Tag Archives: Trump Administration

Newsweek: Trump admin grapples with birthright citizenship dilemma

Posted on by
Reply

The Trump administration is seeking more time in federal court as it considers how to bring a challenge to birthright citizenship before the U.S. Supreme Court.

In a consent motion filed on August 19 in the District of Maryland, government lawyers requested an additional 30 days to respond to an amended complaint in CASA Inc. v. Trump.

The case contests executive order 14160, titled “Protecting the Meaning and Value of American Citizenship.” The order denies citizenship at birth when the mother is unlawfully present (or lawfully but temporarily present) and the father is not a U.S. citizen or lawful permanent resident.

Newsweek contacted the Department of Justice for comment by email outside regular working hours on Wednesday.

Why It Matters

The case goes to the core of the 14th Amendment’s citizenship clause, which for more than a century has guaranteed citizenship to almost everyone born on U.S. soil.

A successful challenge could affect hundreds of thousands of children born each year to undocumented parents, while also testing the limits of presidential power to redefine constitutional rights through executive orders.

With the Trump administration signaling that it plans to seek a Supreme Court review, the litigation has the potential to reshape immigration law and the broader debate over American identity.

What To Know

The plaintiffs, a coalition of immigrant-rights organizations led by CASA, amended their complaint in June.

On July 18, the government’s deadline to respond was extended to August 22. The new motion seeks to push that date back to September 22.

According to the filing, the delay is tied to the administration’s broader legal strategy.

The Justice Department acknowledged that multiple lawsuits were pending against the executive order across different jurisdictions. To resolve the matter more definitively, the solicitor general is preparing to ask the Supreme Court to take up the issue in its next term.

“To that end, the Solicitor General of the United States plans to seek certiorari expeditiously to enable the Supreme Court to settle the lawfulness of the Executive Order next Term, but he has not yet determined which case or combination of cases to take to the Court,” government attorneys wrote.

The administration emphasized that the extension request was not an attempt to stall the proceedings. “This request is not made for purposes of delay, and no party will be prejudiced by the relief requested herein, particularly because Plaintiffs consent to the same,” the motion said.

On August 7, the court in Maryland granted a classwide preliminary injunction, applying nationwide to members of the certified class.

Birthright Citizenship and the 14th Amendment

Executive order 14160 has drawn criticism from immigrant advocacy groups, which argue that birthright citizenship is guaranteed under the 14th Amendment.

The constitutional provision says, “All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States.”

The administration, however, has contended that the clause does not extend to the children of undocumented immigrants.

By moving toward a Supreme Court review, the administration appears to be seeking a definitive ruling on the scope of the citizenship clause. The outcome could have significant implications for immigration law and the legal status of U.S.-born children of noncitizen parents.

What People Are Saying

Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, criticizing the administration’s approach in the Supreme Court, said on May 15: “Your argument … would turn our justice system into a ‘catch me if you can’ kind of regime, in which everybody has to have a lawyer and file a lawsuit in order for the government to stop violating people’s rights.”

Justice Sonia Sotomayor, emphasizing constitutional precedent, added: “So, as far as I see it, this order violates four Supreme Court precedents.”

What Happens Next

If the Trump administration’s request for more time is approved, the government’s deadline would move to September 22. For now, a nationwide injunction continues to block the order, leaving it unenforceable.

Justice Department lawyers say they are considering which case to present to the Supreme Court for review in the next term, a move that could bring arguments before the justices in 2026. Both sides have agreed to the extension, and the government emphasized that no party would be harmed by the delay. While the extension keeps the litigation on hold, the broader fight over birthright citizenship is poised to escalate.

On June 27, the court ruled on nationwide injunctions in Trump v. CASA but did not decide the merits of birthright citizenship. The administration now plans to seek a full review next term on the lawfulness of the executive order itself. If the court grants the review, it will put the question of the core citizenship clause before the justices in a way not seen since United States v. Wong Kim Ark (1898).

Trump admin grapples with birthright citizenship dilemma
The Trump administration is seeking a 30-day delay as the DOJ maps the Supreme Court’s path to test birthright citizenship.

https://www.newsweek.com/trump-admin-grapples-birthright-citizenship-dilemma-2116126

LGBTQ Nation: Kristi Noem defends DHS speechwriter’s racist, antisemitic, anti-LGBTQ+ social media posts

Posted on by
Reply

Eric Lendrum has told followers to vandalize LGBTQ+ art displays and to stop LGBTQ+-inclusive education “by any means necessary.”

Eric Lendrum, a speechwriter for the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS), has expressed racist, antisemitic, and anti-LGBTQ+ views on social media and in podcast appearances as recently as this year. The DHS, led by Secretary of Homeland Security Kristi Noem, has defended Lendrum by pointing out his free speech rights.

Lendrum is currently listed as a DHS speechwriter. He previously worked as a press assistant for the Department of the Interior during the first Trump administration.

From December 2017 to March 2025 — the same month he reported started working at DHS — Lendrum also wrote for conservative website American Greatness, and hosted his The Right Take podcast from at least January 2021 to May 2023, according to NOTUS, which first reported on his hateful digital footprint.

In one December 2021 American Greatness post, he defended the MAGA rioters who attacked the U.S. Capitol building on January 6 as “peaceful protesters,” and compared what he described as the “dehumanization” of American conservatives to that of enslaved Africans in the U.S. and Jews in Nazi Germany.

On his podcast, Lendrum described seeing Democratic members of Congress “crouching under their chairs” during the January 6 insurrection as “gratifying.” In an October 2022 episode, he endorsed the white supremacist “great replacement theory” as “real.” The racist and anti-Semitic white supremacist theory claims that rich Jews want to “replace” white Americans and Westerners with non-white immigrants and people of color (especially Black people and Muslims) to fundamentally change the nation’s racial makeup and political culture.

As NOTUS notes, on an April 2023 episode, Lendrum vowed to “always properly deadname tr**ny freaks” and to continue using the anti-trans slur.

“I will keep calling them tr**nies because I know it’s derogatory, and I know they freakin’ hate it. That’s why I deadname them. That’s why I use their original pronouns,” he said. “You control the language. Don’t give these freaks an inch on the language.”

Even more disturbingly, he argued that “We need to eradicate transgenderism. Wipe it off the face of the Earth. Destroy it. Get rid of it.” Lendrum did clarify that he was “not saying get rid of the people. I’m saying eliminate the ideology. Cure these people.” However, as NOTUS notes, he did not include a similar disclaimer in a November 2024 X post calling for trans eradication.

“The evil ideology of transgenderism must be ERADICATED from the face of the earth, once and for all. Nothing of it must remain,” he wrote. “Real justice must be done.”

Much of Lendrum’s anti-LGBTQ+ rhetoric cited in the NOTUS report comes from his X account, @realEricLendrum, where he also described asylum seekers as “illegal scum” in a September 2023 post.

According to the outlet, his April 2023 post equated trans people to “child molesters.” That same month, he responded to trans activists protesting against Florida’s restrictions on teaching about sexuality and gender identity in schools, writing that “This must be stopped, by any means necessary.”

In a February 2024 post seemingly responding to the arrest of a 19-year-old for defacing a rainbow-colored intersection dedicated to the victims and survivors of the 2016 Pulse nightclub shooting, he called on “more people” to “go out and actively vandalize that hideous display, in a further show of solidarity and a middle finger to the gay agenda.”

In August 2024, he posted that being LGBTQ+ “literally is a choice.”

“There is no ‘gay gene,’” he wrote. “And if being ‘trans’ isn’t a choice, then why do people have to undergo certain treatments in order to ‘become trans’?” Almost all major American medical and psychological associations consider sexual orientation and gender identity to be determined by a combination of inborn genetics and external social factors that are primarily outside of a person’s choosing.

After Bishop Mariann Edgar Budde pleaded with President Donald Trump to have “mercy” on LGBTQ+ people and immigrants at a prayer service ahead of his second inauguration in January, Lendrum attacked Budde on X.

“Lock this freak up,” he wrote, adding that children who identify as LGBTQ+ “are being sexually and psychologically abused by their parents.” His rhetoric echoes that of numerous right-wing politicians and influencers who think that queer people and allies are “grooming” and “sexualizing” children simply by existing and acknowledging the existence of other queer individuals.

According to NOTUS, a description of Lendrum’s role as speechwriter on the DHS Office of Public Affairs’ website specifies that his duties include preparing “speeches, talking points, editorials, Congressional testimony, video scripts, web content and other written content” for DHS Secretary Kristi Noem. As the outlet notes, the agency has drawn criticism in recent weeks for a social media post aimed at recruiting Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents that appeared to reference a notorious 1978 White Nationalist book.

NOTUS and other outlets reported that DHS has declined to answer questions about Lendrum’s hateful comments or its vetting process, responding only with a link to the text of the First Amendment, which says (in part): “Congress shall make no law … abridging the freedom of speech.”

Kristi Noem defends DHS speechwriter’s racist, antisemitic, anti-LGBTQ+ social media posts – LGBTQ Nation
Eric Lendrum has told followers to vandalize LGBTQ+ art displays and to stop LGBTQ+-inclusive education “by any means necessary.”

https://www.lgbtqnation.com/2025/08/kristi-noem-defends-dhs-speechwriters-anti-lgbtq-social-media-posts

Daily Beast: Vance, Hegseth and Miller Branded ‘Nazis’ in Botched PR Stunt

Posted on by
Reply

Protesters heckled Trump’s top officials as they visited historic Union Station.

Vice President J.D. Vance, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, and White House Deputy Chief of StaffStephen Miller were met with a hostile welcome at Washington, D.C.’s Union Station on Wednesday.

Their visit came as the National Guard had been camped out around the iconic station as part of President Donald Trump’s crime crackdown in the nation’s capital.

Bystanders looked on as the trio was met with hecklers in the station’s marble lobby as they came confidently strolling through with their entourage.

“You’re an embarrassment to Ohio,” one woman could be heard shouting as Vance kept a smile plastered on his face.

“F***ing nazi,” another man wearing a backpack shouted while taking video on his phone as the group marched through.

“Get the f*** out of my city,” shouted a third man.

Others could be heard chanting “free DC” as video showed the group casually walking into Union Station’s Shake Shack restaurant.

Other protesters shouted about the war in Gaza and to “free Palestine.”

In another video taken of their entrance, a man could be heard shouting at Vance, “Oh look, it’s couch f—er. You going to f— a couch, buddy?” in a reference to the joke that plagued the vice president on the campaign trail.

Upon entering the restaurant, Vance mingled with some service members, many of whom said they were from South Carolina. He took a few pictures while thanking them for their service and joked that the visit was “a hell of a lot more fun” than what he did most days.

“We ought to be able to enjoy great American cities. That’s what we’re trying to do in the Trump administration,” Vance told reporters from inside the Shake Shack as protesters could still be heard in the background.

As they spoke, a box of burgers sat in front of them, and National Guard members surrounded them. Chants of “Free DC” could still be heard in the background.

“We’re committed to this mission just like the one at the southern border and in Los Angeles,” Hegseth said. “Our law enforcement officers deserve to be able to do their jobs safely.”

The defense secretary gestured to the box of cheeseburgers in front of him and declared he “always liked a good cheeseburger” when he was in uniform, so he was hopeful he could deliver a few of them.

The Trump administration announced earlier this month that it was deploying hundreds of National Guard troops to the nation’s capital to combat crime. Multiple Republican-led states, including West Virginia, South Carolina, Ohio, Mississippi, Louisiana, and Tennessee, have all rushed to send additional troops to D.C.

However, critics have observed that the service members have largely been stationed along the National Mall and at Union Station, two largely low-crime destinations visited by millions of tourists every year.

In an unhinged rant, Miller then said they were going to “add thousands more resources to this city to get the criminals and the gang members out of here.”

He argued they were going to ignore the “stupid white hippies” protesting, who he claimed should go home and “take a nap because they’re all over 90 years old,” despite the hecklers at Union Station appearing to be all different ages.

“It’s kind of bizarre that we have a bunch of old, primarily white people, who are out there protesting the policies that keep people safe when they never felt danger in their entire lives,” Vance angrily added.

Recapping his field trip on Fox News later that night, the vice president deflected on host Laura Ingraham’s description of the appearance as “eventful,” claiming instead he had heard from “a couple of friends” who said the area now “feels safer.”

“Living with lawlessness and disorder,” he added, “is fundamentally a question of political will.”

“If you’ve got the political will to enforce the law, you can make even cities like D.C. safe again, and that’s what we are demonstrating. And I hope that the American people take an important lesson from this because, obviously, D.C. is a federal city. New York, L.A., these places are not,” he said.

“I hope the American people just recognize that you don’t have to live with lawlessness. You don’t have to live with third-world murder rates. If you just take control of these cities, you can make them save places to live again.”

Vance, Hegseth and Miller Branded ‘Nazis’ in Botched PR Stunt
Protesters heckled Trump’s top officials as they visited historic Union Station.

https://www.thedailybeast.com/vance-hegseth-and-miller-branded-nazis-in-botched-pr-stunt

Newsweek: Donald Trump suffers major immigration legal blow

Posted on by
Reply

Afederal judge in Illinois has dismissed a lawsuit filed by the Trump administration that sought to block the state’s workplace privacy law on the grounds that it conflicted with federal immigration enforcement.

In a ruling issued on August 19, Judge Sharon Johnson Coleman of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois rejected the administration’s arguments, finding that the Illinois Right to Privacy in the Workplace Act is not preempted by federal immigration law.

Why It Matters

The ruling matters because it draws a clearer boundary between federal immigration power and state authority over workplace regulation. By rejecting the Trump administration’s effort to use immigration law to override Illinois’ privacy protections, Judge Sharon Johnson Coleman reaffirmed that states retain broad authority to govern employment relationships.

The decision safeguards workers’ procedural rights in the hiring process, could set a precedent for other states considering similar measures, and marks a significant check on the expansion of federal enforcement authority.

What To Know

The case centered on whether federal law—particularly the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986 (IRCA)—supersedes state-level employment protections. The administration argued that provisions of Illinois’ law regulating the use of the federal E-Verify system and protecting employees during the employment verification process interfered with federal immigration authority.

Coleman disagreed, concluding that the state law “is not expressly preempted by IRCA and does not intrude upon the federal government’s constitutional powers in the space of immigration and foreign affairs.” She added that the government’s “broad interpretation of its power to regulate matters of immigration would swallow the historic powers of the states over employment-related issues”.

The Federal Government’s Argument

The Trump administration claimed that several provisions of Illinois’ privacy law—including penalties for violations related to E-Verify—constituted sanctions on employers of unauthorized workers and therefore fell under IRCA’s preemption clause. That provision bars states from imposing civil or criminal sanctions on employers who hire or recruit unauthorized workers/aliens.

The Justice Department also argued that Illinois’ law, by imposing notification requirements and other conditions on the use of E-Verify, conflicted with the federal goal of deterring unauthorized employment.

At oral argument, however, Coleman noted that government lawyers struggled to identify precisely which sections of Illinois law they believed were preempted. In her ruling, she wrote that the administration’s interpretation of IRCA’s preemption clause was “broad to the point of absurdity.”

Judge’s Reasoning

Coleman emphasized that employment regulation has historically been a power of the states. “States possess broad authority under their police powers to regulate the employment relationship to protect workers within the State,” she wrote, citing Supreme Court precedent.

The judge found that Illinois’ law does not penalize employers for hiring unauthorized workers but rather regulates how employers use verification systems and ensures employees’ rights are respected during that process. “A person’s immigration or work authorization status is irrelevant to determine whether an employer has violated any of the provisions of the act,” Coleman explained.

She further rejected the administration’s conflict preemption argument, which claimed that Illinois’ law undermined federal objectives. The government suggested that the state’s notification rules could encourage unauthorized workers to evade detection. Coleman dismissed this as “simply too speculative a basis on which to rest a finding of pre-emption.”

Broader Implications

The ruling represents a significant legal setback for Trump’s immigration agenda, which has frequently sought to expand federal authority over state and local policies. By upholding Illinois’ privacy protections, the court reaffirmed the principle that federal power over immigration does not automatically override state employment laws.

The decision may carry consequences beyond Illinois. Other states have enacted or considered similar laws governing the use of E-Verify and employee privacy. Coleman’s opinion suggests that such measures, when designed to regulate employment rather than immigration status, may withstand federal challenges.

Newsweek contacted the Department of Justice for comment via email outside of regular working hours on Wednesday.

What People Are Saying

Judge Sharon Johnson Coleman wrote in her ruling that Illinois’ workplace privacy law “is not expressly preempted by IRCA and does not intrude upon the federal government’s constitutional powers in the space of immigration and foreign affairs.” She added that the administration’s interpretation of federal law was, “broad to the point of absurdity.”

Kyle Cheney of Politico wrote on X, August 20, 2025, “A federal judge in Illinois has thrown out the Trump administration’s lawsuit against the state that claims IL’s workforce privacy law conflicts with federal immigration enforcement.”

In a broader context, legal scholars and state officials have long debated the limits of federal power in immigration enforcement.

Ilya Somin, professor of law at George Mason University, told the Washington Post in 2017: “Trump and future presidents could use [the executive order] to seriously undermine constitutional federalism by forcing dissenting cities and states to obey presidential dictates, even without authorization from Congress. The circumvention of Congress makes the order a threat to separation of powers, as well.”

What Happens Next

The Trump administration is expected to appeal to the Seventh Circuit, with a possible path to the Supreme Court. For now, Illinois’ workplace privacy law remains in effect, and the ruling could inspire other states to adopt similar protections while intensifying debates over federal versus state authority.

Judge Coleman emphasized that federal immigration power “is not without limits,” and that preemption requires a clear conflict. By leaving Illinois’ law intact and denying an injunction, the ruling marks a notable legal setback for Trump’s immigration strategy.

Donald Trump suffers major immigration legal blow
Judge rejects Trump’s lawsuit, ruling Illinois’ workplace privacy law doesn’t clash with federal immigration power.

https://www.newsweek.com/donald-trump-immigration-legal-setback-illinois-workplace-privacy-2116468

Slingshot News: ‘A Lack Of Cooperation’: Secretary Kristi Noem Blames Local American Police For Her Department’s Own Failures In House Hearing

Posted on by
Reply
‘A Lack Of Cooperation’: Secretary Kristi Noem Blames Local American Police For Her Department’s Own Failures In House Hearing
Secretary Kristi Noem blamed local American police her Department’s own failures during a recent House hearing. Noem claimed that a ‘lack of cooperation’ was the reason for her department’s failures.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/opinion/a-lack-of-cooperation-secretary-kristi-noem-blames-local-american-police-for-her-department-s-own-failures-in-house-hearing/vi-AA1KRC27

Daily Beast: Gabbard’s Revenge Purge Immediately Runs Into a Major Problem

Posted on by
Reply

The Director of National Intelligence stripped more officials of their security clearances after Trump targeted his rivals.

Tulsi Gabbard may have broken the law by publicly identifying dozens of current and former officials while revoking their security clearances, according to a national security lawyer.

Gabbard revealed that 37 people have been targeted in the clearance purge ordered by President Trump, accusing them without evidence of “politicizing and manipulating intelligence, leaking classified intelligence without authorization, and/or committing intentional egregious violations of tradecraft standards.”

Gabbard made the announcement—which comes after Trump stripped the security clearance of his political opponents—by posting a memo from her office on X. The list of 37 individuals targeted includes intelligence officials who concluded that Russia interfered in the 2016 presidential election, as well as those accused by far-right activist Laura Loomer of lacking loyalty to Trump, according to Axios.

Mark Zaid, an attorney who represents intelligence officers and who is suing the Trump administration to have his own stripped security clearance restored, suggested Gabbard may have landed herself in legal trouble by making the memo public.

“Can you say ‘Privacy Act violation’? I certainly can,” Zaid wrote in a post on X. “Further proof of weaponization and politicization. The vast majority of these individuals are not household names & are dedicated public servants who have worked across multiple presidential administrations.”

Zaid—who previously represented a whistleblower who accused Trump of attempting to extort Ukraine for dirt on former President Joe Biden ahead of the 2020 election—told Axios that a person’s security clearance “is maintained in a protected Privacy Act System of records.”

He added the government “cannot simply release that information without written consent from the individual or the existence of a Routine Use, which I do not believe exists for this purpose.”

Those who lost clearances reportedly include officials who signed a letter supporting Trump’s first impeachment trial, when he was accused of threatening to withhold military aid to Ukraine unless President Volodymyr Zelensky agreed to investigate Hunter Biden’s business dealings ahead of the 2020 election.

Others were targeted online by Loomer, an extremist and conspiracy theorist who has taken credit for multiple people being removed from the Trump administration, citing reasons such as their prior service in the Obama or Biden administrations.

“Thank you, Tulsi! MORE SCALPS,” Loomer posted while sharing Gabbard’s memo.

In response to Zaid’s remarks, White House Spokesman Davis Ingle told the Daily Beast: “President Trump promised to end the weaponization of government against American citizens which is why Director Gabbard rightfully directed the revocation of 37 security clearances from current and former intelligence officials who abused their positions of public trust.”

The Trump administration has stripped numerous national security officials and political opponents of their clearances as part of the president’s campaign of retribution.

Those affected include Trump’s 2024 election rival, former Vice President Kamala Harris. New York Attorney General Letitia James—who prosecuted Trump for filing fraudulent financial filings for years—was also targeted, as was former president Joe Biden and his entire family.

The Office of the Director of National Intelligence did not immediately respond to a request for comment from the Daily Beast.

Gabbard’s Revenge Purge Immediately Runs Into a Major Problem
The Director of National Intelligence stripped more officials of their security clearances after Trump targeted his rivals.

https://www.thedailybeast.com/tulsi-gabbards-revenge-purge-immediately-runs-into-a-major-problem

HuffPost: This Republican Governor Has Declined To Send National Guard Troops To D.C.

Posted on by
Reply

Vermont’s Republican Gov. Phil Scott has declined to send the state’s National Guard to Washington, D.C., noting that he didn’t believe it to be a proper use of these troops. 

“In the absence of an immediate emergency or disaster that local and regional first responders are unable to handle, the governor just does not support utilizing the guard for this purpose, and does not view the enforcement of domestic law as a proper use of the National Guard,” Scott’s chief of staff Jason Gibbs told Vermont Public on Friday. 

Scott is the rare Republican leader who’s refused to bow to the Trump administration’s requests as the president has deployed National Guard and federal law enforcement to address what he’s described as a spiraling crime crisis in the capital. In reality, data shows that violent crime rates in the district have declined in 2024 and 2025, and Trump’s efforts have been criticized by Democrats as a “stunt” designed to distract from other controversies his administration is grappling with, like the Justice Department’s handling of the Jeffrey Epstein files.

Scott’s decision followed a Pentagon request for a “few dozen” of the state’s troops, according to Gibbs, and comes as six Republican-led states, including West Virginia, South Carolina, Ohio, Mississippi, Tennessee and Louisiana, have authorized the deployment of their National Guard to D.C. in the last week. 

All told, Trump has already deployed 800 National Guard troops to the city, and the states’ contributions could put that number upwards of 1,700. 

It’s not evident why more troops have been requested from different states and what function they will serve upon their arrival in D.C. 

A spokesperson for Tennessee Gov. Bill Lee told the Associated Press that the state’s National Guard would “assist with monument security, community safety patrols, protecting federal facilities, and traffic control.” Some troops “may be armed,” a Guard representative said Sunday.

“In this case, because it is being hyperpoliticized, the governor doesn’t feel like — and I believe the vast majority of Vermonters don’t feel like — it would be an acceptable and appropriate use of the National Guard,” Gibbs added in his comments to Vermont Public. 

A Scott spokesperson and a White House spokesperson did not immediately respond to a request for comment. A Pentagon spokesperson declined to provide additional comment. 

Gibbs noted that Scott would have viewed the situation differently if D.C. leaders had called for federal aid, which was not the case this time around. On Friday, the D.C. attorney general sued the Trump administration for its federal takeover of the leadership of the district’s police force. 

“This doesn’t make sense. The numbers on the ground and the district don’t support 1,000 people from other states coming to Washington, D.C.,” Mayor Muriel Bowser said on Monday. 

This also isn’t the first time that Scott has pushed back on the Trump administration’s attempts to use the state’s National Guard. Previously, Scott rejected a Defense Department request to utilize Vermont’s National Guard to assist Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents at detention facilities. 

This Republican Governor Has Declined To Send National Guard Troops To D.C.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/this-republican-governor-has-declined-to-send-national-guard-troops-to-d-c/ar-AA1KLFeF

Latin Times: Florida Republicans Remove ‘Deportation Depot’ Merchandise Over Complaints From Home Depot

Posted on by
Reply

A Home Depot spokesperson said the company had reached out to the party because it had not approved the use of its branding or logo

Florida Republicans have removed merchandise related to a new migrant detention center dubbed “Deportation Depot” after Home Depot complained about being linked to it.

“The Deport Depot” merchandise had a logo that was similar to The Home Depot, including the recognizable orange box and stenciled font, according to the Miami Herald.

Home Depot spokeswoman Beth Marlowe said the company had not approved the use of its branding or logo and “reached out to the Republican Party of Florida to resolve this issue,” she said.

The outlet noted that items were still for sale as of Saturday afternoon, with items ranging from $15 to $28 and sales going as political contributions to the party. However, they were removed hours after it published a story on the matter.

Governor Ron DeSantis said last week his administration is taking steps towards holding migrants at the North Florida detention center. “It is not going to take forever, but we are also not rushing to do this right this day,” he said.

The prison is located in a rural area between Tallahassee and Jacksonville. Officials intend to hold up to 1,300 migrants at the Baker Correctional Institution, which has been closed since 2021 due to staff shortages.

The decision comes as a federal judge in Florida judge is considering whether to order the shutdown of the immigrant detention center known as “Alligator Alcatraz” over claims that it could cause “irreparable” harm to the Everglades area in which it is set up.

The Miami Herald noted that the groups are seeking a preliminary injunction to stop operations at the site. They are Friends of the Everglades, the Center for Biological Diversity, Earthjustice and the Miccosukee Tribe.

They sued the Trump and DeSantis administrations, accusing them of dodging a federal law requiring an environmental review of the site before pursuing the initiative. The injunction would stop all operations and further halt construction until there is a verdict. Florida authorities have also sought to fundraise with merchandise related to the center.

Florida Republicans Remove ‘Deportation Depot’ Merchandise Over Complaints From Home Depot
The Republican Party of Florida removed deportation-themed merchandise following complaints from Home Depot

https://www.latintimes.com/florida-republicans-remove-deportation-depot-merchandise-over-complaints-home-depot-588508

Slingshot News: ‘I’m Not Gonna Tell You’: RFK Jr. Flees From Accountability, Refuses To Let Congress Know When Their Letters Will Be Answered During Hearing

Posted on by
Reply
‘I’m Not Gonna Tell You’: RFK Jr. Flees From Accountability, Refuses To Let Congress Know When Their Letters Will Be Answered During Hearing
In a budget hearing held by the House Energy and Commerce Committee several weeks ago, Congressman Frank Pallone (D-NJ) asked Secretary RFK Jr. when his many letters will ever get a response back from the HHS Department. “I’m not gonna tell you… I don’t know,” RFK Jr. replied.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/i-m-not-gonna-tell-you-rfk-jr-flees-from-accountability-refuses-to-let-congress-know-when-their-letters-will-be-answered-during-hearing/vi-AA1KNohl

Daily Mail: DHS under fire for controversial staffer comments

Posted on by
Reply

The Department of Homeland Security is defending the First Amendment rights of a staffer who has come under fire for posts and political commentary related to the Capitol riot. Before joining DHS, Eric Lendrum (pictured right) likened the political fallout conservatives faced from the January 6, 2021 rally to slavery and the Holocaust.

He slammed Democrats for ‘cowering’ under their desks as thousands of angry Americans descended on the Capitol that day. ‘There’s something so gratifying about seeing the images of these members of Congress — especially the Democrats — crouching under their chairs, putting on those stupid, like, bubble masks, those anti-gas bubble masks, and then taking selfies,’ Lendrum said on an episode of his podcast The Right Take just days after the riot.

He also said in a 2021 blog post on the conservative website American Greatness: ‘American conservatives are, right now, on a course for being every bit as ostracized and alienated from broader society as Jews were in the years leading up to Nazi Germany.’ The junior-level speechwriter at DHS also shared anti-immigrant rhetoric on multiple platforms before joining the second Donald Trump administration. In an October 2022 podcast episode, he endorsed the far-right ‘great replacement theory,’ which is a belief that nonwhite immigrants are diminishing the influence of white people across the world.

While a spokesperson for DHS declined to comment on the social media activity of a junior staffer before joining the agency, they instead sent the Daily Mail a link to the text of the First Amendment of the Constitution when asked for comment. Lnedrum did not respond to the Daily Mail’s request for comment on the reports detailing his online activity. Lendrum published on American Greatness until March 2025.

n his post-riot rant in 2021, he said conservative Americans are facing oppression like that faced by enslaved black people in America and Holocaust victims. ‘It has been said that the most surefire way to create an authoritarian regime is to completely dehumanize a significant portion of the population, so that their subsequent enslavement by the state will not face any larger resistance. It was true during slavery, it was true during the Holocaust, and it is true now,’ he wrote.

Lendrum has a relatively low profile, his employer and previous social media activity was first reported by NOTUS on Monday. The last time Lendrum posted to his X account was on the president’s birthday on June 14 this year when he published an image of himself alongside Trump. Lendrum has only 449 followers on X as of time of publication and appears to mostly use it recently to repost messages from Trump cabinet officials and allies. But he has used his X account in the past to share anti-immigrant sentiments.

He expressed lament with a New York Post headline saying that veterans were kicked out of hotels to make way for providing shelter to illegal ‘migrants’ during President Joe Biden’s term. ‘They are not migrants. They are not ‘undocumented.’ They are an invading army. The largest invasion in American history,’ Lendrum wrote on May 13, 2023 in a post to X. He added: ‘And what are you supposed to do with an invading army? Crush it, by any means necessary.’ Lendrum also claimed that asylum seekers are ‘scum.’

Before joining DHS, Lendrum also had a short stint as a press assistant at the Department of the Interior during Trump’s first term. ‘If I could work more closely with him, that is the one case in which I would ever go back into government work. Government work is not fun,’ Lendrum said in December 2022. And now, he’s back in Washington, D.C. for Trump’s second term working for one of the largest and most influential agencies in the federal government. A DHS speechwriter is responsible for preparing a myriad of public content for DHS Secretary Kristi Noem and her deputy. This includes ‘speeches, talking points, editorials, Congressional testimony, video scripts, web content and other written content,’ according to a description of the job.

DHS under fire for controversial staffer comments
advertisement

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/dhs-under-fire-for-controversial-staffer-comments/ss-AA1KN9Jf