Newsweek: Elena Kagan warns Supreme Court “overriding” Congress to give Trump a win

ustice Elena Kagan warned Monday that the Supreme Court is “overriding” Congress to hand President Donald Trump sweeping new powers over independent agencies.

Her dissent came after the court, in a 6-3 decision, allowed Trump to fire Federal Trade Commission member Rebecca Slaughter while the justices consider whether to overturn a 90-year-old precedent limiting presidential removals.

The conservative majority offered no explanation, as is typical on its emergency docket, but signaled a willingness to revisit the landmark 1935 Humphrey’s Executor ruling.

Kagan, joined by Justices Sonia Sotomayor and Ketanji Brown Jackson, said the court has repeatedly cleared firings that Congress explicitly prohibited, thereby shifting control of key regulatory agencies into the president’s hands.

“Congress, as everyone agrees, prohibited each of those presidential removals,” Kagan wrote. “Yet the majority, stay order by stay order, has handed full control of all those agencies to the President.”

Newsweek reached out to the White House for comment via email on Monday afternoon.

Why It Matters

The U.S. Supreme Court has repeatedly faced decisions regarding Trump’s use of his powers since his return to the White House in January. Cases have included attempts to fire large swaths of the federal government workforce, as well as changes to immigration policy and cuts to emergency relief funding, with arguments that it is Congress, not the president, that holds such powers.

What To Know

Monday’s decision is the latest high-profile firing the court has allowed in recent months, signaling the conservative majority is poised to overturn or narrow a 1935 Supreme Court decision that found commissioners can only be removed for misconduct or neglect of duty.

The justices are expected to hear arguments in December over whether to overturn a 90-year-old ruling known as Humphrey’s Executor.

In that case, the court sided with another FTC commissioner who had been fired by Franklin D. Roosevelt as the president worked to implement the New Deal. The justices unanimously found that commissioners can be removed only for misconduct or neglect of duty.

That 1935 decision ushered in an era of powerful independent federal agencies charged with regulating labor relations, employment discrimination and public airwaves. However, it has long rankled conservative legal theorists, who argue that such agencies should answer to the president.

The Justice Department argues that Trump can fire board members for any reason as he seeks to implement his agenda. However, Slaughter’s attorneys argue that regulatory decisions will be influenced more by politics than by the expertise of board members if the president can fire congressionally confirmed board members at will.

“If the President is to be given new powers Congress has expressly and repeatedly refused to give him, that decision should come from the people’s elected representatives,” they argued.

The court will hear arguments unusually early in the process, before the case has fully worked its way through lower courts.

The court rejected a push from two other board members of independent agencies who had asked the justices to also hear their cases if they took up the Slaughter case: Gwynne Wilcox, of the National Labor Relations Board, and Cathy Harris, of the Merit Systems Protection Board.

The FTC is a regulator enforcing consumer protection measures and antitrust legislation. The NLRB investigates unfair labor practices and oversees union elections, while the MSPB reviews disputes from federal workers.

What People Are Saying

Solicitor General D. John Sauer wrote: “The President and the government suffer irreparable harm when courts transfer even some of that executive power to officers beyond the President’s control.”

Supreme Court Justice Elena Kagan, in her dissent: “The majority may be raring to take that action, as its grant of certiorari before judgment suggests. But until the deed is done, Humphrey’s controls, and prevents the majority from giving the President the unlimited removal power Congress denied him.”

Representative Rosa DeLauro, a Connecticut Democrat, in an amicus brief filed in Trump v. Slaughter“Because the President’s limited authority to temporarily withhold funds proposed for rescission under the ICA does not permit the President to withhold those funds through their date of expiration without action from Congress, the district court’s injunction imposes no greater burden on the government than already exists under that law. The stakes for Congress and the public, however, are high. The fiscal year ends on September 30, less than three weeks from today.”

What Happens Next

The court has already allowed the president to fire all three board members for now. The court has suggested, however, that the president’s power to fire may have limits at the Federal Reserve, a prospect that is expected to be tested in the case of fired Fed Governor Lisa Cook.

https://www.newsweek.com/kagan-supreme-court-congress-trump-win-ftc-2133934

Newsweek: Trump administration asks Supreme Court for new emergency order

The Trump administration on Friday asked the Supreme Court to let it move forward with ending protections for more than 300,000 Venezuelan migrants. The Justice Department is seeking to block a San Francisco judge’s ruling that found the administration acted unlawfully when it terminated Temporary Protected Status for the group.

A federal appeals court declined to halt U.S. District Judge Edward Chen’s decision while the case proceeds.

In May, the Supreme Court had already overturned another Chen order affecting about 350,000 Venezuelans, without explanation, as is typical for emergency appeals. Solicitor General D. John Sauer told the justices the earlier ruling should guide them again.

Why It Matters

The Trump administration has taken a hardline stance on Temporary Protected Status, arguing that the protections are meant to be temporary but have been abused by consecutive administrations. Immigration advocates have countered, saying that conditions in Venezuela and other countries have not improved enough to send people home.

What To Know

Friday’s plea by the Trump administration continues a cycle of court orders and challenges around the attempts by Secretary of Homeland Security Kristi Noem to end TPS for two groups of Venezuelans.

“This case is familiar to the Court and involves the increasingly familiar and
untenable phenomenon of lower courts disregarding this Court’s orders on the emergency docket,” the administration wrote in its submission to the Supreme Court.

The argument is that Chen’s final order in the case rested on the same legal basis that had been stayed by the Supreme Court just months earlier.

This back-and-forth has left around 300,000 Venezuelans in limbo, alongside thousands more in a second group also facing the potential loss of their legal status.

Under TPS, immigrants from designated countries are allowed to remain in the United States without fear of deportation. They are granted permission to work while in the U.S., and can sometimes travel out of the country.

Noem and her predecessors hold the power to grant and revoke TPS per country. Status is renewed every 18 months, and the first Trump administration made similar attempts to revoke it but also faced legal challenges, which continued until President Joe Biden took office in 2021.

Part of Noem’s reasoning is that conditions in Venezuela have improved significantly, meaning it is safe for immigrants to return home. This has not necessarily aligned with the broader Trump administration’s views on the South American nation and its leader, Nicolas Maduro.

Trump Admin Moves to Revoke TPS for Syria

Also on Friday, the DHS moved to revoke TPS for another country: Syria.

In a Federal Register notice, the DHS reiterated that conditions had improved in the country, indicating that TPS was no longer necessary. Protections are set to lapse on September 30, 2025.

Protections were first introduced in 2012, at the height of the unrest in the Middle East at the time.

What People Are Saying

The Trump administration, in its filing to the Supreme Court Friday: “Since the statute was enacted, every administration has designated countries for TPS or extended those designations in extraordinary circumstances. But Secretaries across administrations have also terminated designations when the conditions
were no longer met.”

Adelys Ferro, co-founder and executive director of the Venezuelan American Caucus, told Newsweek on August 29: “We, more than 8 million Venezuelans, just didn’t leave the country just because it’s fun, it’s because we had no choice…Venezuelans with TPS are not a threat to the United States.”

What Happens Next

The Supreme Court must now decide whether to take up the appeal.

https://www.newsweek.com/supreme-court-donald-trump-immigrants-deportation-venezuela-migrants-2132804

Newsweek: Immigrant New York farm workers issue warning over ICE raids

New York’s small farms are beginning to feel the strain of immigration enforcement under the Trump administration, with experts warning that an industry heavily reliant on undocumented workers needs an urgent solution from Congress.

While much of the focus when it comes to immigrants in the Empire State has been the New York City metro area, the state itself is home to as many as 67,000 farmworkers across 30,000 farms mostly upstate and on Long Island.

“We are the most important part of the country, because no one can live without food,” said one Mexican man who has worked in New York for 12 years, speaking to Newsweek on condition of anonymity. “So we can live without a car, without electricity, without many things. But we can’t live without food.”

A Multi-Billion Dollar Industry At Risk

The human impact of ongoing ICE raids is evident to those working on the ground. Another farm worker in New York, who spoke on the condition of anonymity for fear of reprisals, told Newsweek that “cows are going to die” if the administration’s deportations continue across the state.

“It’s a risk every day to go to work. It’s a risk to go to the grocery store. It’s a risk to drive your kids to school. It’s a risk to drive your child to their doctor’s appointment,” the worker told Newsweek.

The person said that the farming industry in New York won’t be able to function without immigrant workers.

“It doesn’t make sense on either a human level or on a business level. The food industry relies mostly on undocumented people,” the worker said.

New York is the country’s top producer of yogurt, and number two producer of apples, but U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) raids are potentially putting an $8 billion farming industry at-risk, experts believe.

Margaret Gray, an associate professor of political science at Adelphi University, told Newsweek that New York state has a diversity of farming sectors and immigrant workers supporting them.

“Dairy workers are year-round workers, apple pickers might only be in the state for eight or 12 weeks,” Gray said. “So, a lot of the apple pickers are on H-2A guest worker visas and so they’re not going to be targeted by ICE, but the dairy industry is not eligible for these visas at this time because to be eligible, you cannot have year-round work.”

Year-round operations, such as dairy farms, are largely ineligible for H-2A visas. Dairy farming requires consistent labor throughout the year to care for animals and maintain production, and the H-2A program is designed only for temporary or seasonal work during workforce shortages.

As a result, many dairy farms and other year-round agricultural businesses continue to rely heavily on undocumented workers to keep their operations running.

Gray said that communities like those in Suffolk County, on Long Island, where large immigrant communities have formed around the farming and agricultural industries, are among those most at risk when many residents and workers do not hold legal status.

“Even the detention of one worker right now can cause chaos. I have talked to people who are literally afraid to leave the house,” Gray said. “They’re afraid to go grocery shopping, they won’t go to parent-teacher meetings, and some of them aren’t even sending their children to school out of fear.”

A declining workforce, especially in sectors such as agriculture, could trigger supply shortages and higher labor costs, which may ultimately increase consumer prices.

Undocumented New Yorkers made a substantial economic contribution, paying $3.1 billion in state and local taxes, according to the Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy. The Migration Policy Institute estimates that approximately 11.3 million undocumented immigrants live in New York.

“As business owners and employers in agriculture, we are very dependent on migrant workers,” Dennis Rak, who owns Double A Vineyards in West New York, told Newsweek. “These are jobs that we’d offer to any person, they are not bad-paying jobs, they’re $20 an hour or more, but no one wants to do any sort of manual labor anymore. So it’s critical for agriculture to have access to a source of labor that will do this.”

Will Trump Find a Solution?

Armando Elenes, Secretary-Treasurer for the United Farm Workers of America, told Newsweek that UFW has seen higher engagement from farm workers who want to know their rights should ICE show up.

In May, 14 workers at Lynn-Ette & Sons Farms, in Orleans County, were detained during an ICE raid. Then, in mid-August, agents showed up again to arrest seven more.

“The workers that have not been detained, it’s the fear of them being next or them being targeted, and the workers who were detained, they have their roots here,” Elenes said. “They’ve been here for years, and they have families here, they have friends here, and to be uprooted and basically sent back, whether it be to Guatemala or to Mexico, it’s a traumatic experience.”

President Donald Trump said in July at the Iowa State Fairgrounds that his administration was working on legislation to allow undocumented workers in sectors such as agriculture and hospitality to remain in the country, a compromise that many in MAGA said amounted to “amnesty.”

“We’re working on legislation right now where – farmers, look, they know better. They work with them for years. You had cases where…people have worked for a farm, on a farm for 14, 15 years and they get thrown out pretty viciously and we can’t do it. We gotta work with the farmers, and people that have hotels and leisure properties too,” Trump said, although no official program or policy update has been announced.

The administration has urged those in the U.S. without legal status to self-deport, offering them $1,000 to do so, or face tougher penalties, such as ICE detention. For the Mexican worker Newsweek spoke to, leaving is not an option.

“I think that the people who are taking self-deportation are people who have just arrived and since they haven’t had a permanent job, they don’t have a life, like they don’t have stability anymore,” he said. “So that’s not an option, I think, for most of the people who are here, because, I mean, $1,000 you earn in a week.”

Newsweek asked the USDA what the administration was doing about the issue, with a spokesperson repeating that Trump was “putting America First”, including streamlining H-2A and H-2B visas.

“Our immigration system has been broken for decades, and we finally have a President who is enforcing the law and prioritizing fixing programs farmers and ranchers rely on to produce the safest and most productive food supply in the world,” the spokesperson said.

Rak said he had little faith that the Trump administration was making any serious efforts on immigration reform which would help business owners like him.

“It doesn’t matter who is in the White House, or who’s in charge of Congress, none of them has been able to work together to come up with a solution that would solve this problem,” Rak said. “If the problem was solved with a workable immigration policy, we wouldn’t need to have the enforcement things that are going on now.”

https://www.newsweek.com/new-york-farms-immigrant-workers-ice-raids-2124775

Newsweek: Trump admin plans new time limit for foreign students in US

The Trump administration is proposing new four-year time limits on student, exchange and media visa holders, as part of plans to tighten up immigration rules.

In a proposal filed in the Federal Register on Wednesday, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) announced its intention to modify the F, J, and I visa categories.

“If enacted, this rule would create additional uncertainty, intrude on academic decision-making, increase bureaucratic hurdles and risk deterring international students, researchers and scholars from coming to the United States,” Miriam Feldblum, president and CEO of the Presidents’ Alliance on Higher Education and Immigration, told Newsweek.

Why It Matters

Student visa holders have been a focus of immigration enforcement under the second Trump administration, with many having their legal status revoked and interviews for new applicants paused for several weeks. This latest proposal revisits a plan from President Donald Trump‘s first term.

What To Know

The DHS said that, unlike many other visa types, F, J, and I visas currently do not have time limits; instead, they require holders to adhere to the rules of their respective visas. Under the new plan, four-year limits would be imposed, aimed at stopping lengthy visa overstays.

The three categories cover foreign students, exchange visitors—such as summer workers, au pairs, and medical students—and those in foreign media.

The DHS memo stated that part of the reason for seeking the new limits was due to the “dramatic rise” in these visas, with F visas (used by international students) increasing from 260,000 in 1981 to 1.6 million in 2023.

J visas (used by some students, academics, medical professionals, au pairs and other such visitors) experienced a 250 percent increase between 1985 and 2023, rising from 141,200 to approximately 500,000, while I visas (for media) also doubled during the same period.

The DHS stated that this posed a challenge to its agencies when it came to monitoring individuals in the U.S. with such visa types, and that a fixed-term approach would be more effective in managing immigration numbers.

For student visa holders, under the new proposal, they would have to either apply for a change in status at the end of their term (i.e., for an H-1B or other work-based visa) or ask for an extension of their F-1 visa if they have not completed their studies. Similar parameters would apply to I and J visa holders.

The Trump administration’s efforts to withdraw legal status for students and hold up interviews at the embassy stage have faced and lost to legal challenges in recent months, with student and exchange visitor advocates arguing that these programs deliver significant benefits to the U.S. economy.

What People Are Saying

Miriam Feldblum, president and CEO of the Presidents’ Alliance on Higher Education and Immigration, told Newsweek: “The proposed rule is yet another unnecessary and counterproductive measure targeting international students and scholars. It would require them to repeatedly submit additional applications just to remain in the country and fulfill requirements of their academic programs—imposing significant burdens on students, colleges and universities, and federal agencies alike.”

A DHS Spokesperson, in a statement shared with Newsweek“For too long, past Administrations have allowed foreign students and other visa holders to remain in the U.S. virtually indefinitely, posing safety risks, costing untold amount of taxpayer dollars, and disadvantaging U.S. citizens. This new proposed rule would end that abuse once and for all by limiting the amount of time certain visa holders are allowed to remain in the U.S., easing the burden on the federal government to properly oversee foreign students and history.”

What Happens Next

DHS will now welcome comments and feedback on the proposals. When the idea was floated in 2020, over 32,000 comments were submitted, many of which were against the idea, which was subsequently scrapped by the Biden administration.

This makes zero sense to me. The longer students are here, the more educated & skilled they presumably become, and we should want them to stay longer … perhaps permanently.

https://www.newsweek.com/student-exchange-visa-changes-proposal-trump-administration-2120179

Newsweek: US military action against Mexican cartels could backfire, experts warn

Experts on U.S.-Mexico relations have told Newsweek that reported plans by the Trump administration for potential military operations against cartels in Mexico would be condemned as an act of aggression that could have disastrous unintended consequences — while also “fundamentally misdiagnosing” how the groups operate.

The reported plans, first revealed by independent journalist Ken Klippenstein, are set to be ready for mid-September, and would involve action on Mexican soil at the direction of President Donald Trump.

“Absent Mexican consent, any military action in Mexico will be condemned, I believe justifiably, as an act of aggression in violation of the most basic provision of the UN Charter and customary international law,” Geoffrey Corn, director of the Center for Military Law and Policy at Texas Tech School of Law, told Newsweek.

“The U.S. will undoubtedly assert it is acting pursuant to the inherent right of self-defense. But that right is only applicable in response to an actual or imminent armed attack, not on activities of a non-state group that cause harm to the nation, which I believe is the case.”

The increased enforcement action would come after the Trump administration classified select cartels and transnational criminal gangs as Foreign Terrorist Organizations (FTOs) in February. The president has long argued that the U.S. needed to be firmer in how it dealt with the groups, widely seen as the driving force feeding the cross-border drug trade.

Sending a Message

When Newsweek asked the Department of Defense about the report, Sean Parnell, the Pentagon‘s spokesperson, reaffirmed the president’s FTO designation and the belief that the groups are a “direct threat” to national security.

“These cartels have engaged in historic violence and terror throughout our Hemisphere—and around the globe– that has destabilized economies and internal security of countries but also flooded the United States with deadly drugs, violent criminals, and vicious gangs,” Parnell said.

Klippenstein’s report is not the first to detail potential military action, however, with the U.S. moving personnel into the seas around Mexico and Latin America in recent weeks.

“On the practical level, we have to clarify what ‘military action’ means. One could think of drone strikes on infrastructure, but fentanyl production and trafficking in Mexico is highly fragmented—small networks, labs inside houses in cities like Culiacán. Drone strikes there would be complicated and dangerous,” David Mora, senior analyst for Mexico at International Crisis Group, told Newsweek Thursday.

“If it were instead a deployment of U.S. troops to capture or eliminate a criminal leader, Trump might sell it as a victory. It would sound good and grab headlines, but it would be an empty victory. History shows that this strategy does not solve drug trafficking or organized crime.

“On the contrary, it increases violence. Even the Department of Justice and the DEA have admitted this.”

Military Action Could Backfire on the Border

When the FTO designation was first signed by Secretary of State Marco Rubio, policy experts raised concerns about the unintended consequences the move could have, particularly around immigration.

While Trump has all but shut down the southern border with Mexico, one critic said branding cartels as terrorist organizations could lead to stronger claims for asylum – a concern echoed by Cecilia Farfán-Méndez, the head of the North American Observatory at Global Initiative Against Transational Organized Crime.

“It is mutually exclusive from the border and migration objectives the administration has. Evidence shows that violence drives internal displacement,” Farfán-Méndez told Newsweek. “U.S. military action in Mexico, and potential responses by criminal groups in Mexico, could generate displacement of communities.

“As with other episodes of violence and displacement, it is not unthinkable these communities migrate to the border and seek asylum in the US. This prevents the orderly migration process the Trump administration has sought.”

All three experts Newsweek spoke with raised concerns about the viability and constitutionality of making such moves, when cartels have not necessarily carried out a coordinated attack on the U.S. that could be defined as military action that would require like-for-like retaliation.

Farfán-Méndez said she believed there was a misdiagnosis on the part of the White House regarding how criminal gangs operate, explaining that the drug trade was not “three men hiding in the Sierra Madre that you can target and eliminate”, and that there were actors working in concert on both sides of the border.

U.S. Sentencing Commission data for 2024 backed that up, showing 83.5 percent of those sentenced for fentanyl trafficking within the U.S. were American citizens, rather than foreign nationals.

Sheinbaum Could Be Political Victim

The experts also questioned how operations could affect the relationship between the U.S. and its southern neighbor, where President Claudia Sheinbaum has been clear publicly in her efforts to stem the flow of immigrants and drugs across the border while managing her relationship with Washington over other issues like trade.

“Mexico has always had less leverage,” Mora said. “If during Sheinbaum’s government there were any kind of unilateral U.S. action, it would be extremely politically sensitive. In Mexico, any unilateral action is equal to invasion.

“Imagine the slogan: being the president under whom the United States invaded Mexico again. Politically, it would be almost the end for her.”

For the Trump administration, which came into office in January promising strong border security and the end of fentanyl trafficking into the U.S., the likelihood of stronger actions on cartels appears clear, if the methods and strategy are less so.

Parnell told Newsweek that taking action against cartels, at the president’s directive, required a “whole-of-government effort and thorough coordination with regional partners” to eliminate the abilities of cartels to “threaten the territory, safety, and security” of the U.S.

Corn said any use of military force against the cartels would ultimately do more harm than good.

“I think this also is consistent with a trend we are seeing: when you think your best tool is a hammer, every problem starts to look like a nail,” the lawyer said. “This administration seems determined to expand the use of military power for all sorts of what it designates as ’emergencies.’ But this is fundamentally not a problem amenable to military attack.”

https://www.newsweek.com/trump-plans-military-action-mexico-cartels-2117318

Newsweek: ICE detains woman in green card process and son at Canadian border

A New Zealand woman and her youngest son, living in Washington, were detained by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) on the Canadian border after dropping her other children off in Vancouver.

Sarah Shaw, who is waiting for a green card, and her son Isaac, 6, were arrested despite having some immigration documents. She is now being held in a detention facility in Texas.

Newsweek reached out to ICE and Shaw’s attorney for comment via email Monday morning.

Why It Matters

Since President Donald Trump‘s return to the White House in January, ICE has been seen to take a tougher stance on immigration enforcement, including against those with legal status. This has led to increased uncertainty around international travel for green card holders and those with other long-term visas.

What To Know

A GoFundMe page set up by Shaw’s friend, Victoria Besancon, explained that the mother of three had fully prepared for a quick trip across the U.S.-Canadian border on July 24 to drop off her two eldest children at Vancouver’s airport. They were headed back to New Zealand for a visit with their grandparents.

While crossing into Canada had been fine, on the return trip, immigration officials detained Shaw and Isaac.

Originally entering the U.S. sponsored by her ex-husband, Shaw is now in the process of seeking a green card independently under a domestic violence survivor’s provision. According to the GoFundMe, Shaw had work authorization but not travel permissions just yet, as part of what is known as a “combo card”, while her son did.

Her attorney, Minda Thorward, told NBC King 5 news that under previous administrations, Shaw would likely have been quickly paroled back into the U.S. by Customs and Border Protection (CBP), but that this had clearly shifted under Trump.

Despite Isaac having travel permissions, ICE still holds him in detention, with Shaw also held at the Dilley Immigration Processing Center in South Texas.

Besancon wrote on her GoFundMe page that Shaw works for the Washington State Department of Children, Youth, and Families (DCYF) and was set to begin grad school soon. The funding, sitting at over $33,000 Monday morning, was to cover legal fees and essentials, after she was forced to burn through savings for legal representation.

Shaw’s case is not the first of its kind, with multiple legal residents reported to have been detained by ICE in recent months. While some have known criminal records or histories, which can be reason to withdraw visas, others have claimed that they simply made mistakes with paperwork and should be released.

What People Are Saying

Victoria Besancon, Shaw’s friend, speaking to NBC King 5: “Sarah had been waiting on some travel documents to be approved. But once her visa and her children’s visas were cleared, she felt comfortable taking them to Canada. We assumed everything was fine.

“The main thing Sarah has expressed throughout this ordeal is just absolute shock and devastation. She truly believed she had done everything that was required of her.”

DHS Assistant Secretary Tricia McLaughlin, in a recent statement on immigration enforcement: “The fact of the matter is those who are in our country illegally have a choice—they can leave the country voluntarily or be arrested and deported. The United States taxpayer is generously offering free flights and a $1,000 to illegal aliens who self-deport using the CBP Home app. If they leave now, they preserve the potential opportunity to come back the legal, right way. The choice is theirs.”

What’s Next

Shaw is yet to show up on ICE’s inmate detainee locator, with her friends and legal team urging the agency to release her and her son.

https://www.newsweek.com/domestic-violence-survivor-detained-ice-us-canada-border-2111838

Newsweek: Green card applicants’ kids may lose legal status after Trump admin move

Children of H-1B visa holders may now age out of their protected legal status while their parents apply for green cards, under a Trump administration policy change announced Friday.

The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) announced that it was reversing a Biden administration policy that prevented young adults from losing their legal status if a parent’s application was still pending when their children reached age 21.

Why It Matters

Around 200,000 children and young adults could be affected by the change, which comes amid a flurry of alterations at the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Service (USCIS) to bring policies in line with President Donald Trump’s directives to tighten immigration controls.

What To Know

The USCIS policy change affects those who fall under the Child Status Protection Act (CSPA), which the administration of former President Joe Biden had allowed in February 2023 to apply to some children as soon as their parents became eligible to apply for a green card.

That meant that even if they “aged out” during the wait for a green card, they would not lose legal status.

On Friday, the Trump administration rolled those extensions back, saying that CSPA protections would once again only apply when a visa becomes available via the Department of State. USCIS said this would create a more consistent approach for those applying for adjustment of status and immigrant visas.

With long wait times for adjustment of status applications, particularly for H-1B and other temporary visa holders, this could now mean that when a dependent child turns 21, they lose their legal status and may have to leave the U.S., even if they have lived in the country for most or all of their lives.

Doug Rand, a DHS official during the Biden administration, said that many of those children would be American to their core, but would now be forced to the back of the line for a green card.

What People Are Saying

USCIS, in a news release: “The Feb. 14, 2023, policy resulted in inconsistent treatment of aliens who applied for adjustment of status in the United States versus aliens outside the United States who applied for an immigrant visa with the Department of State.”

Doug Rand, former DHS official, in a statement shared with Newsweek: “Back in 2023, the team I was part of at USCIS made a sensible policy change to make this situation a little less awful for a few more young people. Basically, the government has a choice about whether certain people who “age out” of their immigration status can still hang on to their parents’ place in line for a green card some day.

“We chose yes. Today, the Trump administration is choosing no.”

What’s Next

The new guidance will apply to requests filed after August 15, with those already in process not affected.

https://www.newsweek.com/h1b-green-card-applicants-children-protections-change-trump-administration-2111075

Newsweek: Trump admin identifies gang immigration “loophole”

A new report from U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) has raised concerns over the Special Immigrant Juvenile (SIJ) program, citing instances of identity fraud and gang affiliations among applicants approved for lawful permanent residency.

“The scale of criminality, gang involvement, and fraud described in this report is more extensive than in earlier public discussions of the Special Immigrant Juvenile (SIJ) program,” Morgan Bailey, a partner at Mayer Brown and a former senior official at the Department of Homeland Security, told Newsweek.

… which is followed by a lot of continuing fearmongering not worth quoting.

How hard is it to base each individual’s decision on his or her personal criminal history?

If they have no criminal history, let them be permanent residents.

If they commit crimes, deport them.

After 5 years of permanent residence, they can apply for citizenship, at which point their criminal history will be considered.

If they don’t apply for citizenship, they’ll have to apply to renew their permanent residence after another 5 years, at which point their criminal history will still be reviewed.

Focus on the INDIVIDUALS, not on superficial associations and characteristics.

https://www.newsweek.com/special-immigrant-juvenile-visa-gang-exploitation-uscis-report-2104231

Newsweek: Trump admin ordered to return man deported to El Salvador

President Donald Trump‘s administration has been ordered to return a Salvadoran man who was deported minutes after a federal appeals court blocked his removal.

Jordin Melgar-Salmeron was deported to El Salvador on May 7 despite an order from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, New York, blocking it.

On Tuesday, the appeals court ordered the administration to “facilitate the return” of Melgar-Salmeron as soon as possible to “ensure that his case is handled as it would have been had he not been improperly sent to El Salvador.”

It also directed the government to return to court within one week to provide details on the current location of Melgar-Salmeron and how it planned to return him to the United States.

https://www.newsweek.com/trump-admin-ordered-return-man-deported-el-salvador-2090058

Newsweek: ICE arrests 11 Iranian nationals in US amid fears of secret terror cells

The Trump administration said Tuesday that Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents had arrested 11 Iranian citizens over the weekend who were in the U.S. illegally.

Among those arrested was a man ordered for removal from the United States 20 years ago, and others accused of breaking immigration laws.

Goody goody for them! If there are any Iranian terrorists running around loose in the U.S.A., I sure wouldn’t count on ICE to catch them! They’re too busy snatching gardners off the front lawns of L.A.

https://www.newsweek.com/ice-arrests-iranian-nationals-us-citizen-2089977