US immigration

Subterms

    More stories

    • 138 Shares169 Views

      in US Politics

      Trump officials reportedly consider TV gameshow with US citizenship as prize

      by

      The US Department of Homeland Security is reportedly considering an “out-of-the-box” pitch to participate in a television gameshow that would have immigrants compete to obtain US citizenship.Department spokesperson Tricia McLaughlin described the pitch to the New York Times as a “celebration of being an American” and said the show would include challenges based on American traditions.In a statement, McLaughlin said: “We need to revive patriotism and civic duty in this country, and we’re happy to review out-of-the-box pitches. This pitch has not received approval or rejection by staff.”News of the project surfaced as Donald Trump, himself a former reality TV star, carries out a sprawling immigration crackdown that has ensnared undocumented immigrants as well as lawful permanent residents, refugees and those with temporary status and pending court cases. In some cases, US citizen children have been deported alongside an undocumented parent.Overseeing the deportation effort as homeland security secretary is Kristi Noem, the former governor of South Dakota who has drawn sharp criticism for her “made-for-TV”-style approach to immigration enforcement. Shortly after she was sworn in, Noem appeared in tactical gear for a ride-along with immigration agents.She also traveled to El Salvador, where, well-coiffed and wearing a $50,000 Rolex watch, she posed in a notorious prison housing hundreds of men deported by the Trump administration without due process.The idea for the reality show was pitched by Rob Worsoff, the Canadian-born producer and writer who worked on Duck Dynasty, a reality TV show about a Louisiana hunting family popular with Trump supporters.In an interview, Worsoff told the New York Times that the proposal originated from his own experience with the naturalization process to become a US citizen. Describing the project, he said one of the challenges might center on Nasa to see which participant could assemble and launch a rocket first.The Wall Street Journal reviewed a 36-page slide deck laying out Worsoff’s idea, which he said he pitched to the department during the Obama administration and again during the Biden administration.According to the Journal, his proposal includes one-hour episodes and begins with immigrants sailing to Ellis Island, once a key point of entry for millions of people arriving in the US. Other challenges entail a gold-rush competition set in San Francisco and an auto-assembly-line contest in Detroit.The show would conclude with the winner being sworn in as a US citizen.“This isn’t The Hunger Games for immigrants,” Worsoff told the Journal, stressing that losing contestants would not face deportation. “This is not: ‘Hey, if you lose, we are shipping you out on a boat out of the country.’”The idea was first reported by the Daily Mail, though the department in its statement strongly refuted that Noem was aware of the pitch.McLaughlin said the department receives hundreds of pitches a year for potential television shows, including for documentaries about immigration and border-security enforcement operations as well as white-collar investigations.“Each proposal undergoes a thorough vetting process prior to denial or approval,” she said. More

    • 125 Shares189 Views

      in US Politics

      Trump administration fires nearly 600 contractors at Voice of America

      by

      The administration of Donald Trump has terminated nearly 600 contractors at Voice of America (VOA), the US-funded international news network known for delivering independent journalism to countries with restricted press freedom.The firings, announced on Thursday, appeared to defy a recent court order requiring the government to preserve strong news operations at VOA. The US president has criticized the news network and accused it of spreading “radical” content.The cuts, announced on Thursday, affected mostly journalists along with some administrative staff and represented more than one-third of VOA’s workforce.Among those dismissed are journalists from authoritarian countries who now face deportation, as their visas are linked to their jobs at VOA.“Today is an incredibly difficult day as USAGM terminates many of our contractors who have devoted themselves to fulfilling VOA’s congressionally-mandated mission to deliver factual, balanced and comprehensive journalism to the world,” journalists with the SaveVOA campaign said in a statement. “Among those affected are J-1 visa holders who will be forced to leave the country within 30 days. Several of these journalists come from countries where they could be arrested or worse because of their reporting for VOA.”The group said the team was considering its next steps and remained “committed to the goal of returning all employees to their positions”.The administration cited “the government’s convenience” as the justification for the firings, taking advantage of the workers’ status as contractors rather than full federal employees.Michael Abramowitz, the director of VOA, called the move “inexplicable” and said he was “heartbroken” in an email to staff obtained by the New York Times. Abramowitz has filed a lawsuit to stop the Trump administration from closing VOA.The notification to employees told terminated staffers that they will be let go as of 30 May and instructed them to return their press credentials, badges and other VOA property by that time, according to the Hill.Kari Lake, a Trump ally and senior adviser at the US Agency for Global Media, which oversees VOA, defended the decision as legally permissible. Lake had previously denounced the agency as “unsalvageable” and accused it of corruption without presenting evidence.The federal building that houses the VOA news outlet in Washington DC was also listed for sale on Thursday.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionSenator Jeanne Shaheen, ranking member of the Senate foreign relations committee, issued a statement in response to the firings:“The Trump administration’s gutting of Voice of America threatens access to independent media in places where it is needed most,” the statement reads. “It deeply weakens a critical and cost-effective tool of American influence and soft power. If Voice of America is silenced, PRC and Russian propaganda and lies will fill the void. To add more fuel to the fire, Kari Lake’s recent announcement that the Voice of America will now become a conduit for One America News Network is a gift to Russia and propagandists everywhere.”She added: “Firing respected independent journalists and employees is as strategically shortsighted as it is heartless. The Trump administration’s efforts to gut and de-fund independent media will only harm the United States in the long run.”The firings are the latest in a string of moves by the Trump administration targeting independent news organizations. The Federal Communications Commission, led by Trump appointee and the Project 2025 author Brendan Carr, has ordered investigations into NPR and PBS. Trump is also in an ongoing legal battle with 60 Minutes and CBS, and his administration previously barred the Associated Press from the Oval Office. More

    • 163 Shares169 Views

      in US Politics

      Ice used ‘false pretenses’ for warrant to hunt for Columbia students, lawyers say

      by

      Immigration and Customs Enforcement (Ice) effectively misled a judge in order to gain access to the homes of students it sought to arrest for their pro-Palestinian activism, attorneys say.A recently unsealed search warrant application shows that Ice told a judge it needed a warrant because the agency was investigating Columbia University for “harboring aliens”. In reality, attorneys say, Ice used the warrant application as a “pretext” to try to arrest two students, including one green card holder, in order to deport them.What the unsealed document shows is that the agency “was manufacturing an allegation of ‘harboring’, just so agents can get in the door,” Nathan Freed Wessler, an attorney with the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), said. “What Ice was actually trying to do is get into these rooms to arrest them.”The “harboring aliens” statute is applied to those who “conceal, harbor, or shield from detection” any immigrant who is not authorized to be in the US.The search warrant, which was first reported by the Intercept, relates to two Columbia University students, Yunseo Chung and Ranjani Srinivasan, whom Ice sought to deport over their purported pro-Palestinian activism.According to the document and other court records, agents had arrived at Columbia’s New York campus on 7 March to try to arrest Srinivasan but were unable to enter her dorm room because they did not have a judicial warrant. Two days later, on 9 March, agents arrived at Chung’s parents’ house to search for her, also without a warrant.On 13 March, an agent with Homeland Security Investigations (HSI), an office within Ice, filed the application for a search and seizure warrant with a federal judge in New York, saying that it was investigating Columbia University for “harboring aliens”. The agent claimed he believed there was “evidence, fruits and instrumentalities” that could prove the government’s case against the university. The federal judge granted the warrant and agents subsequently entered and searched two residences on Columbia’s campus.After Chung, a legal permanent resident who has lived in the US since the age of seven, found out about HSI’s search, she sued the government to block its effort to arrest and deport her. In the original complaint, attorneys for Chung claimed the search warrant was “sought and obtained on false pretenses”. Srinivasan, a doctoral student on a student visa, had left the US by then rather than risk arrest.Despite entering the dorm to, as HSI says, investigate whether Columbia was “harboring aliens”, attorneys claim it was used as a pretext to gain access to residences they would not otherwise have been able to enter, in order to carry out the arrests.“The manner of execution suggests that the agents were searching for the two named students, including Ms Chung, and needed a lawful basis to enter the residences in the hope of arresting the students on encounter,” Chung’s attorneys wrote in the March complaint.Chung has since been granted temporary protection from deportation as her case proceeds.The deputy attorney general, Todd Blanche, said in mid-March that the university was under investigation “for harboring and concealing illegal aliens on its campus”.It is unclear whether Ice is still investigating Columbia University for “harboring aliens”. The New York Times recently reported that a separate justice department investigation is seeking a list of names of Columbia students involved in a protest group in order to share it with immigration agents.A Columbia University official with knowledge of the search warrant application said that university had not seen the document before this week, and that the university has complied with subpoenas and judicial warrants when “required”. The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) did not respond to requests for comment by time of publication. HSI referred all questions to the DHS.Since the Trump administration stepped into office, the secretary of state, Marco Rubio, has engaged in a little-used authority to rescind green cards and visas held by a number of students around the country who have been involved in pro-Palestinian advocacy. The state department has accused some of them of supporting Hamas, a US-designated terrorist organization, without providing evidence.“We will be revoking the visas and/or green cards of Hamas supporters in America so they can be deported,” Rubio said in March on X, formerly known as Twitter. Rubio personally determined Chung should be deported, a memo submitted in her case shows.As Wessler explains, even if the secretary of state revokes someone’s legal status, the government is required to engage in the lengthy legal process before attempting to deport them.But, he adds, the government’s attempt to use the “harboring aliens” accusation to enter the building is a worrying escalation by the Trump administration.“There is a lot of concern by people and organizations for [the Trump administration’s] extremely aggressive interpretations of the harboring statute,” Wessler said. “As this episode illustrates, those interpretations don’t hold up to scrutiny.”The ACLU submitted letters to universities and magistrate judges last month, warning them of Ice’s attempts to use similar accusations to justify judicial warrants.“A college or university’s normal conduct in providing housing and services to students does not constitute a violation of Section 1324” – the “harboring aliens” law, one of the ACLU letters states. More

    • 125 Shares199 Views

      in US Politics

      Venezuelans deported by Trump are victims of ‘torture’, lawyers allege

      by

      Lawyers for 252 Venezuelans deported by the Trump administration and imprisoned in El Salvador for two months have alleged that the migrants are victims of physical and emotional “torture”.A law firm hired by the Venezuelan government said that it had been unable to visit the migrants in the mega-prison where they are locked up.The lawyers are seeking “proof of life”, but say they have come up against a wall of silence from President Nayib Bukele’s administration and the Central American nation’s justice system.Grupo Ortega filed a habeas corpus petition with the supreme court on 24 March seeking an end to what it calls the “illegal detention” of the Venezuelans, but is still waiting for a ruling.“They are treating them like common criminals,” lawyer Salvador Ríos said, after the migrants were shown dressed in prison clothing, shackled and with shaved heads.“This is torture,” both physically and psychologically, Rios said in an interview with AFP.The lawyers delivered a letter in early May to Bukele, a key ally of Donald Trump, requesting authorization to visit the Venezuelans, but so far without success.AFP sought a comment from the Salvadorian presidency about the case and the lawyers’ efforts, but has not received a response.Félix Ulloa, the Salvadorian vice-president, told the French media outlet Le Grand Continent that his government merely provides a “service that we could call prison accommodation”.Trump’s administration has paid Bukele’s government millions of dollars to lock up migrants it says are criminals and gang members.Trump invoked rarely used wartime legislation in March to fly migrants to El Salvador without any court hearing, alleging they belonged to the Tren de Aragua gang, a charge that their families and lawyers deny.The Venezuelans, as well as 36 deported Salvadorian migrants, are being held in a maximum-security prison built by Bukele to house thousands of suspects arrested during his sweeping crackdown on street gangs.Images of the Venezuelans entering the Cecot mega-prison in shackles illustrate the brutality, Ríos said.“The damage is not only physical, but also psychological,” Ríos said.In their letter to Bukele, the lawyers sought permission to interview the prisoners, either in person or virtually, which could serve as “proof of life”.They asked Bukele to release the list of the 252 Venezuelans, something that Washington has not done either.One Salvadorian migrant who was initially incarcerated in Cecot – but in April was moved to a prison farm – is Kilmar Ábrego García, a US resident deported due to what the United States itself admitted was an administrative error.A Venezuelan identified in US court documents as “Cristian” was also mistakenly expelled.In both cases, US judges unsuccessfully ordered the Trump administration to facilitate their return to the United States.Volker Türk, the UN human rights chief, said this week that the situation “raises serious concerns regarding a wide array of rights that are fundamental to both US and international law”.“Families we have spoken to have expressed a sense of complete powerlessness in the face of what has happened and their pain at seeing their relatives labelled and handled as violent criminals, even terrorists, without any court judgment as to validity of what is claimed against them,” he said in a statement.Isael Guerrero, another lawyer with Grupo Ortega, described the detentions as “completely illegal” because the Venezuelans “are not being legally prosecuted in any court” in El Salvador.The firm’s head, Jaime Ortega, said they were “100% migrants”.“Not a single one of them is being prosecuted” in the United States for their alleged membership of the Tren de Aragua gang, he said.The fate of the Venezuelans now depends entirely on Bukele, as “the expulsion completely nullifies US jurisdiction”, Ortega said.In April, Bukele offered to trade the 252 Venezuelans for an equal number of political prisoners held by President Nicolás Maduro’s government. More

    • 113 Shares159 Views

      in US Politics

      Judge dismisses trespassing charges against immigrants crossing US-Mexico border

      by

      A federal judge in New Mexico on Thursday dismissed trespassing charges against dozens of immigrants caught in a new military zone on the US-Mexico border, marking a setback for Trump administration efforts to raise penalties for unlawful crossings into the US.Chief US magistrate judge Gregory Wormuth began filing the dismissals late on Wednesday, ruling that immigrants did not know they were entering the military zone in New Mexico and therefore could not be charged, according to court documents and a defense attorney.Assistant federal public defender Amanda Skinner said Wormuth dismissed trespassing charges against all immigrants who made initial court appearances on Thursday. The immigrants still face charges accusing them of crossing the border illegally.“Judge Wormuth found no probable cause,” Skinner said in an email.New Mexico US attorney Ryan Ellison, who filed the first trespassing charges against migrants on 28 April, did not immediately respond to a request for comment.The so-called New Mexico national defense area was established in April along 180 miles (290km) of the border, and US army troops were authorized to detain immigrants entering the area from Mexico.A second buffer zone was set up in Texas this month. Defense secretary Pete Hegseth said in a social media post the military would continue to expand the zones to gain “100% operational control” of the border.US attorneys charged over 100 immigrants with crossing the border illegally and trespassing in the military zones in New Mexico and Texas. Potential combined penalties were up to 10 years imprisonment, according to Hegseth.But Wormuth pushed back against the charges for the immigrants in New Mexico, ordering Ellison on 1 May to show proof they were aware they entered the military zone unlawfully.Defense attorneys argued warning signs in the area were inadequate to inform immigrants they were committing a crime, a position Wormuth agreed with.“The criminal complaint fails to establish probable cause to believe the defendant knew he/she was entering” the military zone, Wormuth wrote in his orders dismissing charges.The Department of Defense did not immediately respond to Reuters’ request for comment. More

    • 138 Shares179 Views

      in US Politics

      Republicans say they want more American babies – but which kind?

      by

      Some of the children were too young to stand on their own. Instead, they sat on their parents’ knees or in their parents’ arms, waving American flags. Many of them seemed confused about what, exactly, was even happening.But these kids were in the midst of making history: their families were among the first to take advantage of Donald Trump’s February executive order granting white South Africans refugee status in the United States, on the grounds that Afrikaner landowners – who make up just 7% of South Africa’s population yet, decades after the end of apartheid, control about half of its land – are facing persecution. While the doors to the US refugee program have been slammed shut to virtually everyone else, these Afrikaners showed up in the US earlier this week, their refugee status promising a path to US citizenship.Days later, the Trump administration took a far narrower view of who deserves access to the American polity. On Thursday morning, a lawyer for the Trump administration argued in front of the US supreme court that the 14th amendment does not guarantee citizenship to the American-born children of “illegal aliens” – a view contradicted by more than a century of legal precedent.This split screen raises a vital question: is the Trump administration really interested in helping children and families flourish – or only the “right” families?Over the last several months, the Trump administration’s policies on immigration, families, and children have been pockmarked by all kinds of contradictions. The administration is reportedly considering numerous policies to convince people to have more children, such as “baby bonuses” of $5,000 or medals for mothers who have six or more kids. The Department of Transportation has issued a memo directing the agency to “give preference to communities with marriage and birth rates higher than the national average”. And JD Vance has proclaimed: “I want more babies in the United States of America.”These moves are, in part, fueled by the growing power of the pronatalism movement, which believes that the declining birthrate in the US is an existential threat to its workforce and its future.Why, then, does the government want to exclude an estimated 150,000 babies born every year?“It’s hard to look at any of these policies and not believe that they’re created for the purpose of satisfying a political base that was promised some sort of notions of recreating a nostalgia for a white Christian nationalist nation,” said P Deep Gulasekaram, a professor of immigration law at the University of Colorado Law School.If the fate of the US workforce is really of concern, experts say immigration could help grow it – but the Trump administration has taken a hardline stance against immigrants from the Global South and their children. The administration has not only reportedly turned the refugee agency responsible for caring for children who arrive in the US alone into an arm of Ice, but also slashed funding for legal representation of children in immigration proceedings. Meanwhile, Republicans in Congress are trying to block parents who lack Social Security Numbers – such as undocumented people – from benefiting from the child tax credit, even in cases where their children are US citizens.The Trump administration has also unveiled new screening protocols that make it far more difficult for undocumented people to “sponsor”, or take custody of, children who enter the US alone. Just last week, the National Center for Youth Law and the legal advocacy group Democracy Forward sued the Trump administration over the changes, which they say have forced kids to languish in government custody. Between December 2024 and March 2025, kids went from spending an average of two months in government custody to spending an average of six.“This administration has compromised the basic health and safety of immigrant children in egregious ways,” Neha Desai, managing director of children’s human rights and dignity at the National Center for Youth Law, said in an email.In March, KFF, a charity that conducts health policy research, conducted focus groups of Hispanic adults who are undocumented or likely living with someone who is undocumented. Many spoke of the effect that the Trump administration’s policies are having on their families and kids.“I have a six-year-old child. Honestly, I’m afraid to take him to the park, and he asks me, ‘Mom, why don’t we go to the park?’” one 49-year-old Costa Rican immigrant woman told KFF. “How do I tell him? I’m scared.”“Even the children worry. ‘Mom, did you get home safely?’ They’re already thinking that something is going to happen to us on the street,” added a 54-year-old Colombian immigrant woman. “So that also makes me very nervous, knowing that there might come a time when they could be left here alone.”The supreme court arguments on Thursday centered not on the constitutionality of birthright citizenship, but on the legality of lower court orders in the case. Still, some of the justices expressed concerns about what the case could mean for children.Eliminating birthright citizenship, Justice Elena Kagan suggested, could render children stateless. The high court needed a way to act fast, she said.If the justices believe that a court order is wrong, she asked, “why should we permit those countless others to be subject to what we think is an unlawful executive action?”Both the historical and legal record make clear that the 14th Amendment encapsulates birthright citizenship, Gulasekaram said. But, he said, predicting the supreme court’s moves is a “fool’s errand”.“There’s really no way of getting around the the conclusion that this is a call to some form of racial threat and racial solidarity as a way of shoring up support from a particular part of the of the of the Trump base,” Gulasekaram said. “Citizenship and the acquisition of citizenship has always been racially motivated in the United States.” More

    • 188 Shares139 Views

      in US Politics

      Newark mayor says prosecutors tried to ‘humilate’ him by forcing redo of fingerprints and mugshot

      by

      Ras Baraka, the Democratic mayor of Newark, said federal prosecutors were seeking to “humiliate and degrade” him by making him give fingerprints and have a mugshot taken for a second time on Thursday.The move came after a court appearance on a trespassing charge stemming from his arrest at an immigration detention center where he was protesting with several members of Congress.The charges against Baraka have unfolded amid fears that the Trump administration is seeking to prosecute Democratic politicians, judges or others who have opposed its policies.Baraka appeared in court for a roughly 15-minute procedural hearing before magistrate judge André Espinosa. The hearing covered mostly scheduling for discovery in the case, which stemmed from an encounter on Friday outside the Delaney Hall immigration detention center.Assistant prosecutor Stephen Demanovich said the government disputed Baraka’s claims that he committed no crime and was invited on to the facility’s property. Confusion over whether Baraka had been fingerprinted and processed after his arrest unfolded after the judge brought the proceedings to a close.As the parties began to walk away, the judge added that the mayor would need to be processed by the US Marshals Service and that it would take 10 minutes. Baraka, looking confused, said he had already been processed after his arrest. The judge said “agents” had processed him but not the marshals.“Let’s go,” Baraka said, before indicating he would go with the marshals.Speaking to a crowd of supporters outside court, Baraka addressed why it took him a while to emerge from the building.“They’re trying their best to humiliate and degrade me as much as they possibly can,” he said. “I feel like what we did was completely correct. We did not violate any laws. We stood up for the constitution of this country, the constitution of the state of New Jersey.”The trespassing charge against Baraka carries a maximum sentence of 30 days in prison.One of Baraka’s attorney’s, Rahul Agarwal, said the defense expected to seek to dismiss the charges because the mayor was arrested by federal agents on private property. He added that it was a “selective prosecution” and that only the mayor had been arrested.Demanovich said the government disputed that but did not go into detail.Baraka has been an outspoken opponent of Donald Trump’s immigration crackdown and a vocal opponent of the facility’s opening.In video of the Friday altercation shared with the Associated Press, a federal official in a jacket with the homeland security investigations logo can be heard telling Baraka he could not enter because “you are not a Congress member”.Baraka then left the secure area, rejoining protesters on the public side of the gate. Video showed him speaking through the gate to a man in a suit, who said: “They’re talking about coming back to arrest you.”“I’m not on their property. They can’t come out on the street and arrest me,” Baraka replied.Minutes later, several Immigration and Customs Enforcement (Ice) agents, some wearing face coverings, surrounded him and others on the public side. Baraka was dragged back through the gate in handcuffs.Delaney Hall is a two-storey building next to a county prison and formerly operated as a halfway house. In February, Immigration and Customs Enforcement awarded a 15-year contract to the Geo Group Inc to run the detention center.Politicians and activists have said facility has been reopened in contravention of local ordinances and without the necessary permits. It is the largest such facility in the north-eastern US, and the first to open during Trump’s second term, according to Ice.A trial date for Baraka has not yet been set.The Associated Press contributed reporting More

    • 188 Shares159 Views

      in US Politics

      This pregnant woman sued Trump over birthright citizenship. Now it’s up to the supreme court

      by

      With the highest court in the US poised to hear her case – and decide her family’s future – Monica was keeping busy babyproofing her house.Monica is a plaintiff in one of three lawsuits challenging Donald Trump’s birthright citizenship order, a case that is being heard before the nation’s highest court on Thursday. She’s expecting her first child in early August.The Guardian first spoke with her in January, not long after Trump took office and signed an executive order seeking to end the constitutionally recognized right of birthright citizenship. Since then, she said, her belly has grown bigger, her feet more swollen. And she is still waiting to see whether her baby will be born as a citizen, or stateless.“We can only wait and hope,” she said. “Let’s wait in faith and trust in the laws of this country.”The Guardian is not publishing Monica’s surname, to protect her from retribution. She and her husband fled political persecution in Venezuela in 2019, and came to the US seeking asylum. The couple had been waiting for their immigration court hearing when they found out, in early January, that Monica was pregnant.“We were so excited,” she said. Just two weeks later, news of Trump’s executive order landed like a blow. Acquiring Venezuelan citizenship for their child would be impossible – both Monica and her husband were outspoken critics of their country’s autocratic leader, Nicolás Maduro – and contacting the government could put them in danger.“I had to fight for my baby,” she said.She had been a member of the Asylum Seeker Advocacy Project (Asap), a non-profit group that advocates for immigrant rights, and when lawyers from the group reached out to expecting parents to see if any would like to join a lawsuit challenging Trump’s order, Monica felt compelled to respond.Two immigration advocacy groups, Asap and Casa, are named as plaintiffs alongside Monica and four other mothers in one of three cases challenging the executive order. A second case was filed by four states and pregnant women, and a third by 18 states, the District of Columbia and San Francisco. The supreme court is hearing these cases consolidated as one.Other than her mother and a few close relatives, nobody knows that she is involved in one of the most closely watched cases to come before the supreme court this year. She has concealed her identity and tried to maintain a low profile, to avoid biasing her family’s asylum case, and to protect her family in Venezuela.But the topic of birthright citizenship and the administration’s intention to end it often comes up in her conversations with friends – especially with immigrant mothers who, like her, worry about their babies’ futures. “We are all on standby,” she said.They worry, too, about news that mothers are being separated from their babies – or being deported alongside their children. “Every day there are new changes, there are new executive orders about us immigrants,” she said. “Every day there is more fear in immigration conditions.”In the meantime, she said, there’s nothing to do but focus on the day to day. Monica and her husband have kept busy getting their home baby-ready, purchasing and assembling cribs and car seats. Now that she’s in her third trimester, she’s packed a go-bag with a change of clothes and other essentials – ready in case she needs to rush to the hospital. “We’re really down to the last few weeks already,” she said.Recently, they settled on a name. More