come to the table or see us in court,” [“Bimbo #3”] Bondi wrote in a post announcing the move. 

She cited a late April executive order from President Trump as legal grounds for the push. 

The Justice Department did not immediately respond to The Hill’s request for the 32 jurisdictions that received letters from [“Bimbo #3”] Bondi. 

The below jurisdictions received a letter from the Department of Justice on Aug. 5:

States:

  • California
  • Colorado
  • Connecticut
  • Delaware
  • Illinois
  • Minnesota
  • Nevada
  • New York
  • Oregon
  • Rhode Island
  • Vermont
  • Washington

Counties:

  • Baltimore County, Md.
  • Cook County, Ill.
  • San Diego County, Calif.
  • San Francisco County, Calif.

Cities:

  • Albuquerque, N.M.
  • Berkeley, Calif.
  • Boston
  • Chicago
  • Denver
  • District of Columbia
  • East Lansing, Mich.
  • Hoboken, N.J.
  • Jersey City, N.J.
  • Los Angeles
  • New Orleans
  • New York City
  • Newark, N.J.
  • Paterson, N.J.
  • Philadelphia
  • Portland, Ore.
  • Rochester, N.Y.
  • Seattle
  • San Francisco City

Pam Bimbo #3 Bondi is one of the stupidest women on Earth. Despite already losing a couple such cases on well-established Tenth Amendment grounds, she is now threatening to replicate her failures in 12 states, 4 counties, and 19 cities. When God passed out brains, Pam Bimbo #3 Bondi must have been hanging out near the manure spreader.

The bottom line is that the federal government can’t compel state and local governments to do its bidding. If the state and local governments don’t wish to comply or assist, the federal government must do its own dirty work.

Bondi ramps up pressure on 32 ‘sanctuary jurisdictions’: Who’s on the list?

https://thehill.com/homenews/administration/5454204-bondi-immigration-enforcement-urge

Newsweek: Justice Department Issues Birthright Citizenship Update

Posted on by
Reply

The U.S. Department of Justice has released an update confirming that it plans to ask the Supreme Court to rule on the constitutionality of President Donald Trump‘s executive order seeking to end birthright citizenship.

The announcement was disclosed in a joint status report filed Wednesday, August 6, 2025, in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington.

Why It Matters

The Justice Department’s plan to seek a Supreme Court ruling on the constitutionality of President Donald Trump’s executive order to end birthright citizenship—entitled “Protecting the Meaning and Value of American Citizenship”—marks a critical juncture in the national debate over immigration and constitutional rights.

Signed on January 20, 2025, it directs the federal government to deny citizenship documents to children born in the U.S. to undocumented or temporary immigrant parents.

At stake is the interpretation of the 14th Amendment, which has long been understood to guarantee citizenship to nearly all individuals born on U.S. soil. A ruling in favor of the order could reshape federal authority over citizenship, impact millions of U.S.-born children, and redefine the limits of executive power—making this one of the most consequential legal battles in recent memory.

What To Know

On February 6, 2025, the district court in Seattle issued a nationwide preliminary injunction blocking enforcement of President Trump’s executive order.

The case under review, State of Washington v. Trump, was just one of several ongoing legal challenges in which lower courts have largely rejected the administration’s legal theory. District courts in Maryland (February 5), New Hampshire (February 10), and Massachusetts (February 13), have each upheld that the order conflicted with constitutional protections and halted its enforcement in their respective jurisdictions.

One of those judges, U.S. District Judge Leo Sorokin, an appointee of former President Barack Obama who sits on the federal bench in Boston, granted a nationwide preliminary injunction, affirming that the constitutional guarantee of citizenship applies broadly, and finding the policy to be, “unconstitutional and contrary to a federal statute.”

The government appealed the ruling and sought partial stays from the district court, the Ninth Circuit, and the Supreme Court. After the Supreme Court denied a partial stay, the Ninth Circuit requested further briefing and, on July 23, upheld the injunction.

The new update came in a joint status report filed August 6, 2025, in which the DOJ stated that Solicitor General D. John Sauer intends to file a petition “expeditiously” for certiorari—a legal term that refers to the process by which a higher court (most commonly the U.S. Supreme Court), agrees to review a lower court’s decision—in order to place the case before the Court during its next term, which begins in October.

This means the Justice Department has now formally indicated it will seek a U.S. Supreme Court ruling on the constitutionality of President Trump’s executive order; though it has not yet chosen which specific case—or combination of ongoing cases—it will use as the basis for its appeal.

The parties plan to update the court further once those appellate steps are finalized.

Fourteenth Amendment At Stake

Since the adoption of the 14th Amendment to the United States Constitution on July 9, 1868, the citizenship of persons born in the United States has been controlled by its Citizenship Clause, which states: “All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside.” Courts have consistently upheld this principle for more than a century, most notably in the 1898 Supreme Court case United States v. Wong Kim Ark.

However, the Trump administration argues that the amendment should not apply to children of parents who lack permanent legal status, a position that has been repeatedly rejected by lower courts.

What People Are Saying

President Trump, during an interview with NBC’s Meet the Press, December 8, 2024, said: “Do you know if somebody sets a foot—just a foot, one foot, you don’t need two—on our land, ‘Congratulations you are now a citizen of the United States of America,’ … Yes, we’re going to end that, because it’s ridiculous.” Adding: “…we’re going to have to get it changed. We’ll maybe have to go back to the people, but we have to end it. … We’re the only country that has it, you know.”

Attorney General Pam Bondi told reporters in June 2025: “Birthright citizenship will be decided in October, in the next session by the Supreme Court.”

DOJ attorneys wrote in the filing: “In light of the Ninth Circuit’s decision, Defendants represent that the Solicitor General plans to seek certiorari expeditiously to enable the Supreme Court to settle the lawfulness of the Citizenship Order next Term.”

Jessica Levinson, constitutional law professor at Loyola Law School, said: “You can’t ‘executive order’ your way out of the Constitution. If you want to end birthright citizenship, you need to amend the Constitution, not issue an executive order.”

What Happens Next

The Justice Department must decide which case or combination of cases it will use to challenge lower court rulings and bring the birthright citizenship issue before the Supreme Court. Once it makes that decision, the DOJ will file a petition for certiorari.

The Court is not required to accept every petition, but because this involves a major constitutional question, it is likely to grant review. If that happens, the Court could hear arguments in 2026 and issue a ruling by June of that year.

For now, the Justice Department and attorneys representing plaintiff states—including Washington, Arizona, Illinois, and Oregon—have agreed to submit another update once the appellate process is clarified or if further proceedings in the district court are required. Until then, the order remains unenforceable, lower court rulings blocking Trump’s executive order remain in effect, and current birthright citizenship protections continue to apply.

What part of Section 1 of the Fourteenth Amendment is so hard to understand? Only a Totally Retarded Dumb-Assed Idiot (TRDAI) could miss the meaning of it:

Section 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

Unfortunately there seems to be no shortage of TRDAIs in the Trump regime. 🙁

Justice Department Issues Birthright Citizenship Update
Fight over Trump’s order to deny birthright citizenship heads toward Supreme Court, with 14th Amendment protections at stake

https://www.newsweek.com/justice-department-issues-birthright-citizenship-update-2110176

Wall Street Journal: Judges Continue to Block Trump Policies Following Supreme Court Ruling

Posted on by
Reply

Even with new curbs on their powers, district judges have found ways to broadly halt some administration actions

When the Supreme Court issued a blockbuster decision in June limiting the authority of federal judges to halt Trump administration policies nationwide, the president was quick to pronounce the universal injunction all but dead.

One month later, states, organizations and individuals challenging government actions are finding a number of ways to notch wins against the White House, with judges in a growing list of cases making clear that sweeping relief remains available when they find the government has overstepped its authority.

In at least nine cases, judges have explicitly grappled with the Supreme Court’s opinion and granted nationwide relief anyway. That includes rulings that continue to halt the policy at the center of the high court case: President Trump’s effort to pare back birthright citizenship. Judges have also kept in place protections against deportations for up to 500,000 Haitians, halted mass layoffs at the Department of Health and Human Services, and prevented the government from terminating a legal-aid program for mentally ill people in immigration proceedings.

To accomplish this, litigants challenging the administration have used a range of tools, defending the necessity of existing injunctions, filing class-action lawsuits and invoking a law that requires government agencies to act reasonably: the Administrative Procedure Act.

It is a rare point of consensus among conservative and liberal lawyers alike: The path to winning rulings with nationwide application is still wide open.

“There are a number of highly significant court orders that are protecting people as we speak,” said Skye Perryman, president and chief executive of Democracy Forward, a liberal legal group that has brought many cases against the Trump administration. “We’re continuing to get that relief.”

Conservative legal advocates also continue to see nationwide injunctions as viable in some circumstances. “We’re still going to ask for nationwide injunctions when that’s the only option to protect our clients,” said Dan Lennington, a lawyer at the Wisconsin Institute for Law & Liberty, which has challenged race and sex-based preferences in federal policies.

The Supreme Court’s decision was long in the making, with Democratic and Republican administrations in turn chafing against their signature policies being held up by a single district court judge. The 6-3 ruling said that when judges find that the executive branch has acted unlawfully, their injunctions against the government can’t be broader than what is needed to provide complete relief to the parties who sued.

“Many judges with policy disagreements continue to abuse their positions to prevent the President from acting by relying on other laws to provide universal relief,” said Harrison Fields, a White House spokesman. “Regardless of these obstacles, the Trump Administration will continue to aggressively fight for the policies the American people elected him to implement.”

Trump’s birthright policy would deny citizenship to children born in the U.S. unless one of their parents was a citizen or permanent legal resident. Judges in the weeks since the high court decision have ruled that blocking the policy everywhere remains the proper solution.

On Friday, U.S. District Judge Leo Sorokin in Boston again said a ruling with nationwide application was the only way to spare the plaintiffs—a coalition of 20 Democratic-run states and local governments—from harm caused by an executive order he said was unconstitutional. The judge noted that families frequently move across state lines and that children are born in states where their parents don’t reside.

“A patchwork or bifurcated approach to citizenship would generate understandable confusion among state and federal officials administering the various programs,” wrote Sorokin, “as well as similar confusion and fear among the parents of children” who would be denied citizenship by Trump’s order.

In a separate decision last week involving a different group of states that sued Trump, the Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco reached a similar conclusion. Both rulings showed that state attorneys general remain well positioned to win broad injunctions against the federal government when they can demonstrate executive overreach.

“You’ve got these elite litigation shops in the states,” Tennessee’s Republican attorney general, Jonathan Skrmetti, said of offices such as his. “You’re gonna figure out a way to continue to be one of the most active participants in the judicial system.”

A New Hampshire judge has also blocked Trump’s birthright order after litigants in that case, represented by the American Civil Liberties Union, used another pathway the Supreme Court left open: filing class-action lawsuits on behalf of a nationwide group of plaintiffs.

Recent cases also underscore that the Administrative Procedure Act, long a basis for lawsuits against administrations of both parties, remains a potent tool. The law allows judges to set aside agency actions they deem arbitrary, capricious or an abuse of discretion.

Judges have blocked Trump policies in a half-dozen cases in the past month under the APA, and in almost every instance have specifically said they aren’t precluded in doing so by the Supreme Court.

Zach Shelley, a lawyer at the liberal advocacy group Public Citizen, filed a case using the APA in which a judge this month ordered the restoration of gender-related healthcare data to government websites, which officials had taken down after an anti-transgender executive order from Trump.

The act was the obvious choice to address a nationwide policy “from the get-go,” Shelley said.

District Judge John Bates in Washington, D.C., said administration officials ignored common sense by taking down entire webpages of information instead of removing specific words or statements that ran afoul of Trump’s gender order. “This case involves government officials acting first and thinking later,” Bates wrote. Nothing in the high court’s ruling prevented him from ordering the pages be put back up, the judge said.

The Justice Department argued that Trump administration officials had acted lawfully and reasonably in implementing the president’s order to remove material promoting gender ideology.

The department is still in the early stages of attempting to use the Supreme Court’s ruling to its advantage, and legal observers continue to expect the decision will help the administration in some cases.

In one, a New York judge recently narrowed the scope of a ruling blocking the administration’s attempts to end contracts with Job Corps centers that run career-training programs for low-income young adults.

If the lawsuit had instead been filed as a class action or litigated in a different way, though, “the result may very well be different,” Judge Andrew Carter wrote.

Judges Continue to Block Trump Policies Following Supreme Court Ruling

https://www.wsj.com/us-news/law/judges-continue-to-block-trump-policies-following-supreme-court-ruling-bf20d1ef

Judges Continue to Block Trump Policies Following Supreme Court Ruling

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/judges-continue-to-block-trump-policies-following-supreme-court-ruling/ar-AA1Jqdn4

USA Today: Lawyer details ‘horrendous conditions’ faced by 11th grader detained by ICE

Posted on by
Reply

“This kid has been sleeping on a cement floor for five days, no access to a shower; he’s brushed his teeth twice,” said Marcelo Gomes da Silva’s immigration attorney.

Sleeping on a cement floor in a windowless room. Only brushing your teeth twice in five days and never getting to shower. Being mocked by a guard.

These are among the “horrendous conditions” that Massachusetts high school junior Marcelo Gomes da Silva endured while being held by Immigrations and Customs Enforcement, according to his lawyer Robin Nice.

Gomes Da Silva, 18, was arrested by ICE agents on May 31 when he was stopped on his way to volleyball practice with friends in his hometown of Milford. Federal officials said they targeted da Silva’s father, Joao Paulo Gomes-Pereira, who they say is an undocumented immigrant from Brazil, but they detained Gomes da Silva − who came to the United States at the age of 7 with his parents − when they realized he had overstayed his visa.

According to Nice, Gomes Da Silva was subsequently detained for five nights in cells that are intended to hold detainees for hours before being transferred. The cells lack access to basic amenities like beds and showers.

“The Burlington (Massachusetts) facility is not a detention center, it’s a holding cell,” Nice told USA TODAY after a June 5 hearing in Gomes da Silva’s case, which has drawn nationwide attention and fervent local opposition to his detention and possible deportation.

“It’s deplorable,” she added.

Nice first raised the issue in a federal immigration court hearing on whether he would be granted bail.

“He’s being held in just awful conditions no one should be subjected to: sleeping on a cement floor for just a few hours per night,” Nice began, before she was cut off by Immigration Judge Jenny Beverly, who noted the hearing was not the proper venue to raise the issue.

Shackles, teasing, and solitary confinement

Nice provided more details on her client’s confinement in a press conference after the hearing, in which the judge set a $2,000 bond for Gomes da Silva’s release, and in a subsequent interview with USA TODAY.

“This kid has been sleeping on a cement floor for five days, no access to a shower, he’s brushed his teeth twice. He’s sharing a room with men twice his age,” Nice said at the press conference outside the Chelmsford, Massachusetts federal immigration court.

At one point, Gomes da Silva was taken to a hospital emergency room because he was suffering severe headaches and vision loss stemming from a high school volleyball injury days earlier. When he was transferred to and from the hospital, he was handcuffed and kept in leg shackles and then moved to a different room, Nice said.

“He got back to the holding facility at 4 am and then was put in what I would refer to as solitary confinement: it was a room without anyone else, and all of these rooms that people are held in, there is no window,” Nice said. “There is no yard time, because it’s not set up for that.”

“If you are detained in the Burlington ICE facility, you do not see the light of day,” she said. “You don’t know what time it is.”

The isolation that da Silva subsequently endured made him so “desperately lonely” that he took to banging on the walls of his cell to get someone to come talk to him, Nice told USA TODAY. The guards, who he said mostly ignored him, nicknamed him “the knocker” in response.

When Gomes da Silva was held in the room with a larger group, one of the guards played a cruel practical joke on the detainees, Nice said:

“He said when ICE opens the door it means either someone’s coming in or someone’s getting released, so everyone perks up when they open the door. So he sees in a little slit in the door window, one ICE officer motion to another and says ‘watch this,’ and so one ICE officer opens the door to the cell and just stands their for a minute and then says, ‘psych!’ And closes the door. And everyone had just perked up,” Nice recounted.

The isolation in the ICE holding facility extended beyond its walls, Nice said. There was no way for her to call her client there, and he could only make one call for two minutes per day − and not even every day.

Nice wasn’t able to get in to see Gomes da Silva until the fifth day of his confinement. He was so shut off from the outside world that he didn’t know his varsity volleyball team had lost in the semi-finals of the state tournament, even though the match drew media coverage.

ICE did not respond to USA TODAY’s request for comment on Nice’s allegations.

In a statement on June 2, Patricia Hyde, acting field director for ICE Enforcement and Removal Operations’ in Boston defended Gomes da Silva’s detention and said the agency intends to pursue deportation proceedings.

“When we go into the community and find others who are unlawfully here, we’re going to arrest them,” Hyde said. “He’s 18 years old and he’s illegally in this country. We had to go to Milford looking for someone else and if we come across someone else who is here illegally, we’re going to arrest them.”

‘Nobody deserves to be down there’

Later on June 5, Gomes da Silva himself addressed reporters after posting the $2,000 bond and being released.

“Nobody deserves to be down there,” da Silva told reporters. “You sleep on concrete floors. The bathroom — I have to use the bathroom in the open with like 35-year-old men. It’s humiliating.”

Gomes da Silva also said they were given only crackers for lunch and dinner. Nice told USA TODAY he was also fed what he described as an undefined “mush” that was “like oatmeal, but not oatmeal.”

A twice-weekly churchgoer, Gomes da Silva asked the guards for a bible but was not provided with one.

Beside him were U.S. Reps. Seth Moulton and Jake Auchincloss, both Democrats from Massachusetts, who said they returned from Washington, D.C., on Thursday to speak with da Silva and to inspect the detention center.

Consequences of an immigration crackdown

The Trump administration has sought to ramp up deportations of undocumented immigrants, including those like da Silva who were brought here as children and have no criminal record. ICE reported holding 46,269 people in custody in mid-March, well above the agency’s detention capacity of 41,500 beds.

USA TODAY has previously reported on allegations of conditions in ICE detention similar to what Gomes da Silva and Nice described.

In March, four women held at the Krome North Processing Center in Miami said they were chained for hours on a prison bus without access to food, water or a toilet. They also alleged they were told by guards to urinate on the floor, slept on a concrete floor, and only got one three-minute shower over the course of three or four days in custody.

The allegations come after two men at Krome died in custody on Jan. 23 and Feb. 20.

Lawyer details ‘horrendous conditions’ faced by 11th grader detained by ICE
“This kid has been sleeping on a cement floor for five days, no access to a shower; he’s brushed his teeth twice,” said the teenager’s attorney.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2025/06/05/marcelo-gomes-da-silva-ice-conditions/84057203007

USA Today: ‘Atrocious:’ lawyers, family and friends of detainees describe ICE detention

Posted on by
Reply

One man, Nexan Aroldo Asencio, was forced to sleep on the wet, foul-smelling floor of the bathroom, according to his wife.

  • The comments paint a similar portrait to the description from Marcelo Gomes da Silva, an 11th grader at Milford High School in Milford, Massachusetts who was held in Burlington for six days.
  • The unusually large volume of immigrants in detention meant a backlog was created at the office in Burlington, Massachusetts.
  • “Two days, he was sleeping on the bathroom floor,” one detainee’s wife said her husband told her. “It was a small room and it had a toilet and a sink, but it was always wet the floor.”

Family members and lawyers of immigrants detained by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement at the agency’s office in Burlington, Massachusetts, say their clients have been held for days in overcrowded holding cells with inadequate and unclean drinking water, little food and no opportunity to bathe.

One man, Nexan Aroldo Asencio, has even been forced to sleep on the wet, foul-smelling floor of the bathroom, according to his wife.

“He said, ‘It’s horrible here in Burlington: I’m sleeping on the bathroom floor. It smells like piss. It smells like poop,'” Christina Maria Toledo, Aroldo Ascencio’s wife, told USA TODAY.

“‘Everyone’s coming in and out. It’s so packed. The only thing they gave me crackers and water that was dirty,'” she said her husband told her.

Derege Demissie, a lawyer who has represented several people who have been held in the facility, told USA TODAY the conditions are “untenable.”

“They’re atrocious, they’re just ridiculous,” he said. “They had at one point up to 18 women there in a small room, with one toilet, and there’s a camera over the toilet.

“They don’t have a bed. They don’t have a blanket. They don’t have a pillow. They have only a mylar blanket like you get in the marathon.”

The comments paint a similar portrait to the description given by Marcelo Gomes da Silva, an 11th grader at Milford High School in Milford, Massachusetts, who was held in the Burlington ICE facility for six days. Lawyers for da Silva and other detainees say the holding cells are overflowing because recent widespread ICE raids have brought in more immigrants than ICE’s facilities are equipped to handle.

“Nobody deserves to be down there,” da Silva, 18, told reporters upon his June 5 release. “You sleep on concrete floors. The bathroom – I have to use the bathroom in the open with like 35-year-old men. It’s humiliating.”

In a statement, ICE contradicted some of the claims by detainees and noted that their stays are temporary.

“The ICE field office in Burlington is intended to hold detainees while they are going through the administrative intake process,” the agency said in an emailed response to USA TODAY. “Afterwards, they are usually moved to a detention facility. There are occasions where detainees might need to stay at the Burlington office for a short period that might exceed the anticipated administrative processing time. While these instances are a rarity, the Burlington field office is equipped to facilitate a short-term stay when necessary. Detainees pending processing are given ample food, regular access to phones, showers and legal representation as well as medical care when needed.”

Immigration raids cause overcrowding

The ICE Boston field office in Burlington, Massachusetts, looks like any suburban office: a low-slung, concrete and dark-glass building that could just as easily be a school or customer call center. If ICE detention facilities are the equivalent of jail, where one is held during court proceedings, the office is the police station. The detainees normally spend a few hours there while they’re being processed and awaiting transfer.

But ICE has recently been conducting raids in Massachusetts that brought in nearly 1,500 undocumented immigrants by June 3. The arrests have caused widespread fear among immigrants in Massachusetts towns such as Milford.

Plymouth County Correctional Facility, in Plymouth, Massachusetts, is the only ICE detention center in the state. The number of ICE detainees there more than doubled in the first three months of this year, according to an April 10 report from WCVB.

The unusually large influx of immigrants in detention meant a backlog was created at the office in Burlington, causing people arrested on an immigration violation to be held for days in a facility unequipped for the purpose, according to lawyers for the detainees.

“This is not set up for overnight detention,” Demissie said. “It’s just a holding place to process people for a few hours, but they’ve arrested so many people, they’ve created an overcrowding situation.”

Those caught in the dragnet are often surprised to be stuck in a holding cell for days on end.

“He was there the whole time, six days, and he was supposed to be there one to three hours,” said Coleen Greco, the mother of one of Gomes da Silva’s volleyball teammates.

“Two days, he was sleeping on the bathroom floor,” Aroldo Asencio’s wife Toledo said he told her. “It was a small room and it had a toilet and a sink, but it was always wet the floor, it looked like it was piss everywhere and it stunk, he said.”

After some people were transferred out of the facility, Aroldo Asencio was transferred from the bathroom to a holding cell.

Gomes da Silva said after his release on June 5 that there were approximately 40 men in a windowless holding cell without beds.

That’s the room Aroldo Asencio was moved to after his first two nights in Burlington. Among his cellmates was Gomes da Silva, a fellow Milford resident. Gomes da Silva sent Toledo a voice memo in which he stated, “Your husband was treated just like everyone there with no respect – they treated all of us inhumanely.”

Like Gomes da Silva, Aroldo Asencio said he had no access to a shower in Burlington, Massachusetts. His first shower came after he was transferred to a longer-term detention facility in Vermont, four and a half days later.

“He wasn’t able to do anything, not brush his teeth, nothing,” Toledo said.

“They have no sanitary products, like soap,” said Demissie, the immigration lawyer who had several clients in the facility.

For a pillow, Gomes da Silva told his volleyball coach, Andrew Mainini, he used his shoes. The metallic blanket was so thin that he was able to fold it up into a bracelet to bring home with him as a souvenir.

‘I don’t want cake, I want my daddy’

Aroldo Asencio is an immigrant from Guatemala who works as a framer, building houses. He and his wife, who is a native-born U.S. citizen from New Jersey, started a construction business in March. They have two four-year-old sons and Aroldo Asencio has already obtained an I-130, a document that recognizes his marriage to a citizen and is a step in the process of applying for a green card.

According to ICE, of the 1,500 immigrants arrested in Massachusetts before June 3, just under 800 of them have criminal records in the United States or abroad.

Aroldo Asencio has no criminal record, Toledo said. He was arrested by ICE agents on May 30 who were looking for his brother Victor, who got arrested for driving under the influence of alcohol last year.

Shortly after Aroldo Asencio left for work that morning, Toledo heard her 4-year-old son Damian screaming, “Daddy!” because his father was outside. She and her twin sons watched the ICE agents arrest her husband.

“It was one officer that went to him and another one, maybe 10 seconds later, grabbed him aggressively, went to put cuffs on,” she recalled. “I said, ‘Why you being so aggressive? He’s not resisting.’ His shirt was ripped. And another officer went to grab him, and they’re being rough with him. And I’m telling them, ‘He’s not fighting, you don’t need to grab him. And my kids are watching. My kids have asthma, and I don’t need them to be crying the way they are.’”

The reason the arrest occurred right in front of their home, Toledo explained, is that when ICE stopped Aroldo Asencio, he didn’t know who they were and he ran home.

“He gets pulled over, but when he looks back, it’s just a regular SUV. But all he sees is people running out of it with masks on. So he gets scared and runs off, and they’re yelling ‘Victor,’ but he’s not Victor.”

Aroldo Asencio and Toledo explained who he was and shared his immigration status, but the ICE agents arrested him anyway.

“They asked about his status, and I’m like, ‘He has an approved I-130. And they said, ‘If you show us, we’ll let him go,’ Toledo said. But even after she showed them the paperwork, they didn’t release him.

Instead, he was transported to the police station and then to Hartford, Connecticut, and later to Burlington, without notifying his wife.

“It was two days I didn’t know anything about him,” Toledo recalled. Eventually, he was able to call her from detention at the ICE office in Burlington.

Toledo says her children, whose fourth birthday her husband missed on June 11, remain disturbed by what happened to their father and his ongoing absence.

“My son Jhon is the one that’s very attached to his father,” Toledo said. “He didn’t want to blow out the candles on his birthday, because he said, ”I don’t want cake, I want my daddy.’”

Demissie represents a client, Kary Diaz Martinez, an immigrant from the Dominican Republic whom he said is also married to a U.S. citizen and has no criminal record.

At a deportation hearing in Boston on June 3, Martinez was released on her own recognizance by a judge, but ICE arrested her when she exited.

“She did what she was supposed to do: appeared at her hearing,” Demissie noted. “In the meantime, she’s married to a U.S. citizen and would be entitled to seek permanent residency here through what is called an adjustment of status. ICE is basically blocking that whole process.”

“There is no reason to arrest her,” Demissie continued, adding that the “inhumane conditions” violated her constitutional rights.

Demissie filed a motion to get Martinez released on the grounds that the conditions in Burlington were inhumane. ICE then found room for her in a Chittenden, Vermont detention facility. They allowed Demissie to meet with this client at a courthouse, after refusing to let them meet in person.

‘Like cat food’

A constant theme in the testimony of ICE detainees in Burlington is the extreme inadequacy of the food and water.

“When they asked for more food or water, they wouldn’t give it to them,” Toledo said, citing her conversations with her husband.

“They described it as like cat food,” Demissie said, referring to his clients’ description of the food they were given.

That may be because the building lacks the equipment needed for cooking.

“We have no kitchens and no dining rooms, and therefore we cannot keep people overnight or over the weekend,” Bruce Chadbourne, then-New England regional director of ICE, said at a public meeting in 2007.

ICE did not respond to a request from USA TODAY to verify if this is still the case.

In response to an inquiry for a previous story on Gomes da Silva’s conditions, ICE said he was provided meals, including sandwiches.

Whatever Gomes da Silva ate in captivity, it clearly wasn’t enough, according to Mainini, his volleyball coach.

“He seemed thin,” said Mainini, who saw Gomes da Silva the night he was released. “As someone who works out with him and sees him daily, he looked thinner than just six days earlier. And it was pretty noticeable in his face, specifically.”

“ICE takes its commitment to promoting safe, secure, humane environments for those in our custody very seriously,” Assistant Secretary of Homeland Security Tricia McLaughlin said in a prior statement in response to Gomes da Silva’s allegations. “ICE is regularly audited and inspected by external agencies to ensure that all ICE facilities comply with performance-based national detention standards.”

Among the traumas Gomes da Silva described to Greco was that ICE asked his cellmates to sign papers in English, which they did not understand. Gomes da Silva speaks Portuguese and Spanish, so he translated the documents, which were often deportation orders. Some of the men then broke down in tears when he told them what the papers said.

Greco said that Gomes da Silva emerged from captivity famished and immediately ordered a 20-piece chicken McNuggets from McDonald’s.

“He talked the entire ride home,” said Greco, who picked him up because Gomes da Silva’s parents are afraid to leave their house and risk ICE arresting them. (His father was the target when Gomes da Silva was pulled over, according to ICE.)

“I said, ‘You don’t have to talk to me,'” the family friend recalled. “He said, ‘No, I want to tell all these stories.'”

‘Atrocious:’ lawyers, family and friends of detainees describe ICE detention
Lawyers, family and friends of ICE detainees in Burlington, Massachusetts describe “horrible” conditions including insufficient food and clean drinking water, and no soap, showers, or beds.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2025/06/13/ice-detention-describe-horrible-conditions/84173121007

NBC News: Trump administration accuses judge of ‘unprecedented defiance’ of Supreme Court in immigration dispute

Posted on by
Reply

The Justice Department asked the Supreme Court to clarify a decision Monday that paved the way for the government to quickly deport criminal immigrants to “third countries.”

 fight over the fate of six migrants the Trump administration wants to deport to South Sudan flared up again on Tuesday as the Justice Department accused a federal judge of “unprecedented defiance” of a Supreme Court decision the previous day.

Solicitor General D. John Sauer filed a motion at the Supreme Court seeking clarification of the Monday evening decision that lifted nationwide restrictions on the administration’s ability to send convicted criminals to “third countries” they have no connection to.

Immediately after the Supreme Court action, Massachusetts-based U.S. District Judge Brian Murphy, who is presiding over the litigation, said in a docket entry he did not believe that a May 21 order he issued that prevented the six people being sent to South Sudan had been blocked by the justices. The detainees are currently being held in a U.S. facility in Djibouti.

Murphy’s understanding was that the high court had blocked only his earlier ruling that set nationwide rules giving those affected a “meaningful opportunity” to bring claims that they would be at risk of torture, persecution or death if they were sent to countries the administration has made deals with to receive deported immigrants.

The Supreme Court itself did not explain its decision and did not specify which of Murphy’s rulings were blocked. But liberal Justice Sonia Sotomayor, who wrote a dissenting opinion, said she did not think Murphy’s May 21 decision was affected.

Trump administration accuses judge of ‘unprecedented defiance’ of Supreme Court in immigration dispute
The Justice Department asked the Supreme Court to clarify a decision Monday that paved the way for the government to quickly deport criminal immigrants to “third countries.”

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/supreme-court/trump-administration-accuses-judge-unprecedented-defiance-supreme-cour-rcna214735

Miami Herald: ‘Have We No Shame’: Judge’s Swift Ruling Defies Trump

Posted on by
Reply

A federal judge in Boston declared that President Donald Trump’s termination of NIH research grants was unlawful. He described the action as “arbitrary and capricious.” Judge William Young’s ruling alleges potential racial bias and condemns the administration’s approach to diversity matters.

Young urged government officials to clarify the meaning of diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) during a hearing. He raised concerns over canceled grants targeting health disparities and noted a troubling pattern of discrimination against racial minorities and the LGBTQ community.

Young said, “I’ve never seen government racial discrimination like this.” Young added, “Have we no shame.” He added, “This represents racial discrimination and discrimination against America’s LGBTQ community.”

‘Have We No Shame’: Judge’s Swift Ruling Defies Trump
More for You

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/have-we-no-shame-judge-s-swift-ruling-defies-trump/ss-AA1HcuZk