Newsweek: Donald Trump’s new census could be bad news for Texas


Is there anything that King Donald can’t seek to manipulate and destroy?


President Donald Trump‘s proposal for a new national census that excludes people living in the United States illegally could reduce Texas’ political power by reducing both its number of Electoral College votes and seats in the House of Representatives.

Why It Matters

The Trump administration is pushing for a new census despite the next one not being due until 2030. Excluding those in the U.S. illegally from the figures would reduce the political representation of states with disproportionately high illegal migrant populations, such as California and Texas.

Citing “two people with knowledge of the effort,” The Texas Tribune reported that the administration’s primary goal behind the new census was to boost Republicans politically, though some experts have expressed skepticism over whether this would happen.

What To Know

On August 7, Trump said he had instructed the Department of Commerce to begin work on a new national census that would exclude illegal migrants, using data from the 2024 presidential election as a baseline.

Census Bureau data is used to determine how many seats each state gets in the House of Representatives and also how many Electoral College votes it gets during presidential elections. So if a state loses population disproportionately once illegal migrants are excluded, it would see its political influence decrease.

In 2024, the Department of Homeland Security estimated that in January 2022 there were 10,990,000 people residing in the U.S. illegally. It found that California had the largest illegal migrant population with 2,600,000 people, followed by Texas with 2,060,000, Florida with 590,000 and New Jersey with 490,000.

Speaking with Newsweek, Joshua Blank, who heads the Texas Politics Project at the University of Texas at Austin, said a new census without illegal migrants would reduce the state’s population and therefore its House representation. He added that Texas “did nothing to promote census participation” in 2020.

Blank said: “While, ostensibly, this move would reduce Texas’ population size for the purpose of congressional districts, it’s probably the case that it’s less than it would if Texas were to have engaged in a serious effort to get a good count in the first place.”

In terms of the nationwide political effect, Blank added: “This would apply to other states, including other states with large immigrant populations, and those that actually sought to get an accurate count, like California. So the overall exchange of seats, since the number of overall congressional seats remains fixed, is pretty hard to game out.”

Trump’s new census plan would almost certainly face legal challenges, with critics arguing that it violates the 14th Amendment, which states that seats in the House should be based on “counting the whole number of persons in each State.”

What People Are Saying

Gil Guerra, an immigration policy analyst at the Niskanen Center, told Newsweek“These numbers matter enormously for apportionment—states like California, Texas, and Florida have substantial undocumented populations that currently contribute to their congressional representation.”

Speaking with The Texas Tribune about the president’s new census proposal, Robert Warren, a demographer at the Center for Migration Studies, said: “It wouldn’t shift enough [House] seats to make any difference, and that’s been true for five straight censuses.”

President Donald Trump wrote on Truth Social on August 7: “I have instructed our Department of Commerce to immediately begin work on a new and highly accurate CENSUS based on modern day facts and figures and, importantly, using the results and information gained from the Presidential Election of 2024. People who are in our Country illegally WILL NOT BE COUNTED IN THE CENSUS. Thank you for your attention to this matter!”

A Department of Commerce spokesperson told Newsweek: “The Census Bureau will immediately adopt modern technology tools for use in the Census to better understand our robust Census data. We will accurately analyze the data to reflect the number of legal residents in the United States.”

What Happens Next

If Trump pushes ahead with his plan, it will almost inevitably spark a major legal battle. Even if the courts approve, experts agree that the overall effect on American politics is hard to determine, though states with a high illegal migrant population—such as Texas—will likely lose some influence.

https://www.newsweek.com/donald-trump-new-census-could-bad-news-texas-2114326

Law & Crime: Judge shreds Trump admin for ‘nonsensical’ bid to terminate 28-year policy that protects immigrant children in federal custody

A federal judge in California has shot down an attempt by the Trump administration to scrub away the government’s 28-year-old Flores Settlement Agreement, which calls for court-mandated oversight on the treatment of immigrant children in federal custody.

U.S. District Judge Dolly Gee issued a 20-page order on Friday, keeping the 1997 agreement in place as Justice Department lawyers “fail to identify any new facts or law” that warrant its termination “at this time,” according to the Barack Obama appointee.

The administration had previously tried terminating the Flores agreement in 2019 at the end of Donald Trump‘s first term, but was unsuccessful then, too. Gee reportedly called a hearing last week on the matter “deja vu” as the government tried propping up similar arguments.

“The court remains unconvinced,” Gee wrote in Friday’s order. “There is nothing new under the sun regarding the facts or the law.”

Under the Flores Settlement Agreement, immigrant children must be held at “state-licensed” facilities — treated properly and humanely — before being released into the custody of family members or guardians “as expeditiously as possible,” per Gee’s order. The settlement is named after Jenny Lisette Flores, a 15-year-old detainee who sparked a class-action lawsuit to be filed in 1985.

The Trump administration recently argued that the Flores agreement was no longer needed because Congress had approved legislation to help deal with the issues the settlement addressed. It also claimed that government agencies had implemented practices and standards to ensure youths were being treated properly.

“The legal basis for the agreement has withered away,” DOJ lawyers argued in a May 22 motion for relief. “Congress enacted legislation protecting UACs [unaccompanied alien children], and the agencies promulgated detailed standards and regulations implementing that legislation and the terms of the FSA,” the lawyers said, blasting the agreement as an “intrusive regime” that has “ossified” federal immigration policy.

“The legal and policy landscape has also changed beyond recognition,” they added.

Gee noted Friday how she had heard this all before.

“These improvements are direct evidence that the FSA is serving its intended purpose, but to suggest that the agreement should be abandoned because some progress has been made is nonsensical,” the judge blasted.

“Incredulously, defendants posit that DHS need not promulgate regulations containing an expeditious release provision because ‘this Court has interpreted [expeditious release] to apply to accompanied children,'” Gee explained. “But ‘the FSA was intended to provide for prompt release of unaccompanied children.’ This is plainly incorrect and ignores the rulings of at least three separate courts.”

Gee concluded her order by saying it was ultimately the Trump administration that “continues to bind itself to the FSA by failing to fulfill its side of the parties’ bargain.”

Lawyers for immigrant children named in the class action complaint that spurred all this have said Trump’s second term has seen similar violations of the Flores agreement that have been alleged in the past.

“In CBP facilities across the country, including in cases documented by class counsel in New York, Maine, Illinois, Ohio, Arizona, Texas, and California, plaintiffs report being held for days and sometimes weeks in restrictive, traumatic conditions,” the lawyers said in a June 17 motion to enforce the FSA. One parent, whose allegations were included in the motion, described how they and their child were held at a facility where “the rooms have hard walls, like cement, and there is a window facing the hall but you cannot go out or see the sun,” per the motion.

“We are never allowed to go out,” the parent said. “The children keep telling us, ‘This is not America.’ They feel imprisoned and confused. They are seeing the sun for the first time in this interview room. They both ran to the window and stared out, and my son asked, ‘Is that America?'”

The plaintiffs’ lawyers accused the Trump administration of wanting to be released from the settlement “not because they have complied with and will continue to observe its fundamental principles, but because they want the flexibility to treat children however they wish,” according to the June motion.

DOJ officials did not respond to Law&Crime’s requests for comment Sunday.

San Francisco Chronicle: ICE arrests of people with no criminal convictions have surged in Northern California

As it has nationwide, ICE is arresting far more suspected immigration violators this summer than before

ICE arrests in Northern California have surged this summer, a Chronicle analysis of deportation data shows. That’s in keeping with national trends.

The Department of Homeland Security, in coordination with Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), claimed on Friday that they are “cleaning up the streets,” targeting what they continued to call the “WORST OF THE WORST” — including “illegal alien pedophiles, sex offenders, and violent thugs.”

But the numbers tell a more complicated story.

Since the beginning of 2025, Immigration and Customs Enforcement has arrested roughly 2,640 people in its San Francisco “area of responsibility” — a 123% increase compared to the final seven months of the Biden administration. The pace picked up dramatically in June and July.

That area spans a large portion of California, from Kern County northward, and also includes Hawaii, Guam, and Saipan. The Chronicle’s analysis focused only on arrests made within California.

Notably, under the Trump administration, arrests of people without criminal convictions have risen sharply. Many of those taken into custody have only pending criminal charges — or none at all. In June, about 58% of arrests involved individuals with no prior convictions. That figure dipped slightly to 56% in July, but just a few months earlier, the numbers were far lower: In December, before President Donald Trump took office, only 10% of arrests involved people without a criminal conviction.

Among those without a conviction, ICE has arrested a large number of individuals whose only suspected violation is entering the country illegally or overstaying their visa. Although administration officials often call these undocumented immigrants “criminals,” being in the U.S. without legal status is a civil violation, not a crime. 

Arrests of convicted criminals are also up, though not as sharply. Those convictions varied widely — from serious and violent crimes like child sexual assault, homicide, and drug trafficking, to lesser charges such as traffic violations and low-level misdemeanors.

ICE officers raided a home in East Oakland on Tuesday and detained at least six people, including a minor and a person with a severe disability, according to an immigration attorney. In June, Oakland police confirmed to the Chronicle that ICE alerted them of its activity, but ICE did not provide additional details. 

Also, for the first time in the Bay Area, ICE detained two U.S. citizens during a protest on Aug. 8, outside the agency’s San Francisco field office at 630 Sansome St. Aliya Karmali, an Oakland immigration attorney, told Mission Local that she hasn’t seen “ICE arresting [U.S. citizen] protestors in the Bay since entering the legal field nearly 20 years ago.”

The picture is similar nationwide. National data from the Transaction Records Access Clearinghouse at Syracuse University indicates that the number of people detained by ICE — excluding those arrested by Customs and Border Protection — saw a 178% increase between Jan. 26 and July 13. 

Since the beginning of 2025, ICE arrests of people with no criminal convictions has skyrocketed, with a 370% increase from the end of January to mid-July. In June, ICE held more people for immigration violations than for pending charges for the first time — a trend that continued into July.  

Reports indicate that ICE has been targeting workers in mostly Latino neighborhoods and on jobsites — sometimes based on vague tips from people claiming they saw undocumented immigrants, but often with no clear reason at all. It has also arrested thousands of people in public places. 

Though the administration views the increased immigration enforcement as necessary for public safety or border security, many believe the arrests are fueling fear, separating families, disrupting labor markets and local economies, and doing little to actually solve the country’s broader immigration problems.

“It seems like they’re just arresting people they think might be in the country without status and amenable to deportation,” said Julia Gelatt, associate director of the U.S. immigration policy program at the nonpartisan Migration Policy Institute, in a June Reuters story.

https://www.sfchronicle.com/bayarea/article/ice-arrests-deport-data-20818148.php

America Uncovered: What Trump’s Proposal Could Mean for the 14th Amendment

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/what-trump-s-proposal-could-mean-for-the-14th-amendment/vi-AA1HPtzp

Daily Beast: Shallow Trump Pressures Zelensky to Wear a Suit to the White House

The Ukrainian president is reportedly planning to ditch his military-style sweatshirt for a black jacket to avoid another White House showdown.

All eyes will be on Volodymyr Zelensky when he arrives at the White House on Monday afternoon—if only to see what he’s wearing when he meets President Donald Trump.

Ukraine’s wartime president found himself the target of a pile-on in his last Oval Office visit in February, when Vice President JD Vance accused him of being “disrespectful” to the U.S. by not wearing a suit and tie.

Keen to avoid a repeat, White House officials have reportedly been pressing Zelensky to dress up for Monday’s crucial talks at the White House, where Zelensky and Trump will be joined a slew of major European leaders.

Citing two sources inside the Trump administration, Axios reported Monday that the White House had explicitly asked Ukrainian officials whether Zelensky would be wearing a suit to the Oval Office.

The White House did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

One source told the outlet that Zelensky would be wearing the same sort of black jacket he wore to meet Trump at the NATO summit in June, rather his usual army-style sweatshirt. “Trump was happy about that,” Axios reported in its newsletter.

Monday’s talks, which come on the heels of Trump’s summit meeting with Vladimir Putin in Alaska on Friday, could help bring an end to Europe’s bloodiest conflict since World War II.

But all anyone in MAGAworld seems to have cared about over the past few days is what Zelensky will be wearing when he shakes Trump’s hand.

In a scathing preview of the Oval Office talks, Real America’s Voice host Brian Glenn told viewers on Sunday: “Two questions right now. One: Will we have peace? But two: Will Zelensky wear a suit?”

The channel, which calls itself the “authentic voice and passion of real people all across America,” then played a clip from Zelensky’s infamous visit to the White House earlier this year when Glenn himself sparked a brutal pile-on from the room by criticizing Zelensky for what he was wearing.

Zelensky’s casual battle dress was reminiscent of that worn by previous wartime leaders during visits to the White House, including Britain’s prime minister during WWII, Winston Churchill. But the February meeting descended into acrimony, with Vance leading what many observers considered an ambush of Zelensky.

Zelensky will be joined at the White House by European leaders including Britain’s Keir Starmer and Emmanuel Macron of France who will try to persuade Trump that the pressure should be on Putin to end the conflict he started in 2022. Casualties are widely reported to be past the million mark after more than three years of attritional fighting.

The Oval Office talks come just days the Alaska summit, at which no real progress appears to have been made—and which some White House officials reportedly left looking ashen-faced.

Trump rolled out the red carpet for Putin, who has largely been ostracized by the international community since his full-scale invasion of Ukraine in 2022. After greeting him like an old friend, Trump let Putin talk first at a post-summit press conference—with no actual questions allowed—and even game him a lift in his armored “Beast” limousine.

It remains clear, however, that Putin is still clinging to his maximalist demands for sovereignty over large parts of Ukraine and subsequent demilitarization.

Trump is expected to greet Zelensky today at 1 p.m. ET, with a series of meetings with other European leaders scheduled throughout the afternoon.

https://www.thedailybeast.com/shallow-trump-pressures-zelensky-to-wear-a-suit-to-the-white-house

Salon: Florida desensitized my family to cruel and unusual punishment

It’s not just at Alligator Alcatraz. Horrific conditions exist throughout the Sunshine State’s prisons

In the weeks since Alligator Alcatraz opened deep within the Everglades in southern Florida, there have been mounting reports of the horrific conditions inside: Maggots in the food, sewage overflowing near beds, people having to remove fecal matter from the toilets with their bare hands due to a lack of water. To protest the conditions, detainees have launched a hunger strike, which likely continues, despite the Department of Homeland Security’s attempts to deny and suppress information about it.

Construction at Alligator Alcatraz could be halted indefinitely in the wake of a lawsuit filed by environmental groups and an Indigenous tribe arguing the detention center’s development on protected wetlands violates environmental laws. Another suit brought by the ACLU claims detainees’ constitutional rights are being violated. Florida seems undeterred. The state is planning to build a second detention center at a correctional institution that was shuttered in 2021 after numerous reports of excessive violence and abuse of inmates by guards. Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis is calling the facility “the deportation depot.”

This scary reality is snowballing in its brutality as President Donald Trump and his administration, Republican politicians and large swaths of the American population continue to broaden the cultural profile of who we deem dangerous enough to lock up. Several states are developing similar concentration camps, including one at Fort Bliss in El Paso, Texas, and an Indiana facility dubbed “The Speedway Slammer.” I’m not surprised. 

I’m also not surprised that Florida is leading the way in building these facilities. The U.S. has the largest incarcerated population in the world, and Florida locks up a higher percentage of its people than any independent democratic country on earth. To date, no other state has spent as much effort collaborating with Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) during the second Trump administration. Following DeSantis’ special session on immigration in January, the Sunshine State passed laws requiring local jurisdictions to enter into agreements with ICE and offering a $1,000 bonus to local officers participating in ICE raids and operations. Immigration detention in Florida quadrupled in less than six months. As the state runs out of space, Florida jails are being used to house detainees, exacerbating overcrowded conditions and forcing people to sleep on the floor. When ICE staff opposed the plans to use Florida jails as ICE detention facilities because it would violate current federal regulations and standards, a local sheriff dismissed the claims, calling them “woke.” 

Prisoners in the Florida Department of Corrections system are often held under many of the same inhumane conditions present at Alligator Alcatraz. My uncle is one of them. 

I’ve visited him in facilities up and down the state: In detention centers; maximum security units; psych wards; private correctional institutions; facilities with barbed wire fences, search dogs and rooftops decorated with armed guards; places in towns so small the only store for miles is a Piggly Wiggly.

I don’t pretend that many of Florida’s prisoners are not guilty of the crimes they’ve been charged with, and I won’t downplay the severity of the crimes committed — my uncle’s included. Unlike the detainees held in Alligator Alcatraz, they have ostensibly been given due process, though we could argue about the justice system’s version of the right that is often applied to Black, brown and poor people. Regardless of the circumstances, however, I believe every person deserves to be treated with dignity and humanity. I don’t believe that violence and cruelty has ever nudged anyone toward a better version of themselves.

One Wednesday in May, I woke up to frantic voicemails from my mom. My uncle had been stabbed multiple times, and she wasn’t sure if he was alive or dead. It had happened two days earlier, but she’d just found out that morning from a fellow prisoner’s girlfriend. Details were spotty. My uncle was an inmate at Dade Correctional Institution, a facility in south Miami deemed the “deadliest in Florida” by the Miami Herald following an investigation into a record number of inmate deaths in 2017. An earlier investigation into the facility revealed that officers had made “sport” of tormenting mentally ill inmates, including forcing inmates into a specially rigged, scalding hot shower as punishment for unruly behavior. 

My uncle had been transferred to the facility from another prison a few years ago because Dade Correctional Institution has an Americans With Disabilities Act unit and he, a lifer, has gone deaf from decades of loud, echoing conditions. 

Since he’s deaf, he didn’t hear the man — or men — coming up on him with the knife. Despite our many requests, the Florida Department of Corrections has not gotten him a hearing aid that doesn’t beep loudly in his ears, so he prefers to stay in his own, soundless world. 

I imagined him walking into the same yard where we’ve sat for visits, thinking about how he’ll get to pet his favorite rescue dog later, the one corrections officers  bring in for training. He prefers the dogs to humans, saying they’re the only redeeming thing about the place. In my mind, he was thinking about the dog when he was surrounded by the other men. He was thinking about the dog as the knife pierced his skin, plunging into the back of his neck and then into his ear. I imagined and reimagined the scene, watching him get caught by surprise, his eyes widening at the pain. 

Did he fall to the ground? Call out for help? The woman who called my mom said four other inmates were also stabbed, and that corrections officers were involved, but it’s impossible to verify. 

There are so many questions. Did the officers provide the knife? Join in on the stabbing? Simply look the other way?

My mom and siblings and I called and emailed each of the prison’s classification officers, coordinators and wardens. This was not the first time in my uncle’s 30-year incarceration that we’ve had to hound the Florida Department of Corrections for answers about his well-being. It was not the first time we’ve received calls from another inmate’s girlfriend or relative about my uncle. There was the time, a few years ago at another facility, when he was taken to the medical unit for lesions in his stomach. He was kept on a gurney in a hallway for days without treatment. He was in so much pain he thought he might die, so he had a friend get in touch with us to let us know. 

Then, like now, we called and tried to get information from the staff and were given the run around. The person with answers was always on break. The warden was never available. We were treated like nuisances for caring. They informed me I was not on “the list” to receive information, a bold-faced lie. I pleaded with anyone I could get on the line. They gave me one-word answers and told me to calm down in an almost bored tone. I cried, begging them to have some compassion, to imagine it was their loved one who was hurt. 

I canceled a few work calls. Without thinking much about it, I texted my co-worker and told her my uncle was stabbed. She expressed alarm and concern. I kept calling, relaying information to my mom and siblings. I reached out to the media, including the writer who investigated Dade Correctional Institution years ago. She recommended that I request copies of my uncle’s inmate file, which is public record, and any incident reports involving his name. I did this and got nothing. I tried again — still, nothing. Unfortunately, none of this was newsworthy, and my sources inside were not considered credible, so the reporters I spoke with didn’t have much to go on. I reached out to an advocacy group and received a reply three months later stating that, due to a lack of resources and too much demand, they could not help me.

A coordinator at the prison eventually told us my uncle was alive, that he had received medical treatment and was being held in solitary confinement for his safety. We were given nothing else. When I asked why we weren’t notified of the incident, I was told that it’s the inmate’s responsibility to notify loved ones — as if he could call us after being stabbed multiple times, and while he was in solitary confinement with a disability that makes it difficult to communicate by phone. 

Several weeks later, my uncle was transferred to another facility at the opposite end of the state. He had 28-day-old sutures he contemplated removing himself because they itched so badly. My fury was exhausting. My family and I stopped talking about the incident and went back to business as usual, putting money on his commissary, sending him books and figuring out how to get messages to him via the new facility’s byzantine communications systems. I dropped any hope of trying to get information about what happened, even from my uncle, who, speaking on a recorded line, just said, “Shit happens in here.” The upside, for him: At least the new facility has air conditioning.

The Eighth Amendment to the Constitution prohibits cruel and unusual punishment, including the denial of necessary medical care for inmates. But thanks to the Prison Litigation Reform Act of 1996, it’s incredibly challenging for inmates to bring suits against this treatment, and just about 1% of all cases actually win. One ongoing lawsuit against Dade Correctional Institution concerns the lack of air conditioning that led to four inmates dying last year in Miami, where heat indexes can rise up to 115 degrees Fahrenheit. The Florida Department of Corrections sought to dismiss the lawsuit, arguing that the deaths were not caused by heat, but a federal judge allowed the lawsuit to proceed. The majority of Florida’s prison housing units are not air-conditioned.

I imagine the detainees in Alligator Alcatraz without adequate shelter or air conditioning in the middle of hurricane season in a South Florida swamp. I think of the cavalier way Republican lawmakers have denied claims about the detention camp’s conditions. I think of Isidro Perez, the 75-year-old Cuban man who died in ICE custody at the Krome Detention Center in Miami in July. I think of the elderly prisoner in a wheelchair who begged for help in the heat at Dade Correctional Institution and died after being refused medical attention. I think of all the lives we have lost to the normalization of cruel punishment, and how many more there are to lose. 

Over the last 50 years, our bureaucratic desensitization to incarceration has grown largely unchecked. Prisons are built quietly, out of sight from the public. Visiting my uncle, regardless of where he is, requires a long drive, countless forms and hours waiting, adherence to seemingly arbitrary rules that differ from place to place and can change at any moment without notice. The point is isolation, to forget about these people. To systematically dehumanize them — first prisoners, then immigrants — and to watch as the public starts to believe they don’t deserve to be treated like humans.

https://www.salon.com/2025/08/17/florida-desensitized-my-family-to-cruel-and-unusual-punishment

Inquisitr: Trump Admin’s New Crackdown Demands Immigrants Prove ‘Good Moral Character’ Beyond Just Staying Out of Jail

New USCIS rule gives officers sweeping power to judge applicants’ morality, from traffic tickets to tax returns

When it comes to immigrants who want to become citizens of the United States, the second-term government of Donald Trump has turned on the moral compass. Although “good moral character” has long been an essential part of the naturalization process, the DOHS is now looking into more detailed areas of an applicant’s life as opposed to just checking boxes, as has been routine for so long. 

U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) issued a new directive on Friday directing officers to give much more weight to whether an applicant’s character truly embodies American values, which go beyond just avoiding jail time.

As a result, immigrants who wish to become citizens after getting a green card will have to submit to a more extensive and private assessment of their contributions, behavior, and even violations of traffic laws!

For many years, the term “good moral character” has been a part of U.S. immigration law. Naturalization applicants already had to prove they were not “habitual drunkards,” d–g traffickers, or convicted murderers.

Even so, the Trump administration wants officers to start digging deeper.

The memo encourages officers to perform a “holistic assessment” of an applicant’s life rather than just relying on a mechanical checklist that looks for serious crimes. Community involvement, caregiving responsibilities, lawful employment, time spent in the United States, tax history, and academic achievements must now be taken into account throughout the review process.

To put it simply, you might rack up moral points by raising your children, filing your taxes, and helping out at the local food bank. Yet, because of the increased scrutiny, even legally allowed behaviors that were previously thought of as trivial, such as constantly reckless driving, harassment, or “aggressive solicitation,” can now be used against you.

Officers have more discretion as a result of this change. However, they also have more freedom to reject applicants for reasons that are not going to be clear to them at the time of application or even after it gets rejected. 

According to the USCIS memo, “acts that are contrary to the average behavior of citizens in the jurisdiction where aliens reside” may be taken into account. It also means that a person’s bid for citizenship may be seriously limited by a poor driving record in California or unpaid child support in Texas — all pointing to their so-called “moral character.” 

The goal is to raise the standard for what it means to be an American. The policy seeks to “restore integrity” to the naturalization process, according to agency chief spokesman Matthew Tragesser, who spoke to ABC News. According to him, “U.S. citizenship is the gold standard of citizenship — it should only be offered to the world’s best of the best.”

Donald Trump’s larger political message (that citizenship is a privilege rather than a right and ought to be saved for people who actively uphold American values instead of just adhering to the law) is made possible by this framing.

The new policy, which puts stricter standards and gives immigration officers greater flexibility, is also in line with the administration’s ongoing attempts to restrict possible paths to citizenship.

Critics perceive a more cynical element at work, though. Joe Biden-era USCIS official Doug Rand contends the new rule was created to scare new applicants away. Rand claims that the administration is, in essence, discouraging legal immigrants from applying for citizenship by broadening the definition of “bad moral character” to include minor, non-criminal behavior.

Rand told ABC News, “They’re trying to increase the grounds for denial of U.S. citizenship by (…) torturing the definition of good moral character to encompass extremely harmless behavior.”

Between 600,000 and 1 million immigrants become citizens of the United States each year, the Irish Star reports

Years of legal residency, civics and English proficiency exams, and strict background checks are already part of the complex process. Now, staying true to constantly changing standards is more vital than avoiding crimes when defining “good moral character.”

Kansas City Star: Trump Suffers Double Legal Blow

District Judge Jennifer Thurston has ordered the release of Syrian asylum seeker Salam Maklad and barred her rearrest without constitutional safeguards. Advocates have raised concerns that contested grant rules are disrupting essential services, while officials have noted that the cases have tested federal authority.

In addition to Thurston’s decision, U.S. District Judge William Smith has blocked new Justice Department grant conditions related to diversity, equity, inclusion, and transgender rights. Both rulings represent legal blows to the Trump administration, as they directly challenge and overturn key policy actions.

Both rulings, issued this month, limit the administration’s ability to enforce its immigration and social policy priorities. Critics say this highlights judicial checks on executive authority despite Republican control in Congress and the White House.

Thurston wrote, “Respondents are PERMANENTLY ENJOINED AND RESTRAINED from re-arresting or re-detaining Ms. Maklad absent compliance with constitutional protections, which include at a minimum, pre-deprivation notice—describing the change of circumstances necessitating her arrest—and detention, and a timely bond hearing.”

Thurston added, “At any such hearing, the Government SHALL bear the burden of establishing, by clear and convincing evidence, that Ms. Maklad poses a danger to the community or a risk of flight, and Ms. Maklad SHALL be allowed to have her counsel present.”

Thurston ordered Maklad’s release after an ICE check-in triggered her detention, noting she has no criminal history and is not a flight risk. She barred ICE from rearresting Maklad without notice of changed circumstances and a timely bond hearing.

Smith granted preliminary relief to 17 nonprofits challenging updated Office on Violence Against Women grant terms. He found the conditions likely arbitrary under federal law.

Smith wrote, “On the one hand, if the Court does not grant preliminary relief, then the Coalitions will face real and immediate irreparable harm from the challenged conditions, conditions which the Court has already concluded likely violate the APA.”

Smith added, “This could result in the disruption of important and, in some cases, life saving services to victims of sexual assault and domestic violence. On the other hand, if the Court grants preliminary relief, then the Office will simply have to consider grant applications and award funding as it normally does.”

Democracy Forward President Skye Perryman said, “The Justice Department should be exploring what they can be doing to keep people and communities safe, not threatening funding for local and community organizations with proven results.”

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/trump-suffers-double-legal-blow/ss-AA1KGtBW

Politico: DC sues over Trump administration’s attempted takeover of city police

Washington officials are suing the Trump administration over what they call a “baseless power grab” after the Department of Justice ordered a new “emergency” head of District police.

“By illegally declaring a takeover of MPD, the Administration is abusing its temporary, limited authority under the law,” Schwalb wrote in an X post Friday. “This is the gravest threat to Home Rule DC has ever faced, and we are fighting to stop it.”

The lawsuit, filed in federal court, warns that the attempted takeover could “wreak operational havoc” on the Metropolitan Police Department because of the confusion about who has operational control. The city’s lawyers say the push by President Donald Trump and Attorney General Pam [“Bimbo#3”] Bondi violates the law in multiple ways — exceeding the president’s legal power to intervene in city affairs and rescinding policies adopted by local government.

They’re asking a federal judge to immediately rescind Bondi’s attempted takeover and effort to rewrite Washington police policies, declaring them to be unlawful. It’s unclear how quickly a judge will act, but the emergency nature of the filing could lead to proceedings as soon as Friday.

The suit is the biggest pushback from city officials since Trump invoked a provision of the Home Rule Act — the 1970s law that allows for limited self-governance by Washington’s government — that allows the president to direct the Metropolitan Police Department’s services to address “special conditions of an emergency nature.”

The case was assigned to U.S. District Judge Ana Reyes, a Biden appointee known for her take-no-prisoners approach from the bench. Reyes, most notably, blocked Trump’s transgender military ban before her injunction was paused by the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals. Amid the litigation, the Justice Department filed a complaint against Reyes for her pointed comments to government attorneys — though she at times also praised their advocacy and made similarly pointed comments to lawyers for the transgender service members.

In a declaration accompanying the city’s bid for an immediate restraining order, D.C. Police Chief Pamela Smith said the administration’s gambit is “endangering the safety of the public and law enforcement officers.”

“In my nearly three decades in law enforcement, I have never seen a single government action that would cause a greater threat to law and order than this dangerous directive.”

The suit underscores that no president in history has invoked the authority to manage the city’s police department. And the city’s lawyers say the president’s power to do so requires cooperation between city officials and the federal government, not a hostile takeover.

Bondi on Thursday issued an order that directed Drug Enforcement Administration head Terry Cole to assume “all the powers and duties” of the city’s police chief as the new “Emergency Police Commissioner,” “effective immediately.”

[“Bimbo#3”] Bondi’s order also purported to rescind or suspend several Washington police orders — including one issued by Smith earlier on Thursday that allowed for limited cooperation with federal immigration authorities.

Washington Mayor Muriel Bowser and Schwalb — both Democrats elected by Washington residents — insisted late Thursday that [“Bimbo#3”] Bondi could not legally disrupt the typical chain of command for MPD officers by requiring them to report to Cole.

“Therefore, members of MPD must continue to follow your orders and not the orders of any official not appointed by the Mayor,” Schwalb wrote in a letter Thursday to Smith that was circulated by Bowser. “Regardless of the [“Bimbo#3”] Bondi order, no official other than you may exercise all the powers and duties of the Chief of Police.”

White House spokeswoman Abigail Jackson said Democrats’ attempts to “stifle” [“Bimbo#3”] Bondi’s orders are “par for the course” for the party.

“The Trump Administration has the lawful authority to assert control over the D.C. Police, which is necessary due to the emergency that has arisen in our Nation’s Capital as a result of failed leadership,” Jackson said in a statement.

A Department of Justice spokesperson declined to comment.

Trump on Monday issued an executive order invoking the Home Rule Act, insisting that the District was overrun by violence. He also deployed the National Guard to the city.

But before [“Bimbo#3”] Bondi’s order Thursday looking to replace the MPD chief, city officials have largely limited their criticism of the Trump administration, noting that Washington was in a fairly unique situation that gave the federal government broad powers and authorities.

“The feds have an outsize role in D.C., we all know that,” Bowser told POLITICO Wednesday morning. “Right now, having a surge of officers enhances our MPD forces on a temporary basis. We’re going to stay focused on hiring more MPD or, when this temporary surge is over, figuring out more permanent partnerships to tap into when we need a surge of officers.”

But Trump’s Monday press conference went far beyond what his executive order said, with the president saying his administration would “take our capital back.”

“Giving us additional resources is a good thing, but that’s also quite different than federalizing our police force,” D.C. Council Chair Phil Mendelson said Wednesday in an interview. “Donald Trump is not going to tell our police how to police.”

Lawmakers on Capitol Hill have introduced dueling legislation over Trump’s moves. Rep. Anna Paulina Luna (R-Fla.) announced a resolution Friday to grant Trump “the authority to maintain federal control of the Metropolitan Police Department (MPD) in Washington, D.C. for as long as necessary to restore law and order.”

Democratic lawmakers also introduced a joint resolution Friday to terminate the administration’s control of D.C. police by voiding Trump’s proclamation of a crime emergency in Washington. But without control of either chamber of Congress, the effort among Democrats is almost certainly futile.

“Trump has made clear that his efforts in D.C., where 700,000 taxpaying American citizens lack the protections of statehood, are part of a broader plan to militarize and federalize the streets of cities around America whose citizens voted against him,” said Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-Md.) in his statement.

https://www.politico.com/news/2025/08/15/dc-police-trump-lawsuit-00511086

Tampa Free Press: Turf War In The Capital: D.C. Attorney General Declares Federal Order On Immigration Unlawful

A.G. Rejects Federal Takeover of Police, Declares City “Not Legally Obligated” to Follow Order

The nation’s capital is the scene of a high-stakes legal and political showdown after D.C. Attorney General Brian Schwalb fired a shot across the bow of the federal government, declaring the city is “not legally obligated” to comply with an executive order aimed at dismantling its sanctuary policies.

The clash began Thursday when Attorney General Pam [“Bimbo #3”] Bondi issued an executive order that sought to end the city’s protections for undocumented immigrants and place the Metropolitan Police Department (MPD) under federal control. The order even named Drug Enforcement Administrator chief Terrence C. Cole as the new head of the MPD.

But in a swift and sharp rebuke, Schwalb penned a letter to MPD Chief Pamela Smith, urging her to ignore [“Bimbo #3”] Bondi’s directive. “It is my opinion that the [“Bimbo #3”] Bondi order is unlawful, and that you are not legally obligated to follow it,” Schwalb wrote in a letter shared by D.C. Mayor Muriel Bowser on social media.

Schwalb’s letter reinforced the local chain of command, reminding Chief Smith that she was “duly appointed by the Mayor and confirmed by the Council” and that MPD members must follow her orders—not those from a federally appointed official.

The dramatic back-and-forth unfolds as the Trump administration continues its federal takeover of the city, citing rampant crime as the justification for deploying federal law enforcement and National Guard troops.

Earlier on Thursday, Chief Smith had already signaled a shift, issuing a memo that increased cooperation with Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE). That memo, praised by Department of Homeland Security officials as an “important first step,” still maintained some restrictions, prohibiting officers from arresting individuals solely on immigration warrants.

But [“Bimbo #3”] Bondi’s subsequent order went much further, rescinding not only those restrictions but also putting the federal government in charge of the city’s police force—a move that local leaders say oversteps federal authority and infringes on D.C.’s limited autonomy.

The Department of Justice and the MPD have remained silent on the matter, leaving the city in a state of legal limbo. The outcome of this unprecedented dispute could have far-reaching implications, setting a precedent for the balance of power between the federal government and local jurisdictions across the nation.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/turf-war-in-the-capital-d-c-attorney-general-declares-federal-order-on-immigration-unlawful/ar-AA1KB4B4