US immigration

Subterms

    More stories

    • 138 Shares129 Views

      in US Politics

      Rubio boasts of canceling more than 300 visas over pro-Palestine protests

      by

      The US state department is undertaking a widespread visa-review process, revoking hundreds of visas and placing hundreds more under scrutiny, targeting mostly foreign nationals engaged in pro-Palestine activism, according to official statements.The secretary of state, Marco Rubio, confirmed the scale of the crackdown, announcing that he has canceled visas for more than 300 people he called “lunatics” connected to campus pro-Palestine protests in the US, with promises of action to continue daily.Asked by reporters during a visit to Guyana in South America to confirm reports of 300 visas stripped, Rubio said: “Maybe more than 300 at this point. We do it every day, every time I find one of these lunatics.”One recent example of the policy’s implementation has been US immigration authorities detaining Rumeysa Ozturk, a Turkish doctoral student at Tufts University on a Fulbright scholarship, in broad daylight by masked agents in plainclothes.Her arrest and visa revocation came after she voiced support for Palestinians in Gaza in an op-ed she co-authored in her student newspaper. The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) claimed she “engaged in activities in support of Hamas”, a justification being denounced as a direct assault on academic freedom and the erosion of free speech and personal liberties.In addressing her case specifically, Rubio said: “We revoked her visa … once you’ve lost your visa, you’re no longer legally in the United States … if you come into the US as a visitor and create a ruckus for us, we don’t want it. We don’t want it in our country. Go back and do it in your country.”But the visa-revocation campaign is just part of a broader, more aggressive deportation enforcement strategy that extends far beyond protest-related actions.The Trump administration has simultaneously implemented other restrictive measures, including pausing green card processing for certain refugees and asylum seekers and issuing a global directive instructing visa officers to deny entry to transgender athletes, of which there are very few.In a statement to Fox News, the state department claimed that it had “revoked the visas of more than 20 individuals”, and said hundreds more were under consideration under the banner of what they call “national security concerns”.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotion“Overall, we continue to process hundreds of visa reviews to ensure visitors are not violating terms of their visas and do not pose a threat to the United States and our citizens,” the statement said.The state department did not return a request for comment on whether these revocations were student visas, work visas or otherwise. More

    • 125 Shares129 Views

      in US Politics

      US immigration officials detain doctoral student at University of Alabama

      by

      US immigration authorities have detained a doctoral student at the University of Alabama, campus officials confirmed on Wednesday.A spokesperson for the state’s flagship university said in a brief statement that a student was arrested “off campus” by federal immigration officials, but declined to comment further, citing privacy laws.The US government’s justification for detaining the student was not immediately clear, and US Immigration and Customs Enforcement (Ice) did not respond to a request for comment late on Wednesday.News of the arrest comes amid reports of the Trump administration increasingly targeting college students for arrest and deportation across the country, including people in the US on visas and permanent residents with green cards, raising alarms on campuses and in surrounding communities.The Crimson White, a student newspaper at the University of Alabama, reported on the arrest, saying the targeted student was detained at their home early on Tuesday morning. The individual is Iranian and was in the US on a student visa and studying mechanical engineering, the newspaper said. The university’s College Democrats group said in a statement that Trump and Ice “have struck a cold, vicious dagger through the heart of UA’s international community”.It was not immediately clear on Wednesday evening if the arrested student had a lawyer.Alex House, a university spokesperson, said its international student and scholar services center was available to assist students with concerns: “International students studying at the university are valued members of the campus community.”But House’s statement added that the university “has and will continue to follow all immigration laws and cooperate with federal authorities”.The Alabama arrest was confirmed the same day news broke that Rumeysa Ozturk, a doctoral student at Tufts University in Boston, was detained by federal immigration agents and taken to an Ice detention center in Louisiana. Her arrest appeared to be part of the US government’s crackdown on students with ties to pro-Palestinian activism on campus last year.The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) said Ozturk was in the US on a visa and accused her of supporting Hamas, but did not provide evidence to support its claims. Media reports noted that Ozturk, a Fulbright scholar and Turkish citizen, had in March 2024 co-written an opinion piece in the Tufts student newspaper, alongside three other authors, supporting calls for the university to “acknowledge the Palestinian genocide”.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionOzturk’s arrest has sparked widespread outrage as video circulated showing masked officers, in plainclothes, approaching her on the street and taking her into custody. A 32-year-old software engineer whose surveillance camera recorded the arrest told the Associated Press it “looked like a kidnapping”.The Massachusetts director of Council on American-Islamic Relations, the Muslim civil rights group, said in a statement: “We unequivocally condemn the abduction of a young Muslim hijab-wearing scholar by masked federal agents in broad daylight. This alarming act of repression is a direct assault on free speech and academic freedom.”Ozturk’s lawyer told the New York Times she was heading out to break her Ramadan fast with friends when she was detained near her apartment.Tufts’s president said the university “had no pre-knowledge of this incident and did not share any information with federal authorities prior to the event”. The university was told the student’s visa was “terminated”, the president added.Ice records suggested Ozturk was taken to Louisiana despite a judge ordering DHS to give advanced notice if officials sought to transfer her out of state.DHS has also faced scrutiny over its efforts to deport Mahmoud Khalil, a Palestinian activist and recent Columbia graduate, who is a green card holder. A US judge in Manhattan on Wednesday blocked immigration officials from detaining Yunseo Chung, a Columbia undergraduate, who is also a permanent resident facing threats of deportation for involvement in Gaza solidarity protests.Maya Yang contributed reporting More

    • 150 Shares99 Views

      in US Politics

      How to protect your phone and data privacy at the US border

      by

      Welcome to Opt Out, a semi-regular column in which we help you navigate your online privacy and show you how to say no to surveillance. The last column covered what to do with your 23andMe account after the company filed bankruptcy. If you’d like to skip to a section about a particular tip, click the “Jump to” menu at the top of this article.If you’re a visa or green card holder with plans to travel to the US, reports of people being turned away at airports over messages found on their devices might be prompting you to second-guess your travel plans. You might be asking whether Customs and Border Protection (CBP) can search your phone, whether you can opt out and what you should do to minimize your risks.The short answer is that yes, CBP can search your devices. Constitutional protections are generally weaker at US borders, including airports. You can try to opt out, but depending on your specific circumstances, you might not be willing to risk the potential ramifications of not complying, which can include the confiscation of your devices.Privacy experts say everyone should conduct a personal risk assessment – which should include your immigration status, travel history and what data you might have on your phone. There’s not a one-size-fits all solution because data that may seem sensitive to some may not be to others, depending on your circumstances. That assessment might affect your calculus of whether to push back if CBP attempts to search your phone, for instance, or how much you want to lock down your devices before heading to the airport.While CBP said it only searched about 47,000 devices of the 420 million people who crossed the US border in 2024, experts the Guardian spoke to say border enforcement has been unpredictable under the Trump administration, so figuring out whether you’re at risk of a device search is not as straightforward as it once was. French officials said a French scientist was recently turned away at an airport in Texas because immigration officers found texts that were critical of Trump on his phone.“The super-conservative perspective is to assume they are completely unhinged and that even the most benign reasons for travel are going to subject non-citizens to these device searches,” said Sophia Cope, a senior staff attorney at the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF), a non-profit digital rights group.If you’re a US citizen, you must be admitted into the country. That said, some jurisdictions allow CBP to work with the FBI or local police to advance domestic investigations, so there are still some risks of your devices being searched for domestic reasons.There are steps you can take to make it harder for CBP officers to access your device and the data on it. So what should you do to protect the data on your phone from being searched? The main thing is to prepare ahead of heading to the airport. Here is what you should be thinking about:Decide if you will comply with a phone searchBefore you travel, start to prepare for the possibility of being pulled into secondary screening. First, you should decide if you’re going to comply if an immigration officer asks if they can search your device. They may ask for your phone password or for you to unlock the device. Ideally, you would unlock the device yourself and not share your password. You can decide not to give your consent, but that does come with its own risks.From a guide to the border from the EFF: “This presents a no-win dilemma. If a traveler complies, then the agents can scrutinize and copy their sensitive digital information. If a traveler declines, then the agents can seize their devices and subject the traveler to additional questioning and detention.”It’s possible that, if you refuse the search, the officer might decide that you are not worth the trouble because you do not present a high risk. They might let you go. On the flip side, though, declining could make the process longer or could result in border agents confiscating your device. If they do confiscate your device, make sure you ask for a property receipt so you can document that they have your device when you try to get it back. Even if you don’t give up your password, immigration officials can use various tools on your device to unlock it themselves. They can also try to guess your password, so make sure you have a strong and long password.There are a lot of reasons you might not want to risk being held back longer than you already have been or risk having your device confiscated – including that you don’t know how long border agents will keep your phone.If you plan to comply with a phone search to avoid any further complications, your phone might be searched either manually or with forensic tools. It is worthwhile to prepare for both types of searches.Turn your phone and Face ID off before entering the USThe EFF recommends turning your devices completely off before entering the US. This could return your phone or laptop to a heightened security state and, as a result, could make it harder for anyone to break the encryption on your device.Privacy advocates also recommend making sure your device requires a password to decrypt or unlock. If you use Face ID or a fingerprint to unlock your phone, for instance, it would be easier for an officer to use it to gain access to your device.Do not wipe your phoneYou might think the most protective options are to completely wipe your phone before traveling, use a burner or travel without a phone. But the EFF’s Cope said that could actually raise suspicions.“People are damned if they do and damned if they don’t,” Cope said. “If you cross the border with no data on your device, that itself can be seen as suspicious.”Instead, if you want to seem cooperative but do have data or texts stored on your phone that you wouldn’t want to be accessed, Cope suggests deleting that information selectively rather than wiping your whole device.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionEncrypt your data and use a strong passwordThe most important step to take before you travel is to encrypt the data on your device, which is different than using encrypted messaging services like Signal. Device encryption can make it harder for CBP officers to access files on your phone or laptop or recover deleted files, even if they confiscate the device and subject it to sophisticated forensic tools.Fortunately, all recent models of both iPhones and most Android phones come with full-device encryption automatically turned on. On an Android, double check that yours is on in the “advanced settings” tab of your “Security” menu. You will want to choose a strong password that is not easy to guess so CBP can’t walk in the front door to your device. Here’s a good primer on how to make a strong password.“This encryption is only as good as the encryption passphrase someone uses on their device, though,” said EFF senior staff technologist Bill Budington. “So the best advice is to choose a strong, nine- to 12-random-character (or four- to five-word) passphrase for the device, and make sure that biometric unlocks like Face ID or Touch ID are turned off when going through sensitive areas like checkpoints or somewhere your device could be confiscated.”Laptops, on the other hand, do not all come with full-device encryption. You can use the encryption tools some of them offer to encrypt your data. MacOS has a tool called FileVault, which you can access by searching for it in the top right corner of your screen, and some Windows computers come with a tool called Bitlocker, which can be used to encrypt your device. The EFF has a full list of tools you can use on various operating systems here.For those of you traveling with a device owned by your employer or someone else, you will want to make sure to have a conversation with them before you travel to ensure your device is sufficiently protected.How to securely delete your dataIn addition to encrypting your devices, you should delete any specific texts, apps, photos, etc that you feel are sensitive or you wouldn’t want a government agent to see.Securely deleting this data requires a few steps and comes with limitations. If you are not wiping your phone entirely, as that may raise suspicions, you will probably opt to delete specific files. That more practical option may be effective for a manual or cursory search but may not be sufficient in the event of a more advanced search by US immigration personnel. Files may not be fully deleted, or there may be references to these files that remain on your device.On top of ensuring your device is encrypted, you will want to make sure that you’ve deleted your files from any trash folders as well. On iMessage, for instance, if you click on “filters” in the top left corner you’ll find a “recently deleted” folder. Make sure you’ve cleared texts from there as well. On iPhones, once a file is deleted from both the main iMessage interface and the “recently deleted” file, it is permanently deleted, according to the company.Cope suggests pre-emptively deleting some apps your don’t want to be searched. This protective method is imperfect because an advanced search could reveal that an app was installed, but it would be a way to avoid having your WhatsApp messages searched, for instance, in the case of a manual search.Move things on to a cloud storage serverDuring law enforcement searches inside the boundaries of the US, a cloud storage server is not more protected than your devices. At the border, however, there are currently policies in place that prohibit CBP from searching online cloud services. In practice, that means that immigration officers will have to put your phone in airplane mode before searching it.“They do specifically say officers are only authorized to look at data that are ‘resident on the device’,” Cope said. “So that is data that is actually on the hard drive of your phone, laptop or camera. They’re supposed to disconnect it from the internet, if it’s an internet-connected device.”If you have data that you don’t want to or can’t delete permanently for any reason, you can delete it off your device and store it on your cloud storage like iCloud, Google Drive or Microsoft One Drive.This is a high-level guide that may not touch on the specifics of your situation. For a full comprehensive guide on how to protect your devices at US borders, please visit the Electronic Frontier Foundation. More

    • 175 Shares169 Views

      in US Politics

      ‘They tricked us’: migrants who braved the Darién Gap forced home by Trump deal

      by

      Outside the Lajas Blancas migrant camp in southern Panama, wooden shops are boarded up. A bed of cold ash lies in an iron drum barbecue which once served meat skewers to hungry migrants.Six months ago, hundreds of people would pass through the camp every day, emerging from the jungles of the Darién Gap between Colombia and Panama to receive humanitarian aid, before continuing their journey north towards the US.Now, however, migration through the gap has slowed to a trickle and the footfall is in the opposite direction, as many migrants from South America try to return home.Adriangela Contreras was one of 300,000 migrants to make the perilous crossing in 2024, carrying her two-year-old daughter, Arianna, as she stepped over dead bodies on the trail.She arrived at Lajas Blancas in November amid a crackdown by Panamanian authorities who rolled out barbed wire in the jungle and introduced biometric tests at the border.Under a $6m agreement with the US, hundreds of migrants from Colombia and Ecuador were returned to their home countries on deportation flights.Most Venezuelans were allowed to proceed, however, and Contreras’ group made it as far as southern Mexico, sleeping in the street and selling candies or washing windscreens to earn bus fares. But when on his first day in office Donald Trump shut down the CBP One app used by asylum seekers to request appointments, Contreras felt she had little option but to retrace her steps.“I’m so disappointed, I didn’t [decide to migrate] for myself but for my family,” she said. “Now I just want to go home, it’s been a long and difficult journey.”The shutdown of CBP One and the increased Panamanian controls have all but extinguished the Darién migrant route.In February, crossings were down 96% compared with the previous year. At the end of that month Lajas Blancas – which once regularly sheltered over 3,000 migrants in plywood buildings and tents – held just 485 migrants, 90% of whom had come from the north.So far this year, 4,091 migrants have returned to Panama and the government has struggled to deal with the logistics of this reverse flow.Oscar Ramírez, a 52-year-old Venezuelan, arrived at Lajas Blancas with barely $1 in his pocket. He had sold his truck to follow the “American dream”, but said he was robbed in Mexico City and then held prisoner by people smugglers in a hotel near Monterrey. “The only thing sure about Mexico is that you will be mugged,” he said.When he eventually made it into the US he was arrested by Ice that same morning and detained for three months before being deported to Villahermosa, Mexico, in January.“They tricked us,” he said, “they told us we would be able to get a repatriation flight from Panama.”Many of the migrants, including Contreras, say they were promised that, upon reaching Panama, they would be offered a place on a plane to Cúcuta, a Colombian city on the border with Venezuela.When the flight never materialized, some migrants who could afford it began taking small boats back to Colombia. On 22 February, a boat containing 19 migrants capsized and a nine-year-old Venezuelan girl drowned.Since then, the Panamanian government has introduced a new route, bussing migrants from Lajas Blancas to Miramar, a port on the Caribbean coast, and boarding them on to ferries to La Miel, an isolated village close to the Colombian border.“It was a horrible experience,” said Jessica Álvarez, who had never been on a boat before. “There were times when I thought we were going to turn over, it was really scary. I vomited and my son was really sick, everyone was so seasick.”From La Miel the migrants are sent on small boats to the villages of Capurganá and then Necoclí in Colombian territory. From there many, including Álvarez, have opted to stay with friends or family in Colombian cities.But Contreras and her daughter remain stuck in Necoclí.“When we first arrived they gave us nothing, not a bite to eat, not a mattress, nothing,” she said, speaking by phone from the Colombian port. With the help of some friends she managed to find a space on the floor of a guesthouse, but she is unsure how she will raise the money to return to Venezuela to see her son who recently underwent eye surgery.“I just want to be back with my family. I hope Venezuela has something better in store for me,” she said.The presidents of Panama and Colombia will meet in Panama City on 28 March with migration at the top of the agenda. Humanitarian aid agencies have started to depart Lajas Blancas, which is due to be closed in the coming weeks. Any further migrants arriving through the Darién Gap will be immediately deported to their home country or to Colombia, according to Panama’s ministry of public security.Ramírez had the funds to pay for a bus to Cúcuta and by Wednesday was back with his family in the state of Barinas. Over the phone he said he was happy to be home, even if he no longer had his truck.“Us migrants, we all had the same thing in our heads, the American dream,” he said. “But after the things we lived, I realized it’s just that: a dream.” More

    • 175 Shares199 Views

      in US Politics

      Columbia protester suit raises questions about free speech rights: ‘Immigration enforcement as a bludgeon’

      by

      In a matter of days, Yunseo Chung was sent into hiding.On 5 March, Chung – a 21-year-old student at Columbia University – attended a sit-in to protest the expulsion of several students involved in pro-Palestinian activism at the famed New York university. Four days later, Immigration and Customs Enforcement (Ice) agents showed up at her parents’ home.When they couldn’t find her there, Ice sought help from federal prosecutors and searched her dormitory – using a warrant that cited a criminal law against “harboring noncitizens”. They revoked her green card and accused her of posing a threat to US foreign policy interests.On Monday, Chung sued Donald Trump and other high-ranking administrations to stop their targeting of her and other students. And on Tuesday, a federal judge ordered the Trump administration to halt its efforts to arrest and deport Chung, saying “nothing in the record” indicated that Chung posed a danger to the community.“After the constant dread in the back of my mind over the past few weeks, this decision feels like a million pounds off of my chest. I feel like I could fly,” she shared in a statement to the Guardian after the ruling.Her location remains undisclosed, and Chung herself has remained shielded – for her own protection – from the public. But she has nonetheless made a powerful statement, by raising a simple question: if the administration can arbitrarily and unilaterally threaten immigrants over political views they disagree with, if it can disregard the free speech rights of lawful permanent residents – what limits, if any, remain on its power?“Officials at the highest echelons of government are attempting to use immigration enforcement as a bludgeon to suppress speech that they dislike, including Ms. Chung’s speech,” her lawyers write in the suit.Unlike some of the other students the administration has targeted for pro-Palestinian activism, including recent graduate Mahmoud Khalil, who led protests on campus, and Cornell PhD student Momodou Taal, who delivered speeches at his university’s pro-Palestinian encampment, Chung’s involvement in the movement was low-profile. She didn’t play an organizing or leading role in any of the protest efforts; she didn’t speak to the media about her activism.“She was, rather, one of a large group of college students raising, expressing, and discussing shared concerns,” her lawyers write.Chung moved to the US from South Korea when she was seven, and has lived in the country ever since. She was a valedictorian in high school; at Columbia, she had contributed to a literary magazine and an undergraduate law journal. She has maintained a 3.99 GPA and interned with a number of legal non-profits including the Innocence Project.Last spring, Chung was one of hundreds of students and other activists who set up the Gaza Solidarity Encampment on the university campus, and hundreds of others visited the space to attend speeches, community events and protests. As the university began meting out disciplinary actions against protesters, hundreds of students and faculty also joined in a walkout in solidarity with student activists, demanding amnesty to student protesters.View image in fullscreenIn May last year, Chung and other students faced disciplinary proceedings for posting flyers on school campus – but the university ultimately found that Chung had not violated policies, according to the lawsuit.After that, Chung continued her studies, and it wasn’t until earlier this month that she came onto immigration officials’ radar.Earlier this year, Barnard College, a sister school to Columbia, announced the expulsions of several protesters – amid a renewed, nationwide crackdown on student protesters that came following pressures from the Trump administration to tamp down pro-Palestinian activism on campus.Chung attended a sit-in demonstration calling on Barnard to reverse the expulsions. Chung became trapped between a crowd of students and New York police department officers investigating a bomb threat, according to the suit. She, and others, were charged by the NYPD for “obstruction of governmental administration”.Days later, immigration officials obtained a warrant to track down and arrest Chung. In a statement on Monday, the Department of Homeland Security characterized the sit-in she attended as a “pro-Hamas protest at Barnard College”.In a press conference after a hearing on Chung’s case Tuesday, Ramzi Kassem, one of her lawyers, said that Chung “remained a resident of the Southern District of New York” and had been “keeping up with her coursework” even amid Ice’s efforts to track her down and arrest her.In a lawsuit filed Monday, Chung’s lawyers wrote that the prospect of arrest and detention has “chilled her speech” – and note that the administration’s pursuit of non-citizen students had overall dampened free expression.“Ms. Chung is now concerned about speaking up about the ongoing ordeal of Palestinians in Gaza as well as what is happening on her own campus: the targeting of her fellow students,” the suit alleges.Scores of other students could also be silenced with similar threats, the suit argues. Faculty at Columbia and universities across the US have reported that international students and green card holders have been worried about attending classes, and are reconsidering plans to visit family, study abroad or travel for research.The administration has also placed immense pressure on universities to cooperate with its crackdown on protesters. Last week, the university agreed to overhaul its protest policies and hire an internal security force of 36 “special officers” who will be empowered to remove people from campus after the administration revoked $400m in funding for the university, which many faculty have taken as a dangerous capitulation that will endanger academic freedom.And the threat of deportation against her is a powerful one, the suit continues. If she is sent to South Korea, she would be arriving in a country she hardly knows – separated from her parents and community, and a sister who is about the start college as well.“Yunseo no longer has to fear that Ice will spirit her away to a distant prison simply because she spoke up for Palestinian human rights,” said Kassem in a statement to the Guardian. “The court’s temporary restraining order is both sensible and fair, to preserve the status quo as we litigate the serious constitutional issues at stake not just for Yunseo, but for our society as a whole.” More

    • 138 Shares169 Views

      in US Politics

      Trump signs executive order that will upend US voter registration processes

      by

      Donald Trump has signed a far-reaching executive order that promises to fundamentally disrupt American voter registration processes, introducing measures so restrictive they could in effect disenfranchise millions of citizens if enacted.Described by Will Scharf, the White House staff secretary, on Tuesday as “the farthest reaching executive action taken” in the nation’s history, the order represents the latest in a long list of assaults against immigration, but also on current voting systems.The sweeping order amends the federal voter registration form to require proof of citizenship in order to vote. It demands documentary proof for citizenship such as a passport to be eligible to vote in federal elections, empowers federal agencies to cut funding to states deemed non-compliant and instructs the Department of Justice to prosecute what the White House paints as “election crimes”.The measure also seeks to block states from accepting mail-in ballots after election day, regardless of when they are mailed in.Many of the provisions in the order are likely to be quickly challenged and are legally suspect. The US constitution explicitly gives states and Congress the authority to set the rules for election and does not authorize the president to do so.“The short answer is that this executive order, like all too many that we’ve seen before, is lawless and asserts all sorts of executive authority that he most assuredly does not have,” said Danielle Lang, a voting rights lawyer at the non-profit Campaign Legal Center.Republicans have long sought to add a citizenship to the federal form and been stymied by the courts. In a 7-2 decision in 2013, for example, the US supreme court said that Arizona could not require proof of citizenship to vote in federal elections. The power to set the requirements on the federal form is left to the bipartisan Election Assistance Commission. Courts have also blocked efforts to short-circuit efforts to add the question.The order tracks with a controversial bill in Congress Safeguard American Voter Eligibility (Save) Act, which would require Americans to prove citizenship in person – a requirement that could immediately eliminate mail-in and online voter registration already across 42 states, as well as DC and Guam.All metrics point to these actions making it harder, not easier, for Americans to vote. According to the state department in 2023, fewer than half of all Americans had a valid passport, and nearly 69 million women who have changed their names would struggle to produce matching documentation, according to a Center for American Progress analysis.Kansas had a law requiring proof of citizenship in effect between 2013 and 2016. It wound up putting the registrations of 30,000 people in jeopardy – the vast majority of whom were eligible to vote.The Center for Democracy and Civic Engagement reported in 2024 that roughly 21 million voting-age Americans, about 9% of the population, do not have a current, valid ID.Despite Trump’s claims of widespread election fraud, federal law already prohibits non-citizens from voting, with penalties including up to five years in prison. Current election systems already use multiple federal databases to verify voter eligibility, including citizenship data from the Department of Homeland Security.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionA day after the 2024 elections, the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (Cisa) director, Jen Easterly – the agency in charge of overseeing election security in the United States – said: “Our election infrastructure has never been more secure and the election community never better prepared to deliver safe, secure, free and fair elections for the American people.“Importantly, we have no evidence of any malicious activity that had a material impact on the security or integrity of our election infrastructure,” Easterly added.Still, Trump framed the order as a critical step in “straightening out our election”, claiming the country is “sick” from what he termed “fake elections.” He added that “there are other steps that we will be taking as the next in the coming weeks” when it comes to the electoral process.This action continues Trump’s long-term efforts to reshape democratic participation, a throwback to his 2020 memo to exclude non-citizens from census population counts that would be used to shape congressional districts. The rhetoric and subsequent follow through represents a potentially transformative – and deeply controversial – approach to voter eligibility that could redefine access to the ballot box.“Perhaps some people think I shouldn’t be complaining because we won in a landslide, but we got to straighten out our election,” Trump said as he signed Tuesday’s order. More

    • 150 Shares139 Views

      in US Politics

      We call on Columbia to stand up to authoritarianism | Open letter

      by

      To the Columbia University administration,As journalists who were trained by Columbia University’s Graduate School of Journalism, and who are steeped in America’s long traditions of free speech and academic freedom, we write to you to express our horror at the events of the past week.The Trump administration has sent immigration enforcers into university-owned student housing and university public spaces at Columbia, has arrested and sought to deport Mahmoud Khalil – not for having committed any documented crimes, but for the thoughts that he has expressed; and has forced another student, Ranjani Srivasan, to flee to Canada after her visa was revoked, also apparently for thought crimes.It has sought to financially cripple the university by withholding $400m in federal funds. And it has demanded the university shut down or restructure departments it deems to be politically problematic, and that it alter its criteria for who to admit to incoming student cohorts.We come from diverse political backgrounds and worldviews; some of us were deeply alienated by last year’s campus protests around the war in Gaza, others of us were sympathetic to the students. Regardless of our political views, however, we firmly believe that the federal government should have no role in policing Columbia’s academic structures, in shaping course requirements and personnel choices made by the university, in dictating admissions strategies, and in terrorizing students for expressing political views that the first amendment clearly protects.Yet, astoundingly, all of these changes are now being accepted by Columbia University in the vain hope of deterring a predatory government from cutting off federal funds and decimating the university’s science research facilities. The university higher-ups have sold out students and faculty alike in their efforts to access federal dollars.We recognize that the fault here lies primarily with the Trump administration, which is stampeding away from democratic norms and, by the day, reinventing the US as an autocracy in the image of Orbán’s Hungary and Putin’s Russia. We recognize, too, that universities such as Columbia are caught between a rock and hard place, damned if they cooperate with the Maga agenda and damned if they don’t.In such a dismal situation, courageously standing up for moral principles and academic codes would have been the honorable – and ultimately more effective – path to take. As Churchill famously said after England and France’s capitulation to Nazi demands at the Munich conference in which Czechoslovakia was dismembered: “You had a choice between dishonor and war; you chose dishonor and you shall have war.”Trump’s administration preys on weakness, and it is employing an extraordinarily effective divide and conquer strategy. We are seeing this in its assault on individual law firms, such as Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison, which this week cried uncle and arranged a meeting with Trump, in which it agreed to do $40m of pro bono work for clients and issues of his choice in exchange for not having their security clearances revoked.That will, of course, only empower Trump and the justice department to ask more of the capitulating attorneys and also to go after additional law firms, seeking the same result – indeed, on Friday night, Trump released a memo directing the Department of Justice to do just that. We are seeing it with major media outlets – take, for example, ABC’s extraordinary decision to donate millions of dollars to the Trump presidential library to make an inconvenient Trump lawsuit disappear; or CBS’s decision to give the Trump team access to the transcripts of its pre-election interview with Kamala Harris. Again, that will only empower Trump to demand further concessions from those companies in how they report on his Administration as well as to seek to kneecap the independence of other media outlets.And, of course, we are seeing it in the escalating war against academia. Columbia’s capitulation won’t end the nightmare that American research universities are facing, rather it will make it worse. For if an institution of the stature, and with the vast endowment resources, of an Ivy League school such as Columbia can be publicly humiliated and made to grovel for Federal crumbs, then every other academic institution in the country is rendered weaker and more open to political attack.Given this reality, we urge Columbia’s administrators to rethink their strategy in dealing with Trump’s authoritarian administration. We urge university administrators around the country to respond collectively rather than allowing themselves to be picked off one by one. And we urge Columbia alumni, of all political persuasions, to join with us in recognizing the enormous stakes in play here, and in demanding that this wonderful academic institution stand up for the values and the beliefs that have held steady since its founding more than 270 years ago. We urge alumni to call their political representatives to protest the assault on academic freedom, to contact Columbia University’s leadership to express their displeasure, and, if necessary, to withhold their donations to Columbia until such time as the university stiffens its spine in its dealings with the Trump administration.This is, we believe, one of the greatest crises facing academia in US history, and also one of the greatest assaults on free speech. How universities such as Columbia respond will determine whether universities remain independent or whether, ultimately, they end up simply serving as extensions of an increasingly authoritarian state.Sasha Abramsky
      Jason Ziedenberg
      Marissa Ventura
      Marion Davis
      Martha Irvine
      Anna Allen
      Gil Griffin
      Megan Williams
      Tony Fong, Science editor
      Victoria Pesce Elliott
      Holly Bass
      Stuart Davis
      Chuck Tanowitz
      Jennifer Cohen Oko
      Carolyn Juris
      Victoria Colliver
      John Nichols
      Chris Lombardi
      Alice Sparberg Alexiou
      Elizabeth Kadetsky
      Dina Hampton
      Aaron Naparstek
      Kevin Heldman
      Jerome Weeks
      Betsy Rosen
      Lizzy Stark
      Jay Ross
      Professor Sam Freedman
      Timothy Cahill More

    • 213 Shares189 Views

      in US Politics

      Donald Trump is seeking to erase the United States as we know it | Laurence H Tribe

      by

      Less than seven weeks into Donald Trump’s second term as president, his administration has set off a new wave of handwringing over what has by now become a familiar question: has the US entered a constitutional crisis?Triggering the latest iteration of that worry, the government hastily deported more than 200 Venezuelan immigrants to a notorious prison in El Salvador, without hearings or evidence and thus without anything even resembling due process of law, pursuant to the US president’s proclamation “signed in the dark on Friday evening” that they constituted an invasion by a foreign state.Trump invoked a 1798 statute last used to intern Japanese Americans during the second world war, buttressed by powers he claimed were inherent in the presidency. Chief judge James E Boasberg of the US district court for the District of Columbia rushed to convene a hearing on the legality of the challenged action as two deportation flights departed from Texas, followed quickly by a third. Moments after the judge ordered them to return so he could rule on a motion barring the deportation, El Salvador’s president, Nayib Bukele, tweeted: “Oopsie … Too late”, with a laughing emoji, even as the court considered whether its order had been defied.The branch of government best able to uncover and safeguard both our noblest traditions and the simple truth in moments such as these – the judiciary – has been hobbled and vilified by Trump and his allies, making wildly irresponsible calls for impeachment that put dangerous targets on the backs of judges who rule in ways they dislike. Even mild-mannered chief justice John Roberts had to cry “foul”. The administration’s cavalier attitude toward courts that fail to do its bidding, exemplified by calls for Boasberg’s removal, seemed to confirm concerns about a looming crisis.But searching for evidence of a “constitutional crisis” in the rapidly escalating clashes of the executive branch with the judicial branch misses the larger cataclysm taking place across the US. This president, abetted by the supine acquiescence of the Republican Congress and licensed by a US supreme court partly of his own making, is not just temporarily deconstructing the institutions that comprise our democracy. He and his circle are making a bid to reshape the US altogether by systematically erasing and distorting the historical underpinnings of our 235-year-old experiment in self-government under law.What we are currently living through is nothing less than a reorganized forgetting of the building blocks of our republic and the history of our struggles, distorting what it means to be American. The body politic is being hollowed out by a rapidly metastasizing virus attacking the underpinnings of our entire constitutional system. Make no mistake. This is how dictatorship grows.Symptomatic of that reshaping is the peculiar emergence, in a duet staged by the president together with the world’s richest man and Trump’s main benefactor, of a co-presidency without precedent in our republic and without even a hint of the irony in such shared power being propagated by ideologues whose mantra has long been the need for a “unitary presidency”.As staffers of the newly minted so-called “department of government efficiency” (Doge) raided congressionally created independent federal agencies and foundations without warning and slashed entire programs without thought, the Trump administration stuttered when asked by the courts to explain who was in charge of the “department” that no Congress had created – and how the leader of that enterprise had somehow acquired the power of the purse that the constitution clearly delegated only to Congress.More than just stonewalling courts and refusing to provide basic information on government activities, the Trump administration has waged war on history itself. Having first debilitated our capacity to act, it is now coming after our capacity to think. The same day Boasberg directed the administration to explain why it had seemingly failed to comply with his order, Doge staffers marched into the Institute of Museum and Library Services (IMLS), the agency responsible for funding many needy public museums, libraries and historic repositories across the country.Like Julius Caesar besieging and burning the Library of Alexandria, the Doge officials descended upon the IMLS to begin the process of gutting the public institutions dedicated to preserving and making widely available the shared memory of our past. It was none other than Benjamin Franklin whose conception of public libraries democratized knowledge and made it accessible to ordinary people. What used to be the private province of the few became the public province of the many.The attack on the IMLS is only the latest episode of the Trump presidency’s attempt to privatize information while replacing authentic history with a version more to its liking. As internet archivists race to back up the nation’s files and records, Trump administration officials have been systematically purging government websites in real time of the tools, concepts and language we need to act as informed citizens. In response to secretary of defense Pete Hegseth’s order to remove “diversity” content from the department’s platforms, the Pentagon took down pages about the Holocaust, September 11, cancer awareness and suicide prevention. So too, the Department of Agriculture deleted entire datasets and resources that farmers relied on to identify ways of coping with heat waves, droughts, floods and wildfires. Websites belonging to the Small Business Administration and Arlington National Cemetery scrubbed their platforms of photographs and references to women, LGBTQ+ individuals and people of color, including facts about American heroes such as Jackie Robinson or Gen Colin Powell.Taken together, these events of the past few weeks reveal an alarmingly rapid collapse of what gives the United States constitution life and meaning. Its words may remain unchanged, but its role in our lives is crumbling before our eyes. Looking for a decisive explosion or a moment of crisis – what physicists call a singularity – in the chaotic onrush of presidential provocations is a fool’s errand, one calculated to disarm the resistance without which we will surely be doomed.The seeds of our ongoing disintegration long precede Trump’s rise to power. They were planted decades ago by strategic politicians who dressed rightwing ideologies in conservative garments, permitting the darkest angels of our nature to take hold and to reach a climax in fake claims of a stolen election that led to an insurrection in our country’s capital, followed first by the Senate’s abdication of its duty in Trump’s second impeachment trial (on the bogus ground that the trial had begun too late to give the Senate jurisdiction) and next by the US supreme court’s gifting of Trump – and every future president – with a nearly absolute immunity transforming the office from one restrained by law to a source of virtually limitless power.Rarely noted is how this frightening power to ignore federal criminal law has been conferred not only on the president but on his legions of loyal lieutenants, from public officials to private militias. Because the constitution itself gives presidents an unbridled power to pardon others – a power Trump reveled in employing to free from prison the violent insurrectionists that he had himself helped unleash – we now live under a system in which any president can license his trusted followers to commit crimes to consolidate his power and wealth, making clear that a pardon awaits them should they face federal prosecution. The upshot is that privateers in league with the president can safely ignore federal laws criminalizing corrupt evasion of rules designed to protect public health and safety while they casually usurp powers the constitution gave to Congress, moving so fast and breaking so much that not even genuinely independent federal courts can keep pace with the mayhem.In his iconic poem The Hollow Men, TS Eliot a century ago famously wrote: “This is the way the world ends / This is the way the world ends / … /Not with a bang but a whimper.” Rooted in our past, the anti-democracy virus has reached a fever pitch as it ravages the body politic and revises all traces of our history. It’s a virus we must fight with all the energy we can muster if we don’t want our system of self-government under law to die – not in a sudden explosion but with a quiet whimper.The tragedy is that too many politicians and organizations are caving in without a fight, leading others to follow suit. With each surrender, Trump and his minions not only grow more emboldened but cement their hold on power by cracking down on all who dare oppose them in court, including lawyers who come to the aid of the administration’s enemies.Without more courageous leaders – including Republican officeholders who fear being primaried by candidates backed by limitless wealth – and without more bravery on the part of corporate CEOs whose fortunes can be threatened by Trump, elite lawyers whose business can shrivel if Trump targets them, and ordinary citizens understandably fearing online threats and worse, this darkness will be our destiny as we are reduced to mere memories and then relegated to the vast wasteland of the forgotten.

      Laurence H Tribe is the Carl M Loeb University professor and professor of constitutional law emeritus at Harvard Law School. Meriting special thanks and acknowledgment is his research assistant, Radhika M Kattula, a third-year law student at Harvard Law School. More