Former President Bill Clinton, rock star Mick Jagger and the late sex offender Jeffrey Epstein are seated at a table in this undated photo released as part of the Epstein files on Friday, Dec. 19, 2025, by the Department of Justice. Clinton has denied any connection to Epstein's alleged crimes. (Photo from Department of Justice)

WASHINGTON — The Department of Justice began releasing thousands of records Friday related to the late sex offender Jeffrey Epstein, but questions remained over whether officials will meet the requirements of a law overwhelmingly backed by both Republicans and Democrats and signed by President Donald Trump.

The department posted four data sets of images and documents just after 4 p.m. Eastern.

The trove reviewed by States Newsroom reporters contains numerous images of Epstein with celebrities, including the late pop star Michael Jackson, rock legend Mick Jagger, illusionist David Copperfield and former President Bill Clinton. Many other faces in photos are redacted. The photos were released without dates or context. 

A reproduction of Epstein’s contact list included entries for Trump, his late former wife, Ivana Trump, and his daughter, Ivanka Trump.

An array of photos of Trump with several women appeared amongst the files, according to a preliminary scan by the New York Times. But the Times also said most of the images already had been made public. 

Trump, who is prolific on social media, had not yet commented in the hours after the files were released. During an earlier press conference on prescription drugs Friday, the president declined to take any questions.

Trump had a well documented friendship with Epstein, a hedge fund manager who enjoyed a circle of wealthy and influential friends — though Trump maintains he had a falling out with Epstein and was never involved in any alleged crimes.

Since July, when Justice officials announced no further files would be released, Trump had resisted loud protests, even from his base, that all investigative material in the government’s possession should be made public. Trump repeatedly called the files a “Democrat hoax,” despite the investigation occurring during his first administration.

Files in the first dataset include images of lavishly furnished rooms, including one that appears to have a taxidermied tiger, as well as bathrooms with framed photographs of women whose faces have been redacted.

Photos in the second data set reveal Epstein seated at a table with Jagger, and another of Clinton lying in a hot tub or spa with the top of his chest visible. Another photo was of Clinton with the late pop star Michael Jackson.

Clinton was also photographed with a woman, whose face is redacted, seated on his lap and with his arm around her. In another, Clinton and Epstein stand side by side, smiling at something off camera and dressed in shiny party shirts.

A spokesperson for Clinton posted on social media that the former president was unaware of Epstein’s illegal activities and cut the financier off socially before allegations were public. The spokesperson, Angel Ureña, also redirected attention back to Trump.

“This is about shielding themselves from what comes next, or from what they’ll try and hide forever,” he wrote about the Trump White House. “So they can release as many grainy 20-plus-year-old photos as they want, but this isn’t about Bill Clinton. Never has, never will be.”

In a Dec. 10 letter from Clinton’s lawyer obtained by the New York Times, the former president denies being connected to any alleged crimes Epstein committed. 

Photos in the third dataset document Epstein’s travels to Europe, desert locations and island locales. Most photos of people other than Epstein, his accomplice Ghislaine Maxwell and Clinton are redacted.

The last dataset also included a completely redacted 119-page grand jury file from New York federal court. Both Epstein and Maxwell were prosecuted in New York, and the Justice Department requested the sealed records be made public.

Maxwell was convicted and sentenced for her role in the scheme to traffic teenage girls for sex.

The fourth trove of files appeared to relate to law enforcement and attorneys’ investigation into potential sex abusers, such as coordinating interviews and crafting timelines. A portion of the documents related to a 2019 grand jury were completely blacked out. 

Following the Justice Department’s release Friday afternoon, both Rep. Tom Massie, R-Ky., and Rep. Ro Khanna, D-Calif., who co-sponsored the Epstein Files Transparency Act, released scathing statements.

“Unfortunately, today’s document release by @AGPamBondi and @DAGToddBlanche grossly fails to comply with both the spirit and the letter of the law that @realDonaldTrump signed just 30 days ago,” Massie posted on X.

Document release to continue

Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche told Fox News Friday morning the department will “release several hundred thousand documents today, and those documents will come in all different forms, photographs and other materials associated with, with all of the investigations into, into Mr. Epstein.” 

But Blanche also said the release will carry over into “the next couple of weeks,” which would be past the Friday deadline set in the law.

The law, unanimously supported by the Senate and approved by the House 427-1, requires the Justice Department to publicly disclose “all unclassified records, documents, communications, and investigative materials in its possession that relate to Epstein or Maxwell.” 

‘ALL the Epstein files’

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer issued a statement Friday slamming the department’s admission that it will not meet the law’s deadline. Trump signed the bill into law on Nov. 19.

“The law Congress passed and President Trump signed was clear as can be — the Trump administration had 30 days to release ALL the Epstein files, not just some. Failing to do so is breaking the law. This just shows the Department of Justice, Donald Trump, and Pam Bondi are hellbent on hiding the truth,” Schumer said, alleging a “cover up.”

“Senate Democrats are working closely with attorneys for the victims of Jeffrey Epstein and with outside legal experts to assess what documents are being withheld and what is being covered up by Pam Bondi. We will not stop until the whole truth comes out,” the New York Democrat continued.

Schumer later criticized in a separate statement the late afternoon release as “just a fraction of the whole body of evidence.”

House Democrats Robert Garcia, D-Calif., and Jamie Raskin, D-Md., released a joint statement Friday stating they “are now examining all legal options in the face of this violation of federal law.” Garcia and Raskin are, respectively, the ranking members of the House Oversight and Government Reform and Judiciary committees. 

Massie, who pushed to bypass Republican leadership to pass the legislation, published a 14-minute video on social media Thursday night regarding how the public should interpret whether the Justice Department follows the statute.

“How will you know if they’ve released all the materials?” Massie said. “Well, one of the ways we’ll know is there are people who covered this case for years, and I’ve talked to them in private, then they know what some of the material is that’s back there.”

The Kentucky Republican said he’s been in contact with victims’ lawyers who claim federal investigators are in possession of names that should be contained in the files.

“If we get a large production on December 19, and it does not contain a single name of any male who’s accused of a sex crime or sex trafficking or rape, or any of these things, then we know they haven’t produced all the documents. It’s that simple,” Massie said.

In a press conference Tuesday led by several Senate Democrats, Schumer said the lawmakers have been “preparing for any scenario” and warned “there will be serious legal and political consequences” if the Trump administration withholds documents required by law to be released.

‘New information’ on Epstein cited  

The brief text of the law does not outline penalties if the deadline is not met.

Types of documents cited in the law include flight logs, plea agreements and immunity deals, and any internal DOJ communications about Epstein, who died in jail in 2019 awaiting trial on federal sex trafficking charges.

The law states documents cannot be delayed, redacted or withheld “on the basis of embarrassment, reputational harm, or political sensitivity, including to any government official, public figure, or foreign dignitary.”

Victims’ identities must be redacted, and written justification is required for any information withheld, according to the law.

Carve-outs also exist for any material relating to ongoing investigations. 

The department announced new investigations on Nov. 14 into Epstein’s ties to Clinton, former Treasury Secretary Larry Summers, and prominent investor Reid Hoffman. 

Attorney General Pam Bondi said Nov. 19 during a press conference that “information has come forward, new information, additional information.”

House Democrats release more photos

Democrats on the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform have been releasing a trickle of private files from Epstein’s estate that were handed over in response to a congressional subpoena. Committee Democrats disclosed dozens more images Thursday.

The public disclosure of the digital files, released via a cloud folder without context, follows the committee Democrats’ announcement Dec. 12 that it had received 95,000 more images from Epstein’s estate. 

Among those images was a photo of Trump surrounded by women whose faces had been redacted, and an image of apparent packaged condoms with Trump’s face on them and a sign reading “I’m HUUUUGE!” Another image, which featured an apparent “Bill Clinton” autograph, shows the former president posing with Epstein, Maxwell and others.

The latest batch of private records released included photos of Epstein with guests at meals and multiple photos of Epstein talking with former Trump strategist Steve Bannon across a sizable wooden desk in what appears to be an office with antique books and collectibles. Another photo shows Epstein dressed in traditional sheikh-style garments. 

A few images of the New York Times’ David Brooks surfaced in the latest batch as well. Epstein is not in the frame with Brooks, an opinion columnist. The Times released a statement to media outlets Thursday that “Mr. Brooks had no contact with (Epstein) before or after this single attendance at a widely-attended dinner” in 2011.

Other images feature former Microsoft CEO Bill Gates standing with a woman whose face has been redacted by the committee, and a solo photo of Google co-founder Sergey Brin.

“Oversight Democrats will continue to release photographs and documents from the Epstein estate to provide transparency for the American people,” Garcia said in a statement Thursday. “As we approach the deadline for the Epstein Files Transparency Act, these new images raise more questions about what exactly the Department of Justice has in its possession. We must end this White House cover-up, and the DOJ must release the Epstein files now.” 

Brown University President Christina Paxson speaks to reporters gathered at the Providence Public Safety Complex on Dec. 16, 2025. Gov. Dan McKee, far left, and Providence Mayor Brett Smiley are also pictured. (Photo by Christopher Shea/Rhode Island Current)

WASHINGTON — Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem said late Thursday she was suspending applications for a diversity visa program because the man suspected of killing two Brown University students and a Massachusetts Institute of Technology professor this week obtained a green card through the program in 2017.

Noem said on social media she was “immediately directing (U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services) to pause the DV1 program to ensure no more Americans are harmed by this disastrous program.”  

Local authorities found the suspect, Portuguese national Claudio Manuel Neves Valente, dead in a New Hampshire storage unit late Thursday, five days after the shooting at Brown in Providence, Rhode Island, that wounded nine and killed two students. 

Two days after the Brown shooting, an MIT professor was found shot in his home and later died at the hospital. Authorities also linked that killing to Neves Valente.

Neves Valente, 48, attended Brown in the early 2000s.

Visa program

The diversity visa program, also known as DV1, grants up to 50,000 immigrant visas each year under a lottery system that aims to select individuals from countries with low rates of immigration to the U.S. 

Most lottery winners reside outside the United States and are processed by the State Department. Lottery winners who are within the U.S. are processed by USCIS. 

More than 14 million individuals applied for the program in 2021, the most recent year for which the State Department has data.

Noem said in her post she was acting on behalf of President Donald Trump, who tried to end the diversity visa program in his first term after an individual from Uzbekistan who came through the program carried out an attack in New York City that killed eight people.

It’s the latest effort by the Trump administration to curtail legal immigration after a tragedy. 

The administration paused asylum applications after an Afghan national who was granted asylum was charged with killing one National Guard member and wounding another in last month’s shooting in Washington, D.C.

The John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts, which the White House said will be renamed the Trump-Kennedy Center.  (Photo courtesy of Kennedy Center)

WASHINGTON — The John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts, a prestigious cultural hub in the nation’s capital, will be renamed the Trump-Kennedy Center, White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt announced Thursday.

The renaming comes after President Donald Trump named himself chair of the board in February in a major shake-up. He later fired the Kennedy Center president as well as board members appointed by President Joe Biden before appointing his own members.

Leavitt said the board unanimously approved the name change. However, a federal statute appears to prohibit the renaming of portions of the center, which is considered a living memorial to Kennedy.

“After December 2, 1983, no additional memorials or plaques in the nature of memorials shall be designated or installed in the public areas of the John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts,” according to the U.S. code. 

Congress likely would need to change the law for the center to be renamed officially. 

The Kennedy Center was renamed in 1964 to honor President John F. Kennedy, who was assassinated.

Leavitt said the renaming was “because of the unbelievable work President Trump has done over the last year in saving the building. Not only from the standpoint of its reconstruction, but also financially, and its reputation.”

“Congratulations to President Donald J. Trump, and likewise, congratulations to President Kennedy, because this will be a truly great team long into the future!,” she wrote.

Since the president’s takeover of the center, major artists and performers have canceled performances or boycotted performing. The artist Issa Rae, and the musical “Hamilton” will no longer perform at the center and dozens of cast members of “Les Misérables” refused to perform for Trump officials earlier this year.

U.S. Department of Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem walks past reporters after doing a TV interview with Fox News outside the White House on March 10, 2025 in Washington, D.C.  (Photo by Anna Moneymaker/Getty Images)

WASHINGTON — A panel of appellate judges seemed skeptical during Thursday oral arguments that the Trump administration erred in relying on a decades-old statute to require millions of noncitizens to register with the federal government and carry documentation.

But they did take issue with the paperwork required of immigrants without legal status as well as the consequences for those who fail to register, and questioned if the practice violated due process and self-incrimination rights.

In February, Department of Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem announced the agency would enforce a rule under the Immigration and Nationality Act that requires all immigrants in the country without legal status to register with the agency or risk fines or potential jail time.  

A federal court in April sided with the Trump administration, allowing the registration requirement to go through.

The suit, brought by immigration rights advocates, does not challenge the statute from 1940 requiring those without legal status to register, but instead the process used by DHS in rolling out the policy without a proper notice and comment period. The suit also challenges a penalty for not filling out paperwork, as the form is only in English and can only be accessed with an internet connection.

Administration position

Arguing on behalf of the Trump administration, Kartik N. Venguswamy from the U.S. Attorney’s Office said a notice and comment period is not needed because the form is just procedural and a new rule is not created. 

He added that the rule does not cause irreparable harm, because any harm is from outside forces, such as immigration enforcement or deportation that could follow registration with the federal government.  

Judges Patricia A. Millett, Gregory G. Katsas and J. Michelle Childs heard the case in the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit. Former President Barack Obama nominated Millett; President Donald Trump nominated Katsas in his first term; and former President Joe Biden nominated Childs.

The judges raised concerns with the form itself, including one question that requires the noncitizen to report any crimes they have committed, regardless of whether they were charged or convicted. 

That wades into violation of the 5th Amendment’s protections against self incrimination, one judge said.

“That’s asking you to confess to things that no government authority is aware of,” Millett said of the final rule. “And it’s a big step toward the 5th Amendment.”

The Migration Policy Institute, a non-partisan immigration think tank, estimated that between 2.2 million and 3.2 million immigrants will have to register. The registration requirement could be a powerful tool in the Trump administration’s efforts to carry out mass deportations.

Rule has gone unenforced

Michelle Lapointe, arguing on behalf of the Coalition for Humane Immigrant Rights, said the federal government has not enforced the rule for nearly 80 years. 

The registration requirement is authorized under a wartime act known as the Alien Registration Act of 1940 that was first used in World War II. It was rarely used after that, but briefly in the aftermath of the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks. 

During that time, any noncitizen males older than 16 who hailed from 25 countries with a Muslim majority had to register with the federal government. But the program led to no terrorism convictions and was eventually dissolved in 2016.

Lapointe said because the rule would apply to as many as 3 million immigrants without legal status, a notice and comment period must occur. Under the rule, immigrants 14 and older who are required to register will need to carry registration documents at all times or risk potential prison terms or fines of up to $5,000.

“It is solely for the process of deportation,” Lapointe said.

As the Trump administration continues with its immigration crackdown, federal immigration officials could carry out their plans for mass deportations by having easy access to records of immigrants unlawfully in the country.

But Childs seemed skeptical that the federal government couldn’t use the statute, because it’s on the books.

Katsas also said the rule is not new — the government has just decided not to enforce it since 1940.

“It seems like a more fair account” that the government is ending a long policy of not enforcing a rule that, on its face, “covers all aliens,” he said.

But Katsas said the “rule does expand the category of information and that’s new.”

That category of information includes the requirement to detail to the federal government any crime the individual has committed, which Lapointe argued would violate 5th Amendment rights. 

Registration form debated

Childs and Millett questioned the roll-out of the form, the fact that it’s only accessible online and in English, and the penalty for not registering with the federal government.

“These are forms regulating a community … where English is not their native language,” Millett said. 

Venguswamy said the forms were in English because “English is the language of the United States government at this point.” 

Earlier this year, Trump signed an executive order directing federal agencies to adopt English as the official language, including paperwork.  

Millett asked Venguswamy if it’s the government’s position that an immigrant who doesn’t understand English will not be charged or issued a penalty for failing to register. 

“I’m not in a position to speak to whether or not that is the position the government will take,” Venguswamy said. 

Millett then asked why a proper notice and comment period is not needed for a new process, even if it’s not creating a new statute. 

She gave Venguswamy an example of the IRS not changing the tax code, but issuing a new tax form for taxpayers to fill out.

“We’re gonna issue new tax forms, for everyone to fill out their taxes, we’re not creating tax obligations, just new forms in Ancient Biblical Greek,” Millett said. 

She asked Venguswamy if a proper notice and comment period would be needed for those new tax forms.

He said it would not, because it’s a change in procedure, not a change to the rule.

“Wow,” Millett said. “We can all be criminally prosecuted for not filling out our taxes unless we can find the five people in the United States who know how to speak Ancient Biblical Greek.”

Delaney Hall in Newark, New Jersey, the largest immigrant detention center on the East Coast, was the site of a May demonstration against the Trump administration’s immigration policies. (Photo by New Jersey Monitor)

WASHINGTON — A federal judge Wednesday blocked a policy from the Department of Homeland Security, finding that it violated an appropriations law that allows members of Congress to make unannounced oversight visits to federal facilities that detain immigrants.

Judge Jia Cobb rejected the Trump administration’s argument that the new policy doesn’t prevent members of Congress from entering a DHS facility that detains immigrants. 

“The notice requirement as implemented by ICE officials does just that: it stops visiting Members of Congress from entering a facility unless they have provided seven days of advance notice,” she wrote in her opinion.

The stay on the DHS policy from Cobb is temporary, while the case proceeds.

This year, DHS created the new policy to require lawmakers to give the agency seven days’ notice, plus approval from an agency official, before visiting a facility where immigrants are detained. 

In July, 12 members of Congress sued, arguing that DHS overreached its authority in creating the policy and that it violated a 2019 appropriations law, referred to as Section 527.

“The Court thus finds that Plaintiffs are likely to succeed on their claim that Section 527 funds are being used to implement a seven-day notice requirement for Members of Congress seeking to enter ICE detention facilities, and that the notice requirement is contrary to law and in excess of DHS’s statutory authority,” Cobb wrote.

As the Trump administration continues with its aggressive immigration crackdown, the number of immigrants held in detention has ballooned. One of the few tools Democrats have, as the minority party, is oversight of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement facilities.  

The suit in the District Court for the District of Columbia charged that the Trump administration overreached its authority in creating the policy.

Those Democrats who sued include: Joe Neguse of Colorado, Adriano Espaillat of New York, Jamie Raskin of Maryland, Robert Garcia of California, J. Luis Correa of California, Jason Crow of Colorado, Veronica Escobar of Texas, Dan Goldman of New York, Jimmy Gomez of California, Raul Ruiz of California, Bennie Thompson of Mississippi and Norma Torres of California.

In a statement, lawmakers praised the decision. 

“It reinforces the rule of law and reminds the administration that oversight is not optional,” they said. “Real-time, on-the-ground visits to immigration detention facilities help prevent abuses and ensure transparency. Oversight is a core responsibility of Members of Congress—and a constitutional duty we do not take lightly.”

Democrats created the policy that allows members of Congress to show up unannounced at DHS facilities that detain immigrants, including ICE field offices, after the first Trump administration’s practice of separating children from their parents at the southern border in 2018.

At that time, Democrats were unable to conduct interviews with separated immigrant families and often denied entry into DHS facilities, so lawmakers included the provision in the fiscal year 2019 appropriations law.

The provision was later expanded to include all immigrants detained at DHS facilities, not just children, and allowed for unannounced visits by members and the inclusion of congressional staff to enter with their members during oversight visits.

Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem arrives for a Senate Appropriations Committee hearing on May 8, 2025. (Photo by Andrew Harnik/Getty Images)

WASHINGTON — U.S. House Republicans on a Judiciary Committee panel during a Wednesday hearing defended the Trump administration’s move to end temporary protections for immigrants who hail from countries deemed too dangerous to return. 

Republican Rep. Tom McClintock of California, the chair of the Immigration Integrity, Security, and Enforcement Subcommittee, slammed former President Joe Biden for “abusing” Temporary Protected Status, or TPS, and other humanitarian programs. 

The federal government grants TPS when a national’s home country is too dangerous to return to, such as after a major natural disaster, ongoing violence or political instability. The status allows immigrants to have legal status and work authorization for up to 18 months before needing to renew the status, which requires a background check. It is not a pathway to citizenship.  

Under the Biden administration, the program expanded to include 1.2 million immigrants. Republicans largely opposed that expansion, and have noted that groups that gain TPS status are rarely removed from the program.

“Along the way TPS became permanent protected status,” McClintock said.

Since being confirmed by the Senate earlier this year, DHS Secretary Kristi Noem has moved to end legal status for 1 million TPS recipients hailing from Afghanistan, Cameroon, Ethiopia, Haiti, Honduras, Nepal, Nicaragua, Syria and Venezuela. 

The top Democrat on the panel, Pramila Jayapal of Washington state, said the move to end TPS for those 9 countries “will lead to people’s death.”  

“When TPS is terminated, we are forcing people to return to real and imminent harm,” Jayapal said. “I’m sad to see us go down this path, but I can’t say I’m surprised.”

There are multiple lawsuits from immigration advocacy groups challenging the Trump administration’s termination of TPS.

Union leader says crackdown harms workers

Democrats on the panel said reducing TPS was part of the Trump administration’s mass deportation campaign.

Rep. Deborah Ross, Democrat of North Carolina, said construction sites in her area have been targets of immigration raids, even though workers on the sites have TPS.

She asked the witness tapped by Democrats, Jimmy Williams, president of the International Union of Painters and Allied Trades, about the effects of the Trump administration’s immigration crackdown at construction sites.

Williams said those TPS workers are leaving the industry and that immigration enforcement at construction sites can put workers in danger.

“You can’t work safely when you’re worried about being targeted for removal,” he said. “The truth is people just won’t show up to work.”

Williams defended TPS as one of the few legal forms that immigrants have in order to have work authorization. He said that TPS falls short because it doesn’t give a pathway to citizenship and creates a limbo for recipients. 

“I believe that this body’s inability to act over the course of the last 40 years on immigration reform is what has led us to this point,” Williams said of the current state of TPS.

Call to narrow program

One of the witnesses invited by Republicans, James Rogers, senior counsel of the America First Legal Foundation, argued that TPS is too broad, and that entire countries should not be designated. Instead, the designation should be limited to a specific location that is affected, he said. 

America First Legal Foundation is a litigation organization founded by Stephen Miller, a top White House adviser who is the main architect of the president’s immigration crackdown. 

Missouri GOP Rep. Bob Onder asked Rogers how much vetting is conducted for immigrants in the TPS program. 

Rogers said it was “impossible” to vet TPS recipients. 

However, in order to be approved for the status, a background check must be completed and with each renewal, the individual with TPS has to be revetted. 

Another witness tapped by Republicans, Larry Celaschi, a councilman for the Borough of Charleroi, Pennsylvania, said in 2022 his town experienced an increased population of TPS recipients from Haiti and that the sudden population change strained local resources. 

“Our borough absorbed an estimated 2,000 to 3,000 migrants in a very short period of time,” he said, adding that the population was previously 4,000. 

Vetting questioned

Over its four years, the Biden administration expanded TPS from roughly 400,000 recipients to over 1.2 million TPS people. Separately, the Biden administration used several humanitarian parole programs to grant temporary legal status for nearly 750,000 immigrants hailing from Afghanistan, Cuba, Nicaragua, Haiti, Venezuela and Ukraine. 

Republicans have long criticized the Biden administration’s expanded use of not only TPS, but other humanitarian programs to handle one of the largest influxes of migrants at the southern border in decades. 

Last month’s shooting near the White House that left one National Guard member dead and another wounded inflamed the debate because the suspect is an Afghan national who had been granted asylum. Since the shooting, GOP officials have increasingly made the accusation that immigrants who came to the U.S. under the Biden administration had little to no screening. 

Republicans on the panel, including Arizona’s Andy Biggs, argued immigrants admitted to the country under Biden were not vetted and allowed into the U.S. illegally, despite being given legal status.

“It’s just B.S. to say ‘everybody’s fully vetted,’” Biggs said. “We don’t know.”

Protesters rally outside of the Theodore Roosevelt Federal Building headquarters of the U.S. Office of Personnel Management on Feb. 5, 2025, in Washington, D.C.  (Photo by Alex Wong/Getty Images)

WASHINGTON — The U.S. House passed a bill Thursday that would overturn an executive order from President Donald Trump that strips collective bargaining rights for roughly 1 million federal employees. 

The 231-195 vote was a rare bipartisan pushback against the president. The bill was sponsored by Maine’s Jared Golden, a Democrat, and Pennsylvania’s Brian Fitzpatrick, a Republican. Twenty Republicans joined all Democrats in supporting the bill.

It’s now referred to the Senate, but it’s unclear if it will garner enough support to reach the chamber’s 60-vote threshold — or even be brought to the floor for a vote.

The move also bucked House Speaker Mike Johnson, a Louisiana Republican, who did not bring the bill to the floor for Wednesday’s vote. Instead, lawmakers were able to vote on it through a legislative maneuver known as a discharge petition. 

The procedure allows rank-and-file members to compel the lower chamber to vote on measures that are not brought up by the leadership of the majority party, which is how bills typically reach the floor.

On Wednesday’s vote to advance the discharge petition, 13 Republicans joined all Democrats.

Following Wednesday’s procedural vote, Golden said in a statement that the bill would restore the rights of federal employees.

“President Trump said ending collective bargaining was about protecting our national defense,” he said. “But in my District, many affected workers build our warships and care for our veterans. If the majority we built over the past few months sticks together, we can overturn this union-busting executive order, and we can show America that this body will protect workers’ rights.”  

House Oversight and Reform Committee Chairman James Comer, a Kentucky Republican, argued against the bill on the floor Thursday, saying lax accountability among the federal workforce harmed taxpayers.

“Accountability problems in the federal workforce are legendary,” he said. “It takes a Herculean effort to fire a poorly performing federal worker or one who is engaged in misconduct.”

Trump signed an executive order in March that banned collective bargaining agreements for federal agencies dealing with national security.

Those agencies include the departments of Defense, Veteran Affairs, Homeland Security, State and Energy, along with the National Science Foundation, the U.S. Coast Guard, most entities within the Department of Justice and several pandemic response and refugee resettlement agencies within the Health and Human Services Department, among others. 

Federal police and firefighters are exempt from the order.

Federal employees have limited bargaining agreements, compared to the private sector. Workers cannot strike or bargain for higher wages or benefits, but they can push for better working conditions, such as protection from retaliation, discrimination, and illegal firings. 

Kilmar Abrego Garcia speaks to a crowd holding a prayer vigil and rally on his behalf outside the ICE building in Baltimore, Maryland, on Aug. 25, 2025. Lydia Walther Rodriguez with CASA interprets for him. (Photo by William J. Ford/Maryland Matters)

WASHINGTON — The wrongly deported Kilmar Abrego Garcia is no longer in U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement custody after a federal judge ordered his release earlier Thursday, according to his attorneys and an immigrant rights group that has advocated his case.

CASA, the immigrant rights group that has supported Abrego Garcia and his family since he was erroneously deported to a brutal Salvadoran prison, told States Newsroom he was released from the Moshannon Valley Processing Center in Pennsylvania before a 5 p.m. Eastern deadline set by the judge. He has remained there since September. 

 However, it remained unclear Thursday night if the Department of Homeland Security will follow the judicial order, and the White House press secretary said the Department of Justice would swiftly appeal the decision.

DHS spokesperson Tricia McLaughlin said in a statement to States Newsroom the “order lacks any valid legal basis and we will continue to fight this tooth and nail in the courts.”

She did not respond to a follow-up question if ICE would follow the order from U.S. District Court of Maryland Judge Paula Xinis to release Abrego Garcia, the Salvadoran immigrant and longtime Maryland resident who cast a spotlight on the Trump administration’s aggressive immigration crackdown after he was wrongly deported.

Abrego Garcia was imprisoned in a brutal prison in El Salvador and returned to the United States to face criminal charges in Tennessee. After he was ordered released from U.S. marshals custody by a federal judge, ICE detained him again at an appointment at the Baltimore, Maryland, ICE field office.

‘Without lawful authority’

Xinis, in a ruling highly critical of the administration’s actions in the case, found that since Abrego Garcia was brought back to the United States, he was detained “again without lawful authority,” because the Trump administration has not made an effort to remove him to a third country, due to his deportation protections from his home country of El Salvador. 

The order comes after Abrego Garcia challenged his ICE detention in a habeas corpus petition. Xinis was mulling a Supreme Court precedent that deemed immigrants cannot be held longer than six months in detention if the federal government is not actively making efforts to remove them.

“Separately, Respondents’ conduct over the past months belie that his detention has been for the basic purpose of effectuating removal, lending further support that Abrego Garcia should be held no longer,” Xinis wrote in her opinion.

Costa Rica has agreed to accept Abrego Garcia as a refugee, but in court, Department of Justice lawyers did not give Xinis a clear explanation of why the Trump administration would not remove him to Costa Rica. Instead, the Trump administration has tried to deport Abrego Garcia to several countries in Africa. 

Prolonged detention found

In her opinion, Xinis said that Abrego Garcia’s release is required under the Supreme Court’s precedent, referred to as the Zadvydas v. Davis case, because his nearly four-month detention at an ICE facility in Pennsylvania had been prolonged. 

“Respondents’ persistent refusal to acknowledge Costa Rica as a viable removal option, their threats to send Abrego Garcia to African countries that never agreed to take him, and their misrepresentation to the Court that Liberia is now the only country available to Abrego Garcia, all reflect that whatever purpose was behind his detention, it was not for the ‘basic purpose’ of timely third-country removal,” Xinis said.

She also noted witness testimony from several ICE officials who were unable to provide any information on efforts to remove Abrego Garcia to a third country where he would not face torture, persecution or deportation to El Salvador.  

“They simply refused to prepare and produce a witness with knowledge to testify in any meaningful way,” she said of the Department of Justice.

While the Trump administration has floated removing Abrego Garcia to Eswatini, Ghana, Liberia and Uganda, the Department of Justice is moving forward with criminal charges lodged against Abrego Garcia that stem from a 2022 traffic stop in Tennessee. 

The judge in that Nashville case is trying to determine if the human smuggling of immigrants charges against Abrego Garcia – to which he has pleaded not guilty – are vindictive. 

Missing order of removal

Another issue Xinis pointed out was the Department of Justice’s inability to produce a final order of removal for Abrego Garica.  

“No such order of removal exists for Abrego Garcia,” she said. “When Abrego Garcia was first wrongly expelled to El Salvador, the Court struggled to understand the legal authority for even seizing him in the first place.”

She also cited the ICE officials’ testimony, which did answer whether a removal order existed. 

“Respondents twice sponsored the testimony of ICE officials whose job it is to effectuate removal orders, and who candidly admitted to having never seen one for Abrego Garcia,” she said. “Respondents have never produced an order of removal despite Abrego Garcia hinging much of his jurisdictional and legal arguments on its non-existence.”

Attorneys for Abrego Garcia have argued if there is no order of removal, there is no basis for his ICE detention.

Abrego Garcia is not challenging his deportation, and has agreed to be removed to Costa Rica, but has remained in ICE detention since August.

William J. Ford contributed to this report. 

Democratic U.S. Rep Jared Golden of Maine announces plans for a discharge petition to force a vote on his bill to overturn an executive order restricting collective bargaining for federal workers Washington, D.C., on July 17, 2025. (Photo via Rep. Jared Golden)

WASHINGTON — The U.S. House agreed Wednesday to consider a bill that would void President Donald Trump’s executive order that strips collective bargaining rights for roughly 1 million federal workers.

The 222-200 vote was a rare bipartisan agreement from the lower chamber to rebuke a policy decision from the president. Thirteen Republicans joined all Democrats voting for the resolution. 

Maine’s Jared Golden, a Democrat, and Pennsylvania’s Brian Fitzpatrick, a Republican, forced the vote by garnering enough signatures from lawmakers under a legislative move known as a discharge petition. The procedure allows rank-and-file members to compel the chamber to vote on measures that are not brought up by the leadership of the majority party, which is how bills typically reach the floor.

Wednesday’s vote was to discharge the bill out of committee and bring it to the floor for a vote. A vote on the bill itself is expected Thursday. 

The discharge petition gained the 218 signatures needed from 213 Democrats and five Republicans: Fitzpatrick, Don Bacon of Nebraska, Rob Bresnahan of Pennsylvania, and Nick LaLota and Mike Lawler of New York. 

In March, Trump signed an executive order that banned collective bargaining agreements for federal agencies dealing with national security. 

Those agencies include the departments of Defense, Veteran Affairs, Homeland Security, State and Energy, along with the National Science Foundation, the U.S. Coast Guard, most entities within the Department of Justice and several pandemic response and refugee resettlement agencies within the Health and Human Services Department, among others. 

“Protecting America’s national security is a core constitutional duty, and President Trump refuses to let union obstruction interfere with his efforts to protect Americans and our national interests,” according to the executive order.

Federal law enforcement and firefighters are exempt from the order.

Bargaining agreements for federal employees are somewhat limited. Workers cannot strike or bargain for wages or benefits, but they can push for better working conditions, such as protection from retaliation, discrimination, and illegal firings. 

The front entrance of the E. Barrett Prettyman U.S. Courthouse in Washington, D.C., which houses the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit. (Jennifer Shutt/States Newsroom)

WASHINGTON — The Trump administration Tuesday defended the merits of its fast-track deportation policy before a panel of judges in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit, saying immigrants who have been in the country for less than two years without legal authorization are not guaranteed due process.

The suit, brought by immigration rights advocacy groups, challenges the Department of Homeland Security’s expanded expedited removal rule’s application to immigrants in the interior of the United States who cannot prove they have remained in the country for more than two years. 

The expanded policy, which allows the removal of immigrants without an appearance before an immigration judge, is a pillar of the Trump administration’s mass deportation campaign. 

Arguing on behalf of the Trump administration, Drew Ensign from the U.S. Department of Justice said that immigrants cannot rely on due process rights granted in the Constitution because those rights are reserved for U.S. citizens. Congress and Supreme Court precedents restrict immigrants’ rights to due process, he said.

Additionally, Ensign argued that because Congress authorized the DHS secretary to use expedited removal, the courts have no jurisdiction on the matter. 

Anand Balakrishnan, legal counsel for Make the Road New York, the immigrant rights advocacy group that brought the challenge, said the policy skirts a fair legal process for immigrants.

Democratic state attorneys general also submitted a brief in support of the immigrant rights groups, arguing that the expanded use of expedited removal is unconstitutional. Those states include California, Arizona, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawai’i, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Oregon, Vermont and Washington state. 

Policy expanded to interior

For decades, expedited removal has been used to apply to migrants apprehended at the U.S. border and quickly deported without appearing before an immigration judge. In January, the Trump administration expanded its scope to the interior of the country and applied it to any immigrant apprehended who cannot prove they have remained in the country for more than two years. 

An appeals court in late November declined the Trump administration’s request to pause a district court’s block of the policy while the appeal was pending. 

Tuesday’s hearing was part of the Trump administration’s appeal on the merits of its policy before a different appeals panel, Judges Justin R. Walker, Neomi Rao and Robert L. Wilkins. President Donald Trump nominated Walker and Rao and former President Barack Obama nominated Wilkins.

The panel appeared skeptical of the administration’s argument that due process rights do not apply to immigrants who entered the U.S. without legal authorization.

Duty to notify

The judges seemed split, though, about if the government should be expected to explain the expedited removal statute to a person it is attempting to remove and what that person’s rights are to challenge their removal, or if the person should have to ask for their own due process rights. 

“Even if we accept your portrayal of how the due process works, … under that framing, there still has to be adequate notice (of removal),” Wilkins said to Ensign. 

Ensign argued that immigrants subject to expedited removal have sufficient notice they are being removed and can’t rely on the due process clause of the Constitution’s Fifth Amendment to challenge it. The executive branch has the authority to decide how to apply the clause to immigrants, he said.

Wilkins pushed back on that argument, saying notices must meet minimum standards. 

“The notice (of removal) has to be sufficient,” he said to Ensign. “(It) has to inform you of at least what the procedures are or what you’re facing.”

Balakrishnan said a mere notice of removal is “inadequate.” An immigrant subject to expedited removal can be deported within hours and without having time to challenge their removal or even speak to an attorney, he said.

Walker seemed skeptical that the burden of notifying an immigrant that they were subject to the policy fell to the government. 

“For someone who has chosen to be here illegally, in violation of our laws….from a due process perspective it’s not too much to ask that if someone here illegally wants the special non-expedited removal procedures that Congress has graciously afforded them, it’s not too much to ask that they ask for them,” he said. 

Balakrishnan argued that wouldn’t be sufficient due process.

“I think it’s common sense that having even that bare amount of information, ‘if you’ve been here for over two years you’re not subject to expedited removal’ would certainly decrease the risk of error,” Balakrishnan said. “I’m not sure how it would be overly burdensome for the government to do that.” 

Farm workers harvesting yellow bell peppers near Gilroy, California. (Nnehring/Getty Images)

WASHINGTON — The Trump administration Thursday announced new restrictions for immigrants, reducing the work authorization periods from five years to 18 months, the latest crackdown on legal immigration.

The new policy follows the shooting of two West Virginia National Guard members by an Afghan national granted asylum earlier this year. 

The shift will not only affect hundreds of thousands of immigrants, but the shortened period for work authorization could create massive backlogs at the agency responsible for processing legal immigration requests, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services. 

“Reducing the maximum validity period for employment authorization will ensure that those seeking to work in the United States do not threaten public safety or promote harmful anti-American ideologies,” USCIS Director Joseph Edlow said in a statement.

“After the attack on National Guard service members in our nation’s capital by an alien who was admitted into this country by the previous administration, it’s even more clear that USCIS must conduct frequent vetting of aliens,” he continued. 

Immigrants affected by the new changes include refugees; those granted asylum; those with a withholding of removal; those with pending applications for asylum or withholding of removal; those adjusting their status, for example by gaining a green card; and those who fall under the Nicaraguan Adjustment and Central American Relief Act of 1997.

That act applies to certain Nicaraguans, Cubans, Salvadorans, Guatemalans, nationals of former Soviet bloc countries and their dependents who in the 1990s had applied for asylum and were systematically denied.

Additionally, USCIS fees for applying for permits and other paperwork increased as a result of the massive tax and spending passage that Republicans passed over the summer and President Donald Trump signed into law. For initial employment authorization, fees are now $550 and $275 to renew. 

Following the shooting, U.S. Army Spc. Sarah Beckstrom, 20, died. A second guard member, U.S. Air Force Staff Sgt. Andrew Wolfe, 24, remains critically wounded but hospitalized in stable condition. 

In response, the Trump administration has ramped up its crackdown on legal immigration and highlighted the need for its mass deportation campaign. The suspect, Rahmanullah Lakanwal, pleaded not guilty to several charges in court on Tuesday. 

This week, all immigration applications from 19 countries listed on Trump’s “high-risk” countries or travel ban from earlier this year, were paused — a move that freezes processing for green card holders and citizenship applications.

Supporters gather for a rally to celebrate the 10th anniversary of the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program in 2012 in New York City. (Photo by Michael M. Santiago/Getty Images) 

WASHINGTON — U.S. Sen. Dick Durbin, a longtime champion of creating legal status for immigrants brought into the country as children who will retire next year, re-introduced his trademark immigration bill for the last time Thursday. 

Durbin, an Illinois Democrat, first introduced the measure now known as the Dream Act in 2001 with Utah Republican Orrin Hatch and has reintroduced it every Congress since. Congress has not passed the bill. 

Durbin, 81, spoke about his legacy on immigration at a Thursday press conference.

“We are a nation of immigrants. I am proud to be the son of an immigrant,” the No. 2 Senate Democrat said. “This is a proud son of an immigrant who’s doing everything he can to help the next generation of immigrants be part of America’s future. The fight has just begun.”

While Congress is again unlikely to approve the measure this year, younger Senate Democrats Catherine Cortez Masto of Nevada and Alex Padilla of California said Thursday they would carry on the effort.

“The dream is still alive,” Padilla said. “We are committed as ever to get it across the finish line.”

Cortez Masto agreed. 

“Some day, with the hard work of everyone, we (will) get it across the finish line,” she said. 

Alaska Republican Lisa Murkowski co-sponsored the latest version of the legislation.

Temporary fix now 13 years old

The Dream Act would create a path to citizenship for immigrant children who came into the country with their parents without legal authorization.

The bill has nicknamed more than 530,000 immigrants in the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals, or DACA, program as Dreamers. The Obama administration created the program in 2012 as a temporary measure to allow recipients to obtain work permits and drivers licenses while Congress created a pathway to citizenship.

DACA’s legality is tied up in the courts, throwing its recipients into limbo. 

For now, existing DACA recipients can continue to renew, but the U.S. 5th Circuit Court of Appeals in January upheld deportation protections for recipients, but found the work authorization portion unlawful. The appeals court limited its ruling to Texas, which spearheaded the suit, meaning that DACA remains in full effect in every state and U.S. territory except Texas.

Many immigration policy experts have called DACA outdated because there are now thousands of undocumented youth who are not eligible for the program because they were not even born by 2007, the year a recipient must have started residence in the United States. 

A federal judge in 2021 blocked new applicants from being accepted.

Trump crackdown adds urgency

Many DACA recipients have been caught up in President Donald Trump’s mass deportation campaign. 

Dozens of recipients have been detained by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, despite their legal status, according to immigrant advocacy groups tracking the issue. 

“This moment in the history of our nation is a terrible, challenging moment for so many people, not just the Dreamers, but immigrants in general,” Durbin said. 

“I’ve been both angry and heartbroken to watch masked federal agents parading in their combat uniforms with automatic weapons in the city of Chicago,” he continued. “I’ve seen them wreak havoc in these communities and sow fear among people who are afraid to even go outside, to go to church or to go shopping.”

The executive director of the immigrant advocacy group United We Dream, Greisa Martinez Rosas, said that while DACA has allowed some immigrant youth to obtain work authorization and deportation protections, more needs to be done, especially under a second Trump administration.

“We are currently facing unprecedented attacks that pose the greatest threat to… the future of the DACA program, and in doing so, the future of this country and those millions of people who would make our country stronger every single day,” she said.

Immigration reform elusive

Durbin said the Dream Act would be a “key step toward true, positive, bipartisan change” in immigration policy.  

​​The last time Congress came close to bipartisan immigration reform was in 2013. 

That year, the bipartisan “Gang of Eight” senators, including Durbin, crafted a bill to create a pathway to citizenship for millions of undocumented people who had resided in the country for years. 

The Senate passed the measure, but then-House Speaker John Boehner, an Ohio Republican, never brought the bill to the floor for a vote.

U.S. Marshals and Homeland Security Investigations agents take a man into custody at the intersection of 14th and N streets NW in Washington, D.C., on Sept. 3, 2025. (Photo by Ashley Murray/States Newsroom)

WASHINGTON — A federal judge late Tuesday barred federal agents from carrying out warrantless arrests in the District of Columbia unless they can demonstrate probable cause, after immigration advocates sued.

Under the preliminary injunction granted by U.S. District Senior Judge Beryl A. Howell, immigration agents can only arrest a person in the district without a warrant if they can establish that the individual is in the United States unlawfully and poses a flight risk before a warrant can be obtained from an authority. 

Advocates who brought the suit had said they believed Latinos were being targeted for arrests in the district, even those with legal status.

“Consequently, viewing all immigrants potentially subject to removal as criminals is, as a legal matter, plain wrong,” wrote Howell, who was nominated by former President Barack Obama.

Howell noted Trump administration officials’ public comments on the need to meet immigration arrest quotas, rather than focusing on targeted enforcement and probable cause.

“Here, ‘the record’ as a whole ‘leaves no doubt’ that defendants in practice have consummated a decisionmaking process that resulted in the implementation of a new policy of conducting warrantless civil immigration arrests based on a lower standard than probable cause,” according to Howell’s order.

National Guard presence

The suit stems from President Donald Trump’s August emergency declaration in the district that flooded the 68-square-mile capital with federal law enforcement and National Guard troops. 

As a result, there has been an uptick in aggressive immigration enforcement by federal officers, both in plain clothes and masked, in neighborhoods with high immigrant populations.

The four individual plaintiffs in the case are all immigrants with some form of legal status, such as a pending asylum case or temporary protections. But all were arrested and detained by federal officers, sometimes for days. 

In statements to the court, they described feeling like they were being kidnapped and argued they were targeted because of their ethnicity. They said they feared they will continue to be targeted because they are Latino.

The legal organizations representing the plaintiffs pushed for two class certifications, which means others who were affected would be represented in the suit. 

Howell said in her order that she would make a determination on those two class certifications at a later time. 

ACLU, others praise preliminary injunction

Legal groups representing the plaintiffs celebrated the preliminary injunction.

“Despite the Trump administration’s attempts at fear and intimidation, everyone in D.C. has rights, regardless of who they are and their immigration status; and all federal agents are required by law to respect these rights,” according to a joint statement from the legal groups who brought the suit against the federal government. 

Those legal groups included the American Civil Liberties Union of the District of Columbia; the American Civil Liberties Union; Amica Center for Immigrant Rights; CASA; National Immigration Project; the Washington Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights and Urban Affairs; and the law firm of Covington & Burling LLP.  

 

People are sworn in as new U.S. citizens during a special U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services naturalization ceremony on the Hollywood Sign Terrace at historic Griffith Observatory on Oct. 21, 2024 in Los Angeles. (Photo by Mario Tama/Getty Images)

WASHINGTON — The Trump administration late Tuesday paused all immigration applications from 19 countries the president earlier had listed for restricted travel into the United States, a move that freezes processing for green card holders and citizenship applications.

After two West Virginia National Guard members were shot in the District of Columbia by an Afghan national who was granted asylum, the Trump administration has moved to halt and reexamine all forms of legal immigration, which is handled by U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services. 

One guard member, U.S. Army Spc. Sarah Beckstrom, 20, died, and U.S. Air Force Staff Sgt. Andrew Wolfe, 24, remains critically wounded, although his condition is said to be stable. The suspect, Rahmanullah Lakanwal, pleaded not guilty to several charges on Tuesday. 

The memo says that USCIS will place a hold on processing benefits requests — including citizenship processing — from immigrants hailing from the 19 “high-risk” countries and the agency will re-review any of those approved requests for immigrants who entered the U.S. after Jan, 21, 2021, or under the Biden administration. 

The 19 countries with travel restrictions into the U.S. are: Afghanistan, Burma, Burundi, Chad, Cuba, Republic of the Congo, Equatorial Guinea, Eritrea, Haiti, Iran, Laos, Libya, Sierra Leone, Somalia, Sudan, Togo, Turkmenistan, Venezuela and Yemen. In June the president issued a travel ban on those 19 countries. 

The hold will remain in place until otherwise directed by USCIS Director Joseph Edlow, according to the memo.

The memo also states that USCIS will delay action on all applications for asylum and withholdings for removal, regardless of country of origin, “pending a comprehensive review.” A withholding of removal is granted by an immigration judge when a country is deemed too dangerous for an immigrant for deportation, so a third, safer country must be chosen.

“USCIS has considered that this direction may result in delay to the adjudication of some pending applications and has weighed that consequence against the urgent need for the agency to ensure that applicants are vetted and screened to the maximum degree possible,” according to the memo. “Ultimately, USCIS has determined that the burden of processing delays that will fall on some applicants is necessary and appropriate in this instance, when weighed against the agency’s obligation to protect and preserve national security.”

President Donald Trump and his administration have often criticized immigrants who were granted temporary legal protections under the Biden administration, arguing they were not properly vetted. 

That has included a special program created for Afghan allies fleeing the Taliban takeover after the chaotic withdrawal by the U.S. in 2021, as well as Latin Americans granted humanitarian parole from Cuba, Haiti, Nicaragua and Venezuela. 

Members of the U.S. Secret Service and other law enforcement agencies respond to the shooting of two members of the West Virginia National Guard near the White House on Nov. 26, 2025. (Photo by Anna Moneymaker/Getty Images)

WASHINGTON — The man accused in the shooting of two West Virginia National Guard members in the District of Columbia pleaded not guilty in his Tuesday arraignment hearing, during which he appeared virtually from a hospital bed.

U.S. Army Spc. Sarah Beckstrom, 20, died as a result of her injuries, and U.S. Air Force Staff Sgt. Andrew Wolfe, 24, remains in the hospital with severe wounds. 

D.C. Superior Court Magistrate Judge Renee Raymond denied bond for 29-year-old Rahmanullah Lakanwal, an Afghan national who officials allege drove across the United States to the district from his residence in Washington state. The guard members were attacked while on duty in a downtown neighborhood blocks from the White House.

“He came across the country 3,000 miles, armed with a specific purpose in mind,” Judge Raymond said in her reasoning for denying him bond. “The government’s case is exceedingly strong.”

The U.S. Attorney’s Office filed charges Tuesday for first-degree murder while armed; possession of a firearm; and assault with the intent to kill. 

Lakanwal’s next court date is Jan. 14.

“The nature and circumstances of the instant offense, the strength of the government’s case, and the sheer terror that resulted, that continues to animate because of his actions, leads me to conclude that no conditions or combination of conditions, will reasonably ensure the safety of the community,” Raymond said.

West Virginia Gov. Patrick Morrisey wrote on social media Tuesday that Wolfe “remains in critical condition but is stable.”

“Doctors and the family are optimistic about his current progress and note that he has responded to some basic requests such as a thumbs up sign and wiggling his toes,” Morrisey said.

Troops in the district

The West Virginia National Guard members shot last week are among the 2,000 troops stationed in the district since August, after President Donald Trump declared a “crime emergency.” 

Republican governors have offered to send their states’ reserves of National Guard members to the nation’s capital. A federal judge last month found the president’s deployment of troops to the district illegal. 

Lakanwal was granted asylum this year after he came to the United States through a special humanitarian program for Afghanistan allies who served along American forces and had to flee the country after the Taliban took it over following the chaotic U.S. withdrawal in 2021. 

The shooting that took place on the eve of the Thanksgiving holiday has resulted in Trump expanding his immigration crackdown to include a halt to asylum applications, as well as increased scrutiny on visa applications from Afghan nationals. 

“In the wake of last week’s atrocity, it is more important than ever to finish carrying out the president’s mass deportation operation,” White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said at Monday’s press briefing. “They must go back to their home countries.”

Translator appears for Lakanwal

During Tuesday’s arraignment, Lakanwal seemed to thrash around in pain in his hospital bed. A translator also appeared virtually for Lakanwal. 

Lakanwal’s lawyer raised concerns about U.S. Attorney Jeanine Ferris Pirro, a former Fox News host, holding future press conferences, warning that could harm a “free and fair trial” for Lakanwal. Pirro held a press conference on Thanksgiving morning to discuss the shooting.

“The government at their own peril … continue to taint a potential jury pool against Mr. Lakanwal as a result of their press conferences,” he said.

Department of Defense press secretary Kingsley Wilson said during a Tuesday briefing at the Pentagon that all National Guard members in the district would be armed. 

Following last week’s shooting, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth said he would request an additional 500 National Guard members be deployed in the district. 

It’s unclear if that directive would violate a federal judge’s order that found the August deployment unlawful. The federal judge stayed her Nov. 20 order for three weeks to give the administration time to either appeal or remove the troops. The Trump administration filed an emergency appeal after the shooting in the district.

Ashley Murray contributed to this report.

A makeshift memorial of flowers and American flags honoring the late West Virginia National Guard member Sarah Beckstrom stands outside the Farragut West Metro station on Dec. 1, 2025 in Washington, D.C.  (Photo by Heather Diehl/Getty Images)

WASHINGTON — President Donald Trump has accelerated his drive to curb legal immigration, after a native of Afghanistan who had been granted asylum was accused in a shooting in the nation’s capital that left one member of the West Virginia National Guard dead and another in critical condition.

“In the wake of last week’s atrocity, it is more important than ever to finish carrying out the president’s mass deportation operation,” White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said during Monday’s press briefing. “They must go back to their home countries.”

The Trump administration at the beginning of the president’s second term launched an unprecedented crackdown on all forms of immigration. The deadly shooting on the eve of the Thanksgiving holiday, in a commercial area of the District of Columbia just blocks from the White House, has intensified the push.

The Department of Homeland Security in a social media post after the Wednesday attack called for immigrants to “remigrate,” which is a far-right concept in Europe that calls for the ethnic removal of non-white minority populations through mass migration.

“There is more work to be done,” Leavitt said, “because President Trump believes that he has a sacred obligation to reverse the calamity of mass unchecked migration into our country.”

The suspect in the guard shooting is a 29-year-old Afghan national who entered the country during the Biden administration through a special immigrant visa program for Afghan allies after the chaotic U.S. withdrawal from the country in 2021. 

Authorities identified him as Rahmanullah Lakanwal, who worked for a CIA counterterrorism operation in Afghanistan, according to the New York Times. He was granted asylum under the Trump administration earlier this year.

The U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of Columbia plans to charge Lakanwal with first-degree murder after one of the National Guard soldiers, U.S. Army Spc. Sarah Beckstrom, 20, died as a result of her injuries. 

Still hospitalized is U.S. Air Force Staff Sgt. Andrew Wolfe, 24. Trump has indicated he intends to honor both Beckstrom and Wolfe at the White House.

District officials said the shooting of guard members was “targeted,” but the motive remains under investigation. 

Pauses on asylum

Leavitt said the Trump administration will continue “to limit migration, both illegal and legal,” after the shooting.

Separately on Wednesday, the administration ended Temporary Protected Status for more than 330,000 nationals from Haiti, opening them up for deportations by February. 

Within hours of Wednesday’s shooting, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services halted all immigration requests from Afghanistan nationals. On Thursday, USCIS head Joseph Edlow announced that by direction of Trump the agency would reexamine every green card application from “every country of concern,” which are the 19 countries on the president’s travel ban list.  

And by Friday, Secretary of State Marco Rubio directed all U.S. embassies to suspend all visa approvals for individuals with passports from Afghanistan. 

Over the weekend, Trump told reporters that those pauses on asylum could last “a long time,” although it’s unclear what authority the executive branch has to suspend a law created by Congress through the 1980 Refugee Act. 

This is not the first time Trump has tried to end asylum this year, as there is a legal challenge to the president barring asylum seekers from making asylum claims at U.S. ports of entry.

Venezuelan boat strikes

During Monday’s press conference, Leavitt also defended the Trump administration’s continued deadly strikes on boats off the coast of Venezuela allegedly containing drugs. The attacks have been occurring since September. 

The president and Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth have stated, without evidence, that the boats’ operators are narco-terrorists and that the strikes are legal, since they have taken place in international waters. Roughly 80 people have been killed in nearly two dozen attacks since September. 

Leavitt disputed any questions of wrongdoing by the administration during a Sept. 2 strike, when two survivors clinging to boat wreckage were allegedly killed by a follow-on strike, as first reported by The Washington Post Friday.

“President Trump and Secretary Hegseth have made it clear that presidentially designated narco-terrorist groups are subject to lethal targeting in accordance with the laws of war,” Leavitt said, adding that Hegseth authorized a military commander to conduct the operation.

However, the attacks have raised concern among members of Congress, and following the Post story, the U.S. Senate and House Armed Services committees moved to open bipartisan inquiries into the military strikes, with a focus on the alleged follow-on attack that killed two survivors. 

How the National Guard wound up in the district

Trump initially mobilized 800 National Guard troops to the nation’s capital in August after claiming a “crime emergency” in the district, despite a documented three-decade low in crime.

Many were instructed they would be carrying service weapons, The Wall Street Journal reported on Aug. 17. The White House effort was accompanied by a heightened U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement presence in the district.

The mobilization then became tied up in court for months.

A federal district judge in the District of Columbia found the administration’s deployment of more than 2,000 guard troops in the city illegal but stayed her Nov. 20 decision for three weeks to give the administration time to appeal and remove the guard members from the district’s streets.

The guard troops had been expected to remain in the district through the end of February.

The administration filed an emergency motion in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia for a stay to be issued on the order by Thursday. The administration filed the emergency motion the same day as the attack on the two National Guard members.

Trump ordered an additional 500 guard members to the district following the shooting.

The Joint Task Force District of Columbia has been overseeing guard operations in the district, including units from the district, Alabama, Georgia, Louisiana, Mississippi, Ohio, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee and West Virginia.

Members of law enforcement and National Guard soldiers respond to a shooting of two National Guard members on Nov. 26, 2025, in Washington, D.C. (Photo by Andrew Leyden/Getty Images)

WASHINGTON — Two National Guard members from West Virginia were in critical condition Wednesday evening after being shot near the White House in Washington, D.C., officials said.

FBI Director Kash Patel, a Metropolitan Police Department leader and Mayor Muriel Bowser emphasized during a press conference the investigation was in the preliminary stages, but said the shooting was “targeted” and that one suspect, who was also shot, was in custody. 

“At approximately 2:15 this afternoon, members of the D.C. National Guard were on high visibility patrols in the area of 17th and I Street Northwest when a suspect came around the corner, raised his arm with a firearm and discharged at the National Guard members,” MPD Executive Assistant Chief Jeffery Carroll said. 

“There were other (National Guard) members that were in the area. They were able to, after some back and forth … subdue the individual and bring them into custody,” Carroll added. “Within moments, members of law enforcement in the area were also able to assist and bring that individual into custody.”

The Department of Homeland Security in a press release late Wednesday identified the suspect as an Afghan national who entered the U.S. in September 2021. Numerous news reports gave his name as Rahmanullah Lakanwal. The Associated Press, citing a law enforcement official not authorized to speak publicly, reported the suspect sustained “injuries that are not believed to be life-threatening.”

U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services posted late Wednesday that “Effective immediately, processing of all immigration requests relating to Afghan nationals is stopped indefinitely pending further review of security and vetting protocols.”

Carroll said there were no other suspects at the time of the press conference, in the early evening, and that law enforcement officials had reviewed video footage from the area where the shooting took place. 

“It appears, like I said, to be a lone gunman that raised the firearm and ambushed these members of the National Guard, and he was quickly taken into custody by other National Guard members and law enforcement members,” he said. 

The guardsmen were armed, but Carroll said investigators had not yet determined if they shot back or how the suspect, whom he did not name, was shot. 

“At this point, we’re still investigating exactly who shot the individual. It’s not clear at this time,” he said. 

Officials were also not yet sure “what kind of weapon” the suspect used during the shooting, which Carroll said “happened right in front of the Metro, although there is no indication that the perpetrator was on the Metro.” The Metro is the district’s public transit system.

Bowser reiterated during the press conference that the two National Guard members were in critical condition and referred to the shooting as “targeted.” 

Trump delivers remarks

President Donald Trump delivered brief remarks Wednesday night from Florida, condemning the “monstrous, ambush-style attack.”

Trump praised his deployment of guard troops to the district as “part of the most successful public safety and national security mission in the history of our nation’s capital.”

“This heinous assault was an act of evil, an act of hatred and an act of terror. It was a crime against our entire nation. It was a crime against humanity. The hearts of all Americans tonight are with those two members of the West Virginia National Guard and their families,” Trump said in a recorded video message posted on his social media platform, Truth Social, around 9:20 p.m. Eastern. 

Trump said “based on the best available information” the suspect is from Afghanistan, which he called “a hellhole on Earth” and that he had been “flown in” by former President Joe Biden.

Trump said his administration will “re-examine every single alien who has entered our country from Afghanistan under Biden.” 

Biden established a program to bring Afghans who assisted American troops during two decades of war to the United States after his administration withdrew troops in August 2021.

FBI and partners to lead investigation

Patel said the investigation will be treated as an assault on a federal law enforcement officer. 

“The FBI will lead out on that mission with our interagency partners to include the Department of Homeland Security, Secret Service, ATF, DEA, and we’re thankful for the mayor’s assistance in this matter,” Patel said. “The Metropolitan Police Department and their skills in investigating homicides and gun shootings in this city is exceptional. 

“We will work together collaboratively, because this is a matter of national security, because it’s a matter of pride.”

West Virginia Gov. Patrick Morrisey wrote on social media before the press conference that the guard members had died, though he later posted he was hearing “conflicting reports about the condition of our two Guard members and will provide additional updates once we receive more complete information.”

“Our prayers are with these brave service members, their families, and the entire Guard community,” he added. 

Trump was briefed on the shooting and was “actively monitoring this tragic situation,” according to a statement Wednesday afternoon from White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt. The shooting happened just one day before Thanksgiving. 

Trump posted on social media that both guardsmen were “critically wounded” and taken to two separate hospitals. The shooter, he added, was “also severely wounded, but regardless, will pay a very steep price.”

Trump mobilized 800 National Guard members to the district in August, on the grounds of a “crime emergency,” despite a nearly 30-year low in violent crime in the city. 

Some of the guard troops were instructed they would be carrying service weapons while deployed in the district, according to an Aug. 17 report in the Wall Street Journal. 

Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth told reporters Wednesday the administration will send an additional 500 National Guard troops to the district.

“This will only stiffen our resolve to ensure that we make Washington DC safe and beautiful,” Hegseth said.

The White House was placed on lockdown for a period due to the shooting, according to a White House official. Trump and first lady Melania Trump were not present at the time of the shooting.

Last week, a District of Columbia federal judge found the Trump administration’s deployment of the National Guard in the city illegal. However, Judge Jia Cobb paused her order for three weeks to give the Trump administration time to remove the guard members along with appealing her ruling.  

More than 2,000 members of the guard have remained in the district, and are expected to stay until the end of February, according to Cobb’s order.

The Trump administration on Wednesday asked the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit in an emergency motion to intervene.

When Trump mobilized the Guard, he also federalized the district’s police force for 30 days. While the federalization of the police force expired, Trump has kept the National Guard in the district.

Since then, Republican governors have agreed to send their own Guard members to the district, from Louisiana, Ohio, South Carolina and West Virginia, among others. 

Lawmakers react

Members of Congress responded to the initial reports of the shooting with prayers and gratitude for the service members. 

“Praying for the National Guard members wounded in this horrific shooting,” U.S. House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, D-N.Y., wrote on social media. “Thankful for the brave law enforcement officers and first responders who swiftly apprehended a suspect. There is no place for violence in America.”

Sen. Joni Ernst, an Iowa Republican and retired lieutenant colonel in the Iowa National Guard, called for prayers for the victims. 

“Join me in praying for the two National Guardsmen shot in D.C. and their families,” she said. “Our men and women in uniform truly put their lives on the line to keep us safe and deserve our greatest respect.”

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., wrote he was “closely monitoring the situation and am praying for the wounded National Guardsmen and their families.”

“My heart breaks for the victims of this horrific shooting in Washington DC near the White House,” Schumer wrote. “I thank all the first responders for their quick action to capture the suspect.”

Speaking in Fort Campbell, Kentucky, Vice President JD Vance, a U.S. Marine Corps veteran, said the attack was “a somber reminder.”

“Our soldiers are the sword and the shield of the United States of America,” he said. “And as a person who goes into work every single day in that building and knows that there are a lot of people who wear the uniform of the United States Army, let me just say very personally thank them for what they’re doing.”

Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., wrote that his “thoughts and prayers are with the National Guardsmen who were attacked this afternoon. I urge you to keep them in your prayers too.”

Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., wrote the “National Guard has done heroic work this year working around the clock to make our nation’s capital safe again. We are forever grateful for the swift actions of law enforcement and for all those who risk their own lives to protect everyone else.”

Jacob Fischler and Leann Ray contributed to this report.

Department of Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem at a Nashville press conference on July 18, 2025, to discuss arrests of immigrants during recent Immigration and Customs Enforcement sweeps. (Photo by John Partipilo/Tennessee Lookout)

WASHINGTON — Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem announced Wednesday the end of temporary protected status for roughly 330,000 nationals from Haiti by February, opening them up to deportations.

In her reasoning, Noem said extending temporary protected status to Haitians would be “contrary to the national interest of the United States” and will end on Feb. 3.

TPS is granted to nationals who hail from countries deemed too dangerous for a return, due to violence or major natural disasters. 

While TPS was granted to Haitians due to the 2010 earthquake, conditions in the country have worsened amid rising gang violence since 2021. 

“Moreover, even if the Department found that there existed conditions that were extraordinary and temporary that prevented Haitian nationals …from returning in safety, termination of Temporary Protected Status of Haiti is still required because it is contrary to the national interest of the United States to permit Haitian nationals … to remain temporarily in the United States,” according to the notice in the Federal Register. 

The notice is meant to comply with a court order earlier this year that barred DHS from ending TPS for nationals from Haiti until protections were set to expire in February. 

States with large Haitian immigrant populations include Florida, New York, New Jersey and Pennsylvania, according to the Migration Policy Institute, a think tank that studies global migration.

Noem, who stated in her confirmation hearing that she planned to curtail TPS renewals, has moved to end protections for nationals from Afghanistan, Cameroon, Honduras, Nepal, Nicaragua, Syria and Venezuela.

Prisoners look out of their cell as Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem tours the Terrorist Confinement Center, or CECOT, in Tecoluca, El Salvador, on March 26, 2025. (Photo by Alex Brandon-Pool/Getty Images)

WASHINGTON — The Department of Justice acknowledged in a court filing that Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem made the call to continue removals of Venezuelans to a brutal Salvadoran prison, despite a federal judge’s order to stop the deportations.

The Tuesday filing noted that Noem was advised by top officials at the Justice Department she did not need to comply with the March 15 judicial order to halt the deportations because it had been issued after the flights took off. The Venezuelan nationals were deported under an obscure wartime law called the Alien Enemies Act.

“After receiving that legal advice, Secretary Noem directed that the AEA detainees who had been removed from the United States before the Court’s order could be transferred to the custody of El Salvador,” according to the DOJ filing. “That decision was lawful and was consistent with a reasonable interpretation of the Court’s order.”

Noem’s decision sent 137 Venezuelan men to a mega-prison for months until the Venezuelan government could broker a prison swap with El Salvador and the United States to have the men returned. 

In an emergency March 15 order, U.S. District Judge James Boasberg said the planes carrying the Venezuelans had to return to the United States.

They did not have the opportunity to challenge their removal, which was a violation of their due process rights, the American Civil Liberties Union has argued in its case against the Trump administration. 

Tuesday’s filing represents a shift in legal strategy from the administration, which had initially argued that because Boasberg’s order was verbal and not written, his temporary restraining order carried no weight. 

Contempt probe

The filing comes after Boasberg resumed a contempt investigation to identify the Trump administration officials involved in authorizing the Venezuelans’ removals.

Last week, Boasberg ordered the administration to submit filings on how to proceed with the contempt inquiry.

“I certainly intend to find out what happened that day,” Boasberg said last week.

Tuesday’s filing argued that contempt proceedings are not needed and that “the Government maintains that its actions did not violate the Court’s order.”

The ACLU, which is representing the deported men, in its filing on the contempt issue urged Boasberg to request testimony from nine current and former officials from the Homeland Security and Justice departments. 

The ACLU also said the government should identify “all individuals involved in the decision… regardless of whether they were the ultimate decision-maker or had direct input into the decision, as well as all those with knowledge of the decision-making process.”

Once those people had been identified, Boasberg could determine in what order testimony should be gathered.

President Donald Trump addresses undecided Latino voters during a Univision Noticias town hall event in Doral, Florida, during the closing weeks of the 2024 presidential campaign.  (Photo by Joe Raedle/Getty Images) 

WASHINGTON — A majority of U.S. Latinos have grown pessimistic since the 2024 presidential election and increasingly disapprove of the immigration and economic policies of the second Trump administration, according to a new report from the Pew Research Center.

About 70% of Latinos in the U.S. disapprove of President Donald Trump’s record, with 65% disapproving of his handling of immigration and 61% saying his policies have worsened the economy, according to the report.

The report found Latinos’ views are still divided by how they voted in the last presidential election, though even Trump voters’ opinions of the president have declined.

“Those who voted for Trump express strong support for the president and his policies, while those who voted for Kamala Harris hold deeply negative views,” according to the report. 

Latinos were among the groups with the largest shifts toward Trump. In his first campaign in 2016, 28% backed him. In 2020, about 36% of Latinos voted for Trump and that support again grew in 2024, when nearly 48% supported him. Latinos are among the fastest growing demographic groups in the U.S., and are the second largest racial group in the country. 

The Nov. 24 Pew Research Center report analyzed survey responses from more than 5,500 Hispanic adults conducted from Sept. 22-28 and Oct. 6-16. The study used the terms Latino and Hispanic people interchangeably.

Disapproval on immigration 

The study found deep disapproval of the Trump administration’s immigration policies, amid aggressive immigration enforcement operations in areas with large Latino immigrant populations.

More than half of Latino adults reported that they worry that they, a family member or a close friend could be deported. Almost 59% of Latinos said they have seen or heard of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement raids or arrests in their community in the past six months. 

“About seven-in-ten (71%) say (the Trump administration) is doing too much when it comes to deporting immigrants living in the country illegally, up from 56% in March,” according to the study.

In his 2024 campaign, Trump promised to conduct mass deportations and end temporary legal status given to newly arrived migrants under the Biden administration.

Economic outlook worrying

Two-thirds of Latinos said their overall situation has worsened since last year.

“This is the first time that most Hispanics say their situation has worsened in nearly two decades of Pew Research Center Hispanic surveys,” according to the report. 

Inflation and the economy were major policy concerns for Latinos, like most voters, in the 2024 presidential election.

The Pew Research Center study found that in the last year, 1 in 3 Latinos struggled to pay for groceries, medical care and rent or a mortgage.

“Many Latinos also have a negative outlook on the economy’s future,” according to the study. “About half (49%) say the nation’s economy will worsen over the next year, up substantially from 2024. Another 23% say economic conditions will be about the same as now.”