CBS News: Mexican man dies in ICE custody at Arizona detention center, officials say

A man from Mexico in U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement custody died last week at a hospital in Arizona, the federal agency said.

He had been detained at the Central Arizona Correctional Complex, in the town of Florence, and was pronounced dead by a doctor at the Mountain Vista Medical Center, near Phoenix, on the morning of Aug. 31, according to ICE. The agency said his cause of death was unknown and remained under investigation.

Lorenzo Antonio Batrez Vargas, 32, was a citizen of Mexico who had been arrested by Flagstaff police on Aug. 2 and charged with possession and use of drug paraphernalia, which is a felony. Immigration enforcement agents said they took Vargas into custody in Phoenix before transferring him to the detention center in Florence.

Vargas had been arrested at least twice before by Flagstaff police, according to ICE. The agency said he was convicted by the Flagstaff Municipal Court of driving under the influence in 2018 and 2024, with the latter conviction resulting in a sentence of 10 days in confinement.

ICE said its agents notified the U.S. Department of Homeland Security, the Office of Inspector General, and the ICE Office of Professional Responsibility of Vargas’ death, which is required by agency policies. They also notified the Mexican Embassy.

“ICE remains committed to ensuring that all those in its custody reside in safe, secure, and humane environments. Comprehensive medical care is provided from the moment individuals arrive and throughout the entirety of their stay,”  the agency said, adding, “At no time during detention is a detained illegal alien denied emergent care.”

Asked for any updates on the investigation into Vargas’ death, a spokesperson for ICE told CBS News in an email Sunday that the agency would post more information to its website once it becomes available.

Fourteen people, including Vargas, have died at immigration detention centers across the U.S. since the beginning of the year, according to ICE.

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/mexican-man-dies-ice-custody-arizona-detention-center

The Dispatch: No, President Trump’s Tariffs Haven’t Generated $8 Trillion in Revenue

President Donald Trump speaks to reporters after signing executive orders in the Oval Office of the White House in Washington, D.C. on September 5, 2025. (Photo by MANDEL NGAN/AFP via Getty Images)

On Labor Day, a post on the White House’s official X account lauded President Donald Trump for having generated $8 trillion in revenue for the federal government and celebrated his “protectionist trade policies” for creating $8 trillion in U.S. investment. The text of the post highlights the trade policies, while an accompanying graphic touts the tariff revenue.

Trump also claimed Tuesday that the U.S. has “taken in almost $17 trillion in investment … most of it has come in because of tariffs.”

None of the claims is accurate.

A Bipartisan Policy Center analysis of the Treasury Department’s daily statements shows that the federal government has taken in $158.4 billion in tariff revenue since January 21, the day after Trump’s inauguration. On August 22, the Congressional Budget Office updated past projections and now estimates that Trump’s tariffs on China, Mexico, and several other countries will reduce deficits by $4 trillion—over the next decade. Each year, the United States on average takes in $3 trillion in imported goods, which makes the claim of $8 trillion in tariff revenue just in 2025 nearly impossible. 

The White House maintains on its website a list of pledges of investment by various companies and countries, most recently updated on September 2. The list includes private sector projects such as a “$600 billion investment in U.S. manufacturing and workforce training” by Apple, $500 billion by Nvidia to update its U.S. infrastructure, and $200 billion by Micron to boost its U.S. production of memory chips. And it includes pledges by foreign nations such as the United Arab Emirates ($1.4 trillion), Qatar ($1.2 trillion), and Japan ($1 trillion) to invest in the U.S. 

Add up those amounts, and you get roughly $7.5 trillion. But there are several reasons not to take these pledges at face value. As Dispatch contributor and Cato Institute vice president Scott Lincicome has written, companies like Apple, Amazon, or the chip manufacturer TMSC often seek to gain favor with a new administration by promising multibillion-dollar investments. These often involve either expansions of projects already in the works or vague pledges that lack concrete time frames. 

“Oftentimes companies that are actually pledging new investment will say they’re going to do it based on market conditions,” Lincicome told The Dispatch. “Well, market conditions change, and suddenly what looks like a good investment isn’t a good investment, and it never happens. Or, the timeline is hilariously drawn out, and so it might take 10 years to hit that number.”

Trump’s first term, Lincicome continued, featured a collection of multibillion-dollar pledges from manufacturing giants—ultimately, with mixed successes. “Some of it certainly happened, but a lot of it didn’t, and some of it that did happen actually ended up collapsing. Look at [Magnitude] 7 Metals, this big aluminum company. [Trump trade adviser] Peter Navarro went out there and claimed this was the future of American aluminum, and it’s closed down two years later.”

When asked to clarify, the White House did not offer further explanation for their Labor Day post or for Trump’s remarks. 

“President Trump is right: tariffs are bringing in historic revenue for the federal government, revenue that will amount to trillions of dollars in the coming years,” White House spokesperson Kush Desai told The Dispatch in an email. “Tariffs made America rich once before, and tariffs will Make America Wealthy Again.”

Simply bullshit! “The federal government has taken in $158.4 billion in tariff revenue since January 2”, not $8 trillion. Liars!

And they probably haven’t taken into account the changes in spending habits that occur when taxes and prices increase.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/opinion/no-president-trump-s-tariffs-haven-t-generated-8-trillion-in-revenue/ar-AA1LZYLT

Daily Beast: Pam [Bimbo #3] Bondi Takes Aim at Boston Citing Crimes From Elsewhere

The attorney general suggested Boston Mayor Michelle Wu is somehow responsible for an alleged crime that occurred 100 miles outside city limits.

Attorney General Pam Bondi cited crimes that occurred outside of Boston to criticize the city’s mayor in a head-scratching interview with Fox News.

Bondi, 59, told Sean Hannity that Boston—one of the safest major cities in America—is actually “not” safe, citing a trio of grisly crimes. She singled out Mayor Michelle Wu, claiming the 40-year-old Democrat has lost control of the city.

“A Haitian national was charged with raping a child in a migrant center,” she said. “An 18-year-old illegal alien from Haiti molested a 10-year-old child. An illegal from El Salvador, 11 counts of rape against a child … I could go on and on about the crimes in the Boston area. So, if she’s not going to protect the people of Boston, we are.”

As Mediaite first noted, the alleged migrant center incident took place 20 miles from Boston, the alleged molestation took place 30 miles outside city limits, and the incident involving the Salvadoran national took place on Nantucket, an island about 100 miles south of the state capital.

Wu, of course, has zero jurisdiction over crimes that take place well outside Boston’s city limits. It would be the equivalent of blaming President Donald Trump for something that occurred over the border in Mexico or Canada.

The Trump administration, which has already deployed the National Guard to the streets of Los Angeles and Washington, D.C., has signaled plans for similar actions in other Democrat-controlled cities, including Boston.

Reached for comment, Wu’s office said in a statement: “For months, the Trump DOJ, DHS, and ICE have been spreading blatant lies and threatening to ‘bring hell’ to cities like Boston who refuse to bow down to their authoritarian agenda, so this unconstitutional attack is not a surprise.”

It continued, “This country was born facing down bullies, with Bostonians leading the way. Today, Boston is the safest major city in the country because we have worked to build trust in the community, so that everyone feels safe seeking help or reporting a crime. We will not be bullied or intimidated into abandoning the efforts that make Boston a safe home for everyone.”

The administration sued Boston and Wu on Thursday over an ordinance that limits local police from cooperating with federal immigration enforcement.

Wu responded that same day, “This unconstitutional attack on our city is not a surprise. Boston is a thriving community, the economic and cultural hub of New England, and the safest major city in the country—but this administration is intent on attacking our community to advance their own authoritarian agenda.”

Boston is not suffering from a crime spike. It reported its lowest homicide rate since 1957 last year, and other violent and property crimes are on a “downward trend.”

Bondi refused to let those facts get in the way of her talking point.

“Michelle Wu is one of the worst offenders in the entire country,” she told Hannity. “She says Boston is safe. It’s not.”

https://www.thedailybeast.com/pam-bondi-takes-aim-at-boston-citing-crimes-from-elsewhere

Associated Press: South Sudan repatriates Mexican man deported from US in July

South Sudan said Saturday it repatriated to Mexico a man deported from the United States in July.

The man, a Mexican identified as Jesus Munoz-Gutierrez, was among a group of eight who have been in government custody in the east African country since their deportation from the U.S.

Another deportee, a South Sudanese national, has since been freed while six others remain in custody.

Munoz-Gutierrez’s repatriation to Mexico was carried out by South Sudan’s foreign ministry in concert with the Mexican Embassy in neighboring Ethiopia, the South Sudanese foreign ministry said in a statement.

The repatriation was carried out “in full accordance with relevant international law, bilateral agreements, and established diplomatic protocols,” it said.

In comments to journalists in Juba, the South Sudan capital, Munoz-Gutierrez said he “felt kidnapped” when the U.S. sent him to South Sudan.

“I was not planning to come to South Sudan, but while I was here they treated me well,” he said. “I finished my time in the United States, and they were supposed to return me to Mexico. Instead, they wrongfully sent me to South Sudan.”

The U.S. Department of Homeland Security has said that Munoz-Gutierrez had a conviction for second-degree murder and was sentenced to life in prison.

South Sudan is engaging other countries about repatriating the six deportees still in custody, said Apuk Ayuel Mayen, a spokeswoman for the foreign ministry.

It is not clear if the deportees have access to legal representation.

Rights groups have argued that the Trump administration’s increasing practice of deporting migrants to third countries violates international law and the basic rights of migrants.

The deportations have faced opposition by courts in the U.S., though the Supreme Court in June allowed the government to restart swift removals of migrants to countries other than their homelands.

Other African nations receiving deportees from the U.S. include Uganda, Eswatini and Rwanda. Eswatini, in southern Africa, received five men with criminal backgrounds in July. Rwanda announced the arrival of a group of seven deportees in mid-August.

https://apnews.com/article/south-sudan-us-mexico-deportations-924ebd609d65efc6681f4bb59b6cc94e

Associated Press: Legal aid group sues to preemptively block U.S. from deporting a dozen Honduran children

A legal aid group has sued to preemptively block any efforts by the U.S. government to deport a dozen Honduran children, saying it had “credible” information that such plans were quietly in the works.

The Arizona-based Florence Immigrant & Refugee Rights Project (FIRRP) on Friday added Honduran children to a lawsuit filed last weekend that resulted in a judge temporarily blocking the deportation of dozens of migrant children to their native Guatemala.

In a statement, the organization said it had received reports that the U.S. government will “imminently move forward with a plan to illegally remove Honduran children in government custody as soon as this weekend, in direct violation of their right to seek protection in the United States and despite ongoing litigation that blocked similar attempted extra-legal removals for children from Guatemala.”

FIRRP did not immediately provide The Associated Press with details about what information it had received about the possible deportation of Honduran children. The amendment to the organization’s lawsuit is sealed in federal court. The Homeland Security Department did not immediately respond to email requests for comment on Friday and Saturday.

The Justice Department on Saturday provided what is perhaps its most detailed account of a chaotic Labor Day weekend involving the attempted deportation of 76 Guatemalan children. Its timeline was part of a request to lift a temporary hold on their removal.

Over Labor Day weekend, the Trump administration attempted to remove Guatemalan children who had come to the U.S. alone and were living in shelters or with foster care families in the U.S.

Advocates who represent migrant children in court filed lawsuits across the country seeking to stop the government from removing the children, and on Sunday a federal judge stepped in to order that the kids stay in the U.S. for at least two weeks.

The government initially identified 457 Guatemalan children for possible deportation, according to Saturday’s filing. None could have a pending asylum screening or claim, resulting in the removal of 91. They had to have parents or legal guardians in Guatemala and be at least 10 years old.

In the end, 327 children were found eligible for deportation, including 76 who boarded planes early Sunday in what the government described as a first phase, according to a statement by Angie Salazar, acting director of the U.S. Health and Human Services Department’s Office of Refugee Resettlement. All 76 were at least 14 years old and “self-reported” that they had a parent or legal guardian in Guatemala but none in the United States.

The Justice Department said no planes took off, despite a comment by one of its attorneys in court Sunday that one may have but returned.

Children who cross the border alone are generally transferred to the Office of Refugee Resettlement, which falls under the Health and Human Services Department. The children usually live in a network of shelters across the country that are overseen by the resettlement office until they are eventually released to a sponsor — usually a relative

Children began crossing the border alone in large numbers in 2014, peaking at 152,060 in the 2022 fiscal year. July’s arrest tally translates to an annual clip of 5,712 arrests, reflecting how illegal crossings have dropped to their lowest levels in six decades.

Guatemalans accounted for 32% of residents at government-run holding facilities last year, followed by Hondurans, Mexicans and El Salvadorans. A 2008 law requires children to appear before an immigration judge with an opportunity to pursue asylum, unless they are from Canada and Mexico. The vast majority are released from shelters to parents, legal guardians or immediate family while their cases wind through court.

Justice Department lawyers said federal law allows the Department of Health and Human Services to “repatriate” or “reunite” children by taking them out of the U.S., as long as the child hasn’t been a victim of “severe” human trafficking, is not at risk for becoming so if he or she is returned to their native country and does not face a “a credible fear” of persecution there. The child also cannot be “repatriated” if he or she has a pending asylum claim.

The FIRRP lawsuit was amended to include 12 children from Honduras who have expressed to the Florence Project that they do not want to return to Honduras, as well as four additional children from Guatemala who have come into government custody in Arizona since the suit was initially filed last week.

Some children have parents who are already in the United States.

The lawsuit demands that the government allow the children their legal right to present their cases to an immigration judge, to have access to legal counsel and to be placed in the least restrictive setting that is in the best interest of the child.

https://apnews.com/article/immigration-children-trump-deportations-guatemala-honduras-70c0912b3ee8c1038e793974b7141d67

Knewz: CBP detains mom with green card over marijuana conviction from decades ago

A Massachusetts mother of four and longtime U.S. resident has been released from immigration custody after being detained earlier this month at Boston Logan International Airport over a decades-old marijuana conviction. Knewz.com has learned that Jemmy Jimenez Rosa, 42, had traveled to Mexico with her family on vacation and was stopped by Customs and Border Protection upon reentry despite holding a recently renewed green card.

The Massachusetts mom was detained after returning from vacation

On August 11, Rosa returned to the United States with her husband and children. Her husband, Marcel Rosa, said he handed over the family’s passports and his wife’s green card before officers escorted her into a private room. She was then held at Logan Airport for four days. According to her lawyer, Todd Pomerleau, she was denied access to a phone, her medications and basic hygiene. “She has diabetes, high blood pressure, mental health issues,” Pomerleau told Newsweek. He added that she was twice hospitalized in those first days of detention. After that period, Rosa was transferred to a detention facility in Maine. “She was in such poor condition that she could barely walk or function,” Pomerleau said.

No official explanation provided for her detention

Pomerleau said he was never given an official explanation for Rosa’s detention, but he believes it stemmed from a 2003 misdemeanor possession charge for a small amount of marijuana. “At most, it could have possibly been a 2003 possession charge for a small amount of marijuana, which was pardoned fully and unconditionally by the governor of Massachusetts. The records were sealed, which means they never would have even had access to them without gaining special permission from the court.” Pomerleau later challenged the old conviction in Roxbury district court, arguing that Rosa did not receive adequate legal counsel when she entered her plea two decades earlier. The judge and prosecutor agreed, vacating the conviction and dismissing the case.

She was later released

Pomerleau filed an emergency motion demanding Rosa’s release, noting she had never been served with a notice to appear. Later that day, she was freed. Her husband described her detention as devastating for the family. In a GoFundMe post, he wrote, “Jemmy is a valid green card holder who was born in Peru and came to the U.S. at the age of 9. No reason for the arrest has been given. She has been held without receiving proper medical care. … Jemmy is very selfless, constantly trying to help out family and friends. Everything’s about the kids with her.” The fundraiser has collected more than $12,500 for legal expenses. Pomerleau said her case illustrates the risks many legal immigrants face under current enforcement policies. “There needs to be fundamental change. Hopefully our case sheds light on the travesty of justice,” he said.

Her detention came amidst broader immigration crackdown

Rosa’s case unfolded against the backdrop of an immigration administration crackdown that has swept up immigrants with legal status as well as undocumented residents. A Customs and Border Protection spokesperson said in a statement, “A green card is a privilege, not a right, and under our nation’s laws, our government has the authority to revoke a green card if our laws are broken and abused. Lawful Permanent Residents presenting at a U.S. port of entry with previous criminal convictions may be subject to mandatory detention and/or may be asked to provide additional documentation to be set up for an immigration hearing.” However, Pomerleau criticized the government’s actions, saying, “What is happening now is unprecedented. It’s an assault on the rule of law and due process.” Massachusetts Congressman Stephen Lynch said the episode raised “red flags in terms of the delay and what services are available to her as a legal permanent resident.”

https://knewz.com/cbp-officers-detain-mom-with-green-card-over-marijuana-conviction-from-decades-ago

Associated Press: US hiring stalls with employers reluctant to expand in an economy grown increasingly erratic

The American job market, a pillar of U.S. economic strength since the pandemic, is crumbling under the weight of President Donald Trump’s erratic economic policies.

Uncertain about where things are headed, companies have grown increasingly reluctant to hire, leaving agonized jobseekers unable to find work and weighing on consumers who account for 70% of all U.S. economic activity. Their spending has been the engine behind the world’s biggest economy since the COVID-19 disruptions of 2020.

The Labor Department reported Friday that U.S. employers — companies, government agencies and nonprofits — added just 22,000 jobs last month, down from 79,000 in July and well below the 80,000 that economists had expected.

The unemployment rate ticked up to 4.3% last month, also worse than expected and the highest since 2021.

“U.S. labor market deterioration intensified in August,’’ Scott Anderson, chief U.S. economist at BMO Capital Market, wrote in a commentary, noting that hiring was “slumping dangerously close to stall speed. This raises the risk of a harder landing for consumer spending and the economy in the months ahead.’’

Alexa Mamoulides, 27, was laid off in the spring from a job at a research publishing company and has been hunting for work ever since. She uses a spreadsheet to track her progress and said she’s applied for 111 positions and had 14 interviews — but hasn’t landed a job yet.

Bubba Trump is doing a splendid job of trashing our economy! And unfortunately, it’s only just begun.

https://apnews.com/article/jobs-economy-unemployment-trump-firing-f686eab61f7d6b702ca10b12b0250498

Independent: Trump asks Supreme Court to approve his tariffs after warning US would be ‘destroyed’ if they don’t go ahead

President demands highest court weigh in on his use of International Emergency Economic Powers Act 1977 to slap hefty levies on imported goods

Donald Trump has appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court to overturn a lower court’s ruling that the basis for his “reciprocal tariffs” policy was not legal, having warned the country would be “destroyed” without it.

The Court of Appeals ruled on Friday in agreement with a May finding by the Court of International Trade that the president had overstepped his authority by invoking a law known as the International Emergency Economic Powers Act 1977 to place hefty levies on goods imported from America’s trading partners.

Trump was incensed by the decision, insisting it was “highly partisan” and “would literally destroy the United States of America.”

Now, the administration has asked the conservative-majority Supreme Court to decide whether to take up the case by September 10, despite its new term not beginning until October 6, with a view to hearing arguments in November.

“The stakes in this case could not be higher,” Solicitor General D John Sauer wrote in his filing. “The president and his cabinet officials have determined that the tariffs are promoting peace and unprecedented economic prosperity, and that the denial of tariff authority would expose our nation to trade retaliation without effective defenses and thrust America back to the brink of economic catastrophe.”

Attorneys representing small businesses challenging the tariff program said they were not opposed to the Supreme Court hearing the matter and said, on the contrary, they were confident their arguments would prevail.

“These unlawful tariffs are inflicting serious harm on small businesses and jeopardizing their survival,” said Jeffrey Schwab of Liberty Justice Center. “We hope for a prompt resolution of this case for our clients.”

Trump announced his “Liberation Day” tariffs in the White House Rose Garden on April 2, invoking the IEEPA to set a 10 percent baseline tax on all imports and even higher taxes on goods being shipped from nearly every one of America’s trading partners, with China, Canada and Mexico among those hardest hit.

However, his announcement sent shockwaves through the world’s stock markets as investors panicked over their likely economic consequences, eventually forcing Trump into a rethink. He duly announced a week later that the implementation of the tariffs would be suspended for 90 days, a deadline that was eventually extended until August.

Administration officials led by Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick used the intervening summer months to attempt to broker custom deals with other countries but only succeeded in securing a handful of agreements, notably with the U.K. and Vietnam.

A revised list of tariffs that came into effect on August 7 saw India (51 percent), Syria (41 percent), Laos (40 percent), Myanmar (4o percent) and Switzerland (39 percent) particularly hard done by.

Then, last week, the Court of Appeals agreed with two challenges, one brought by the small businesses and another by 12 states, to rule in a seven-four majority decision that the president’s power to regulate imports under the law does not include the power to impose tariffs.

“It seems unlikely that Congress intended, in enacting IEEPA, to depart from its past practice and grant the president unlimited authority to impose tariffs,” the justices wrote in their decision.

They added that U.S. law “bestows significant authority on the president to undertake a number of actions in response to a declared national emergency, but none of these actions explicitly include the power to impose tariffs, duties, or the like, or the power to tax.”

The Independent is the world’s most free-thinking news brand, providing global news, commentary and analysis for the independently-minded. We have grown a huge, global readership of independently minded individuals, who value our trusted voice and commitment to positive change. Our mission, making change happen, has never been as important as it is today.

Bubba dearest,

Your tariffs are illegal.

You had no legal authority to levy them.

They gotta go.

You gotta go, too.

Period.

Stop.

End of story.

https://www.the-independent.com/news/world/americas/us-politics/trump-supreme-court-tariffs-appeal-b2819975.html

Newsweek: Lower income Americans issued warning over Trump post move

A nearly century-old trade rule that allowed Americans to import small packages without paying duties has been eliminated by President Donald Trump‘s administration, which could disproportionately affect low-income households.

Why It Matters

The “de minimis” exemption, which applied to packages worth under $800 coming into the U.S., had long allowed goods to bypass customs duties and complex paperwork. On August 29, the Trump administration officially ended the rule, which covered 1.36 billion shipments valued at $64.6 billion in fiscal year 2024.

While the end of de minimis came for China—the largest inbound source of such shipments—and Hong Kong earlier this year, the August 29 change impacts every U.S. trading partner. As a result, more than 30 countries’ postal operators restricted or suspended shipments to the U.S. ahead of the policy change, including major trade partners such as India, Mexico, and Japan.

Supporters of the policy shift argue that it levels the playing field for domestic businesses and addresses concerns over unsafe imports. Trump described the de minimis exemption as “a big scam going on against our country, against really small businesses, and we’ve ended it.” The White House said the rule had also been exploited to evade tariffs and enables the import of illegal substances such as fentanyl.

What To Know

According to a 2024 National Bureau of Economic Research paper, eliminating de minimis could reduce consumer welfare by up to $13 billion each year, with lower-income households feeling the greatest impact.

The research found that the de minimis rule is a “pro-poor trade policy,” but its elimination flips it “from pro-poor to pro-rich.”

Shipments to the lowest-income zip codes face an average tariff of just 0.5 percent, compared with 1.5 percent for the wealthiest areas, the research says. In scrapping the rule, that balance flips, with tariffs for low-income communities projected jump to nearly 12 percent, while wealthier areas would see an increase of about 6.5 percent.

On top of that, every package would be charged an administrative fee, a cost that the research says would fall hardest on low-income households since they make more use of de minimis shipments.

“Lower-income households that rely on inexpensive imported goods such as clothing, household items, and phone accessories will be hardest hit,” Usha Haley, Barton distinguished chair in international business at Wichita State University, told Newsweek.

“For these consumers, even small increases in the prices of everyday items are a larger share of their discretionary spending, making the policy regressive in practice.”

Commercial carriers, which handle the majority of these parcels, must now file customs entries and pay tariffs. For postal services, flat fees of $80 to $200 are allowed temporarily, and will soon switch to the origin country’s applicable tariff rate. In many cases, sellers will pass on the cost of this to the consumer.

Sean Henry, CEO and co-founder at supply chain company Stord, agreed the burden of higher prices will be particularly visible in poorer communities. “A disproportionate amount of shipments entering the U.S. under the de minimis program were going to lower-income zip codes,” he told Newsweek.

“Consumers of a lower-income level have often found these extremely cheap products from platforms like Shein and Temu, and those product categories will feel the impact most acutely.”

Why Is De Minimis Being Axed?

The White House and U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) have both contended that de minimis rules have been exploited by bad actors.

According to the CBP, smugglers have exploited de minimis shipments to move drugs and weapons into the country. They often undervalue or mislabel goods, disguising dangerous items as harmless.

The White House has made similar assertions, saying that de minimis has encourages the evasion of tariffs and allowed the funneling of “deadly synthetic opioids as well as other unsafe or below-market products that harm American workers and businesses into the United States.”

What Happens Next

The end of de minimis won’t just impact America’s poorest, with all consumers facing price hikes on goods made outside of the U.S.

“In the short term, consumers are likely to see immediate price hikes,” Robert Khachatryan, CEO at Freight Right Global Logistics, told Newsweek. “Low-dollar items such as $10 accessories or fast-fashion staples will face double-digit percentage increases once merchandise processing fees and duties are applied.”

https://www.newsweek.com/lower-income-americans-warning-trump-de-minimis-2122766

Columbus Ledger-Enquirer: ‘Totally Unfair’: ACLU Calls For Migrant’s Release

Mexican immigrant Sergio Serna Ramirez and his wife, Kristina Ramirez, were reportedly detained by Customs and Border Protection (CBP) after the couple accidentally drove toward the Canadian border in Michigan. Advocates argued the case shows overreach and have called for humanitarian parole. Serna Ramirez has remained in ICE custody pending a final hearing, and Kristina claims she was held by CBP for three days.

The case remains ongoing and unresolved. Sergio Serna Ramirez is reportedly still in ICE custody at the Monroe County Jail near Detroit, Michigan, where he has been held for nearly three months. A final immigration court hearing could result in an order of removal to Mexico.

Ramirez said, “When we were detained, my husband, they said, ‘oh we’re going to let him out in 48 hours.’” She added, “My husband is not a murderer, my husband is not a criminal. My husband is a very loving and good person. I just am very upset, outraged by the injustice in this world. It just wrong how they have him there.”

Ramirez stated, “We have followed every law, we have jumped through every hoop and our lives are being derailed because we took one wrong turn.”

Serna Ramirez was reportedly transferred to an ICE facility at Monroe County Jail near Detroit. Serna Ramirez has lived in the Chicago area for around two decades and has a pending U.S. visa application.

ACLU of Illinois Communications Director Ed Yohnka and Ald. Byron Sigcho-Lopez have called for Serna Ramirez’s release on humanitarian grounds and criticized the case’s handling.

Yohnka said, “This is a human tragedy about one family but is also an example of system that has run amok.”

Ramirez said, “Without him, I’m heartbroken. I’m torn.” She stated, “It’s just totally unfair, not right.”

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/crime/totally-unfair-aclu-calls-for-migrant-s-release/ar-AA1LFN1S