More stories

  • in

    Mistrial Declared in Case of Arizona Rancher Accused of Murdering Migrant

    George Alan Kelly is accused of fatally shooting Gabriel Cuen-Buitimea, an unarmed migrant from Mexico, on his 170-acre ranch in Kino Springs, Ariz., last year.A judge on Monday declared a mistrial in the case of an Arizona rancher who was accused of murdering an unarmed migrant on his property after he crossed the U.S.-Mexico border last year, in a case that inflamed people on both sides of the national debate over immigration.The mistrial was declared after jurors were unable to reach a unanimous verdict during deliberations that began on Thursday. The judge scheduled a hearing for April 29, according to the Arizona Superior Court in Santa Cruz County.Calls on Monday evening to prosecutors and to Brenna Larkin, a lawyer for Mr. Kelly, were not immediately returned.Gabriel Cuen-Buitimea was among a group of undocumented migrants who were crossing the high desert in Kino Springs, Ariz., near the border with Mexico on Jan. 30, 2023, when they spotted a Border Patrol vehicle and scattered, according to the authorities.When two of the men, Mr. Cuen-Buitimea and Daniel Ramirez, ran onto George Alan Kelly’s 170-acre ranch, Mr. Kelly fired his AK-47-style rifle at them, the authorities said. Mr. Cuen-Buitimea 48, who had crossed into the United States from his native Mexico in search of work, was hit in the back, law enforcement officials said.Hardened immigration critics and conservative ranchers seized on the case, casting Mr. Kelly as the real victim in posts on social media and saying that the episode was evidence of a growing threat to their security and livelihoods. But many in Santa Cruz County were horrified by the killing and viewed the surge in migrants crossing the border as a humanitarian crisis.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • in

    Man Sentenced to 35 Years in Prison for Kidnapping F.B.I. Worker

    Juan Alvarez-Sorto and two other people were on a drug trafficking trip in 2022 when they carjacked an S.U.V. belonging to a crime victim specialist, federal prosecutors said.Curt Lauinger, an F.B.I. employee, had just left a crime scene early one morning in May 2022, and was driving toward Rapid City, S.D., when he stopped on the side of the road because he thought he was being pulled over by the police, according to court documents.As he looked out the window, records show, a man pointed a rifle and ordered him to get out of his S.U.V.Mr. Lauinger was then forced into the back seat of his vehicle, and the man, Juan Alvarez-Sorto, along with two others — Deyvin Morales and Karla Alejandra Lopez-Gutierrez — drove off, according to court documents.The three were trying to hide from the police near Red Shirt, S.D., after a high-speed chase during a trip from Colorado in which the three had planned to distribute drugs, prosecutors said. They had pulled over and planned to carjack the next vehicle that drove by, prosecutors said, apparently to continue to elude law enforcement officers.Mr. Lauinger was later able to escape after the three stopped at a gas station in Hermosa, S.D., south of Rapid City, according to court documents.It was unclear whether the three knew that Mr. Lauinger worked for the F.B.I. as a crime victim specialist, whose responsibilities include offering emotional support and legal protection.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • in

    Kristi Noem, South Dakota Governor and Trump VP Contender, Is Barred by Tribes

    Four of South Dakota’s federally recognized Native American tribes have barred the state’s governor, Kristi Noem — a Republican whose name has been floated as a potential running mate for former President Donald J. Trump — from their reservations. The latest blocked Ms. Noem on Thursday.Three of the tribes barred Ms. Noem this month, joining another tribe that had sanctioned the governor after she told state lawmakers in February that Mexican drug cartels had a foothold on their reservations and were committing murders there.Ms. Noem further angered the tribes with remarks she made at a town hall event last month in Winner, S.D., appearing to suggest that the tribes were complicit in the cartels’ presence on their reservations.“We’ve got some tribal leaders that I believe are personally benefiting from the cartels being there, and that’s why they attack me every day,” Ms. Noem said.The tribes are the Cheyenne River Sioux, the Rosebud Sioux and the Standing Rock Sioux and the Oglala Sioux, which in February became the first group to bar Ms. Noem from its reservation. Their reservations have a combined population of nearly 50,000 people and encompass more than eight million acres, according to state and federal government counts. Standing Rock Indian Reservation, the third tribal area to have restricted Ms. Noem’s access, extends into North Dakota.The tribes have accused Ms. Noem of stoking fears and denigrating their heritage when she referred to a gang known as the Ghost Dancers while addressing state lawmakers and said that it had recruited tribal members to join its criminal activities.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • in

    NYC and DocGo to Part Ways After Migrant Service Operator’s Contract Ends

    DocGo, which has a $432 million contract with the city, faced allegations of providing migrants with false papers, wasting food and hiring unlicensed security guards.New York City will soon part ways with DocGo, which has provided services to migrants under a lucrative $432 million contract, city officials said Tuesday.Last spring, the company, a medical services provider that had multimillion-dollar contracts to provide Covid tests and vaccinations, landed a no-bid contract to house and care for migrants in the city and upstate despite having no broad experience dealing with asylum seekers.But the company quickly faced allegations that its employees or subcontractors had mistreated and lied to migrants, provided them with fake work papers, wasted staggering amounts of food and hired unlicensed security guards. In the wake of reporting by The New York Times and other news outlets, Attorney General Letitia James started an investigation into DocGo over possible violations of state or federal laws regarding the treatment of people in its care.In a written statement Tuesday, as first reported by Politico, Mayor Eric Adams’s chief of staff, Camille Joseph Varlack, said the city would not renew DocGo’s contract to house and care for migrants in New York City hotels when it expires in early May, one year after it took effect. A Texas-based company, Garner Environmental Services, will take over those services temporarily — at a cost of $10 less per person, per night than DocGo receives, officials said.“This will ultimately allow the city to save more money and will allow others, including nonprofits and internationally recognized resettlement providers, to apply to do this critical work, and ensures we are continuing to use city funds as efficiently and effectively as possible,” Ms. Varlack said.The city will begin a competitive bidding process to find a new provider to take over the work.But Ms. Varlack said the city was working on a temporary contract extension for DocGo’s services upstate in order to minimize disruptions to the 1,800 or so migrants, including school-age children, who are in DocGo’s care at cut-rate motels from Westchester County to Buffalo. City Hall says the extension will last until a new provider is selected in the competitive bidding process.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • in

    Trump, at Fund-Raiser, Says He Wants Immigrants From ‘Nice’ Countries

    Former President Donald J. Trump, speaking at a multimillion-dollar fund-raiser on Saturday night, lamented that people were not immigrating to the United States from “nice” countries “like Denmark” and suggested that his well-heeled dinner companions were temporarily safe from undocumented immigrants nearby, according to an attendee.Mr. Trump, the presumptive Republican presidential nominee, made the comments during a roughly 45-minute presentation at a dinner at a mansion owned by the billionaire financier John Paulson in Palm Beach, Fla., a rarefied island community.Guests were seated outdoors at white-clothed tables under a white tent, looking out on the waterway that divides the moneyed town from the more diverse West Palm Beach, a mainland city, according to the attendee, who was not authorized to speak publicly about the private event but provided an extensive readout of Mr. Trump’s remarks.Dozens of wealthy donors helped write checks that the Trump campaign and the Republican National Committee claim totaled more than $50 million, an amount that would set a record but had not been verified. Campaign finance reports encompassing the date of the event won’t be available for months.Some of Mr. Trump’s comments were standard fare from his stump speeches, while other parts of the speech were tailored to his wealthy audience.About midway through his remarks, the attendee said, Mr. Trump began an extensive rant about migrants entering the United States, at a time when President Biden has been struggling with an intensified crisis at the Southern border.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • in

    Donald Trump’s Insatiable Bloodlust

    An earthquake. An eclipse. A bridge collapse. A freak blizzard. A biblical flood. Donald Trump leading in battleground states.Apocalyptic vibes are stirred by Trump’s violent rhetoric and talk of blood baths.If he’s not elected, he bellowed in Ohio, there will be a blood bath in the auto industry. At his Michigan rally on Tuesday, he said there would be a blood bath at the border, speaking from a podium with a banner reading, “Stop Biden’s border blood bath.” He has warned that, without him in the Oval, there will be an “Oppenheimer”-like doomsday; we will lose World War III and America will be devastated by “weapons, the likes of which nobody has ever seen before.”“And the only thing standing between you and its obliteration is me,” Trump has said.An unspoken Trump threat is that there will be a blood bath again in Washington, like Jan. 6, if he doesn’t win.That is why he calls the criminals who stormed the Capitol “hostages” and “unbelievable patriots.” He starts some rallies with a dystopian remix of the national anthem, sung by the “J6 Prison Choir,” and his own reciting of the Pledge of Allegiance.The bloody-minded Trump luxuriates in the language of tyrants.In “Macbeth,” Shakespeare uses blood imagery to chart the creation of a tyrant. Those words echo in Washington as Ralph Fiennes stars in a thrilling Simon Godwin production of “MacBeth” for the Shakespeare Theater Company, opening Tuesday.“The raw power grab that excites Lady Macbeth and incites her husband to regicide feels especially pertinent now, when the dangers of autocracy loom over political discussions,” Peter Marks wrote in The Washington Post about the production with Fiennes and Indira Varma (the lead sand snake in “Game of Thrones.”)We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • in

    Appeals Court Keeps Block on Texas Migrant Law

    The decision in favor of the federal government left in place a trial court injunction while courts determine whether the measure is legal. A federal appeals court late Tuesday ruled against Texas in its bitter clash with the federal government, deciding that a law allowing the state to arrest and deport migrants could not be implemented while the courts wrestled with the question of whether it is legal.A three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, which has a reputation for conservative rulings, sided in its 2-to-1 decision with lawyers for the Biden administration who have argued that the law violates the U.S. Constitution and decades of legal precedent.The panel’s 50-page majority opinion left in place an injunction imposed last month by a lower court in Austin, which found that the federal government was likely to succeed in its arguments against the law. The opinion was written by the Fifth Circuit’s chief judge, Priscilla Richman, a nominee of President George W. Bush, and was joined by Judge Irma Carrillo Ramirez, who was nominated to the bench by President Biden last year.Judge Richman found that Texas’ law conflicted with federal law and with Supreme Court precedent, particularly a 2012 immigration case, Arizona v. United States.“For nearly 150 years, the Supreme Court has held that the power to control immigration — the entry, admission and removal of noncitizens — is exclusively a federal power,” she wrote. “Texas has not shown that it is likely to succeed on the merits,” she said after discussing how various arguments made by the state fell short.It was a setback for Gov. Greg Abbott but not an unexpected one: The governor has said that he anticipated the fight over the law’s constitutionality to eventually reach the Supreme Court. Mr. Abbott has said the law, which allows the state to arrest and deport migrants on its own, is necessary to deal with the record number of migrants crossing into Texas from Mexico. We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • in

    A Sweeping New Immigration Law Takes Effect in Texas

    There was no immediate response along the border after the U.S. Supreme Court cleared the way for Texas police to arrest and deport migrants. Officials have not said when enforcement would begin.The most aggressive state-level immigration law in the nation went into effect in Texas on Tuesday after the U.S. Supreme Court temporarily sided with Gov. Greg Abbott in his increasingly bitter confrontation with the Biden administration over border policy.The law makes it a crime for migrants to enter Texas from Mexico without authorization, and creates a process for state courts to order migrants charged with violating the law to return to Mexico, no matter their national origin.The high court ruled that the law could temporarily go into effect while a federal appeals court further considers whether to override a lower-court ruling that found the Texas measure unconstitutional on a variety of grounds.“Huge win,” Ken Paxton, the Texas attorney general, said in a statement. Mr. Abbott, the governor, sounded a slightly more cautious note about the Supreme Court’s decision, describing it as “a positive development.”The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit said that it would hold oral arguments Wednesday morning on whether the lower-court injunction blocking the law should be allowed to stay in effect while the full appeal is underway.The sudden clearance for the law to go into effect appeared to catch Texas officials off guard. As of Tuesday evening, no date had been set for enforcement to begin. Two state officials said that the timing was still being discussed and that arrests could begin within days.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More