Trump administration

Subterms

    More stories

    • 125 Shares199 Views

      in US Politics

      US supreme court allows Trump administration to freeze teacher-training grants

      by

      The US supreme court is letting the Trump administration temporarily freeze $65m in teacher-training grants that would promote diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) initiatives in a 5-4 decision.The decision came down on Friday afternoon, with five of the court’s conservatives – Justices Amy Coney Barrett, Neil Gorsuch, Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito and Brett Kavanaugh – in the majority. Justices Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan and Ketanji Brown Jackson all dissented.In the unsigned opinion, the court said that the states made it clear “that they have the financial wherewithal to keep their programs running”, but the Trump administration had a strong case that it would not be able to reclaim any of the funds spent while the lower court’s order remained in place.The cuts to more than 100 programs had been temporarily blocked by a federal judge in Boston, who found that they were already affecting training programs aimed at addressing a nationwide teacher shortage. The federal appeals court in Boston turned away an appeal from the administration to allow them to resume.The emergency appeal is among several the high court is considering in which the justice department argues that lower-court judges have improperly obstructed Donald Trump’s agenda.Friday’s order was the first time in three attempts that the nation’s highest court gave the administration what it wanted on an emergency basis.US district judge Myong Joun issued a temporary restraining order sought by eight Democratic-led states that argued the cuts were probably driven by efforts from Trump’s administration to eliminate diversity, equity and inclusion programs.The Republican president also has signed an executive order calling for the dismantling of the education department, and his administration has already started overhauling much of its work, including cutting dozens of contracts it dismissed as “woke” and wasteful.The two programs at issue – the Teacher Quality Partnership and Supporting Effective Educator Development – provide more than $600m in grants for teacher preparation programs, often in subject areas such as math, science and special education, the states have argued. They said data has shown the programs had led to increased teacher retention rates and ensured that educators remain in the profession beyond five years.Despite Joun’s finding that the programs already were being affected, the high court’s conservative majority wrote that the states can keep the programs running with their own money for now. By contrast, the majority said in an unsigned opinion, the federal government probably wouldn’t be able to recover the cash if it ultimately wins the lawsuit.
      Kagan wrote in dissent that there was no reason for the court’s emergency intervention.“Nowhere in its papers does the Government defend the legality of canceling the education grants at issue here,” Kagan wrote.In a separate opinion, Brown Jackson wrote: “It is beyond puzzling that a majority of Justices conceive of the government’s application as an emergency.”
      The administration halted the programs without notice in February. Joun, an appointee of Democratic president Joe Biden, found that the cancellations probably violated a federal law that requires a clear explanation.The appellate panel that rejected the administration’s request for a stay also was made up of judges appointed by Democrats.California is leading the ongoing lawsuit, joined by Massachusetts, New Jersey, Colorado, Illinois, Maryland, New York and Wisconsin.Boston public schools have already had to fire several full-time employees due to the loss of grant funding, and the College of New Jersey has also canceled the rest of its teacher-residency program. California State University has ended support for two dozen students in a similar program, and eliminated financial assistance for 50 incoming students. More

    • 113 Shares179 Views

      in US Politics

      Democrats decry reported dismissal of NSA director Tim Haugh

      by

      Top congressional Democrats are protesting against the firing of Gen Tim Haugh as director of the National Security Agency (NSA), with one lawmaker saying the decision “makes all of us less safe”.Haugh and his civilian deputy at the NSA, Wendy Noble, have been dismissed from their roles, the Washington Post reported late on Thursday, with CNN reporting likewise, both outlets citing multiple unnamed officials and other senior sources close to the matter who had requested anonymity.US defense department spokesperson Sean Parnell on Friday thanked Haugh “for his decades of service to our nation, culminating as US cyber command commander and National Security Agency director”.“We wish him and his family well,” Parnell’s statement said, confirming Haugh’s departure without elaborating on why.The ousting had not been officially confirmed by the government or the individuals by Friday afternoon, but the NSA website had been updated with both Haugh and Noble no longer listed in their roles.Lt Gen William J Hartman is now listed there as acting director of the NSA and Sheila Thomas as his acting deputy.Haugh also headed US Cyber Command, which coordinates the Pentagon’s cybersecurity operations. Hartman has been appointed acting head of the command, according to its website.The NSA notified congressional leadership and top lawmakers of the national security committees of Haugh’s firing late on Wednesday but did not give reasons, the Associated Press reported, citing a source. Senior military leaders were only informed on Thursday, the news agency said.The NSA declined to comment and referred the Guardian to the Department of Defense, which said it would provide more information when it became available.Outrage from critics was fulsome. Senator Mark Warner, vice-chair of the Senate intelligence committee, said in a statement: “General Haugh has served our country in uniform, with honor and distinction, for more than 30 years. At a time when the United States is facing unprecedented cyber threats … how does firing him make Americans any safer?”Representative Jim Himes, the ranking member on the House intelligence committee, said he was “deeply disturbed by the decision”.“I have known General Haugh to be an honest and forthright leader who followed the law and put national security first – I fear those are precisely the qualities that could lead to his firing in this administration,” Himes added. “The intelligence committee and the American people need an immediate explanation for this decision, which makes all of us less safe.”Senator Jack Reed, a Democrat from Rhode Island, said Donald Trump “has given a priceless gift to China, Russia, Iran, and North Korea by purging competence from our national security leadership”.“In addition to the other military leaders and national security officials Trump has fired, he is sending a chilling message throughout the ranks: don’t give your best military advice, or you may face consequences,” Reed added.Earlier on Thursday, Donald Trump said he had fired “some” White House National Security Council officials, a move that came a day after far-right activist Laura Loomer raised concerns directly to him about staff loyalty.Loomer, during her Oval Office conversation with Trump, urged the president to purge staffers she deemed insufficiently loyal to his “make America great again” agenda, according to several people familiar with the matter. They all spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss the sensitive personnel manner.Loomer posted on X in the first moments of Friday morning: “NSA Director Tim Haugh and his deputy Wendy Noble have been disloyal to President Trump. That is why they have been fired.”She added a screed about how they were hired by Joe Biden during his presidency and were, she said, “hand picked” by Mark Milley, then chair of the joint chiefs of staff, the most senior uniformed officer in the military. Milley served Trump in his first term in the White House but has since turned fiercely critical, calling the president dangerous and “fascist to the core”, and was fired in the early days of Trump’s second term. The 47th US president then also revoked Milley’s security clearance. Biden, the 46th US president, had preemptively pardoned Milley in his final days in office, following threats from Trump that the veteran was treasonous and should face the death penalty.Loomer added Haugh was “referred for firing” and Noble was Haugh’s “Obama loving protégé” who was nominated by Biden and promoted diversity, equity and inclusion at the agency. Loomer noted: “This is called VETTING”.She also said Noble was a protege of James Clapper, director of national intelligence in Barack Obama’s presidency, and said Clapper should be in prison.Trump spoke to reporters on Air Force One on Thursday afternoon after the earlier firing of six national security agency staffers below the level of Haugh and Noble, based on recommendations from Loomer, a extremist cheerleader for Trump and a white supremacist with an incendiary social media presence who has no political experience outside of unsuccessfully running for US Congress in Florida twice.“Always we’re letting go of people,” Trump said. “People that we don’t like or people that we don’t think can do the job or people that may have loyalties to somebody else.”The firings come as Trump’s national security adviser Mike Waltz continues to fight calls for his ouster after using the publicly available encrypted Signal app to discuss planning for the sensitive 15 March military operation targeting Houthi militants in Yemen.Warner said on Thursday night: “It is astonishing, too, that President Trump would fire the nonpartisan, experienced leader of the National Security Agency while still failing to hold any member of his team accountable for leaking classified information on a commercial messaging app – even as he apparently takes staffing direction on national security from a discredited conspiracy theorist in the Oval Office.”Haugh met last month with Elon Musk, whose so-called “department of government efficiency”, or Doge, has roiled the federal government by slashing personnel and budgets at dozens of agencies. In a statement, the NSA said the meeting was intended to ensure both organizations were “aligned” with the new administration’s priorities.Haugh had led both the NSA and Cyber Command since 2023. Both departments play leading roles in the nation’s cybersecurity. The NSA also supports the military and other national security agencies by collecting and analysing a vast amount of data and information globally.Cyber Command is known as America’s first line of defence in cyberspace and also plans offensive cyber-operations for potential use against adversaries. Defense secretary Pete Hegseth recently ordered the office to pause some offensive cyber-operations against Russia, in another sign of how Trump’s administration is transforming the work of the nation’s intelligence community.Renée Burton, a cybersecurity expert previously working for the NSA, told CNN the removal of the personnel was “alarming” and the disruption would “expose the country to new risk”.The Associated Press contributed reporting More

    • 163 Shares169 Views

      in US Politics

      Federal judge rules return of Maryland man mistakenly deported to El Salvador prison

      by

      A federal judge on Friday afternoon ordered the US to return a Maryland man mistakenly deported to an El Salvador prison after a Trump administration attorney was at a loss to explain what happened.The wife of the man, who was flown to a notorious Salvadoran prison had earlier joined dozens of supporters at a rally before a court hearing on Friday, where his lawyers had asked the judge – Paula Xinis – to order the Trump administration to return him to the US.Xinis on Friday called Kilmar Abrego Garcia’s deportation “an illegal act” and pressed US justice department attorney Erez Reuveni for answers. Reuveni had few, if any, to offer, conceding that Abrego Garcia should not have been removed from the US and sent to El Salvador. He could not cite any authority held by the Trump administration to arrest Abrego Garcia in Maryland.“I’m also frustrated that I have no answers for you for a lot of these questions,” he said.Reuveni said, “I don’t know,” when asked why Abrego Garcia was sent to El Salvador, which has a history rife with human rights abuses.Abrego Garcia’s wife, US citizen Jennifer Vasquez Sura, hasn’t spoken to him since he was flown to his native El Salvador last month and imprisoned. She urged her supporters to keep fighting for him “and all the Kilmars out there whose stories are still waiting to be heard”.View image in fullscreen“To all the wives, mothers, children who also face this cruel separation, I stand with you in this bond of pain,” she said during the rally at a community center in Hyattsville, Maryland. “It’s a journey that no one ever should ever have to suffer, a nightmare that feels endless.”The campaign to reunite the couple will shift to a courtroom in Greenbelt, Maryland, a suburb of Washington DC.The White House has cast Abrego Garcia, 29, as an MS-13 gang member and assert that US courts lack jurisdiction over the matter because the Salvadoran national is no longer in the US.Abrego Garcia’s attorneys have countered that there is no evidence he was in MS-13. The allegation is based on a confidential informant’s claim in 2019 that Abrego Garcia was a member of a chapter in New York, where he has never lived.Abrego Garcia’s mistaken deportation, described by the White House as an “administrative error”, has outraged many and raised concerns about expelling noncitizens who were granted permission to be in the US.Abrego Garcia had a permit from the Department of Homeland Security to legally work in the US, his attorney Simon Sandoval-Moshenberg said. He served as a sheet metal apprentice and was pursuing his journeyman license.He fled El Salvador around 2011 because he and his family were facing threats by local gangs. In 2019, a US immigration judge granted him protection from deportation to El Salvador because he was likely to face gang persecution. He was released and Immigration and Customs Enforcement (Ice) did not appeal the decision or try to deport him to another country.Abrego Garcia later married Vasquez Sura. The couple are parents to their son and her two children from a previous relationship.“If I had all the money in the world, I would spend it all just to buy one thing: a phone call to hear Kilmar’s voice again,” Vasquez Sura said. “Kilmar, if you can hear me, I miss you so much, and I’m doing the best to fight for you and our children.” More

    • 150 Shares119 Views

      in US Politics

      Trump extends deadline for TikTok sale to non-Chinese buyer to avoid ban

      by

      Donald Trump said he will sign an executive order to extend the TikTok ban deadline. This is the second time the president will have delayed the ban or sale of the social media app, and will punt the deadline to 75 days from now.The TikTok deal “requires more work to ensure all necessary approvals are signed”, Trump announced on his Truth Social platform on Friday.ByteDance, TikTok’s parent company, issued a statement in response to the executive order: “ByteDance has been in discussion with the U.S. Government regarding a potential solution for TikTok U.S. An agreement has not been executed. There are key matters to be resolved. Any agreement will be subject to approval under Chinese law.”Congress passed a law last year forcing TikTok to either divest or sell its assets in the US. The law stemmed from concerns that the app’s Chinese owner, ByteDance, could use the social media platform to manipulate Americans. The first deadline to ban or force the sale of the app was 19 January. But, on his first day in office, Trump signed an executive order to delay that decision to 5 April. Now the new deadline will be in mid-June.Earlier this week, the president met with potential buyers for TikTok and said his administration is “very close” to a deal. Among those who’ve reportedly thrown in bids are a consortium of investors led by the software giant Oracle, asset manager Blackstone, Amazon, Walmart, billionaire Frank McCourt, a crypto foundation, and the founder of the adult website OnlyFans.TikTok is a tremendously popular social media app with 170 million users in the US. Investors and corporations see huge appeal with owning the app and its secretive algorithm.ByteDance has said it has no plans to sell TikTok and in previous court filings said a divestiture “is simply not possible: not commercially, not technologically, not legally”.After announcing sweeping tariffs on dozens of countries, Trump hinted on Thursday aboard Air Force One that he might lessen the trade penalties on China if ByteDance were to approve a sale. The country faces a 54% tariff on goods imported to the US. “We have a situation with TikTok where China will probably say we’ll approve a deal, but will you do something on the tariffs. The tariffs give us great power to negotiate,” he said.In his Truth Social post Friday, Trump reiterated that sentiment, saying: “We hope to continue working in Good Faith with China, who I understand are not very happy about our Reciprocal Tariffs (Necessary for Fair and Balanced Trade between China and the U.S.A.!).skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotion“We do not want TikTok to ‘go dark,’” he continued. “We look forward to working with TikTok and China to close the Deal. Thank you for your attention to this matter!” More

    • 175 Shares189 Views

      in US Politics

      More than 80 ex-staffers of top law firm express ‘deep outrage’ over Trump deal

      by

      More than 80 former employees of Skadden, Arps, Meagher & Flom sent a letter to the law firm on Friday expressing “deep outrage” over its decision to reach an agreement with Donald Trump in order to avoid an executive order punishing the firm.Skadden, a top-ranked law firm, reached an agreement, announced on 28 March, to commit at least $100m in pro-bono services to causes both the firm and the president support, including assisting veterans, law enforcement, local government officials and combatting antisemitism. The agreement also says Skadden won’t engage in race-based hiring.In exchange, Skadden will avoid being the subject of one of Trump’s executive orders punishing law firms. The president has issued orders targeting several firms, threatening to cripple them by revoking security clearances, barring attorneys from access to government buildings, and forcing clients to disclose their relationship to the firm if they do business with the government.Experts see Trump’s efforts to intimidate lawyers from taking on cases adverse to the president’s interests as deeply anti-democratic, and employees and former employees of many of the firms targeted by the president have pushed back.“As attorneys, we all took an oath to uphold the Constitution of the United States,” the letter from former Skadden employees said. “As one of the country’s most powerful and most profitable law firms, Skadden’s influence over the legal profession cannot be understated. In light of Skadden’s position, it is outrageous and self-interested that rather than fulfilling the legal profession’s oath and standing in solidarity with fellow law firms that were fighting to uphold the Constitution, Skadden caved to bullying tactics instead.”Many of the country’s biggest and most profitable firms have stayed largely silent on the executive orders. The firms, which include places like Kirkland & Ellis, Latham & Watkins, and Cravath, Swaine & Moore – notably did not join more than 500 US law firms that signed onto an amicus brief on Friday in support of a challenge to the order.“Those Orders pose a grave threat to our system of constitutional governance and to the rule of law itself. The judiciary should act with resolve – now – to ensure that this abuse of executive power ceases,” said the brief, which was authored and signed by Donald Verrilli Jr, who served as the solicitor general under Barack Obama.Skadden reached the preemptive agreement after Perkins Coie, another firm targeted by Trump, successfully got a court to issue an injunction blocking most parts of the order. Skadden’s agreement was also announced the same day two other prominent firms, Jenner & Block and WilmerHale, sued over executive orders targeting them. Both firms were also able to secure court orders blocking most of the provisions in Trump’s orders against them.Some lawyers at major law firms have been so angry over the position their employers have taken that they have quit.“I believe, as I know many of you do, that what the current presidential administration is doing is wrong,” Thomas Sipp, a Skadden associate, who quit this week wrote in a departure email. “That we are sliding into an autocracy where those in power are above the rule of law. Skadden’s agreement with the Trump administration sent our country deeper down this descent.”Law students and attorneys are also closely monitoring which firms are heeding Trump. A spreadsheet circulating online lists more than a dozen firms who have taken action to accommodate the administration in some way, even if they haven’t been targeted.One first-year law student at one of the country’s top law schools told the Guardian on Thursday that he was tracking how firms were responding and it was influencing where they were applying for a job.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionSkadden’s capitulation, the alumni wrote in their letter, had only paved the way for Trump to further bully other firms into settling. Two other firms, Wilkie, Farr, and Gallgher and Milbank LLP have also reached preemptive deals with Trump.“We were shocked to hear about Skadden’s concessions, concessions given under the threat of an executive order whose substance had already been blocked by a federal court,” the letter said. “The deals Willkie Farr and Milbank struck with President Trump this week evinces the deeply disturbing behavior that Skadden helped normalize.”The agreement also takes aim at the firm’s prestigious Skadden fellowship, in which 25 to 30 lawyers a year from the nation’s top law schools work on social justice issues. Under the agreement with Trump, lawyers in the fellowship have to “represent a wide range of political views, including conservative ideals”. At least five lawyers from the fellowship have to be assigned to “assisting Veterans; ensuring fairness in our Justice System; combatting Antisemitism, and other similar types of projects”.“As alumni who have proudly represented Skadden in a variety of practice areas, we call on you to clearly affirm the firm’s commitment to reject the administration’s attacks on the judiciary, the Constitution, and rule of law before it’s too late,” the letter said. More

    • 200 Shares129 Views

      in US Politics

      I worked in Trump’s first administration. Here’s why his team is using Signal | Kevin Carroll

      by

      No senior US government official in the now-infamous “Houthi PC Small Group” Signal chat seemed new to that kind of group, nor surprised by the sensitivity of the subject discussed in that insecure forum, not even when the defense secretary, Pete Hegseth, chimed in with details of a coming airstrike. No one objected – not the director of national intelligence, Tulsi Gabbard, who was abroad and using her personal cellphone to discuss pending military operations; not even the presidential envoy Steve Witkoff, who was in Moscow at the time. Yet most of these officials enjoy the luxury of access to secure government communications systems 24/7/365.Reasonable conclusions may be drawn from these facts. First, Trump’s national security cabinet commonly discusses secret information on insecure personal devices. Second, sophisticated adversaries such as Russia and China intercept such communications, especially those sent or received in their countries. Third, as a result, hostile intelligence services now probably possess blackmail material regarding these officials’ indiscreet past conversations on similar topics. Fourth, as a first-term Trump administration official and ex-CIA officer, I believe the reason these officials risk interacting in this way is to prevent their communications from being preserved as required by the Presidential Records Act, and avoid them being discoverable in litigation, or subject to a subpoena or Freedom of Information Act request. And fifth, no one seems to have feared being investigated by the justice department for what appears to be a violation of the Espionage Act’s Section 793(f), which makes gross negligence in mishandling classified information a felony; the FBI director, Kash Patel, and attorney general, Pam Bondi, quickly confirmed that hunch. Remarkably, the CIA director John Ratcliffe wouldn’t even admit to Congress that he and his colleagues had made a mistake.The knock-on effects of this are many. The secretary of state, Marco Rubio, needs to address his colleagues’ characterization of European partners as “pathetic” with foreign ministers now dubious of the US’s intentions. Allies already hesitant to share their countries’ secrets with the US, because of valid counterintelligence concerns regarding Trump’s affinity for Vladimir Putin, will clam up even more rather than risk their sources being compromised by Trump’s appointees. Gabbard and Ratcliffe may have perjured themselves before Congress regarding whether their Signal chat included classified national defense information; certainly, their credibility on Capitol Hill is shredded. As a former CIA case officer, I suspect these directors’ own subordinates will prefer not to share restricted handling information with them going forward. Hegseth, confirmed as secretary by a vote of 51-50 despite concerns over his character and sobriety, lost any moral authority to lead the defense department by reflexively lying about his misconduct, claiming that the story by Jeffrey Goldberg, the unsuspecting Atlantic editor improvidently included in the text chain, is somehow a “hoax” despite the fact the White House contemporaneously confirmed its authenticity.Trump dismisses this scandal, now under investigation by the Pentagon’s inspector general, as a witch-hunt, and his followers will fall in line. But every senator who voted to confirm these national security officials, despite doubts regarding their temperaments and qualifications, quietly knows that they own part of this debacle. For fear of facing Republican primary challengers funded by Elon Musk, these senators failed in their solemn constitutional duty to independently provide wise advice and consent regarding nominations to the US’s most important war cabinet posts. How would the senators have explained their misfeasance to service members’ bereaved families – their constituents, perhaps – had the Houthis used information from the Signal chat, such as the time a particular target was to be engaged, to reorient their antiaircraft systems to intercept the inbound aircraft?I happen to have served in Yemen as a sensitive activities officer for special operations command (central). Conspicuous in their absence from the Signal chat were uniformed officers responsible for the recent combat mission: the acting chair of the joint chiefs of staff Adm Christopher Grady, central command’s Gen Michael Kurilla and special operations command’s Gen Bryan Fenton. These good men would have raised the obvious objection: loose talk on insecure phones about a coming operation jeopardizes the lives of US sailors and marines standing watch on warships in the Red Sea and Gulf of Aden, naval aviators flying over the beach towards the target, and likely special operators, intelligence officers and human sources working in the shadows on the ground.You don’t need 30-plus years in uniform to know that holding a detailed yet insecure discussion about a pending military mission is wrong; the participants in the chat knew, too. They just didn’t care, not as much as they cared about keeping their communications from being legally discoverable. They’re safe in the knowledge that in a new era without benefit of the rule of law, Patel’s FBI and Bondi’s justice department will never bring charges against them, for a crime which uniformed service members are routinely prosecuted for vastly smaller infractions. As the attorney general made plain in her remarks about this matter, federal law enforcement is now entirely subservient to Trump’s personal and political interests.Most senior US government officials in 2025 are, unfortunately, far gone from the fine old gentleman’s tradition of honorable resignation. But participants in the Signal chat should consider the Hollywood producer character Jack Woltz’s pained observation to the mafia lawyer Tom Hagen in The Godfather about his indiscreetly wayward mistress: “A man in my position cannot afford to be made to look ridiculous.” Trump, the justice department and the Republican Congress may not make them resign, but to the US’s allies and adversaries, and to their own subordinates, these officials now look ridiculous.

      Kevin Carroll served as senior counselor to the former homeland security secretary John Kelly and as a CIA and army officer More

    • 188 Shares159 Views

      in US Politics

      Ukrainians who fled war fear deportation under Trump: ‘I am young, I want to live’

      by

      Not long after Russia invaded Ukraine in 2022, Danyil packed everything he could in a bag and traveled 15 hours by bus from the Zakarpattia region in western Ukraine to the Czech Republic.He fled the war at 17, just as the Ukrainian president, Volodymyr Zelenskyy, forbade men between the ages of 18 and 60 from leaving the country. Now aged 20, he watches from the US as the war drags on. In December, Zelenskyy said 43,000 Ukrainian soldiers have been killed and another 370,000 have been wounded in the war.“I didn’t want to die young,” said Danyil, whose last name the Guardian is withholding due to concerns for his safety if he returns to Ukraine now.His view of current, US-brokered negotiations are: “There are peace talks now but unless the Russian government is overthrown nothing is going to change. They will continue to bomb.”After 10 months of working in a Czech automobile plant in the northern region of Liberec, Danyil traveled to the US on 4 January 2023, thanks to a Biden administration program, Uniting for Ukraine, that offered a temporary sanctuary to Ukrainians fleeing the Russian aggression.But soon after Donald Trump took office again in January, he suspended the Uniting for Ukraine policy, pausing admissions under the program and barring those already in the US from renewing their two-year work permits and deportation protections.Weeks later, the Trump administration paused all immigration applications for further relief by those who arrived under Uniting for Ukraine and other Biden-era processes that relied on a policy known as parole and Trump has blocked pathways to permanent legal status.The moves have pushed hundreds of thousands into a state of insecurity after they were welcomed to a safe haven.As of December 2024, the US had 240,000 Ukrainians with US sponsors under the Uniting for Ukraine program, including Danyil, according to government figures obtained by the Guardian.Unable to renew their parole status or apply for another temporary legal status, Danyil and the other thousands of immigrants could lose their permits and could end up undocumented and vulnerable to deportation.Danyil said his parole status ended at the beginning of this year and while he has applied for renewal, he hasn’t received a response from the US Citizenship and Immigration Services.“I don’t want to stay here illegally but I don’t want to go back to Ukraine. I am afraid, I am young, I want to live,” he said.Because Ukrainian newcomers were only given permission to live in the US for two-year increments, many applied for other legal shelters, including Temporary Protected Status (TPS).Earlier in January, Joe Biden’s homeland security secretary, Alejandro Mayorkas, extended Ukraine’s designation for TPS through October 2026. As of September 2024, 63,425 Ukrainians had been granted TPS in the US.Danyil said he applied for TPS this March, but has not yet received a response.Trump has directed the Department of Homeland Security to re-evaluate TPS designations of all countries, and his administration has already announced it will phase out protections for hundreds of thousands of migrants from countries under ongoing armed conflicts.In response, the agency has said that it would revoke the temporary legal status of more than 530,000 Cubans, Haitians, Nicaraguans and Venezuelans welcomed into the US under another Biden-era sponsorship known as CHNV.More recently, the US district judge Edward Chen in San Francisco blocked the Trump administration from terminating the temporary protection program for 350,000 Venezuelan migrants.But with continued administration efforts to repeal protection for immigrants in the country, advocates are worried that officials could also discontinue Ukraine’s TPS designation, leaving Ukrainians afraid to go back to a country still at war with no other valid status in the US.“That’s what has really threatened the safety of over 240,000 Ukrainians,” said Anne Smith, the executive director at Ukraine Immigration Task Force, a nonprofit organization that has helped families from Ukraine find refuge in the US.“There’s a great danger of being deported, and if not deported, then placed in detention for a long time. Given the majority of the Ukrainians who came here on Uniting for Ukraine under humanitarian parole, there really are no legal avenues available to them unless either the Department of Homeland Security lifts the processing of applications suspension or Congress decides to act,” she added.On the third anniversary of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, Senator Dick Durbin, Democrat of Illinois, introduced a bill that would offer Ukrainians who were granted parole, like Danyil, a temporary guest status, regardless of when they arrived in the US.“When the war started, Republicans across the country opened their hearts and communities to desperately fleeing Ukrainians, even actively petitioning President Biden to protect them from deportation. So far, not a single Republican has cosponsored my bill. But I urge them to join this simple act of American compassion. Standing up to dictators and speaking out for victims of war should never be a partisan issue,” Durbin said in a recent press release.Illinois is now home to 57,000 Ukrainians brought to the US under Uniting for Ukraine and another 65,000 reside in New Jersey and New York.The Leonid Foundation, named after a Ukrainian man who was killed in Mariupol during the Russian assault of 2022, has helped more than 3,000 Ukrainian refugees relocate to New Jersey since the war started, according to Anna Move, the organization’s president.The foundation helped Danyil find a home in central New Jersey. He works mounting television sets in people’s homes and is saving money hopefully to go to college. Meanwhile, he assists wounded Ukrainian soldiers who come to the US to get their prosthetics.He said: “A lot of people like me dream of staying in the US because there’s an opportunity. I am afraid of going back, I’ve seen those soldiers.” More