Politico: Gavin Newsom: ‘I don’t think Donald Trump wants another election’

The California governor painted a bleak picture of the state of American democracy under President Trump.

Gavin Newsom warned the country is on the precipice of tipping into authoritarianism, predicting that President Donald Trump does not want to leave office after his term ends and accusing federal immigration officials of acting as “the largest private police force in history.”

The California governor, speaking at POLITICO’s “The California Agenda: Sacramento Summit” on Wednesday, repeatedly urged the audience to “wake up” to dangers he said are posed by the president. He cast Immigration and Customs Enforcement officers, as well as Border Patrol agents, as acting in Trump’s interests instead of the general public.

“When they’re done with this — all that funding and that ‘big beautiful betrayal’ allows more resources for this private police force that increasingly is showing a tendency not to swear an oath to the Constitution, but to the president of the United States,” Newsom said.

Newsom — stating that “the rule of law is being replaced by the rule of Don” — predicted the federal agents would be sent to voting booths and polling places across the country. But he later questioned whether there would be future democratic elections at all.

“I don’t think Donald Trump wants another election,” he said, adding he has two dozen “Trump 2028″ hats sent to him by the president’s supporters. He suggested that people dismissing talk of a third term were naive.

Newsom described a moment during his 90-minute Oval Office meeting with Trump in February when the president pointed to a painting of former President Franklin D. Roosevelt — which he interpreted as a nod to Trump’s desire to serve a third term.

Trump said this month he would “probably not” run for a third term, which would be in violation of the Constitution.

Newsom, a likely 2028 candidate, struck an angry and pugilistic tone throughout his interview as he implored Democrats to be more assertive and “stand tall” against Trump. He repeated a piece of advice that he said he once heard from former President Bill Clinton on the rise of American populism: “‘Given the choice, the American people always support strong and wrong versus weak or not,’” Newsom recalled. “And I think our party needs to wake up.”

“We’re losing this country in real time,” he said. “It’s not bloviation, not exaggeration. It’s happening.”

Newsom himself has recently embraced a more aggressive approach on social media, mocking Trump and Republicans through his personal and press office accounts on X. He said he’s pulling few punches on that front as his team deploys more satirical memes and splashy AI-generated content.

“We have a ‘Kill Switch,’” Newsom said, responding to a question about whether he approves the posts. The governor added that he’s killing “less every day,” prompting laughter from the audience.

https://www.politico.com/news/2025/08/27/newsom-donald-trump-another-election-00532972

Rolling Stone: Trump Threatens Criminal Charges Against Top Democratic Donor

The president says Hungarian billionaire George Soros “should be charged”

President Donald Trump is continuing to transform the Justice Department into a tool for vengeance against his political enemies, including billionaire philanthropist and Democratic donor George Soros. 

“George Soros, and his wonderful Radical Left son, should be charged with RICO because of their support of Violent Protests, and much more, all throughout the United States of America,” Trump wrote Wednesday on Truth Social, referencing conspiracy theories claiming that Soros and his philanthropic group, the Open Society Foundation, pay money to and supply violent protesters. 

“We’re not going to allow these lunatics to rip apart America any more, never giving it so much as a chance to ‘BREATHE,’ and be FREE. Soros, and his group of psychopaths, have caused great damage to our Country! That includes his Crazy, West Coast friends. Be careful, we’re watching you!” Trump added. 

Soros has long been a boogeyman for right wingers, who have — for decades at this point — made the Jewish investor the centerpiece of antisemitic conspiracy theories, as well as other conspiracies claiming his financial support of pro-Democracy organizations is actually part of an effort to destroy “western civilization.”

In a statement to Rolling Stone, The Open Society Foundation wrote that “these accusations are outrageous and false. The Open Society Foundations do not support or fund violent protests. Our mission is to advance human rights, justice, and democratic principles at home and around the world.”

“We stand for fundamental freedoms guaranteed by the Constitution, including the rights to free speech and peaceful protest that are hallmarks of any vibrant democracy,” the organization added.

In the early months of Trump’s second administration, and especially in recent weeks, the Justice Department and other federal agencies have been weaponized to go after people Trump  perceives as enemies, and critics of his political project.  

Last week, the FBI raided the home of former national security adviser John Bolton, who has been a public critic of the president since his departure from Trump’s first administration. Last month, the Department of Justice announced that it would launch a “strike force” to investigate former President Barack Obama, and placed New York Attorney General Letitia James — who successfully prosecuted Trump and his company — under investigation. The Justice Department is also probing Sen. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.) who led the first impeachment of Trump during his first term. The investigations into both James and Schiff center around potential mortgage fraud.

During a Cabinet meeting on Wednesday, Trump denied he is weaponizing the government by, as a reporter put it to him, “digging into the mortgage records of officials you don’t like.” Trump responded by saying that the reporter should be the one doing the digging before quickly moving onto a different question.

During the same Cabinet meeting, Trump for the second straight day mused to reporters about the American people wanting a dictator. “I’m not a dictator, I just know how to stop crime,” Trump claimed.

But while Trump may claim he’s not an authoritarian, the way he’s transformed agencies intended to serve the public into his personal attack dogs has all the hallmarks of fascism.

https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-news/trump-threatens-charges-george-soros-1235416539

New Civil Rights Movement: ‘Frogs in a Boiling Pot’: Trump Blasted After Again Insisting ‘I’m Not a Dictator’

For the second day in a row, President Donald Trump insisted he is not a dictator, but also insisted that many Americans would like to have one running the country. Some critics are calling his remarks a “trial balloon.”

“So the line is that I’m a dictator — but I stop crime,” Trump said at his televised Cabinet meeting on Tuesday (video below). “So a lot of people say, ‘You know, if that’s the case, I’d rather have a dictator.’ But I’m not a dictator. I just know how to stop crime.”

Those remarks echo ones he made just one day earlier in the Oval Office while attacking Illinois Democratic Governor JB Pritzker.

“I have some slob like Pritzker criticizing us before we even go there,” he said of his plan to deploy the National Guard to Chicago. “I made the statement that next should be Chicago, ’cause, as you all know, Chicago’s a killing field right now. And they don’t acknowledge it, and they say, ‘We don’t need him. Freedom, freedom. He’s a dictator, he’s a dictator.’”

“A lot of people are saying, maybe we like a dictator,” Trump mused. “I don’t like a dictator. I’m not a dictator. I’m a man with great common sense and a smart person.”

Declaring that an American president “even suggesting that Americans want to do away with democracy and be ruled” by a dictator is “chilling,” Rolling Stone on Monday noted that “Trump has been ruling like an authoritarian since retaking office in January, repeatedly thumbing his nose at Congress, the Constitution, and any other check on presidential power.”

CNN’s Aaron Blake, even before Trump’s second “I’m not a dictator” attestation, wrote: “Many people are increasingly entertaining the idea of a dictator. They are his supporters.”

“They don’t necessarily say, ‘Yes, I want a dictator.’ But polling shows Republicans have edged in that direction – to a pretty remarkable degree.”

“Perhaps the most startling poll on this came last year,” Blake explained. “A University of Massachusetts Amherst survey asked about Trump’s comment that he wanted to be a dictator, but only for a day,” during the campaign. “Trump said it was a joke, but 74% of Republicans endorsed the idea.”

He noted that a “Pew Research Center poll early this year showed 59% of Republicans and Republican-leaning independents agreed that many of the country’s problems could be better solved ‘if Donald Trump didn’t have to worry so much about Congress and the courts.’”

And, Blake added, “as many 3 or 4 in 10” Republicans, according to several polls, are “endorsing that kind of power.”

Critics expressed outrage.

Journalist Ahmed Baba observed: “This is the second day in a row he’s said this. This is an intentional normalization effort.”

Journalist Aaron Rupar wrote, “note how Trump on a daily basis is trying to normalize the idea that he’s a dictator.”

Rep. Jake Auchincloss (D-MA) wrote: “Deploying the military to cities. Breaking laws. Attacking judges. Firing generals, economists, and central bankers who speak truth to power. Praising autocrats who hate America. Republican officials have given up on the rule of law. They obey the law of the ruler. But in America, law is king.”

Hedge fund manager Spencer Hakimian wrote: “You are all frogs in a boiling pot.”

Watch the video below or at this link.

Alternet: ‘Novel take on the Constitution’: Trump gives away the game on claim GOP is ‘party of states’ rights’

CNN analyst Aaron Blake said President Donald Trump is now leading Republican party in its assault on states’ rights.

“[Trump] has spent much of his second term attempting to chip away at states’ rights — or at least, the ones he doesn’t like,” said Blake, adding that Trump more recently referred to states as subservient to the federal government in a pitch to get rid of mail-in voting and voting machines.

“Remember, the States are merely an ‘agent’ for the Federal Government in counting and tabulating the votes,” the president posted on Truth Social. “They must do what the Federal Government, as represented by the President of the United States, tells them, for the good of our country, to do.”

This was not Trump’s first reference to states as “agents” of the federal government, but it was one of the first that referenced himself personally as more powerful.

“This is a rather novel take on the Constitution, to put it mildly,” said Blake, explaining that the Constitution says the “Times, Places and Manner of holding Elections … shall be prescribed in each State by the Legislature thereof.” Congress may tweak regulations, but there is no role for the president.

“And Trump isn’t saying that Congress should outlaw mail-in voting or voting machines, mind you. Instead, he’s saying the states ‘must’ get rid of them because he tells them to — apparently because he was elected president and because he has determined it’s “for the good of the country,” said Blake. “This is merely the latest in a long line of drastic Trump claims to power.

Trump claimed during his first term that the Constitution gave him absolute power, even when out of office, reports Blake. He’s “floated terminating portions of the Constitution, while repeating his false claims that the 2020 election was rigged.” Earlier this year, Blake notes Trump suggesting his actions “couldn’t be illegal as long as he was acting to ‘save’ the country.”

These things are inconsistent with decades of conservative orthodoxy, which holds that the federal government should be small and that states should lead the way, said Blake. The 2016, Republican Party platform devoted an entire section to states’ rights, arguing “Every violation of state sovereignty by federal officials is not merely a transgression of one unit of government against another; it is an assault on the liberties of individual Americans.”

But since then, Blake says Trump has issued executive orders targeting state and local governments’ “sanctuary” policies, and he’s directed the DOJ to block states from enforcing their own pollution laws. He’s also dispatched troops to Los Angeles without the consent of the governor and federalized the police in Washington, DC. He also tried unsuccessfully to block funding to New York for trying to curb traffic congestion and threatened other state’s funding over transgender rights.

Blake said “if nothing else,” Trump’s latest Truth Social post “has finally said how he really feels about the concept of states’ rights.”

https://www.alternet.org/trump-washingotn-dc-troops

Latin Times: Rubio’s Contradicting Arguments on Birthright Citizenship Resurface as Supreme Court Weighs Trump Order Looking to Restrict it

Rubio’s comments came amid a lawsuit challenging his eligibility to run for president on the grounds that, as the son of Cuban immigrants who became U.S. citizens only after his birth

A new report has revealed that Secretary of State Marco Rubio argued in a federal court filing in 2016 that the Constitution guarantees citizenship to nearly all children born in the United States regardless of their parents’ immigration status when he was a Republican senator running for president, a position that now stands in sharp contrast to the executive order issued by Trump in January which seeks to restrict birthright citizenship.

Rubio’s 2016 filing responded to a lawsuit challenging his eligibility to run for president on the grounds that, as the son of Cuban immigrants who became U.S. citizens only after his birth, he was not a “natural born citizen.”

As The New York Times points out, the court dismissed the case, but Rubio’s arguments went further than necessary, affirming that the 14th Amendment was designed to ensure that “all persons born in the United States, regardless of race, ancestry, previous servitude, etc., were citizens of the United States.”

Rubio went on to say that the amendment, the common law on which it was based and the leading Supreme Court precedent all confirmed that “persons born in the United States to foreign parents (who were not diplomats or hostile, occupying enemies) were citizens of the United States by virtue of their birth.”

Trump’s executive order, by contrast, states that children born in the U.S. are not automatically citizens if their mothers were either unlawfully present or only in the country on a temporary basis and if their fathers were neither U.S. citizens nor lawful permanent residents. The order has been blocked in lower courts, but the administration has asked the Supreme Court to take up the issue this fall.

Peter J. Spiro, a citizenship law expert at Temple University, told the NYT that Rubio’s earlier arguments remain significant and that “there’s no reason why the argument he put to work in 2016 couldn’t be put to work today against the Trump executive order.” Rubio, now secretary of state, oversees the implementation of immigration and passport laws.

Tommy Pigott, a State Department spokesman, dismissed the focus on Rubio’s past filing, saying he is “100 percent aligned with President Trump’s agenda,” and claiming that “it’s absurd the NYT is even wasting time digging around for decade-old made-up stories.”

Rubio has faced backlash for his contrasting stances on issues affecting immigrants in the past few months, especially Latinos. A group called Keep Them Honest erected signs in May accusing him of betraying Venezuelans after supporting the administration’s move to end Temporary Protected Status. Rubio, once a leading Republican advocate for TPS, has recently called the designation harmful to U.S. interests and linked it to security threats.

https://www.latintimes.com/rubios-contradicting-arguments-birthright-citizenship-resurface-supreme-court-weighs-trump-order-588498

MSNBC:Maddow Blog | Why the Pentagon needed to clarify Pete Hegseth’s position on women’s voting rights

The good news is, the defense secretary’s spokesperson said he supports a woman’s right to vote. The bad news is they had to clarify in the first place.

Under normal circumstances, no one would think to ask the Pentagon whether the current secretary of defense supports women’s voting rights, but there’s little about our current political landscape that’s “normal.” Hence, The Hill reported:

The Trump administration on Thursday sought to clarify Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth’s support for women’s voting rights following controversy spurred by his repost of a video tied to a pastor who said the opposite. ‘Of course, the secretary thinks that women should have the right to vote. That’s a stupid question,’ Pentagon press secretary Kingsley Wilson told reporters during Thursday’s briefing.

I can appreciate why the DOD’s right-wing spokesperson — someone who, as Politico reported earlier this year, “has touted antisemitic views, white supremacist conspiracy theories and Kremlin-like statements on social media” — would be eager to dismiss the line of inquiry. But it really wasn’t that stupid a question.

In fact, it was just two weeks ago when Hegseth used his social media account to amplify a video about a Christian nationalist church that included various pastors saying women should no longer be allowed to vote. The Associated Press reported:

In the post, Hegseth commented on an almost seven-minute-long report by CNN examining Doug Wilson, cofounder of the Communion of Reformed Evangelical Churches, or CREC. The report featured a pastor from Wilson’s church advocating the repeal of women’s right to vote from the Constitution, and another pastor saying that in his ideal world, people would vote as households. It also featured a female congregant saying that she submits to her husband.

Hegseth didn’t explicitly endorse the idea of repealing voting rights for American women, but he also didn’t make any effort to distance himself from the rhetoric used in the video he shared with his online followers. On the contrary, he promoted the video, alongside his own written message that read, “All of Christ for All of Life.”

When this sparked a controversy, the former Fox News host could’ve made it clear that he disagreed with the comments, or that he supports leaving the 19th Amendment intact. Instead, Hegseth said nothing.

What’s more, the secretary’s office didn’t make much of an effort, either. When asked about the video he promoted, a Pentagon spokesperson told the AP that Hegseth is “a proud member of a church” that is affiliated with CREC and he “very much appreciates many of Mr. Wilson’s writings and teachings.”

All of this, of course, came on the heels of Hegseth’s efforts to purge several women from leadership posts within the U.S. armed forces.

Hopefully, what the Pentagon spokesperson said was accurate, and the secretary doesn’t actually support rolling back women’s voting rights, despite the content of the video he amplified online. But to see this question as somehow out of bounds given the broader context is difficult to take seriously.

https://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/maddowblog/pentagon-needed-clarify-pete-hegseths-position-womens-voting-rights-rcna225686

Washington Post: A night in D.C. after Trump’s National Guard deployment

Spend the night with us in one of D.C.’s nightlife hubs, as federal police roam, crowds are smaller, bartenders worry and clubgoers try to enjoy themselves.

The sunlight dimmed along this stretch of U Street to the familiar soundtrack of a city ready for the weekend: rumbling buses taking home tired commuters, high heels clacking along sticky sidewalks and chattering crowds ready to order their first round.

Then a group gathered on a street corner with pots and pans, jingling them as the darkness grew closer. They whooped and cheered for a few minutes, a brief moment of joyful resistance seeking to counteract the image of the crime-ridden city described by the president.

Among the clubgoers in miniskirts and sweat-soaked T-shirts, there were federal agents hopping in and out of unmarked cars. A protester held a sign reading “America has no kings.” Police officers were met with boos and phones ready to record.

Welcome to the first Friday night in D.C. since President Donald Trump announced he was placing the local police under federal control and sending in National Guard troops to a city where 9 in 10 voters cast ballots for his opponent. The next morning, the White House would announce that the overnight operation yielded 52 arrests and the seizure of three illegal firearms. Twenty-two multiagency teams were deployed throughout the city.

Trump justified the exertion of executive power to reduce crime by depicting the city as a lawless wasteland, despite violent crime reaching 30-year lows. But many of those gathered around the bars and clubs in Northwest Washington on Friday night said they felt more unsettled by the federal presence than any other safety concerns.

Washington Post journalists spent Friday night in a popular section of U Street — a nightlife hub that is among the areas of the city with the highest number of crimes reported this year. Earlier this summer, D.C. police implemented a youth curfew over concerns about rowdy crowds in some areas.

Nearby, two nights earlier, a mix of local and federal authorities pulled over drivers for seat belt violations or broken taillights while onlookers chanted: “Go home, fascists.”

On Friday, crowds were smaller, bartenders and club managers said, and they wondered if patrons were staying inside to avoid federal authorities. And yet, there were still people ready to party.

The largest police response The Post witnessed Friday night was over a claim of a stolen bike. It was around 8:30 p.m., and the sky was ink blue.

One couple heading home from an event at a nearby synagogue looked on with furrowed brows. They spotted a few D.C. police cruisers blocking traffic and agents donning vests labeled “HSI” — Homeland Security Investigations. They hadn’t seen that before, not here.

A pair of French tourists, in D.C. for the first time and looking for a bar, paused when they saw the police cruisers and growing crowd. Earlier, they had strolled by the White House and marveled at the Capitol, and now they were trying to make sense of the flashing lights.

They had loosely followed the week’s headlines and were still thrilled to be visiting.

“We’re on vacation, so we try to cut [out] the news,” Solène Le Toullec said, and they walked on.

At the sight of local and federal law enforcement throughout the night, people pooled on the sidewalk — watching, filming, booing.

“Get out!”

“Go!”

“Quit!”

Such interactions played out again and again as the night drew on. Onlookers heckled the police as they did their job and applauded as officers left.

Click the links below to read the rest:

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/a-night-in-d-c-after-trump-s-national-guard-deployment/ar-AA1KFJnn

Idaho Statesman: Idaho Christian nationalists embrace the immoral if they have power | Opinion

Women should not be allowed to vote, according to the cult to which Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth belongs:

Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth recently shared on X an interview with Moscow Pastor Doug Wilson, a key figure in the Christian nationalist movement who argues that women should be subordinate to men – even to the point that they should not be allowed to vote.

The movement has been emboldened by the re-election of President Donald Trump, and the CNN report Hegseth shared details the ongoing effort among Wilson and his allies to gain political power.

And the episode contains another important lesson: That the essential part of Christian nationalism is right-wing nationalism, while Christianity is a secondary, accidental feature.

The point is to gain power for a reactionary kind of political and cultural view – hence the movement’s constant insistence on the submission of women to men; the sympathy for the Old South, even to the point of defending slavery; constant attacks on gay and transgender people; occasionally downplaying the Holocaust and so on – and Christianity is a pretty cloak to wrap that foul project in.

This explains their consistent embrace of individuals who relentlessly exhibit personal debauchery – so long as they have political power – people like Hegseth and Trump.

To recite the obvious: Trump has been found liable for sexually abusing a woman, has bragged about his ability to sexually assault women at will, faced complaints about leering at teenage contestants in the locker rooms of beauty pageants, has cheated (often ostentatiously) on all three of his wives and faces numerous other credible allegations of sexual misconduct.

Hegseth, Trump’s moral clone, has faced credible allegations of sexual assault and admitted cheating on the mother of his children with five different women. His former sister-in-law has alleged he abused his next wife. His drunken escapades have become notorious.

“I have no respect for any man that belittles, lies, cheats, sleeps around and uses women for his own power and ego,” wrote one of his critics. “You are that man (and have been for years) and as your mother, it pains me and embarrasses me to say that, but it is the sad, sad truth.”

When the idea is that only families, led by a husband, can vote, Hegseth dons the demeanor of a pious Christian and declares, “All of Christ for All of Life.” But the moment his marriage requires him to be faithful, his Bible hits the floor just before his pants.

We are all poor sinners, it’s true. But doesn’t it seem strange that the Kingdom of God would be brought forth by the most degenerate among us? Maybe it’s worth thinking about false prophets and the idea that “you will know them by their fruit.”

The Christian nationalist movement’s embrace of people like this can be understood in much the same way as the massive hoard of pornography found on the outwardly pious Osama bin Laden’s hard drives after his death: It shows that terrorism was his primary commitment, and his religion was a situationally dispensable secondary matter.

In the CNN segment, Wilson argued that working for a theocratic takeover of Idaho government is nothing but tending “our little corner of the vineyard.” Asked if Muslims in Idaho should have to live by Christian law, Wilson responded: “If I went to Saudi Arabia, I would fully expect to live under their God’s rules.”

But Idaho is not Wilson’s little corner of the vinyard.

What the Christian nationalist movement proposes is not a return to Idaho’s older and better days. It is the imposition of a new and fundamentally alien order. The equality of women, even if never perfectly realized, has been deeply threaded through Idaho’s history and tradition from the very beginning.

Unlike in many eastern states, the right of women to vote was not a late development in Idaho’s history. Only six years after Idaho’s 1890 founding, the right of women to vote was enshrined in the state Constitution – with the overwhelming approval of the then-all-male electorate – making ours the fourth state to protect universal suffrage.

That is our heritage.

Two years later, in 1898, Permeal J. French became Idaho’s first female constitutional officer when she was elected state superintendent. After that, Idaho has always had at least one woman in statewide office or Congress, except for a brief period between 2013 and 2014 between the resignation of State Controller Donna Jones and the election of Superintendent Sherri Ybarra.

That is our history.

The point isn’t for America or Idaho to be Saudi Arabia with a different religion. The point is for America and for Idaho to be free.

If Wilson doesn’t like that, maybe he should find another vineyard. Maybe the aforementioned Saudi Arabia, where it’s illegal to be gay, where women can’t vote, where institutions quite like slavery persist, where most of what Wilson and his cohort want for Idaho is already accomplished.

Sure, there may theological differences, but what’s a minor philosophical disagreement between friends, especially when they agree about pretty much everything else?

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/idaho-christian-nationalists-embrace-the-immoral-if-they-have-power-opinion/ar-AA1KAseo

Brandenton Herald: ‘Villainized’: ICE Officers Respond to Rise in Threats


Would somebody please call a Whambulance?

An 830% increase of a very small number is still a fairly small number, especially when these purported incidents are distributed among ICE’s 10,000+ abusive bully boys.


Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents have reported a staggering 830% increase in violence amid the implementation of mass deportation policies under President Donald Trump. Some have spoken up regarding their experiences of violence in hopes of humanizing their work and countering hostility. ICE Officer Kristian Moreno noted that officers have been targeted for simply enforcing the law.

Speaking with Fox News host Lara Trump, Moreno said, “It has been very sad to see how we’re villainized, the names used towards us.” She added, “We got a job to do. We’re just enforcing the law. We’re not making up the law, and it’s sad, but we just keep pushing through it.”

ICE Officer Chris Sandoval noted the risks agents face, such as being photographed and doxxed. He stated that misinformation and negative views have hindered their efforts to protect vulnerable communities.

Sandoval stated, “It’s kind of unfair to where… we’re doing our job, we’re serving the country, but sometimes I see people writing and stuff, and you’re hurting your own community.”

ICE Officer Edgardo Centeno expressed concern about rising hostility toward ICE agents. He noted that working conditions in Los Angeles and New York have become troubling and condemned political rhetoric inciting violence against agents.

Centeno said, “I believe in the First Amendment, and you can express yourself all you want, but when you are enforcing, as a Congress member…[people] to go after us, then you’re crossing that line.”

Centeno added, “We should not be afraid of doing our jobs. I raised my hand to defend the Constitution, and I’ll die for it. That’s who I am, and I know my partners are the same here.”

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/villainized-ice-officers-respond-to-rise-in-threats/ar-AA1KDSBm

KTLA: ICE officers barred from using deceptive tactics in Southern California home raids

U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement officers are no longer allowed to identify themselves as local police or use deceptive tactics during home arrests in Southern California, following a court-approved settlement reached in a class action lawsuit.

The settlement, approved Monday by U.S. District Court Judge Otis D. Wright II in Kidd v. Noem, prohibits ICE officers in the agency’s Los Angeles Field Office from falsely claiming to be state or local law enforcement or misrepresenting the nature of their visit in order to enter a home or persuade a resident to come outside.

The case was filed in 2020 by Osny Sorto-Vazquez Kidd and two immigrant advocacy organizations, the Inland Coalition for Immigrant Justice and the Coalition for Humane Immigrant Rights (CHIRLA). The lawsuit challenged the constitutionality of ICE’s home arrest practices in Los Angeles and surrounding counties.

Under the agreement, ICE officers may not claim to be conducting criminal investigations, probation or parole checks, or other public safety inquiries unless those claims are accurate. Officers are also prohibited from using pretexts, such as suggesting a problem with a resident’s vehicle, to lure individuals outside.

“This settlement makes clear immigration officers are not above the Constitution and will be held accountable for their deceptive practices,” said Diana Sanchez, a staff attorney at the ACLU Foundation of Southern California, which represented the plaintiffs. “We’ll be monitoring to ensure ICE does not violate the rights of our community members.”

As part of the settlement, ICE officers in the Los Angeles Field Office must wear visible identifiers clearly labeling them as “ICE” whenever they display the word “POLICE” on their uniforms. The measure aims to prevent confusion among residents and reduce the possibility that individuals might mistake federal immigration agents for local law enforcement.

“For far too long, ICE disrespected the privacy of community members by taking shortcuts around the Constitution’s requirement that law enforcement have a warrant signed by a judge to enter a home,” said Annie Lai, director of the Immigrant and Racial Justice Solidarity Clinic at the UC Irvine School of Law. “Thanks to this settlement, ICE must now be transparent about who they are if they don’t have a warrant and want to speak with someone at their home.”

The settlement also mandates new training protocols. ICE must inform all Los Angeles Field Office officers of the new policies through broadcast messages and regular trainings. Officers will be required to document certain details when conducting home arrests, and ICE must share those records with class counsel to ensure compliance. This oversight will remain in place for three years.

The Los Angeles Field Office covers seven counties: Los Angeles, Orange, San Bernardino, Riverside, Ventura, Santa Barbara and San Luis Obispo.

The settlement follows a related court ruling issued in May 2024, which found that ICE officers and Homeland Security Investigations agents may not enter the private area around a home, known legally as the “curtilage,” without a judicial warrant or consent if their intent is to make a warrantless arrest. The combined effect of the two rulings significantly limits ICE’s authority to carry out home arrests without judicial oversight.

Angelica Salas, executive director of CHIRLA, said the decision brings meaningful safeguards. “By prohibiting ICE agents from using trickery, for example, falsely claiming that there is an issue with a resident’s vehicle, to lure people out of their homes, this settlement protects all its occupants and creates a safer community.”

Lizbeth Abeln, deputy director at the Inland Coalition for Immigrant Justice, called the agreement a long overdue victory.

“For years, we’ve heard the testimonies: ICE agents impersonating local police, showing up at people’s doors, lying about their purpose, and using fear to tear families apart,” she said. “ICE can no longer use deception to target our communities.”

Giovanni Saarman González, a partner at Munger, Tolles & Olson LLP and counsel for the plaintiffs, said the settlement, combined with the earlier ruling, offers meaningful relief to the classes and the broader Southern California community.

https://ktla.com/news/california/ice-officers-barred-deceptive-tactics-home-raids