MSNBC: Judge reinstates South Dakota professor who called Charlie Kirk a ‘hate spreading Nazi’

The art professor “demonstrated that he is likely to succeed on the merits of his First Amendment claim,” a federal judge wrote.

A University of South Dakota art professor can keep his job — for now, at least — despite his private Facebook post in which he called Charlie Kirk “a hate spreading Nazi” after Kirk was fatally shot while speaking at a Utah college.

A judge’s temporary restraining order keeping Phillip Michael Hook in his position while his lawsuit proceeds highlights that at least some employers may have overstepped legally in taking actions against employees for their speech about Kirk, the Trump-allied activist who has been eulogized as a free speech advocate. It also reinforces that Attorney General Pam Bondi was incorrect when she attempted to single out so-called hate speech as something that the First Amendment doesn’t protect.

Explaining her temporary ruling in Hook’s favor Wednesday, U.S. District Judge Karen Schreier reasoned that the professor’s speech “is entitled to First Amendment protection” and that the school failed to produce “any evidence of disruption” in response to Hook’s post. Such evidence wouldn’t necessarily justify his firing, but it would add a layer to the analysis that the Clinton appointee determined she didn’t have to examine here.

Hook wrote in his Sept. 10 post, which he made while at home and not working:

Okay. I don’t give a flying f*** about this Kirk person. Apparently he was a hate spreading Nazi. I wasn’t paying close enough attention to the idiotic right fringe to even know who he was. I’m sorry for his family that he was a hate spreading Nazi and got killed. I’m sure they deserved better. Maybe good people could now enter their lives. But geez, where was all this concern when the politicians in Minnesota were shot? And the school shootings? And Capitol Police? I have no thoughts or prayers for this hate spreading Nazi. A shrug, maybe.

He wrote in a follow-up post that day, while still at home and not working:

Apparently my frustration with the sudden onslaught of coverage concerning a guy shot today led to a post I mow [sic] regret posting. I’m sure many folks fully understood my premise but the simple fact that some were offended, led me to remove the post. I extend this public apology to those who were offended. Om Shanti.

Republican state officials spoke out against the professor and supported his firing. The university told Hook that it intended to fire him and that he would be placed on leave in the meantime. He filed a lawsuit alleging unconstitutional retaliation against core political speech.

Opposing the restraining order in a court filing ahead of Schreier’s ruling, university officials wrote that Hook’s post “angered many people, both internal and external” to the university. They also said that a restraining order is unnecessary because even if Hook succeeds in his claim, he can get reinstatement and back pay.

Schreier nonetheless ordered Hook reinstated through Oct. 8, when the judge will hold a preliminary injunction hearing on the next steps in the case. For now, she wrote, the professor “has demonstrated that he is likely to succeed on the merits of his First Amendment claim.”

https://www.msnbc.com/deadline-white-house/deadline-legal-blog/charlie-kirk-social-media-professor-fired-south-dakota-rcna233718

Reuters: Trump signs order targeting antifa as a ‘terrorist organization’

  • Trump designates antifa a ‘terrorist organization’
  • Critics warn of potential free speech attack
  • Legal experts question constitutionality of designation

U.S. President Donald Trumpsigned an executive order on Monday calling the antifa movement a “terrorist organization,” the White House said, after promising actions targeting left-wing groups following Charlie Kirk’s assassination.

Kirk, a prominent conservative activist with close ties to Trump, was assassinated on September 10 while speaking on a college campus in Utah. A 22-year-old technical college student has been charged with Kirk’s murder.

Investigators are still looking for a motive and have not said the suspect operated in concert with any groups. But the Trump administration has used the killing as a pretext to revive years-old plans to target left-wing groups they regard as being hostile to conservative views.

Antifa, short for anti-fascist, is a “decentralized, leaderless movement composed of loose collections of groups, networks and individuals,” according to the Anti-Defamation League, which tracks extremists.

“While some extreme actors who claim to be affiliated with antifa do engage in violence or vandalism at rallies and events, this is not the norm,” it says on its website.

Trump’s 370-word executive order directs “all relevant executive departments and agencies” to “investigate, disrupt, and dismantle any and all illegal operations” conducted by antifa or anyone who funds such actions, according to the White House.

“Individuals associated with and acting on behalf of Antifa further coordinate with other organizations and entities for the purpose of spreading, fomenting, and advancing political violence and suppressing lawful political speech.”

Federal law enforcement officials already investigate violent and organized crime associated with a variety of hate groups and ideological movements.

The U.S. government does not currently officially designate solely domestic groups as terrorist organizations in large part because of constitutional protections.

But a Justice Department official with knowledge of discussions on the issue said Trump’s order would unlock expansive investigative and surveillance authorities and powers.

The person, who declined to be named, said the designation would allow the U.S. government to more closely track the finances and movements of U.S. citizens and to investigate any foreign ties of the loose network of groups and nonprofits the Trump administration views as antifa.

FOCUS IS ON FOREIGN FUNDING

Critics of the administration have warned it may pursue an attack on free speech and opponents of the Republican president.

The FBI’s Counterterrorism and Counterintelligence Divisions will be used to track finances – both domestic and foreign sources of funding – and attempt to identify the central leadership of antifa, the official said. FBI surveillance and investigative operations are normally restricted in how they can target U.S. citizens.

“The big picture focus is on foreign money seeding U.S. politics and drawing connections to foreign bank accounts,” a White House source familiar with the plans told Reuters.

“The designation of antifa gives us the authority to subpoena banks, look at wire transfers, foreign and domestic sources of funding, that kind of thing,” the White House source said.

It was not clear which individuals would be the target of such a probe.

Political violence experts and U.S. law enforcement officials have previously identified far-right attacks as the leading source of domestic violent extremism. Trump administration officials have sought to portray left-wing groups as the main drivers of political violence in their remarks since Kirk’s death.

Legal experts have said the domestic terrorism designation may be legally and constitutionally dubious, hard to execute and raise free-speech concerns, given that subscription to an ideology is not generally considered criminal under U.S. law.

During the first Trump administration there were at least two failed efforts to designate antifa a terrorist organization, according to internal Department of Homeland Security communications viewed by Reuters.

https://www.reuters.com/world/us/trump-sign-order-designating-antifa-terrorist-organization-2025-09-22

Newsweek: Tucker Carlson urges “civil disobedience” if Trump DOJ targets hate speech

Tucker Carlson warned in a special episode of his show on Tuesday that “civil disobedience” could erupt should the Trump administration and other “bad actors” use Charlie Kirk’s death as a means to attack free speech.

Why It Matters

Kirk, 31, co-founder and executive director of the national conservative organization Turning Point USA, was fatally shot September 10 during a speaking engagement at Utah Valley University in Orem, Utah. Immediately following his death, President Donald Trump ordered flags to be at half-staff, and in the days since, some conservatives have openly called for stricter free-speech barriers, including on college campuses.

U.S. Attorney General Pam [“Bimbo #3”] Bondi said and later defended the Department of Justice‘s intent to crack down on “hate speech” nationwide, saying threats of violence are federal crimes under the U.S. Constitution. [“Bimbo #3”] Bondi’s remarks have been met with vitriol from people on both sides of the political aisle, with many quoting Kirk’s own words and sentiments regarding the sanctity of free speech.

What To Know

Carlson opened Wednesday’s episode of The Tucker Carlson Show, a tribute to Kirk called “America After Charlie Kirk,” featuring conservative and liberal guests, including Megyn Kelly and Cenk Uygur, with a near 35-minute introduction about the former conservative commentator’s legacy and how free speech is essentially more vital than ever.

“Consider what it means if you don’t respect free speech, which is another way of saying free conscience—the right of other people to make up their own minds about the basic questions of what is right or wrong, and to express their views on those issues,” Carlson said.

“If you don’t respect the right of other people to do that, and if you take steps to prevent them from doing that, what are you really saying? You’re saying, “I don’t think you have a soul. You’re a meat puppet I can control. I think you’re an animal, maybe a sub-animal. You’re a slave.'”

Carlson then invoked [“Bimbo #3”] Bondi into the argument, referencing her recent remarks on free speech and so-called hate speech in the wake of Kirk’s murder.

Kirk would not have objected to anything more than Bondi’s words of purported defense of free speech, Carlson said, adding that perhaps she “didn’t think it through and was not attempting to desecrate the memory of the person she was purporting to celebrate.

“You hope Charlie Kirk’s death won’t be used by a group we now call bad actors to create a society that was the opposite of the one he worked to build,” Carlson said. “You hope that! You hope a year from now, the turmoil we’re seeing in the aftermath of his murder won’t be leveraged to bring hate speech laws to this country.

“And trust me…if that does happen, there is never a more justified moment for civil disobedience than that—ever, and there never will be. Because if they can tell you what to say, they’re telling you what to think, there is nothing they can’t do to you because they don’t consider you human. They don’t believe you have a soul.”

Jimmy Kimmel Suspension

On Wednesday, ABC announced it had suspended Jimmy Kimmel Live! indefinitely following backlash over comments host Jimmy Kimmel made about Kirk.

“We hit some new lows over the weekend with the MAGA gang desperately trying to characterize this kid who murdered Charlie Kirk as anything other than one of them and doing everything they can to score political points from it,” Kimmel said on air.

Following Kirk’s death, Kimmel called the murder “senseless,” and the longtime talk show host had also issued a message of love to Kirk’s family in an Instagram post.

Kimmel’s suspension came hours after FCC Chairman Brendan Carr publicly criticized Kimmel’s remarks and suggested regulatory consequences. The move also coincides with Nexstar Media Group’s pending $6.2 billion merger with Tegna, which is subject to FCC approval—raising questions about whether corporate and regulatory pressures influenced the network’s response.

In the aftermath of the Kirk shooting, some conservatives have praised the firing of individuals from their respective jobs after making comments online that were deemed in poor taste.

Other conservatives have lauded Kirk and advocated for statues to be erected in his honor.

What People Are Saying

Ryan McCormick, managing partner at New York-based Goldman McCormick public relations, told Newsweek: “The abrupt termination of Jimmy Kimmel’s show seems perplexing considering how valuable it had been to ABC. According to TVREV, it ranked as the network’s 10th best ad earner, delivering 11.8 billion national TV ad impressions.

“For something like this to happen, it would likely seem that the legal implications of Kimmel’s controversial statements must either be substantial, the reputational fallout from Kimmel’s recent comments was too severe to contain, or ABC had been planning to do this all along but was waiting for the right moment. From a PR perspective, it seems the die was cast for this day to come when Kimmel made his program politically polarizing (permanently narrowing the audience size).”

New York trial attorney Nicole Brenecki told Newsweek: “If a network parts ways with a host because of something they said, it’s typically a business or contractual decision, not a First Amendment violation. The U.S. Constitution protects individuals from government censorship, but private companies have their own standards and are generally free to make programming choices—even if those choices spark public debate about free expression.”

What Happens Next

One week after Kirk’s shooting and death, tensions remain high and conversation continues surrounding free speech and political violence.

https://www.newsweek.com/tucker-carlson-jimmy-kimmel-abc-trump-free-speech-2131881

Daily Mail: Fatima Payman declares that Charlie Kirk was an ‘awful person’ after he was assassinated

Senator Fatima Payman has described Charlie Kirk as an ‘awful person’ in a video in which she appears to make light of his assassination. 

Kirk, a 31-year-old father of two and controversial conservative commentator, was shot in the neck last week during a rally at Utah Valley University. He died a short time later.

The independent senator for WA responded to Kirk’s death in a live TikTok video, recorded at some point over the last week.

‘What do I think about Charlie Kirk and obviously his assassination?’, she told her nearly 195,000 followers. 

‘I think he was a pretty awful person and he doesn’t deserve all the recognition he’s getting.’

She added: ‘It would have been best to not have him assassinated and for him to remain a footnote in the Trumpian era of the United States. 

‘But yeah, so, not cool. Yeah, Charlie Kirk got shot and he’s RIP – whatever you want RIP to stand for! Some people will say it’s not peace. Fill in the blanks people, fill in the blanks.’

Her video has received swift condemnation, with One Nation Leader – and longtime Payman enemy – Pauline Hanson claiming it exposes her ‘radical leftist ideology’.

‘Fatima Payman mocking the death of Charlie Kirk isn’t just vile, it’s revealing,’ Senator Hanson said. 

‘When the mask slips, this is what the left shows us: no compassion, no decency, only contempt. And yet they lecture the rest of us about unity and respect. 

‘Remember this moment the next time anyone from the left starts lecturing from atop their moral high horse.’

A spokesperson for Senator Payman did not reveal what other possible meaning of ‘RIP’ she was referring to.  

‘Senator Payman condemns all forms of political violence, and the level of violence we are seeing in the United States is frightening,’ the spokesperson added. 

‘The Senator extends her sympathies to Charlie Kirk’s young family. For them, this is a terrible tragedy, and they deserve compassion in their grief.’

The spokesperson insisted that Senator Payman ‘notes that since Mr Kirk’s death, there has been a wave of commentary revisiting his statements and public positions.

‘The Senator will not engage in attempts to recast or glorify Mr Kirk’s record. Her focus remains on condemning violence, supporting victims of hate speech, and standing for respectful, democratic debate,’ the spokesperson added. 

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-15106055/Fatima-Payman-Charlie-Kirk-awful-person.html

Raw Story: Bipartisan fury spreads after ‘evil’ Trump treats domestic violence as ‘no biggie’

President Donald Trump downplayed domestic violence in a Monday speech as part of his White House Religious Liberty Commission — and was hit by swift condemnation.

Not only were onlookers outraged by the president’s dismissal of spousal abuse, some also called out Trump’s own long history with women. The so-called “Access Hollywood” tape, for example, recorded Trump bragging that he can grab women’s genitals without consent.

Trump had been complaining that domestic crimes were being counted in Washington, DC — which, he said, was diminishing the success of him sending in troops to tackle crime.

“If a man has a little fight with the wife, they say, this was a crime, see?” he added. “So now I can’t claim 100%.”

His comment was made on the same day that an appeals court ruled unanimously against Trump’s appeal of a defamation case in which he relentlessly attacked E. Jean Carroll publicly, claiming she was lying when she claimed he sexually assaulted her in a department store.

It also happens while Trump is being criticized for his administration working to conceal the files around the investigation of Jeffrey Epstein, who killed himself after being arrested for sex trafficking and child molestation.

“Just the president Benedict Donald co-signing that your husband beating you or forcing you to have sex against your will is ‘like no biggie,'” wrote actor Rachel True on X.

The Voter Protection Project account on X characterized it, “Donald Trump just said domestic violence shouldn’t be a crime.” The group noted it was “curious to see how MAGA will try to spin this.”

Politico columnist Jonathan Martin expected the upcoming spin would be, “Look, he was on the Old Testament section of the speech.”

Rep. Yvette Clarke (D-N.Y.) posted a screen capture of a reporter in which biographer Harry Hurt III said that he acquired Ivana Trump’s divorce deposition in which she alleged that Trump raped her.”

Republican and Bulwark publisher Sarah Longwell called it, “Just a casual dismissal of domestic violence as a crime.”

Professor of economics and public policy at the University of Michigan, Justin Wolfers, posted, “Let me say what the President won’t: Domestic violence is not okay. It’s immoral, illegal and abusive, and no real man is okay would do it, approve of it, or minimize it.”

“Utah is one of the worst states in the nation for women’s equality. Republicans here will defend against those claims forcefully, but they won’t back away from their support of a president that endorses domestic violence. Their claims are hollow,” wrote Utah state Sen. Nate Blouin.

Lawyer Mark Ramos called the comment, “Grossly irresponsible. And un-Christian. Yet *that’s who he is* – zero change from his entitled, amoral, “grab ’em” bully mindset. If you supported him before for whatever policy or party loyalty or false promises, it’s not too late to stop ignoring his vile idiocy. Your choice.”

“That ‘see’ at the end is as evil as the statement because it frames bs as empirical evidence. Smh,” said college faculty member Antoine Hardy.

Analyst Julie Roginsky wrote on X, “Of course the man whose wife accused him or rape and tearing out chunks of her hair would say this.”

Researcher Will Stancil called on officials to say something. “Every single Democrat should instantly condemn him for this and demand a retraction and apology. They should demand Republicans condemn it too, although they’ll be too cowardly to do it. Blow it up. He’s supporting domestic violence – it’s grotesque and nightmarish,” he wrote on X.

https://www.rawstory.com/trump-domestic-violence-2673970568

Washington Post: RFK Jr. says anyone who wants a covid shot can get one. Not these Americans.

Pharmacies and doctors are struggling to adjust to a new regulatory environment for updated coronavirus vaccines that are no longer broadly recommended.

Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. told senators last week that anyone can get a new coronavirus vaccine. But many Americans are finding the opposite.

Confusion is rippling through the health care system as pharmacies and doctors try to adjust to providing a vaccine that is no longer broadly recommended. Americans’ experiences vary widely, from easily booking appointments to having to cross state lines to access the shots, according to more than 3,200 submissions to The Washington Post’s request for readers to share their experiences.

Chain pharmacy locations in some parts of the country have yet to stock the shots or are turning away patients seeking the updated vaccines manufactured to protect people from the worst effects of new strains of the coronavirus. In some states, they require prescriptions, a step that has largely not been required since vaccines became widely available in early 2021.

Even more confusing: Pharmacies are reaching different conclusions about whether they’re allowed to administer coronavirus vaccines, even in the same state. And some states, including New York and Massachusetts, have scrambled in recent days to rewrite their rules to make it easier to get shots.

Many patients puzzle about whether they qualify to get the shot at all, or if they remain free as in years past.

Officials in the Trump administration have insisted that the new coronavirus vaccines remain available to those who want them and have blasted those who have suggested otherwise. Some Republican leaders are casting doubt on the safety of the shots, while some Democratic governors are rushing to preserve access — underscoring the nation’s deepening political divide over vaccines.

In Washington, D.C., Vernon Stewart, a 59-year-old retired parking enforcement officer, spent Wednesday riding his bike to see a doctor to get a prescription for the vaccine and to find a pharmacy where he could get it, only to be told the shot was not available. At one CVS, Stewart was seated in the chair with his sleeve rolled up when a nurse emerged to tell him his Medicaid insurance plan didn’t cover it.

On Friday morning, he hopped on the Metro train to Temple Hills, in Maryland — a state where CVS is not requiring prescriptions. He didn’t have to show his insurance card and paid nothing for the shot. He left with a bandage on his arm and a free bag of popcorn.

“It shouldn’t have to be this hard,” Stewart said Friday. “It was such a hassle. But I found a way.”

Doctors have the option to provide coronavirus vaccines “off label” to lower risk groups without approval from the Food and Drug Administration. Amid the fierce debates about coronavirus vaccines and low uptake of the latest versions, plenty of Americans want them.

Some, like Stewart, simply want to protect their health, despite not being considered at high risk. Many care for elderly or immunocompromised people and don’t want to get them sick. Some want to be immunized before traveling abroad or to reduce their risk of long covid.

Research has shown that annual coronavirus vaccinations reduce hospitalization and death, especially in people with weaker immune systems because of their age and underlying conditions. Health officials in the Trump administration argue that a universal recommendation is no longer warranted, because clinical trials have not demonstrated the vaccines are effective at reducing infection or transmission in younger and otherwise healthy people who are at low risk of hospitalization. Past research into updated coronavirus vaccines suggests they confer short-term partial protection against infections and can reduce transmission by reducing viral loads and symptoms.

Under Kennedy, the FDA in August narrowed approval of updated coronavirus shots to those 65 and older and people with underlying conditions that elevate their risk of severe disease. Typically, a Centers for Disease Control and Prevention advisory committee meets soon after such an announcement — often a few days later — to recommend which Americans should get coronavirus vaccines. The recommendations, which previously applied to everyone ages 6 months and older, compel insurers to pay for the vaccines.

But this year, the CDC panel was thrown into turmoil when Kennedy fired its members and replaced them with his own picks, most of whom have been critical of coronavirus vaccines. The panel is now scheduled to meet Sept. 18-19.

The vast majority of Americans receive coronavirus shots at pharmacies. More than a dozen states limit the vaccines that pharmacists can give without a doctor’s prescription to only those recommended by the CDC advisory panel, according to the American Pharmacists Association, complicating efforts even for those who are seniors or have preexisting conditions as approved by the FDA.

Five Democratic-led states — Colorado, Massachusetts, New Mexico, New York and Pennsylvania — have recently issued orders to pharmacies to provide coronavirus vaccines without a prescription.

At CVS, the nation’s largest pharmacy chain, prescriptions are still required for coronavirus vaccines in Louisiana, Maine, New Mexico (where the order has yet to take effect), Utah and West Virginia. Patients in higher-risk groups can receive them through CVS Minute Clinics to bypass prescription requirements in Arizona, Florida, Georgia, North Carolina, Virginia and D.C.

The nation’s other two largest pharmacy chains — Walgreens and Walmart — have not provided a list of states where prescriptions are required to get the vaccine.

In a combative appearance before the Senate Finance Committee on Thursday, Kennedy bristled when Sen. Maggie Hassan (D-New Hampshire) accused the Trump administration of taking steps that deny people vaccines.

“Everybody can get the vaccine. You’re just making things up,” Kennedy said. “You’re making things up to scare people, and it’s a lie.”

In Virginia, Elaine Cox said she and her husband asked their doctor for a prescription before leaving Saturday for a vacation in Italy. The office declined because it hadn’t received CDC guidance. Cox, 68, suffers from chronic lung disease, and her nephew died of the viral infection in 2022.

“I was crying this afternoon about this,” she said on Thursday. “My family takes [covid] very seriously.”

Pharmacy employees have given conflicting instructions about how to get coronavirus vaccines, patients report.

In San Antonio, 78-year-old Brant Mittler was told at a CVS Minute Clinic that he needed a prescription on Monday, even though the pharmacy includes Texas among its no-prescription states. The next day, a pharmacist at the same clinic told him it wasn’t needed.

In states where CVS does not require prescriptions, coronavirus vaccine appointments aren’t available for younger, healthier people outside the recommended categories. But the list of qualifying medical conditionsincluding physical inactivity, being overweight or a history of smoking, is so long that nearly anyone who wants a shot should be able to get one, said Amy Thibault, a CVS spokeswoman.

“If you’re five pounds overweight, you qualify,” she said. “If you’ve smoked a cigarette once, you qualify.”

Some people seeking prescriptions from their doctors face pushback.

In Louisville, Stephen Pedigo said his primary care doctor recommended against receiving the vaccine, arguing that covid is mild and that the vaccine has “a lot of complications,” including heart problems, according to a screenshot of their messages.

The most recent CDC guidance says coronavirus vaccination is “especially important” if you are 65 or older and notes vaccines underwent the most intensive safety analysis in U.S. history.

Pedigo, who is 66 and has undergone a heart valve replacement, insisted, and the office gave him the prescription. He received the shot at a CVS on Friday. “I trust the vaccines are safe,” Pedigo said.

Doctors offices also have reported challenges helping patients get vaccinated.

In Raleigh, North Carolina, pediatrician Mary-Cassie Shaw said her office has preordered from Moderna hundreds of shots, at $200 a dose, but worries that insurers won’t provide reimbursement.

Families for the past month have been asking for coronavirus shots to go along with flu vaccines, she said.

One 12-year-old immunocompromised girl went to CVS but needed a prescription from Shaw — who was asked by the pharmacist to rewrite the prescription to include certain diagnosis codes indicating why the patient needed the vaccine.

“I have to do the legwork to come up with the codes that might qualify them,” Shaw said. “It’s a huge barrier. It’s ridiculous.”

Vaccination rates for the latest coronavirus shots have been low, particularly for people not considered at high risk, according to CDC estimates. For adults, uptake of the 2024-2025 vaccine ranged from 11 percent for younger adults to nearly 44 percent for those 65 and older. Roughly 13 percent of children between 6 months and 17 years received the shot.

The most effective way to increase vaccine uptake is to make it easier for people to get the shots, said Noel Brewer, professor of public health at the University of North Carolina Gillings School of Global Public Health. In states such as North Carolina, the added step of getting prescriptions will prompt many people to not bother, he said.

“They might even just hear about other people having a hassle and decide to go back another time and never get back to it,” said Brewer, who studies patient behavior in regard to vaccines.

Last week, California, Hawaii, Oregon and Washington announced plans to form a “health alliance” to coordinate vaccine recommendations based on advice from national medical organizations rather than the federal government, because, they said, federal actions have raised concerns “about the politicization of science,” according to a joint statement.

Massachusetts Gov. Maura Healey (D) announced Thursday that her state would be the first to require insurance companies to cover vaccines recommended by the state’s Department of Public Health, even if the CDC does not. Washington state government officials on Friday recommended coronavirus vaccines for people ages 6 months and older.

At 59, Brewer doesn’t fall into the category of people for whom the FDA recommended updated coronavirus vaccines. Instead, Brewer said, he will wait until the fall, when he might travel to a blue state.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/health/other/rfk-jr-says-anyone-who-wants-a-covid-shot-can-get-one-not-these-americans/ar-AA1M32EI

NBC News: Utah violinist released from ICE detention on bond

Donggin Shin, a 37-year-old violinist who has played with the Utah Symphony, was being held in a Colorado detention center more than 500 miles from his home.

A Utah violinist who has played with high-profile orchestras has been released on bond after being detained by Immigration and Customs Enforcement last month.

Donggin Shin, 37, was apprehended by immigration authorities in a hotel parking lot while he was on a work trip in Colorado and placed in ICE detention on Aug. 18. His father brought him to the U.S. from South Korea when he was a child and he lives in Salt Lake City, according to his attorney, Adam Crayk.

Shin, who goes by the name John, was held at the Denver Contract Detention Facility in Aurora, Colorado — more than 500 miles away from his home — according to an ICE database. He was released on $25,000 bond on Tuesday.

“I never thought I would have to feel what it’s like to be shackled on my ankles and my wrist, feeling like some kind of a serious criminal, as if I have murdered someone,” Shin said at a press conference Friday, according to KSL-TV, an NBC affiliate based in Salt Lake City.

“I was absolutely terrified. Obviously, I cried all day,” he added.

Shin was held for a total of 17 days and is now wearing an ankle monitor, according to Crayk.

Shin was identified by ICE’s Fugitive Operations Team, which is generally focused on apprehending immigrants who have committed serious crimes and are considered national security threats, according to charging documents.

A spokesperson for the Department of Homeland Security did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

In response to previous questions about Shin, a senior Department of Homeland Security official told NBC News: “Our message is clear: criminal illegal aliens are not welcome in the United States.”

The official added that Shin had a DUI conviction. Records show the matter was resolved after Shin pleaded guilty to the misdemeanor offense in 2020 and served his probation.

Crayk, Shin’s attorney, told NBC New in a previous interview that his client’s father was battling brain cancer at the time of his prior arrest.

“My father was losing a battle to a Level 4 glioblastoma brain tumor. He had limited time to live,” Shin said, according to KSL-TV. “I fell into a depression during that time and the impaired driving followed.”

Shin entered the U.S. on a tourist visa on Sept. 3, 1998, which “required him to depart the U.S. by March 3, 1999,” according to DHS. But Crayk previously told NBC News that this timeline is incomplete, as Shin’s father switched to a student visa, which conferred status onto Shin at the time.

Crayk said Shin became a DACA recipient years later, but lost his DACA protections due to his 2020 conviction. He has remained without lawful status for the last four and a half years.

Shin works in telecommunications but has played with the prestigious Utah Symphony and Ballet West in recent years.

Musicians have been playing at the state Capitol each day, determined to raise awareness until Shin returns home.

Shin’s wife, DeNae Shin, thanked the Salt Lake City community for its support over the last few weeks.

“During those really dark times where I was feeling such despair, it was really those letters that kept me going,” she said.

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/utah-violinist-released-ice-detention-bond-rcna229538

Reuters: These Trump voters back his immigration crackdown, but some worry about his methods

While Trump supporters are happy to see criminals deported, they are split over methods for detaining immigrants.

Juan Rivera voted for President Donald Trump, hoping that the president’s efforts to rid the United States of illegal immigration would improve safety in the Southern California city where the 25-year-old content creator lives.

Neighborhoods near Rivera’s home in San Marcos that used to be frequented by migrants with “violent tendencies” do feel much safer now, he said. But he also said he’ll “never forget” seeing U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents pull over a truck of Latino workers and haul the men into their cars without asking for identification, leaving the empty truck behind.

Some of Rivera’s family members work for U.S. Border Patrol. Other relatives who are in the process of establishing legal residency in the United States “are scared of going to work because they fear that they’re going to get pulled over by immigration,” he said.

Overall, however, Rivera gave the Trump administration very high marks on its handling of immigration because “there’s a lot more public safety.”

Seven months into his second term, Trump’s signature issue – immigration – is still helping buoy his overall sinking approval ratings, making up for a downturn in support for his economic policies. A group of 20 Trump voters Reuters has interviewed monthly since February, including Rivera, illuminated the complex views behind the numbers.

Reuters asked the voters to rate the Trump administration’s handling of immigration on a scale of 1 to 10. Sixteen gave it a rating of 7 or higher, and none rated it below 5.

They universally support Trump’s tightening of U.S. border security to prevent further illegal immigration and his efforts to expel immigration offenders with violent criminal records. But there was less consensus about how Trump is going about the crackdown.

“President Trump was elected based on his promise to close the border and deport criminal illegal aliens,” said White House spokesperson Abigail Jackson in an emailed statement. “The Trump Administration will continue carrying out the largest mass deportation operation in history.”

The 20 voters were selected from 429 respondents to a February 2025 Ipsos poll who said they voted for Trump in November and were willing to speak to a reporter. They are not a statistically representative portrait of all Trump voters, but their ages, educational backgrounds, races/ethnicities, locations and voting histories roughly correspond to those of Trump’s overall electorate.

Seven of the voters said they worried about the means Trump was using to achieve his goals, with some recoiling at the way authorities are rounding up immigrants for deportation.

“I agree that you have to have an immigration policy and enforce it. I don’t agree with kidnapping people off the street,” said Virginia Beach-based retiree Don Jernigan.

Jernigan, 75, said that footage of ICE raids he has seen on ABC and Fox News “reminds me of Nazi Germany. And you would rarely hear me say that name, Nazi, okay? But it does, the way they snatch people.”

Other voters, such as Will Brown, 20, a student at the University of Wisconsin – Madison, urged the administration to pursue even more ambitious deportation goals.

Brown, who said he “couldn’t be more of a fan of Stephen Miller,” the White House aide credited with designing Trump’s immigration policy, noted that the deportation rate of Trump’s second term so far lagged that of the last two Democratic administrations. “Honestly, I don’t think they’re doing enough,” he said.

REALITY DIVIDE

The voters’ attitudes towards traditional news outlets heavily affected their view of Trump’s immigration crackdown.

“If you get your information from one source, ICE is devils incarnate, and if you get it from another source, they’re superheroes,” said Gerald Dunn, 66, a martial arts instructor in upstate New York.

Dunn said he rarely reads or watches news from mainstream outlets because “everything is so exaggerated.” Instead, he browses headlines and watches YouTube videos to stay informed.

He has heard reports of ICE agents detaining non-criminal immigrants, but said such incidents are blown out of proportion.

“You’re going to arrest people wrongfully, and it turns out they shouldn’t have been arrested. That doesn’t mean you don’t arrest anybody.”

In the Chicago suburbs, municipal office secretary Kate Mottl, 62, said she is thrilled with Trump’s immigration policy. She does not believe news outlets that report immigrants without a criminal record are being swept up in raids.

Mottl was dismayed to learn that some immigrants without legal status she knows are afraid of being deported under Trump.

“I tell them, ‘you shouldn’t be worried about that because you’re not a bad person. You’re not committing crimes,’” she said, adding that she feared they were being misinformed by the news sources they watch.

CLEARER PATHWAY TO LEGAL STATUS

Fourteen of the 20 voters said they hoped Trump would improve the immigration system and vetting process to help deserving foreigners with the potential to contribute to the U.S. economy legalize their status more easily in the United States.

Like Mottl, Lesa Sandberg of St. George, Utah, said she knows undocumented immigrants “who are raising their families here, who are working, who are contributing to our economy and our society. And my heart goes out to them.”

Sandberg, 57, who runs an accounting business, rents properties and works for a former Republican congressman’s political action committee, said she is glad to see the administration cracking down on immigrants with criminal backgrounds.

But when it comes to the immigrants in the U.S. illegally she considers friends, she said, “I would never call ICE on them … [it’s] that whole concept of when we know people in the situation, feelings are different about it because we know how bad it is for them.”

David Ferguson, 53, a mechanical engineer and account manager in western Georgia, said some of the foreign students in his daughter’s graduate school program want to stay and work in the United States but fear they won’t be able to re-enter if they visit their home countries, despite having valid visas.

Some immigrants really do “want to have long-term residency and be productive members of our society. Let’s give them a path for that,” he said.

Ferguson said he doesn’t think an amnesty program is necessarily the solution. But Juan Rivera, the Trump voter in southern California, thinks it could attract wide support.

“It’s actually a really big sentiment I’ve been hearing from a lot of local Republican elected officials, that the Trump administration [should] offer amnesty the way that Reagan did,” said Rivera, who does Latino outreach advocacy for his county’s Republican Party.

His own father was able to become a U.S. citizen after former Republican President Ronald Reagan signed legislation in 1986 granting amnesty to about 3 million immigrants without legal status, according to Rivera.

He said he hopes Trump moves the country toward “an immigration system that balances security with humanity.”

https://www.reuters.com/world/americas/these-trump-voters-back-his-immigration-crackdown-some-worry-about-his-methods-2025-09-02

LA Times: California took center stage in ICE raids, but other states saw more immigration arrests

Ever since federal immigration raids ramped up across California, triggering fierce protests that prompted President Trump to deploy troops to Los Angeles, the state has emerged as the symbolic battleground of the administration’s deportation campaign.

But even as arrests soared, California was not the epicenter of Trump’s anti-immigrant project.

In the first five months of Trump’s second term, California lagged behind the staunchly red states of Texas and Florida in the total arrests. According to a Los Angeles Times analysis of federal Immigration and Customs Enforcement data from the Deportation Data Project, Texas reported 26,341 arrests — nearly a quarter of all ICE arrests nationally — followed by 12,982 in Florida and 8,460 in California.

Even in June, when masked federal immigration agents swept through L.A., jumping out of vehicles to snatch people from bus stops, car washes and parking lots, California saw 3,391 undocumented immigrants arrested — more than Florida, but still only about half as many as Texas.

When factoring in population, California drops to 27th in the nation, with 217 arrests per million residents — about a quarter of Texas’ 864 arrests per million and less than half of a whole slew of states including Florida, Arkansas, Utah, Arizona, Louisiana, Oklahoma, Tennessee, Georgia, Virginia and Nevada.

The data, released after a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit against the government, excludes arrests made after June 26 and lacks identifying state details in 5% of cases. Nevertheless, it provides the most detailed look yet of national ICE operations.

Immigration experts say it is not surprising that California — home to the largest number of undocumented immigrants in the nation and the birthplace of the Chicano movement — lags behind Republican states in the total number of arrests or arrests as a percentage of the population.

“The numbers are secondary to the performative politics of the moment,” said Austin Kocher, a geographer and research assistant professor at Syracuse University who specializes in immigration enforcement.

Part of the reason Republican-dominated states have higher arrest numbers — particularly when measured against population — is they have a longer history of working directly with ICE, and a stronger interest in collaboration. In red states from Texas to Mississippi, local law enforcement officers routinely cooperate with federal agents, either by taking on ICE duties through so-called 287(g) agreements or by identifying undocumented immigrants who are incarcerated and letting ICE into their jails and prisons.

Indeed, data show that just 7% of ICE arrests made this year in California were made through the Criminal Alien Program, an initiative that requests that local law enforcement identify undocumented immigrants in federal, state and local prisons and jails.

That’s significantly lower than the 55% of arrests in Texas and 46% in Florida made through prisons or jails. And other conservative states with smaller populations relied on the program even more heavily: 75% of ICE arrests in Alabama and 71% in Indiana took place via prisons and jails.

“State cooperation has been an important buffer in ICE arrests and ICE operations in general for years,” said Ariel Ruiz Soto, a Sacramento-based senior policy analyst at the Migration Policy Institute. “We’ve seen that states are not only willing to cooperate with ICE, but are proactively now establishing 287(g) agreements with their local law enforcement, are naturally going to cast a wider net of enforcement in the boundaries of that state.”

While California considers only some criminal offenses, such as serious felonies, significant enough to share information with ICE; Texas and Florida are more likely to report offenses that may not be as severe, such as minor traffic infractions.

Still, even if fewer people were arrested in California than other states, it also witnessed one of the most dramatic increases in arrests in the country.

California ranked 30th in ICE arrests per million in February. By June, the state had climbed to 10th place.

ICE arrested around 8,460 immigrants across California between Jan. 20 and June 26, a 212% increase compared with the five months before Trump took office. That contrasts with a 159% increase nationally for the same period.

Much of ICE’s activity in California was hyper-focused on Greater Los Angeles: About 60% of ICE arrests in the state took place in the seven counties in and around L.A. during Trump’s first five months in office. The number of arrests in the Los Angeles area soared from 463 in January to 2,185 in June — a 372% spike, second only to New York’s 432% increase.

Even if California is not seeing the largest numbers of arrests, experts say, the dramatic increase in captures stands out from other places because of the lack of official cooperation and public hostility toward immigration agents.

“A smaller increase in a place that has very little cooperation is, in a way, more significant than seeing an increase in areas that have lots and lots of cooperation,” Kocher said.

ICE agents, Kocher said, have to work much harder to arrest immigrants in places like L.A. or California that define themselves as “sanctuary” jurisdictions and limit their cooperation with federal immigration agents.

“They really had to go out of their way,” he said.

Trump administration officials have long argued that sanctuary jurisdictions give them no choice but to round up people on the streets.

Not long after Trump won the 2024 election and the L.A. City Council voted unanimously to block any city resources from being used for immigration enforcement, incoming border enforcement advisor Tom Homan threatened an onslaught.

“If I’ve got to send twice as many officers to L.A. because we’re not getting any assistance, then that’s what we’re going to do,” Homan told Newsmax.

With limited cooperation from California jails, ICE agents went out into communities, rounding up people they suspected of being undocumented on street corners and at factories and farms.

That shift in tactics meant that immigrants with criminal convictions no longer made up the bulk of California ICE arrests. While about 66% of immigrants arrested in the first four months of the year had criminal convictions, that percentage fell to 30% in June.

The sweeping nature of the arrests drew immediate criticism as racial profiling and spawned robust community condemnation.

Some immigration experts and community activists cite the organized resistance in L.A. as another reason the numbers of ICE arrests were lower in California than in Texas and even lower than dozens of states by percentage of population.

“The reason is the resistance, organized resistance: the people who literally went to war with them in Paramount, in Compton, in Bell and Huntington Park,” said Ron Gochez, a member of Unión del Barrio Los Angeles, an independent political group that patrols neighborhoods to alert residents of immigration sweeps.

“They’ve been chased out in the different neighborhoods where we organize,” he said. “We’ve been able to mobilize the community to surround the agents when they come to kidnap people.”

In L.A., activists patrolled the streets from 5 a.m. until 11 p.m., seven days a week, Gochez said. They faced off with ICE agents in Home Depot parking lots and at warehouses and farms.

“We were doing everything that we could to try to keep up with the intensity of the military assault,” Gochez said. “The resistance was strong. … We’ve been able, on numerous occasions, to successfully defend the communities and drive them out of our community.”

The protests prompted Trump to deploy the National Guard and Marines in June, with the stated purpose of protecting federal buildings and personnel. But the administration’s ability to ratchet up arrests hit a roadblock on July 11. That’s when a federal judge issued a temporary restraining order blocking immigration agents in Southern and Central California from targeting people based on race, language, vocation or location without reasonable suspicion that they are in the U.S. illegally.

That decision was upheld last week by the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. But on Thursday, the Trump administration petitioned the Supreme Court to lift the temporary ban on its patrols, arguing that it “threatens to upend immigration officials’ ability to enforce the immigration laws in the Central District of California by hanging the prospect of contempt over every investigative stop.”

The order led to a significant drop in arrests across Los Angeles last month. But this week, federal agents carried out a series of raids at Home Depots from Westlake to Van Nuys.

Trump administration officials have indicated that the July ruling and arrest slowdown do not signal a permanent change in tactics.

“Sanctuary cities are going to get exactly what they don’t want: more agents in the communities and more work site enforcement,” Homan told reporters two weeks after the court blocked roving patrols. “Why is that? Because they won’t let one agent arrest one bad guy in the jail.”

U.S. Border Patrol Sector Chief Gregory Bovino, who has been leading operations in California, posted a fast-moving video on X that spliced L.A. Mayor Karen Bass telling reporters that “this experiment that was practiced on the city of Los Angeles failed” with video showing him grinning. Then, as a frenetic drum and bass mix kicked in, federal agents jump out of a van and chase people.

“When you’re faced with opposition to law and order, what do you do?” Bovino wrote. “Improvise, adapt, and overcome!”

Clearly, the Trump administration is willing to expend significant resources to make California a political battleground and test case, Ruiz Soto said. The question is, at what economic and political cost?

“If they really wanted to scale up and ramp up their deportations,” Ruiz Soto said, “they could go to other places, do it more more safely, more quickly and more efficiently.”

https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2025-08-10/california-was-center-stage-in-ice-raids-but-texas-and-florida-each-saw-more-immigration-arrests

Newsweek: Utah college student says ICE agent who detained her “knew it wasn’t right”

A 19-year-old student at the University of Utah says the Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agent who detained her repeatedly apologized and “knew it wasn’t right,” but his “hands were tied.”

Caroline Dias Goncalves was pulled over by police in Fruita, Colorado, on June 5 on the way to Denver. Shortly after being let go by the officer, Dias Goncalves was stopped again a few miles away in Grand Junction—this time by immigration agents.

“He kept apologizing and told me he wanted to let me go, but his ‘hands were tied.’ There was nothing he could do, even though he knew it wasn’t right. I want you to know—I forgive you,” Dias Goncalves said in a statement.

https://www.newsweek.com/caroline-dias-goncalves-utah-college-student-ice-agent-2089824