Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem testifies before the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee on Tuesday, May 20, 2025. (Screenshot from committee webcast)

WASHINGTON — U.S. Department of Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem Tuesday was grilled by senators on the Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee about funding estimates for a barrier along the southern border, as well as concerns about the Trump administration’s adherence to due process in immigration enforcement.

Noem was sharply criticized by Democrats for her answers to questions about habeas corpus, which they said she did not define correctly. “Habeas corpus is a constitutional right that the president has to be able to remove people from this country,” Noem said before she was cut off by Democratic Sen. Maggie Hassan of New Hampshire, who had asked her for a definition.

“That’s incorrect,” Hassan said. “Habeas corpus is the legal principle that requires that the government provide a public reason for detaining and imprisoning people. If not for that protection, the government could simply arrest people, including American citizens, and hold them indefinitely for no reason.”

As for the cost of President Donald Trump’s border plans, even Republicans expressed doubts.

“I know the wall is (of) great symbolic value, but I think we should reassess the cost,” Republican Chair Rand Paul of Kentucky said about the House’s reconciliation package, which calls for $46 billion in border wall funding.

Noem appeared before the committee to discuss President Donald Trump’s fiscal year 2026 budget request for Congress along with the border security provisions in the reconciliation package. Congressional Republicans are using reconciliation — a special procedure that skirts the Senate’s 60-vote filibuster — to put together one bill to fulfill Trump’s priorities on border security, tax cuts, energy policy and defense.

“The border crisis is the biggest problem that was facing our country, and it was one that was imperative to fixing for our nation’s future,” Noem, the former governor of South Dakota, said. “We’re solving this crisis at a record pace, and we have delivered the most secure border in American history.”

Senate Democrats pressed Noem about DHS spending, noting that she is on track to run out of funding by mid-July, and her agency’s immigration crackdown that has led to expensive immigration enforcement.

The top Democrat on the panel, Sen. Gary Peters of Michigan, noted that detaining migrants at the Guantanamo naval base costs as much as $100,000 a day, compared to $160 a day at a U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement facility. 

“I think that’s kind of outrageous,” Peters said. “I’m concerned by the staggering cost of this, and I would hope, Secretary (Noem), you could commit to providing this committee a detailed breakdown of the total cost of that operation there.”

Noem said she would get the cost breakdown for him. 

Questions about habeas corpus

Several Senate Democrats, including Hassan, Andy Kim of New Jersey and Elissa Slotkin of Michigan, questioned comments from senior White House officials such as Stephen Miller, who has said discussions about suspending habeas corpus were underway.

Habeas corpus allows people in the U.S. who believe they are being unlawfully detained to petition for their release in court, and it can be used to challenge immigration detention.

The U.S. Constitution in allowing for habeas corpus to be suspended says “in Cases of Rebellion or Invasion the public Safety may require it.” That provision is within Article I of the Constitution, which covers the functions of the legislative branch, or Congress.

Habeas corpus has only been suspended four times in U.S. history, during the Civil War; in almost a dozen South Carolina counties that were overrun by the Ku Klux Klan during reconstruction; in a 1905 insurrection in U.S. territories in the Philippines; and after the Pearl Harbor bombing in Hawaii.

Slotkin told Noem she was concerned by her response that she believes the president has the right to suspend habeas corpus.

“You sat here in front of all of us and swore an oath to the Constitution,” Slotkin said to Noem, adding that if the president were to suspend habeas corpus, it would be a “complete overreach.”

“It is a right that we all get, that American citizens get, that people who are in the United States legally have,” Slotkin said.

Kim asked Noem, a former member of the U.S. House, if she knew what section of the Constitution allows for the suspension of habeas corpus and which article it’s under.

Noem did not know the answer to either question.

“It’s in Article I,” Kim said. “Do you know which branch of government Article I outlines the tasks and the responsibilities for?”

Noem said Congress. She then argued former President Abraham Lincoln suspended habeas corpus.

Lincoln suspended habeas corpus between Washington, D.C., and Philadelphia because of the Civil War and initially did so without congressional approval. He later called Congress back into session to get congressional approval for it.

Reality show with competing immigrants

Democratic Sen. Richard Blumenthal of Connecticut asked Noem if DHS was considering hosting a reality show that would make immigrants compete for citizenship, according to multiple media reports.

Noem vehemently denied that DHS was looking at it.

“There may have been something submitted somewhere along the line, because there are proposals pitched to the department, but me and my executive team have no knowledge of a reality show, and it’s not under consideration,” she said.

Kim pressed Noem about the recent confrontation between House lawmakers and immigration officials at Delaney Hall in his home state of New Jersey.

Three New Jersey Democratic members – Reps. Bonnie Watson Coleman, LaMonica McIver and Rob Menendez — were in Newark protesting the reopening of Delaney Hall, an immigrant detention center.

The mayor of Newark, Ras Baraka, who was also protesting, was arrested.

The Trump administration Monday levied two felony charges against one of those members, McIver, accusing her of assaulting officers during Baraka’s arrest.

Kim said he was concerned about the incident and asked Noem if she was aware that members of Congress do not need prior notice to conduct oversight at DHS facilities.

Members of Congress are allowed to conduct oversight visits at any DHS facility that detains immigrants, without prior notice, under provisions in an appropriations law.

Noem accused the three House members of “storming” the facility.

“We give tours when members of Congress ask for it, we just ask that they not be politicized,” she said.

Prep for big sporting events

Florida GOP Sen. Rick Scott and Rand Paul asked Noem about how prepared DHS is for providing security to big sporting events such as the Super Bowl and soccer’s World Cup.

Scott wanted to know how security preparations for the 2026 World Cup, which includes games in Miami, are going.

Miami is one of 11 U.S. cities hosting the World Cup. The others are Atlanta; Boston; Dallas; Houston; Kansas City, Missouri; Los Angeles; the San Francisco Bay area; the New York and New Jersey metropolitan area; Philadelphia; and Seattle.

“We are working diligently with FIFA and other entities to ensure that cities and states have the assets that they need. This will be an unprecedented world event,” Noem said. “It will be taking place in three different countries and many cities across our country, but also Mexico and Canada, and it will take place over a month.”

The World Cup, which first began in the 1930s, is typically held in one country every four years. The last time two countries hosted the month-long event was in 2002, with Japan and South Korea.

Paul asked Noem if the NFL or FIFA, international soccer’s governing body, ever paid DHS for its security measures.

Noem said no.

“Here’s my point,” Paul said. “The NFL makes billions of dollars. These people ought to pay. I mean, it’s ridiculous that the average taxpayer could never afford to go to an NFL Super Bowl, (and) has got to pay for their security.”

The U.S. Supreme Court on Oct. 9, 2024. (Photo by Jane Norman/States Newsroom)

WASHINGTON — The U.S. Supreme Court said Monday it will allow, for now, the Trump administration to terminate temporary protections for a group of 350,000 Venezuelans, striking down a lower court’s order that blocked the process.

The order still means the group of Venezuelans on Temporary Protected Status — a designation given to nationals from countries deemed too dangerous to return to remain in the U.S. — will be able to continue to challenge in court the end of their work permits and the possibility of removal. But they no longer have protections from deportation. 

No justices signed onto the ruling, which is typical in cases brought before the high court on an emergency basis, but liberal Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson noted she would have denied the request.

TPS status for that group of Venezuelans — a portion of Venezuelans living in the United States, not all of them — was set to end on April 7 under a move by the Trump administration.

But U.S. District Judge Edward Chen of the Northern District of California in March blocked Department of Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem’s decision to vacate an extension of TPS protections that had been put in place by the Biden administration until October 2026.

The case is now before the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals.

Chen, who was appointed by former President Barack Obama, blocked the Trump administration from removing protections for that group of Venezuelans on the basis that Noem’s actions were “arbitrary and capricious,” and potentially motivated by racism.

“Acting on the basis of a negative group stereotype and generalizing such stereotype to the entire group is the classic example of racism,” Chen wrote in his order.

Noem cited gang activity as her reason for not extending TPS for the group of 350,000 Venezuelans, who came to the United States in 2023.

A second group of 250,000 Venezuelans who were granted TPS in 2021 will have their work and deportation protections expire in September. Chen’s order did not apply to the second group of Venezuelans.

Those with TPS have deportation protections and are allowed to work and live in the United States for 18 months, unless extended by the DHS secretary.

Democrats criticized Monday’s decision, including Colorado Sen. Michael Bennet.

“Ending protections for Venezuelans fleeing Maduro’s regime is cruel, short-sighted, and destabilizing,” he wrote on social media.

Rep. Pramila Jayapal, Democrat of Washington state, wrote on social media that Venezuelans “face extreme oppression, arbitrary detention, extrajudicial killings, and torture — the exact type of situation that requires our government to provide TPS.”

Monday’s order is one of several immigration-related emergency requests from the Trump administration before the Supreme Court.

Last week, the high court heard oral arguments that stemmed from an executive order signed by President Donald Trump to end the constitutional right to birthright citizenship.

And justices in a separate case, again, denied the Trump administration from resuming the deportations of Venezuelans under an 18th-century wartime law known as the Alien Enemies Act. 

Maryland Democratic U.S. Rep. Glenn Ivey, who represents the district where Kilmar Abrego Garcia and his wife live, led the chant “bring him home” outside the U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland shortly before a hearing in Abrego Garcia’s case on Friday, May 16, 2025. (Photo by Ariana Figueroa/States Newsroom)

GREENBELT, MARYLAND — A federal judge said Friday the Trump administration has “pretty broadly” invoked the state secrets privilege to withhold information on its efforts — or, the judge indicated, a possible lack of effort — to return a wrongly deported Maryland man from a prison in El Salvador.

President Donald Trump’s administration moved last month to invoke the so-called state secrets privilege to shield information about its process to facilitate the return of Kilmar Abrego Garcia to the United States after a top immigration official admitted his removal to a prison in El Salvador was an “administrative error.”

The judge handling the case, U.S. District Judge Paula Xinis, granted an expedited discovery process after she found last month that “nothing has been done” by the administration to return Abrego Garcia.

She did not make a public order regarding the state secrets privilege Friday afternoon before closing her courtroom to the public to discuss sensitive matters with attorneys for Abrego Garcia and the Department of Justice.

The state secrets privilege is a common-law doctrine that protects sensitive national security information from being released. The Trump administration has argued the need to invoke it in this case to protect diplomatic relationships.

‘He’ll never walk free in the United States’

During the public portion of Friday’s hearing, Xinis pressed the Department of Justice attorneys about Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem’s comment that Abrego Garcia “will not return” to the U.S.

“That sounds to me like an admission that your client will not take steps to facilitate the return,” Xinis said. “That’s about as clear as it can get.”

DOJ attorney Jonathan D. Guynn disagreed and said the Trump administration is complying with court orders. He said Noem’s comment meant that if Abrego Garcia was back in U.S. custody he would be removed either to another third country or back to El Salvador.

“He’ll never walk free in the United States,” Guynn said.

He added that the Trump administration is “currently complying and we plan to comply.”

Xinis said she disagreed, and then she clashed with Guynn over the legality of Abrego Garcia’s removal.

Guynn said that he was lawfully deported.

Xinis answered that she found months ago that Abrego Garcia was unlawfully detained and removed from the U.S.

Few documents produced

One of the attorneys for Abrego Garcia, Andrew J. Rossman, said the Trump administration has invoked the state secrets privilege for 1,140 documents relating to the case. From that request, Rossman said his team received 168 documents, but 132 were copies of court filings and requests made by him and his team.

Xinis seemed visibly stunned by Rossman’s report and had to clarify that his team had only received 36 new documents, which Rossman confirmed.

Rossman said that none of the documents for which the government is invoking the state secrets privilege are classified.

“There’s ways to do this right, and they haven’t done it,” he said, noting that he has attorneys on his team who have security clearances and can review classified and sensitive information.

Rossman said that he and his team are seeking answers to three questions: the status of Abrego Garcia, what steps the Trump administration has taken, if any, to facilitate his return, and the steps the federal government will take, if any, to comply with court orders.

Guynn said the Trump administration received an update from El Salvador on Thursday that Abrego Garcia was in “good health” and had “even gained weight.”

The U.S. Supreme Court ordered that the Trump administration must “facilitate” the return of Abrego Garcia.

Rossman, said that it’s “deeply disturbing” that administration officials, including the president, have made public statements that contradict court orders directing the government to return Abrego Garcia to the U.S.

President Donald Trump has said he could easily pick up the phone and order El Salvador to return him but won’t because he believes Abrego Garcia is a member of the MS-13 gang.

Noem was pressed at a May 14 congressional hearing about a photo that appears altered to add letters across Abrego Garcia’s knuckles to indicate his inclusion in the gang. She said she was unaware of it.

A federal judge in the District of Columbia, in a separate case regarding Trump’s use of an archaic wartime law for deportations, questioned Department of Justice attorneys on the president’s claim that he could order Abrego Garcia to be returned. The attorney admitted that the president sometimes overstates his influence abroad.

El Salvador prison

Abrego Garcia has had protections from deportation since 2019, but he was one of nearly 300 men on three mid-March removal flights to a notorious prison in El Salvador known as CECOT.

Abrego Garcia has been moved to a lower security prison, according to Maryland Democratic Sen. Chris Van Hollen, who traveled to the country last month to meet with Abrego Garcia and inquire with Salvadoran officials about why he is being held there.

Those officials said Abrego Garcia was being held because of the agreement between the United States and El Salvador.

The U.S. has a $15 million agreement with El Salvador’s government to house immigrants removed from the U.S., mostly Venezuelans removed under the wartime law, the Alien Enemies Act of 1798.

The Trump administration has argued that Abrego Garcia is a national of El Salvador and in that country’s custody and the U.S. cannot force another government to return him. 

Hours before Friday’s hearing, dozens of protestors gathered outside the court, calling for Abrego Garcia to be returned to the U.S., as well as criticizing the Trump administration’s immigration crackdown. 

U.S. Rep. Glenn Ivey, who represents the area in Maryland where Abrego Garcia and his family live, appeared outside the court and led chants calling for the release of Abrego Garcia from El Salvador.

“The president has to obey the orders of the Supreme Court,” Ivey said. “The Supreme Court has spoken here, and it’s time for him to follow it and bring him home.”

The U.S. House Budget Committee votes on Friday, May 16, 2025 on a massive reconciliation package. The vote failed, 16-21. (Screenshot from House webcast)

WASHINGTON — Republicans suffered a major setback to their “big, beautiful bill” on Friday, when amid conservative objections the U.S. House Budget Committee failed to approve the measure, a crucial step in the process.

In a 16-21 vote, Reps. Andrew Clyde of Georgia, Josh Brecheen of Oklahoma, Ralph Norman of South Carolina, Chip Roy of Texas and Lloyd Smucker of Pennsylvania broke from their GOP colleagues to block the bill from moving toward the floor, demanding changes to several provisions.

The breakdown over the 1,116-page bill marks an escalation in the long-running feud between centrist Republicans, who have been cautious about hundreds of billions in spending cuts to safety net programs, and far-right members of the party, who argue the changes are not enough.

The committee is scheduled to reconvene Sunday at 10 p.m. Eastern. House Speaker Mike Johnson of Louisiana has said he wants the package on the floor prior to the Memorial Day recess.

Speedier work requirements

Norman said he remains a “hard no” until new work requirements for Medicaid recipients phase in more quickly. As the bill is written, the requirements won’t begin until 2029.

“To phase this in for four years — We’re telling a healthy-bodied, a healthy American that you got four years to get a job. No, your payment stops now,” Norman said.

Brecheen criticized the bill for not going far enough to repeal wind and solar energy tax credits, which he contends are “undermining natural gas jobs.”

“We have to fix this,” he said.

Clyde denounced the measure for not adhering to President Donald Trump’s promise of “right-sizing government,” as Clyde described it. The Georgia Republican also pleaded for lower taxes on firearms and stronger cuts that would put Medicaid on a “sustainable path.”

“Unfortunately, the current version falls short of these goals and fails to deliver the transformative change that Americans were promised,” Clyde said.

Smucker initially voted ‘yes,’ but then joined his four colleagues to oppose the measure.

Trump wrote on his social media platform shortly before the committee voted that “Republicans MUST UNITE behind, ‘THE ONE, BIG BEAUTIFUL BILL!’”

“We don’t need ‘GRANDSTANDERS’ in the Republican Party. STOP TALKING, AND GET IT DONE! It is time to fix the MESS that Biden and the Democrats gave us. Thank you for your attention to this matter!”

‘A wrecking ball to Medicaid’

Democrats, who as expected unified in voting no against the bill, slammed it as “ugly,” “cruel” and a “betrayal.”

“This bill takes a wrecking ball to Medicaid, on which 1 in 5 Americans and 3 million Ohioans depend for medical care — children, seniors in nursing homes,” said Rep. Marcy Kaptur, who represents northern Ohio. “Please come with me to visit the nursing homes. … Perhaps too many on the other side of the aisle have not had to endure a life that has major challenges.”

Rep. Ilhan Omar of Minnesota said the proposed cuts to safety net programs would be “devastating.”

“Their changes will kick millions of Americans off their health care and nutrition assistance. That means more untreated illnesses, more hungry children, more preventable deaths,” she said.

Republican-only bill

Republicans are using the complex reconciliation process to move the package through Congress with simple majority votes in each chamber, avoiding the Senate’s 60-vote legislative filibuster, which would otherwise require bipartisanship. 

Reconciliation measures must address federal revenue, spending, or the debt limit in a way not deemed “merely incidental” by the Senate parliamentarian. That means the GOP proposals must carry some sort of price tag and cannot focus simply on changing federal policy.

Republicans are using the package to extend the 2017 tax law, increase spending on border security and defense by hundreds of billions of dollars, overhaul American energy production, restructure higher education aid and cut spending.

The 11 House committees tasked with drafting pieces of the legislation have all debated and approved their measures along party lines.

The Agriculture Committee, Energy and Commerce Committee and Ways and Means Committee all completed their work earlier this week, amid strong objections from Democrats.

Proposed changes to the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, or SNAP, could shift considerable cost-sharing onto states for the first time, presenting challenges for red-state lawmakers who need to explain the bill back home.

More than $600 billion in federal spending cuts to Medicaid during the next decade could also cause some difficulties for moderate Republicans, some of whose constituents are likely to be among the millions of Americans expected to lose their health insurance.

Republicans also have yet to reach an agreement on the state and local tax deduction or SALT, a priority for GOP lawmakers from blue states like California, New Jersey and New York.

The Budget Committee’s role in the process was to package together all of the bills and then send the one massive bill to the Rules Committee, the last stop before floor debate for major legislation.

That won’t be able to happen until after GOP leaders get nearly all the Republican lawmakers on the panel to support the package. 

U.S. Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem delivers remarks to staff at the Department of Homeland Security headquarters on Jan. 28, 2025, in Washington, D.C. (Photo by Manuel Balce Ceneta-Pool/Getty Images)

WASHINGTON — U.S. Department of Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem Wednesday harshly criticized three Democrats who were accosted by federal immigration officials while protesting the opening of an immigrant detention center in New Jersey.

Democrats at the hearing of the House Homeland Security Committee in turn said Immigration and Customs Enforcement officials physically assaulted the lawmakers.

Noem, who was appearing to discuss President Donald Trump’s fiscal year 2026 budget for the agency, said the Democrats who went to Delaney Hall to oversee the conditions were not conducting proper oversight.

Members of Congress are allowed to conduct oversight visits at any DHS facility that detains immigrants, without prior notice, under provisions in an appropriations law.

“I believe that it was breaking into a federal facility and assaulting law enforcement officers,” Noem, the former governor of South Dakota, said.

Newark incident

Last Friday, the three New Jersey Democratic members – Reps. Bonnie Watson Coleman, LaMonica McIver and Rob Menendez — were in Newark protesting the reopening of an immigrant detention center.

The mayor of Newark, Ras Baraka, was arrested. It was a stark escalation of Democratic lawmakers’ opposition to the Trump administration’s immigration crackdown.

After the incident, Menendez detailed how ICE agents “pushed, physically assaulted two female members of Congress.” 

Several Republicans on the panel that oversees Homeland Security, including Chair Mark Green of Tennessee, said there should be consequences for the Democrats, such as criminal charges.

Green accused one of three Democrats of assaulting a law enforcement officer.

“This behavior demands a swift and firm response, and I assure you, action will be taken,” Green said.

Arizona GOP Rep. Eli Crane suggested there be criminal charges lodged against the Democratic members and Republican Rep. Andy Ogles of Tennessee suggested to Noem that she “look into actions (to) be taken if a member assaulted” law enforcement.

The top Democrat on the panel, Rep. Bennie Thompson of Mississippi, slammed Noem for the incident.

“Instead of following the law, masked ICE personnel stopped and assaulted the members,” he said. “Then, to make matters worse, instead of launching an investigation into the incident, your department lied to the press about the situation and threatened to arrest members of Congress for doing their job.”

One of the Democrats who was at the detention center protest, McIver, sits on the committee, but she did not speak to Noem about the incident.

“This is not about me,” McIver said, and instead pressed Noem about international students who had their visas revoked.

Focus on Abrego Garcia

Democrats criticized Noem and the Trump administration’s aggressive immigration enforcement that has led to swift deportations and concerns about a lack of due process.

They especially focused on Kilmar Abrego Garcia, a Maryland man who was wrongly deported to a prison in El Salvador.

Rhode Island Democratic Rep. Seth Magaziner called Noem’s leadership of DHS “sloppy,” and said it has led to immigrants and even U.S. citizen children being wrongly deported.

“Instead of enforcing the laws, you have repeatedly broken them,” Magaziner said. “You need to change course immediately before more innocent people are hurt on your watch.”

California Democratic Rep. Eric Swalwell asked Noem if Abrego Garcia was given proper due process.

Swalwell said he was defending due process and held up a poster that showed Trump holding a picture of Abrego Garcia’s hand that digitally added “MS-13” tattoos to his knuckles.

He asked her several times if the photo was doctored. Noem did not answer the question but said she was unaware of the image.

Instead she said that even if Abrego Garcia were returned to the United States, he would be immediately deported. The U.S. Supreme Court ruled the Trump administration must facilitate the return of Abrego Garcia but he remains in El Salvador.

Crane asked Noem if she supported suspending habeas corpus, something that top Trump officials such as Deputy White House Chief of Staff Stephen Miller have floated.

Habeas corpus allows people who believe they are being unlawfully detained to petition for their release in court, and it’s used to challenge immigration detention. It’s currently the only avenue that Venezuelans subject to the Alien Enemies Act of 1798 have to challenge their deportation under the wartime law.

“That’s not in my purview to weigh in on,” Noem said. “This is the president’s prerogative to pursue, and he has not indicated to me that he will or will not be taking that action.”

The U.S. Constitution allows for habeas corpus to be suspended “in Cases of Rebellion or Invasion the public Safety may require it.”

Crane argued that unauthorized immigration counted as an “invasion,” and therefore could be used to suspend habeas corpus.

Habeas corpus has been suspended four times in U.S. history, during the Civil War; in almost a dozen South Carolina counties that were overrun by the Ku Klux Klan during reconstruction; in a 1905 insurrection in U.S. territories in the Philippines; and after the Pearl Harbor bombing in Hawaii.

FEMA dismantling

Thompson grilled Noem about the president’s comments wanting to dismantle FEMA.

Noem said that she is supportive of Trump’s policy.

“The president has been clear that he wants to empower states to give them the opportunity to build out their response,” she said.

She said that while the federal government will be there for support, that local and state governments “know what they need.”

Thompson asked Noem if she had a plan for the federal government responding to natural disasters.

Noem said while there is nothing in writing, “the White House is coming forward with a plan…that will be making recommendations.”

GOP Rep. Carlos Gimenez of Florida, said that while he supports efforts to “reform FEMA,” he stressed to Noem that “we can’t leave those who can’t fend for themselves.”

Federal funding for the Washington Bridge demolition and rebuild project faces new uncertainty under new executive directives tying infrastructure grants to states’ cooperation with federal immigration policies. (Photo by Christopher Shea/Rhode Island Current)

This story first appeared on the Rhode Island Current.

There’s no reason why money for road repairs and flood protections should hinge upon states’ cooperation with federal immigration policies, contend 20 Democratic states attorneys general.

That’s why the AGs are asking a federal judge to stop federal agencies from a “grant funding hostage scheme” that requires detaining undocumented immigrants who don’t commit crimes in order to receive key federal grants and aid.

Two new federal lawsuits filed in U.S. District Court in Rhode Island Tuesday against the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) aim to protect and preserve billions of federal dollars already awarded to states for emergency preparedness, disaster relief and infrastructure projects.

Directives issued in April by DHS and DOT secretaries informed states that their federal funding required compliance with federal immigration policies. The AGs — representing Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Maine, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Nevada, New Mexico, New York, Oregon, Washington, Wisconsin and Vermont — allege this violated constitutional protections for separation of powers.

“By hanging a halt in this critical funding over States like a sword of Damocles, Defendants impose immense harm on States, forcing them to choose between readiness for disasters and emergencies, on the one hand, and their judgment about how best to investigate and prosecute crimes, on the other,” the lawsuit against DHS, the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) and the U.S. Coast Guard, and their leaders, states.

“Defendants’ grant funding hostage scheme violates two key principles that underlie the American system of checks and balances: agencies in the Executive Branch cannot act contrary to the authority conferred on them by Congress, and the federal government cannot use the spending power to coerce States into adopting its preferred policies. Defendants have ignored both principles, claiming undelegated power to place their own conditions on dozens of grant programs that Congress created and bulldozing through the Constitution’s boundary between state and federal authority.”

The AGs say state and local public safety officials have more important work to do than cater to the whims of a new administration, which stand in contradiction to state-level directives like, for example, authorizing licenses for undocumented immigrants. Rhode Island lawmakers granted driving privileges for undocumented residents in 2022, with a July, 1 2023 effective date, joining 19 other states and D.C.

Federal protocols followed by U.S. Immigrations and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and other agencies could force state and local police to use state license laws as a way to find and detain undocumented immigrants.

“As a former U.S. Attorney and former federal prosecutor, I know how many ICE agents are in Rhode Island and it’s under 10,” Rhode Island Attorney General Peter Neronha, said during a virtual news conference Tuesday. “What they need in order to carry out their agenda is for us to do the work for them, pulling us away from important law enforcement work in Rhode Island.”

No state has seen federal funding cut off since directives were issued by U.S. Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem and U.S. Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy. Not yet.

States’ abilities to respond to natural disasters and security threats, and complete key infrastructure projects, including the much-anticipated rebuild of the westbound Washington Bridge in Rhode Island, hinge upon a continued flow of congressionally authorized federal grants and aid.

The $221 million Biden-era infrastructure grant awarded to Rhode Island for the Washington Bridge project only became accessible in late March, after weeks of uncertainty in the wake of the administration change. Gov. Dan McKee’s office and the Rhode Island Department of Transportation did not immediately respond to inquiries for comment Tuesday regarding continued access to the funds in the wake of Duffy’s April 24 directive tying federal infrastructure grants to compliance with federal diversity and immigration policies.

The Duffy directive fails to provide any statutory or legal explanation for why transportation funding relates to immigration enforcement. The new requirements  jeopardize more than $628 million in federal funding in Rhode Island, and billions of dollars more across the country, the AGs argue in their lawsuit against Duffy and DOT.

“If Plaintiff States reject Defendants’ unlawful Immigration Enforcement Condition, they will collectively lose billions in federal funding that is essential to sustain critical public safety and transportation programs, including highway development, airport safety projects, protections against train collisions, and programs to prevent injuries and deaths from traffic accidents. The loss of this funding will cause state and local providers to scale back or even terminate many of these programs and projects,” the complaint states. “More cars, planes, and trains will crash, and more people will die as a result, if Defendants cut off federal funding to Plaintiff States.”

The new complaints reprise language of the 20 state AG lawsuits against the Trump administration that preceded them, calling the executive agencies’ actions “arbitrary and capricious” and in clear violation of constitutional separation of powers and spending clauses.

Neronha during the press conference pointed to the success that AGs have had in other lawsuits, temporarily preserving funding and policy protections for education, immigration, research funding, public health, and grants and aid to state governments, among others.

Not that he expects the frenzy of legal activity will abate anytime soon.

“As we stack wins against the Trump administration for violation of the Constitution and other federal laws, what we are seeing is a creeping authoritarianism in this country,” Neronha said. “The president is trying to take power for himself. He’s trying to sideline Congress, and now, he’s attempting to undermine the judiciary.”

Neronha likened the latest federal directives attempting to force states to redirect their own law enforcement to serve federal civil immigration policies to “holding a gun to states’ heads.”

Rhode Island, home to four of the 20 federal lawsuits against the Trump administration already, was again picked as the setting for the latest complaints due to the “strong team” within Neronha’s office, he said.

Neronha and other AGs bringing the two cases against the administration also stressed the sum of their collaborative parts.

“We’ve built the best and biggest law firm in the country, and we’re fighting for all Americans,” Neronha said.

The U.S. Department of Justice did not immediately respond to requests for comment on Tuesday.

The lawsuit against DOT was assigned to U.S. District Chief Judge John Jr. McConnell Jr., while the case against DHS was assigned to Senior District Judge William E. Smith, according to the public court docket.

Rhode Island Current is part of States Newsroom, a national nonprofit news organization.

Prison officers stand guard at a cell block at maximum security penitentiary CECOT, or Center for the Compulsory Housing of Terrorism, on April 4, 2025, in Tecoluca, San Vicente, El Salvador.. (Photo by Alex Peña/Getty Images)

WASHINGTON — The Trump administration is asking the U.S. Supreme Court to lift its own injunction placed last month in the Northern District of Texas to allow for the deportation of a group of Venezuelan nationals under an 18th-century wartime law.

In the Monday filing, the Trump administration stated that the 176 Venezuelans have alleged ties to the Tren de Aragua gang, and are therefore subject to removal under the Alien Enemies Act of 1798.

U.S. Department of Homeland Security Assistant Secretary Tricia McLaughlin said in a statement that detaining suspected members of the Tren de Aragua gang poses a threat to U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement officers and staff.

She said that 23 migrants barricaded themselves in the Bluebonnet Detention Facility in Anson, Texas. and “threatened to take hostages, and endangered officers.” Reuters sent a drone over the facility, and captured images of the detained men spelling out SOS with their bodies, over fears that they would be sent to El Salvador. 

The Trump administration has removed those subject to the Alien Enemies Act to a notorious mega-prison in El Salvador.

The administration request stems from an April 18 emergency application from the American Civil Liberties Union that asked the high court to bar any removals under the Alien Enemies Act in the Northern District of Texas over concerns that the Trump administration was not following due process.

The justices, in a 7-2 ruling, ordered that while the lower case is before the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals, “the Government is directed not to remove any member of the putative class of detainees from the United States until further order of this Court.”

Monday’s filing by Solicitor General D. John Sauer argues that those Venezuelans subject to the proclamation must be deported because the migrants “have proven to be especially dangerous to maintain in prolonged detention.”

In a Wednesday response, the ACLU warned that if the Supreme Court lifts its injunction, “most of the putative class members will be removed with little chance to seek judicial review.”

“And under the government’s position, courts will lack authority to remedy unlawful removals to the CECOT Salvadoran prison, where individuals could be held incommunicado for the remainder of their lives,” according to the ACLU brief.

In a separate emergency filing that issued a nationwide injunction that barred the Trump administration from invoking the proclamation, the Supreme Court ruled that, for now, the Trump administration can continue to use the Alien Enemies Act.

But the justices unanimously ruled that those who are subject to the wartime law must be given proper due process as enshrined in the U.S. Constitution.

Several federal judges have blocked the use of the wartime law in their districts that cover Colorado, Northern and Southern Texas and Southern New York.

A federal judge in Western Pennsylvania Tuesday was the first to uphold the Trump administration’s use of the Alien Enemies Act, but said those accused must have at least three weeks to challenge their removal.

In court documents, the Trump administration has noted that adequate time for someone to challenge an Alien Enemies Act designation is roughly 12 hours. 

Boxes of sugary cereal, including those from General Mills, fill a store's shelves on April 16, 2025, in Miami, Florida. (Photo by Joe Raedle/Getty Images)

The U.S. House Agriculture Committee’s portion of Republicans’ massive taxes and spending bill would partially shift to states the costs of the country’s largest food assistance program, which some experts and Democrats predicted will lead to major cuts in the program — and possibly even an end to it in some states.

The measure will be taken up by the panel Tuesday night and is expected to be voted on late Tuesday or early Wednesday, after which it will be folded into a larger reconciliation package with 10 other bills passed out of committees and sent to the floor. The entire House is set to vote on the legislation before Memorial Day.

The federal government currently pays for all Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, or SNAP, benefits. A provision in the Agriculture Committee’s piece of Republicans’ “big, beautiful bill” to enact President Donald Trump’s agenda would transfer between 5% and 25% of that cost to states, depending on each state’s payment error rate, starting in 2028.

The program provided about $100 billion in food assistance to nearly 42 million Americans last year, according to data from the U.S. Department of Agriculture. Eligibility currently depends on tests related to income, assets, work requirements and more.

But the change in cost structure could lead states to opt out entirely, said Ty Jones Cox, vice president for food assistance at the left-leaning economic think tank Center for Budget and Policy Priorities, leading some needy families unable to pay for groceries.

“The language is unclear, but it could end SNAP entirely in some parts of the country if states decide the new state funding requirements are impossible for them to meet,” Cox said in a statement late Monday after the bill’s release. “The bill’s massive cuts disguised as ‘cost shifts’ pass the buck to states – but ultimately would leave families holding an empty grocery bag when states aren’t willing or able to backfill for lost federal funds.” 

Republicans plan to use the reconciliation package to permanently extend the 2017 tax law, increase spending on border security and defense by hundreds of billions of dollars, overhaul American energy production, restructure higher education aid and cut spending.

“Our budget reconciliation text restores SNAP to its original intent—promoting work, not welfare—while saving taxpayer dollars and investing in American agriculture,” House Committee on Agriculture Republicans said on X on Monday night.

Funding tied to error rate

Under the bill, states’ responsibility would rise with the broadly defined error rate of payments, which includes fraud as well as paperwork mistakes by a beneficiary or caseworker.

States with an error rate of 6% or less would be responsible for paying 5% of benefits, and those with an error rate higher than 10% would shoulder one-quarter of the cost of benefits.

Two other intermediate categories would exist for states with error rates between 6% and 10%.

Based on current data, more than half of states would fall into the highest category of error rates. The national average is 11.7% and more than two dozen states and territories have rates higher than 10%.

The states are: Alaska, Arizona, California, Delaware, Florida, Georgia, Hawaii, Indiana, Kansas, Maine, Maryland, Michigan, Mississippi, Missouri, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Oklahoma, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Carolina, Tennessee and West Virginia. The District of Columbia also has an error rate over 10%, as do Guam and the Virgin Islands.

Alaska’s nation-leading 60% error rate would be nearly impossible to bring under 10% by the time the provision goes into effect, Jones Cox said in a Tuesday interview.

Only seven states — Idaho, Iowa, South Dakota, Utah, Vermont, Wisconsin and Wyoming — would qualify for the lowest state cost-share.

$290 billion in cuts overall

The measure would incentivize states to control the $13 billion per year in erroneous payments, a House Agriculture Committee summary of the legislation said. The bill as a whole would cut $290 billion in federal spending over a 10-year budget window, according to the summary.

While congressional Republicans can claim they are not cutting benefits with the bill, the program would shrink with a lower federal cost-share, Jones Cox said.

“They can say it’s not a cut, because they’re going to say it’s just shifting those costs to the states,” she said. “But it is a cut because states, if they cannot fill the gap… that brings down the program, period.”

The changes would force state budget officers to choose from among a host of unattractive options: cutting SNAP, offsetting costs with corresponding cuts to other programs or raising revenues through taxes or other measures.

States “have a few options,” Jones Cox said. “None look good.”

Republicans are using the complex reconciliation process to move the package through Congress with simple majority votes in each chamber, avoiding the Senate’s 60-vote legislative filibuster, which would otherwise require bipartisanship. 

Reconciliation measures must address federal revenue, spending, or the debt limit in a way not deemed “merely incidental” by the Senate parliamentarian. That means the GOP proposals must carry some sort of price tag and cannot focus simply on changing federal policy.

Democrats slam bill

On a press call Tuesday, Democratic officials and an anti-hunger nonprofit blasted the proposal.

Sen. Peter Welch, a Vermont Democrat, expressed skepticism that U.S. DOGE Service head Elon Musk could find a more efficient use of the $2 per meal SNAP provides during the call with other Democratic senators, Oregon Gov. Tina Kotek and the nonprofit, Hunger Free Vermont.

“This is not a waste, fraud and abuse deal,” Welch said. “This is really about taking away basic nutritional security that is so absolutely essential to the well-being of our families and our kids in Vermont and in every single state across the nation.”

Kotek, who started her political career as a policy advocate for the Oregon Food Bank, said she saw firsthand the effect of food insecurity. More than 700,000 Oregonians receive benefits from SNAP, and every dollar spent on SNAP generates another $1.50 to $1.80 in economic activity at grocery stores, farmers’ markets and other local businesses, Kotek said.

“When you cut SNAP, you’re not cutting bureaucracy,” she said. “You’re cutting a child’s dinner. You’re cutting their breakfast. You’re cutting their family’s dignity.”

One in four New Mexicans rely on SNAP, said Sen. Ben Ray Luján, D-N.M. The farmers and ranchers he represents also plan their farming season based on what grocery stores and food banks will need, and farmers already planted seeds with the idea that those vegetables will be used for school lunches and other food programs.

“The way to look at this is it’s not fiscally responsible,” Luján said. “It’s taking away from the hungry across America to make billionaires and millionaires even wealthier, and it’s going to even explode the deficit.”

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

WASHINGTON — Department of Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem Monday announced about 9,000 Afghans living in the United States who had been protected from deportation will no longer be shielded as of mid-July.

After the United States withdrew from Afghanistan in 2022, the Biden administration designated Temporary Protected Status, along with other legal temporary status pathways, for thousands of Afghans who aided the U.S. against the Taliban terrorist group and fled their home country. Thirteen U.S. military members were killed in the chaotic withdrawal at the Kabul airport.

About 80,000 Afghans came to the U.S. and settled in various programs that offered legal protections and work authorization. Of that group, 9,000 were designated TPS.

TPS is granted to nationals whose home country is deemed too dangerous to return due to violence or disasters.

The TPS designation for Afghanistan will expire on May 20 and deportation protections will lift on July 12. The order is likely to face legal challenges, since Noem’s moves to curtail TPS for other nationals have faced lawsuits.

“This administration is returning TPS to its original temporary intent,” Noem said in a statement. “We’ve reviewed the conditions in Afghanistan with our interagency partners, and they do not meet the requirements for a TPS designation. Afghanistan has had an improved security situation, and its stabilizing economy no longer prevent(s) them from returning to their home country.”

The termination of the status comes as the Trump administration fast-tracked the classification of refugees for white South Africans who landed in the U.S. Monday at Dulles International Airport in Virginia.

President Donald Trump signed an executive order in February that noted Afrikaners — an ethnic group in South Africa made up of European descendants, predominantly Dutch — are “victims of unjust racial discrimination” after South Africa’s government passed a land ownership law in an effort to address land dispossession that occurred under apartheid.

The Trump administration suspended all refugee services in late January and has resisted a district court’s order to reinstate the program, along with contracts to organizations that facilitate refugee resettlement services.

Noem said that determination to end TPS for Afghanistan was based on a review from U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services on Afghanistan’s conditions along with input from the State Department.

The Taliban currently control the government and the State Department’s travel advisory for the country is the highest level, a 4, which means it advises against traveling.

DHS added in a statement that Noem “further determined that permitting Afghan nationals to remain temporarily in the United States is contrary to the national interest of the United States.”

Noem has also ended TPS for Venezuelans and Haitians.

The Trump administration asked the U.S. Supreme Court in early May to lift a lower court’s order that reversed Noem’s decision to end TPS for one group of Venezuelans. 

Newark Mayor Ras Baraka being released from a federal building hours after his arrest on May 9, 2025.

NEWARK — Newark Mayor Ras Baraka, who was arrested Friday and accused of trespassing at an immigration detention center, was released from custody hours after his detainment to cheers from hundreds of supporters.

Baraka, a Democrat, walked out of the federal building where he was being held just before 8 p.m. to the strains of “Ain’t No Stoppin’ Us Now” by McFadden & Whitehead blaring through speakers that had been set up by protestors.

The mayor, one of six Democrats running for governor in the June 10 primary, said he “didn’t do anything wrong.”

“I didn’t know this morning when I woke up that I would be in this facility here, that I would end up incarcerated for something that I believe is my democratic right to show up and speak out against what I think was happening here, a violation of city and state laws,” he said.

He was ordered to be released by U.S. District Court Judge Andre M. Espinosa at roughly 7:30 p.m. Baraka said he was charged with trespassing and will have to appear in court May 15. He said Department of Homeland Security agents treated him “very nicely.”

https://x.com/amandaleetv/status/1920995570405040155?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1920995570405040155%7Ctwgr%5Ef3f7eb1d5a2e197815e2fbc1eb0ed07f6c3e6334%7Ctwcon%5Es1_&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fnewjerseymonitor.com%2F2025%2F05%2F09%2Fthis-shouldnt-have-happened-newark-mayor-says-hours-after-his-arrest-during-ice-protest%2F

Baraka’s release capped off a wild day in Newark that started with him and three members of Congress — Democratic Reps. Bonnie Watson Coleman, LaMonica McIver, and Rob Menendez — appearing in Newark to visit Delaney Hall, a 1,100-bed immigration detention center that Baraka has tried to prevent from opening, saying the jail’s owner has not obtained necessary city permits.

Baraka said he was with fire officials Friday attempting to gain entrance to the facility, and videos show he was warned by federal agents that he would be placed under arrest.

After immigration agents arrested Baraka, acting U.S. Attorney Alina Habba claimed the mayor was trespassing. McIver and Menendez said Baraka was invited onto the jail’s property before he was arrested.

A scuffle broke out after protestors locked arms to protect Baraka, with Watson Coleman and McIver being pushed by immigration agents, videos show. Menendez was also seen yelling at officers not to arrest the mayor.

Baraka was walked away by masked agents and plainclothes officers.

The Department of Homeland Security characterized the incident as a “bizarre political stunt.” It claims the House members were “holed up in a guard shack” with protestors while a bus of detainees entered the security gate. It also denied claims that Delaney Hall does not have the proper permitting — allegations at the center of a lawsuit Newark filed against the jail’s owner, Geo Group — and said inspections and fire codes have been cleared.

Once protestors and officials found out Baraka was being held at an ICE facility on Frelinghuysen Avenue about 10 minutes away from Delaney Hall, the protest moved there — and grew. Hundreds of supporters and immigration activists stood in the pouring rain, relentlessly chanting for hours for federal officials to free the mayor.

State senators, county commissioners, local council members, and politicos from nearby New York also joined the protest. Meanwhile, statements of support poured in from other Democrats who are also running for governor, while Republicans used it as an opportunity to attack Baraka. Baraka’s campaign also sent out a fundraising text while he was detained.

During the protest, ICE agents peered through windows of the brick building where Baraka was being held, and a group of six agents stood in the parking lot, keeping watch on the crowd.

Watson Coleman told reporters that she had been “manhandled” during Baraka’s arrest. And Menendez called it an “act of intimidation” to keep the public from speaking about the Trump administration’s increasing immigration enforcement.

“The fact that they pushed, physically assaulted two female members of Congress, ask yourself if this is the beginning or if they’re going to change course,” Menendez said. “I have no faith that they’re going to change course, but we will continue to speak out against it.”

Gov. Phil Murphy, a Democrat, said on social media that while he was happy to see Baraka released, “the bottom line is he never should have been detained in the first place.”

While walking with police officers down Frelinghuysen Avenue after his release, Baraka was asked what his next steps would be.

“See my children,” he said.

New Jersey Monitor is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. New Jersey Monitor maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Terrence T. McDonald for questions: info@newjerseymonitor.com.

Reading Time: 6 minutes

Rennie Glasgow, who has served 15 years at the Social Security Administration, is seeing something new on the job: dead people.

They’re not really dead, of course. In four instances over the past few weeks, he told KFF Health News, his Schenectady, New York, office has seen people come in for whom “there is no information on the record, just that they are dead.” So employees have to “resurrect” them — affirm that they’re living, so they can receive their benefits.

Revivals were “sporadic” before, and there’s been an uptick in such cases across upstate New York, said Glasgow. He is also an official with the American Federation of Government Employees, the union that represented 42,000 Social Security employees just before the start of President Donald Trump’s second term.

Martin O’Malley, who led the Social Security Administration toward the end of the Joe Biden administration, said in an interview that he had heard similar stories during a recent town hall in Racine, Wisconsin. “In that room of 200 people, two people raised their hands and said they each had a friend who was wrongly marked as deceased when they’re very much alive,” he said.

It’s more than just an inconvenience because other institutions rely on Social Security numbers to do business, Glasgow said. Being declared dead “impacts their bank account. This impacts their insurance. This impacts their ability to work. This impacts their ability to get anything done in society.”

“They are terminating people’s financial lives,” O’Malley said.

Though it’s just one of the things advocates and lawyers worry about, these erroneous deaths come after a pair of initiatives from new leadership at the SSA to alter or update its databases of the living and the dead.

Holders of millions of Social Security numbers have been marked as deceased. Separately, according to The Washington Post and The New York Times, thousands of numbers belonging to immigrants have been purged, cutting them off from banks and commerce, in an effort to encourage these people to “self-deport.”

‘They are terminating people’s financial lives.’

Martin O’Malley, who led the Social Security Administration toward the end of the Joe Biden administration

Glasgow said SSA employees received an agency email in April about the purge, instructing them how to resurrect beneficiaries wrongly marked dead. “Why don’t you just do due diligence to make sure what you’re doing in the first place is correct?” he said.

The incorrectly marked deaths are just a piece of the Trump administration’s crash program purporting to root out fraud, modernize technology and secure the program’s future.

But KFF Health News’ interviews with more than a dozen beneficiaries, advocates, lawyers, current and former employees, and lawmakers suggest the overhaul is making the agency worse at its primary job: sending checks to seniors, orphans, widows, and those with disabilities.

Philadelphian Lisa Seda, who has cancer, has been struggling for weeks to sort out her 24-year-old niece’s difficulties with Social Security’s disability insurance program. There are two problems: first, trying to change her niece’s address; second, trying to figure out why the program is deducting roughly $400 a month for Medicare premiums, when her disability lawyer — whose firm has a policy against speaking on the record — believes they could be zero.

Since March, sometimes Social Security has direct-deposited payments to her niece’s bank account and other times mailed checks to her old address. Attempting to sort that out has been a morass of long phone calls on hold and in-person trips seeking an appointment.

Before 2025, getting the agency to process changes was usually straightforward, her lawyer said. Not anymore.

The need is dire. If the agency halts the niece’s disability payments, “then she will be homeless,” Seda recalled telling an agency employee. “I don’t know if I’m going to survive this cancer or not, but there is nobody else to help her.”

Some of the problems are technological. According to whistleblower information provided to Democrats on the House Oversight Committee, the agency’s efforts to process certain data have been failing more frequently. When that happens, “it can delay or even stop payments to Social Security recipients,” the committee recently told the agency’s inspector general.

While tech experts and former Social Security officials warn about the potential for a complete system crash, day-to-day decay can be an insidious and serious problem, said Kathleen Romig, formerly of the Social Security Administration and its advisory board and currently the director of Social Security and disability policy at the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities. Beneficiaries could struggle to get appointments or the money they’re owed, she said.

For its more than 70 million beneficiaries nationwide, Social Security is crucial. More than a third of recipients said they wouldn’t be able to afford necessities if the checks stopped coming, according to National Academy of Social Insurance survey results published in January.

Advocates and lawyers say lately Social Security is failing to deliver, to a degree that’s nearly unprecedented in their experience.

Carolyn Villers, executive director of the Massachusetts Senior Action Council, said two of her members’ March payments were several days late. “For one member that meant not being able to pay rent on time,” she said. “The delayed payment is not something I’ve heard in the last 20 years.”

When KFF Health News presented the agency with questions, Social Security officials passed them off to the White House. White House spokesperson Elizabeth Huston referred to Trump’s “resounding mandate” to make government more efficient.

“He has promised to protect social security, and every recipient will continue to receive their benefits,” Huston said in an email. She did not provide specific, on-the-record responses to questions.

Complaints about missed payments are mushrooming. The Arizona attorney general’s office had received approximately 40 complaints related to delayed or disrupted payments by early April, spokesperson Richie Taylor told KFF Health News.

A Connecticut agency assisting people on Medicare said complaints related to Social Security — which often helps administer payments and enroll patients in the government insurance program primarily for those over age 65 — had nearly doubled in March compared with last year.

Lawyers representing beneficiaries say that, while the historically underfunded agency has always had its share of errors and inefficiencies, it’s getting worse as experienced employees have been let go.

“We’re seeing more mistakes being made,” said James Ratchford, a lawyer in West Virginia with 17 years’ experience representing Social Security beneficiaries. “We’re seeing more things get dropped.”

What gets dropped, sometimes, are records of basic transactions. Kim Beavers of Independence, Missouri, tried to complete a periodic ritual in February: filling out a disability update form saying she remains unable to work. But her scheduled payments in March and April didn’t show.

She got an in-person appointment to untangle the problem — only to be told there was no record of her submission, despite her showing printouts of the relevant documents to the agency representative. Beavers has a new appointment scheduled for May, she said.

Social Security employees frequently cite missing records to explain their inability to solve problems when they meet with lawyers and beneficiaries. A disability lawyer whose firm’s policy does not allow them to be named had a particularly puzzling case: One client, a longtime Social Security disability recipient, had her benefits reassessed. After winning on appeal, the lawyer went back to the agency to have the payments restored — the recipient had been going without since February. But there was nothing there.

“To be told they’ve never been paid benefits before is just chaos, right? Unconditional chaos,” the lawyer said.

Researchers and lawyers say they have a suspicion about what’s behind the problems at Social Security: the Elon Musk-led effort to revamp the agency.

Some 7,000 SSA employees have reportedly been let go; O’Malley has estimated that 3,000 more would leave the agency. “As the workloads go up, the demoralization becomes deeper, and people burn out and leave,” he predicted in an April hearing held by House Democrats. “It’s going to mean that if you go to a field office, you’re going to see a heck of a lot more empty, closed windows.”

The departures have hit the agency’s regional payment centers hard. These centers help process and adjudicate some cases. It’s the type of behind-the-scenes work in which “the problems surface first,” Romig said. But if the staff doesn’t have enough time, “those things languish.”

Languishing can mean, in some cases, getting dropped by important programs like Medicare. Social Security often automatically deducts premiums, or otherwise administers payments, for the health program.

Lately, Melanie Lambert, a senior advocate at the Center for Medicare Advocacy, has seen an increasing number of cases in which the agency determines beneficiaries owe money to Medicare. The cash is sent to the payment centers, she said. And the checks “just sit there.”

Beneficiaries lose Medicare, and “those terminations also tend to happen sooner than they should, based on Social Security’s own rules,” putting people into a bureaucratic maze, Lambert said.

Employees’ technology is more often on the fritz. “There’s issues every single day with our system. Every day, at a certain time, our system would go down automatically,” said Glasgow, of Social Security’s Schenectady office. Those problems began in mid-March, he said.

The new problems leave Glasgow suspecting the worst. “It’s more work for less bodies, which will eventually hype up the inefficiency of our job and make us, make the agency, look as though it’s underperforming, and then a closer step to the privatization of the agency,” he said.

Jodie Fleischer of Cox Media Group contributed to this report.

KFF Health News is a national newsroom that produces in-depth journalism about health issues and is one of the core operating programs at KFF — an independent source of health policy research, polling and journalism. Learn more about KFF.

This article first appeared on KFF Health News and is republished here under a Creative Commons license.

At Social Security, these are the days of the living dead is a post from Wisconsin Watch, a non-profit investigative news site covering Wisconsin since 2009. Please consider making a contribution to support our journalism.

Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem arrives for a Senate Appropriations Committee hearing in the Dirksen Senate Office Building on Capitol Hill on Thursday, May 8, 2025 in Washington, D.C. (Photo by Andrew Harnik/Getty Images)

WASHINGTON  — The top Democrat on a U.S. Senate Appropriations Committee panel Thursday slammed Department of Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem for her handling of her agency’s funding and the Trump administration’s immigration crackdown.

Sen. Chris Murphy warned Noem that DHS is at risk of running out of its $65 billion in funding by July – two months before the end of the fiscal year – and therefore close to triggering the Antideficiency Act, a federal law prohibiting government agencies from spending funds in excess of their appropriations. 

“Your department is out of control,” the Connecticut Democrat told Noem. “You are running out of money.”

Noem, who appeared before the Senate Appropriations Subcommittee on Homeland Security, was also grilled by Democrats about the high-profile case of a wrongly deported Maryland man sent in March to a notorious prison in El Salvador.

The White House’s “skinny” budget proposal suggests $107 billion for DHS starting Oct. 1, and assumes that Republicans pass the reconciliation package under consideration to allocate a massive $175 billion overall in border security.  

“If we now live in a world in which the administration spends down the accounts that were priorities for Republicans and does not spend down the priorities that were priorities for Democrats, I don’t know how we do a budget,” Murphy said.

Sen. Patty Murray, top Democrat on the full Senate Appropriations Committee, slammed Noem for not following “our appropriations laws.”

She was critical of how immigration enforcement has caught up U.S. citizens and immigrants with protected legal statuses.

“Your crackdown has roped in American citizens and people who are here legally with no criminal record,” the Washington Democrat said. 

She also criticized Noem for spending $100 million on TV ads that range from praising the president to warning migrants not to come to the United States or to self-deport.

Noem in addition launched this week an initiative to provide up to $1,000 in “travel assistance” to immigrants without legal authorization to self-deport, which would amount to $1 billion if President Donald Trump’s goal of deporting 1 million people is met. The source of those funds in the DHS budget is unclear. 

Murray asked Noem about more than $100 billion in DHS funds not being used or re-programmed elsewhere for immigration enforcement, and called it “an illegal freeze.”

She then asked Noem when DHS would unfreeze those funds.

Noem did not answer and instead blamed the Biden administration, and said the previous administration “perverted” how the funds were used.

Murray said she did not think it was “credible that $100 billion is used to break the law.”

“I am very concerned that DHS is now dramatically over-spending funding that Congress has not provided,” Murray said. “We take our responsibility seriously to fund your department and others. We need to have answers, we need to have accountability, and we need to make sure you’re not overspending money that you were not allocated.”

Abrego Garcia deportation

Noem got into a heated exchange with one of the Democrats on the panel, Maryland Sen. Chris Van Hollen, who traveled to El Salvador to speak with wrongly deported Kilmar Abrego Garcia. The Trump administration has admitted his deportation was an “administrative error.”

The U.S. Supreme Court unanimously ruled that the Trump administration must “facilitate” the return of Abrego Garcia, who was sent initially to brutal CECOT but is now housed in another prison.

Van Hollen asked Noem what DHS has done to bring back Abrego Garcia, who had a 2019 court order barring his return to his home country of El Salvador for fear he would be harmed by gang violence.

Noem did not answer what steps the Trump administration was taking and said that because Abrego Garcia is a citizen of El Salvador, he is in that nation’s custody and cannot be brought back.

Trump has contradicted his own administration, stating that if he wanted to bring back Agrego Garcia he would, but won’t because he believes Abrego Garcia has gang ties.

While Trump officials like Noem have alleged that Abrego Garcia has ties to the MS-13 gang, no evidence has been provided in court and federal Judge Paula Xinis, who is presiding over the case, called the accusations “hearsay.”

Noem then questioned why Van Hollen was advocating for Abrego Garcia in the first place.

“Your advocacy for a known terrorist is alarming to me,” she said.

Van Hollen said that he was advocating for due process, which the Trump administration has been accused of skirting in its deportations. A federal judge in Louisiana next week plans to hold a hearing to determine if the Trump administration violated due process in deporting a 2-year-old U.S. citizen and her mother to Honduras.

Murphy also pressed Noem on the issue and asked how she was coordinating with El Salvador for Abrego Garcia’s release.

“There is no scenario where Abrego Garcia will be returned to the United States,” she said.

Noem then said that even if Abrego Garcia were returned to the U.S., “we would immediately deport him again.”

GOP worried about students, TPS holders

Some Republicans on the panel, including the committee chair, raised concerns with Noem about how the Trump administration’s immigration crackdown is affecting students with visas.

“There are so many others who do deserve scrutiny,” said Chairwoman Susan Collins, a Maine Republican, who said she was worried about students from Canada who attend school in her home state. “But these are dually enrolled Canadian students, and they’ve been crossing the border for years without trouble.” 

She said Canadian students are being stopped by U.S. Customs and Border Protection and given intense screenings.

“They have student visas, but they’re being subjected to extensive searches and questioning,” she said to Noem. “I don’t want us to discourage Canadian students from studying at the northern Maine institutions that we have for education.”

Noem said she would look into it.

Alaskan Republican Sen. Lisa Murkowski raised the issue of paperwork not being processed for those with Temporary Protected Status in her state. TPS is granted to those who come from a country that is considered too dangerous or unstable to return to due to war, natural disasters or other instability.

Murkowski said several groups of immigrants in her state with temporary protected status and humanitarian protection are at risk of losing their work protections, such as Afghans, Haitians, Venezuelans and Ukrainians.  

“The majority of these folks are just truly valued members of their new community,” Murkowski said. “They’re helping us meet workforce needs and really contributing to the tax base here. They’ve expressed great concern about their status and work authorizations that may be revoked or allowed to expire.”

She said that U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services has not processed TPS or humanitarian protection renewals for up to five months.

Noem said that those with TPS are being looked at, and admitted that some Ukrainians got an erroneous email that notified them their status was revoked.

She said DHS has not made a decision on whether or not to renew TPS for Ukrainians, who were granted the status due to Russia’s ongoing invasion of the country.

“Some of these TPS programs have been in place for many, many years, but the evaluation on why TPS should be utilized and when it can be utilized by a country is the process that the administration is going through,” Noem said. 

Cam Hamilton, at the time senior official performing the duties of the administrator at FEMA, testifies before a House Appropriations subcommittee on May 7, 2025. (Screenshot from House webcast)

WASHINGTON — The Trump administration has ousted the leader of the Federal Emergency Management Agency and replaced him with another official, States Newsroom has confirmed.

Cam Hamilton, senior official performing the duties of the administrator at FEMA, was let go just one day after he testified before Congress about the size and scope of the federal agency.

President Donald Trump and Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem have both indicated they could support getting rid of FEMA and Trump has established a FEMA reform council to assess the agency’s role.

But during his testimony Wednesday before the House Appropriations Homeland Security Subcommittee, Hamilton said he personally did “not believe it is in the best interest of the American people to eliminate the Federal Emergency Management Agency.”

“Having said that, I’m not in a position to make decisions and impact outcomes on whether or not a determination such as consequential as that should be made,” Hamilton said. “That is a conversation that should be had between the president of the United States and this governing body on identifying the exact ways and methodologies, in which, what is prudent for federal investment, and what is not.”

Hamilton, a former Navy Seal and combat medic, said earlier in the hearing that he had served in five different administrations, but that the “highest honor of my career is serving right now in the Trump administration. Keeping the American people first.”

A Department of Homeland Security spokesperson confirmed to States Newsroom on Thursday that Hamilton was no longer in the lead role at FEMA, but opted not to detail why exactly the personnel change happened.

“Mr. David Richardson will be the senior official performing the duties of the Administrator,” the DHS spokesperson wrote in an email.

A FEMA spokesperson confirmed the firing as well, writing that “(e)ffective today, David Richardson is now serving as the Senior Official Performing the duties of the FEMA Administrator. Cameron Hamilton is no longer serving in this capacity.”

DHS Assistant Secretary for Public Affairs Tricia McLaughlin released a statement Friday saying the administration had named Hamilton as the senior adviser for school safety in the Office of Elementary & Secondary Education at the Department of Education.

Richardson was appointed the assistant secretary of Countering Weapons of Mass Destruction Office at the Department of Homeland Security in January, according to his biography. 

House Appropriations Committee ranking member Rosa DeLauro, D-Conn., released a statement saying the “Trump administration must explain why he has been removed from this position.

“Integrity and morality should not cost you your job, and if it does, it says more about your employer than it does you.”

Florida Democratic Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz, a senior member of the Appropriations Committee, wrote in a statement that firing “FEMA’s chief just three weeks before hurricane season begins shows how little President Trump cares about Floridians’ and Americans’ safety.

“The added cruelty of his timing — a day after acting Administrator Hamilton publicly opposed dismantling the agency during a Congressional budget hearing — sends a chilling message from Trump that every American is on their own and that Trump Administration officials cannot be trusted to offer their candid, expert opinion to Congress or anyone, without consequences.”

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

WASHINGTON — The U.S. Department of Homeland Security announced Monday that the agency will provide $1,000 in what it called “travel assistance” to people in the United States without permanent legal status if they self deport.

It’s the latest attempt by DHS to try to meet the Trump administration’s goal of removing 1 million migrants without permanent legal status from the country. DHS Secretary Kristi Noem touted the option as cost-effective.

“If you are here illegally, self-deportation is the best, safest and most cost-effective way to leave the United States to avoid arrest,” Noem said in a statement. “This is the safest option for our law enforcement, aliens and is a 70% savings for US taxpayers.”

It’s unclear from which part of the DHS budget the funding for the travel assistance is coming, as it would roughly cost $1 billion to reimburse up to $1,000 to meet the goal of removing 1 million people.

DHS did not respond to States Newsroom’s request for comment.

President Donald Trump gave his support for the move Monday afternoon, according to White House pool reports. 

“We’re going to get them a beautiful flight back to where they came from,” the president said.

Self-deportation would be facilitated by the CBP Home app, which was used by the Biden administration to allow asylum seekers to make appointments with U.S. Customs and Border Protection.

The payment would apparently not be made in advance. DHS said that once those who use the app to self deport arrive in their home country, they will receive a travel stipend of $1,000.

According to DHS, the Trump administration has deported 152,000 people since taking office in January. The Biden administration last year deported 195,000 people from February to April, according to DHS data.

DHS said already one migrant has used the program to book a flight from Chicago to Honduras.

“Additional tickets have already been booked for this week and the following week,” the agency said in a statement.

The Trump administration has rolled out several programs to facilitate mass self-deportations, such as a registry to require immigrants in the country without legal authorization to register with the federal government.

Immigrants who don’t register with the federal government could face steep fines and a potential prison sentence. 

The U.S. Capitol on March 14, 2024. (Photo by Jennifer Shutt/States Newsroom)  

WASHINGTON — Three U.S. House committees on Tuesday approved the first few bills that will make up Republicans’ massive reconciliation package after rejecting numerous Democratic amendments.

The Armed Services, Homeland Security, and Education and Workforce committees each voted mostly along party lines to send their measures to the Budget Committee, which is expected to bundle them together with the other eight bills later this month.

The additional House committee markups are scheduled to take place Wednesday and next week. Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., hopes to put the entire package on the floor for a vote before the Memorial Day recess begins.

Nearly every one of the chamber’s 220 GOP lawmakers will need to vote to approve the 11-bill package in order to send it to the Senate, where Republicans will likely make changes to the legislation.

The first three markups included some of the less controversial aspects of the package for Republicans, including plans to increase spending on defense by $150 billion, a $70 billion boost to border security funding and an overhaul of federal student loans and Pell grants.

Homeland Security Chairman Mark E. Green, R-Tenn., wrote in a statement that GOP lawmakers on the panel “advanced funding to give Border Patrol agents the tools they have long requested to accomplish their homeland security mission in the field while protecting our communities.”

“Conversely, the actions of our colleagues across the aisle today proved what the American people have known for some time,” Green wrote. “Democrats would rather advocate for a radical, open-borders agenda than for the safety of their own constituents, or the CBP personnel who suffered through a historic border crisis under the Biden-Harris administration.”

The panel voted 18-14 along party lines to approve the bill. 

Education and Workforce Committee Chairman Tim Walberg, R-Mich., wrote in a statement after his panel approved its bill that the measures “not only would save taxpayers over $350 billion but also bring much-needed reform in three key areas: simplified loan repayment, streamlined student loan options, and accountability for students and taxpayers.”

“I’m proud of the Committee’s work today to finally stand up and end the status quo of endless borrowing,” Walberg wrote.

That panel voted 21-14 along party lines to approve its bill.

House Armed Services Committee Chairman Mike Rogers, R-Ala., wrote the defense funding increase would ensure “that our national defense remains the strongest in the world and supports an agile and modern fighting force.”

That committee voted 35-21 to advance its bill, with five Democrats — Don Davis of North Carolina, Jared Golden of Maine, Gabe Vasquez of New Mexico, Eugene Vindman of Virginia and George Whitesides of California — voting with all committee Republicans in favor.

House committees are expected to release bills next week showing how Republicans plan to extend the 2017 GOP tax law as well as how they plan to cut federal funding on Medicaid and the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, or SNAP, program. 

U.S. House Speaker Mike Johnson, joined by GOP Reps. Lisa McClain of Michigan and Troy Downing of Montana, speaks at a news conference following a meeting of the House Republican Conference on April 29, 2025. House Republicans began the process of approving a massive bill to support President Donald Trump’s priorities on the 100th day of second presidency Tuesday. (Photo by Anna Moneymaker/Getty Images)

WASHINGTON — U.S. House Republicans on Tuesday kicked off their work to build consensus on “one big, beautiful bill,” to fund President Donald Trump’s priorities, including a major funding boost for immigration enforcement and border security. 

After returning from a two-week recess, House lawmakers started debating and amending the various sections of the bill with markups in the Armed Services, Education and Workforce, and Homeland Security committees.

Congressional Republicans are using reconciliation — a special procedure that skirts the Senate’s 60-vote filibuster — to put together one bill to fulfill the White House’s priorities on border security, tax cuts, energy policy and defense.

The Homeland panel’s bill, which would increase funding for border security by $70 billion, aligns with Trump’s second-term agenda, which has centered on an immigration crackdown.

The Homeland Security portion of the reconciliation package recommends $46.5 billion to construct a barrier along U.S. borders and $5 billion for Customs and Border Protection facilities, including $4.1 billion to hire 3,000 Border Patrol agents and 5,000 CBP officers. It would also set aside $2 billion for retention and signing bonuses for CBP staff.  

“It is critical that the Republican majority do what the people elected us to do, approve funds for effective border security and enforcement measures,” House Homeland Security Chairman Mark Green of Tennessee said.

The bill also includes $2.7 billion in technology surveillance along U.S. borders and roughly $1 billion for inspection technology at ports of entry. 

The top Democrat on the committee, Rep. Bennie Thompson of Mississippi, said Democrats were unified in their opposition to the proposal. He argued that roughly $70 billion in funding would only aid the Trump administration in its plans of mass deportation and not address border security.

“House Republican leadership is putting lipstick on this pig of a reconciliation package by pretending it’s about border security,” Thompson said.

Votes on all three committees’ bills, and amendments mostly from Democrats raising objections to the package, were expected late Tuesday or after midnight Wednesday. The committees are not expected to adopt any of the Democratic amendments.

Summer floor votes

Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., said Tuesday he expects the House will spend the rest of this week and next week debating the 11 different bills in committee before rolling them all into one reconciliation package.

The full House will debate and vote to approve the legislation before Memorial Day, under the current timeline.

“I don’t know how long the Senate is going to take to do their piece,” Johnson said. “But I was very encouraged after the meeting yesterday, frankly. Leader (John) Thune and Sen. (Mike) Crapo are on point. The Senate Republicans have been working very hard together.”

Thune, of South Dakota, is the Senate majority leader and Crapo, of Idaho, chairs the tax-writing Finance Committee.

Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent has said the administration would like the package to clear Congress before the Fourth of July, though Johnson said he “hopes” to finalize a deal before that deadline.

Thune said later Tuesday that the reconciliation package’s final look will be decided by what policies have the votes to get through each chamber.

“Ultimately, what gets included in a reconciliation bill will be determined by what there are 218 votes for in the House and 51, or 50, votes for in the United States Senate,” Thune said.

Democrats object to deportations

Democrats on the Homeland Security panel introduced amendments to signal their opposition to the administration’s deportation agenda.

Louisiana Rep. Troy Carter was one of several Democrats to sharply criticize the recent deportation of three U.S. citizen children to Honduras during the Homeland Security Committee’s markup.

He noted that one of the children removed with his mother to Honduras, is a 4-year-old battling Stage 4 cancer.

“This is not border security,” Carter said. “This is state-sanctioned trauma.

Democrats introduced amendments to bar federal funds being used to detain immigrants at a foreign prison, following an agreement between the U.S. and El Salvador to detain more than 300 men in a notorious mega-prison. Experts have raised concerns the agreement could violate a law against funding foreign governments engaged in human rights abuses.

“This is not an idle possibility,” Democratic Rep. Seth Magaziner of Rhode Island said.

He pointed out that Trump asked El Salvador’s president Nayib Bukele to consider taking “homegrown” criminals, meaning U.S. citizens.

“This is insane,” Magaziner said. “It is outrageous and every American should be terrified by this prospect.”

Several other Democrats introduced amendments related to the Trump administration’s use of the prison in El Salvador.

Boost for Pentagon

The House Armed Services Committee portion of the reconciliation package would bolster defense spending by $150 billion over the next decade.

That funding would be divvied up between numerous national security priorities, including $25 billion for Trump’s goal of having a countrywide missile defense system, similar to Israel’s Iron Dome.

The defense bill would appropriate $34 billion for shipbuilding and the maritime industrial base, $21 billion for munitions purchases, $14 billion for “initiatives to scale production of game changing new technology,” $13 billion for nuclear deterrence and $12 billion to enhance military readiness, according to a GOP summary of that bill. 

Chairman Mike Rogers, R-Ala., said at the beginning of his committee’s markup that the bill would make a “generational investment in our national security.”

“It is clear we are no longer deterring our adversaries,” Rogers said. “The threats we face today from China, Russia, Iran and North Korea and others, are much more serious and challenging than we have ever faced before.”

Washington Democratic Rep. Adam Smith, ranking member on the panel, said there’s “no question that the Department of Defense has needs and there’s also no question that we as a country face threats.”

But Smith criticized Republicans for moving the defense funding boost within the massive reconciliation package, which will increase the deficit.

“We’re, once again, saying to the American people, ‘This is important but not important enough to actually pay for it.’ So the budget itself is a huge problem,” Smith said. “And you really can’t support the additional $150 billion for defense if you don’t support the overall reconciliation bill because that’s what this is. And the overall reconciliation bill, I firmly believe, is a disaster for this country.”

Smith criticized Republicans for proposing additional dollars for the Pentagon while it is run by Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, who is under investigation for sending information about a bombing campaign in Yemen to a group chat that inadvertently included a journalist and a different group chat that included his wife, brother and others.

“They have not even begun to prove that there is a chance in hell that they will spend this money intelligently, efficiently and effectively,” Smith said. “Secretary Hegseth has proven himself to be completely incapable of doing the job of secretary of Defense.”

Cuts for Pell grants

The Education and Workforce Committee’s markup fell along similar partisan lines, with GOP lawmakers lauding the bill and Democrats rejecting Republicans’ plans seeking to overhaul federal spending.

Chairman Tim Walberg, R-Mich., said the legislation would cut $330 billion in federal spending over the next decade by reshaping federal student loan programs and Pell grants for low-income students, among several other changes.

“Dumping more federal money into a broken system doesn’t mean that system will work,” Walberg said. “In fact, government spending on higher education has reached record highs, yet millions of students benefiting from those funds will ultimately end up with a degree that doesn’t pay off or fail to finish school altogether.”

The GOP bill, he said, would “bring much-needed reform in three key areas: simplified loan repayment, streamlined student loan options, and accountability for students and taxpayers.”

Walberg scolded former President Joe Biden for not working with Congress to overhaul federal grant and loan programs for higher education, saying the former administration “was determined to keep pouring taxpayer funds into the abyss in a futile attempt to keep up with the unacceptable and unaccountable institutional prices.”

Virginia Democratic Rep. Bobby Scott, ranking member, said that Congress should look at ways to make college more affordable through reforms, but said the GOP bill “misses the mark.”

“This current reconciliation plan would increase costs for colleges and students. It would limit students access to quality programs, which would then reduce their likelihood of finding a rewarding or successful career,” Scott said. “And then take the so-called savings to pay for more tax cuts for the wealthy and the well-connected.”

Republicans “limiting the students’ access to Pell grants and federal loans,” he said, could increase the number of people who have to rely on “predatory, private loans” to pay for college.

“Put bluntly: The Republican plan will limit how much money middle- and low-income students can borrow from the federal government,” Scott said. “As a result, limiting the federal student aid that students can receive means that millions of students will not be able to access federal assistance that they need to complete their degrees. Moreover, this bill will force student borrowers into unaffordable repayment plans.”

Foreign-made semiconductors are facing scrutiny and tariffs by the Trump administration, which would cause a ripple effect for manufacturing and price of most electronic goods, experts say. (Photo by Narumon Bowonkitwanchai/Getty Images)

The price of technology goods and services in the U.S. will likely rise in the next few months, experts say, as the White House continues to shift its strategy on tariffs for imported electronic hardware.

After initial reports that Chinese goods would receive as high as a 145% tariff, President Donald Trump said on April 13 that electronics like smartphones, computers and semiconductors — chips that process, power and transmit information — would be exempt. But Trump said later that day that imported semiconductors, and the electronics they’re embedded in, will likely be facing their own tariff structure in the coming weeks.

In tandem with Trump’s announcement, the U.S. Department of Commerce announced an official investigation into semiconductor imports, aiming to study the national security implications of importing manufacturing equipment and derivative products. The move is likely two-fold, tech experts say — Trump’s aim with foreign tariffs is to pressure American manufacturers to make more goods in U.S. facilities.

But his administration is also likely looking for cybersecurity risks that could be introduced through foreign manufacturing, like in compromised operating systems, embedded malicious code, or flawed designs, said Derek Lemke, senior vice president of product level intelligence at risk management firm Exiger.

“They power everything from advanced weapons systems and critical infrastructure to smartphones and laptops,” Lemke said. “Many of these components are manufactured abroad, often in regions with rising geopolitical tensions or limited transparency into supply chain practices.”

The U.S. is currently upping its manufacturing of semiconductors. It produced about 10% of the world’s semiconductors in 2022, and is projected to reach 14% by 2032 with the additional funding and infrastructure provided by the CHIPS and Science Act, passed during the Biden administration. But while many advanced chips are designed by American companies like Nvidia, Apple, Qualcomm and AMD, they are manufactured in Taiwan, which is currently negotiating tariff deals with the U.S.

Many electronics involve manufacturing processes from all over the world, making the tariff structure involved a complicated one. And while it’s a good idea for Americans to manufacture more of their semiconductors to diversify the global supply chain of chips, the country is nowhere near prepared to make as many as we need, said Nikolas Guggenberger, an assistant professor of law with a focus on antitrust, law and technology, privacy, and regulation at The University of Houston Law Center.

Guggenberger called semiconductor manufacturing “among the most complex industrial processes on Earth,” which would require years of planning, training and billions in investment for the U.S. to become a leader.

While the U.S. awaits more clarity over tariffs on electronic goods and the findings of the semiconductor probe, Guggenberger and Lemke say that American consumers should prepare themselves for higher prices on smartphones, laptops and other personal devices. Because semiconductors are used in so many everyday products, those price hikes could seep into wider spending, Guggenberger said.

“From a computer to everyday devices, like a garage opener, or a toaster,” he said. “It’s everything, it’s absolutely everything.”

Guggenberger said there’s a possibility that very high tariffs could also lead to a pause or slowdown in manufacturing in general, meaning consumers may see emptier shelves or a backlog on products in a few months.

Those on the software side of the tech industry will feel the effects, too, Lemke said. Software companies, AI developers and cybersecurity experts all rely on computing power from chip hardware, and disruption in the supply chain could slow innovation in these businesses, he said.

Even just the discussion of tariffs is having a ripple effect through the tech sector, Lemke said. Companies are having to evaluate their supply chains, their sourcing and maybe stockpile some components to their products.

“The uncertainty alone is enough to influence pricing, procurement strategies and investment decisions across the tech ecosystem,” Lemke said. 

Former Social Security Administration Commissioner Martin O’Malley came to Wisconsin this week as he travels the country warning about the danger of cuts to the administration. | Photo courtesy Maryland's Executive Office of the Governor.

Martin O’Malley, the former Maryland governor and Social Security commissioner under President Joe Biden, was rushing around Wisconsin Thursday, conducting a flurry of local media interviews before speaking at an evening town hall in Racine.

“I’ve found myself doing a lot of town halls,” O’Malley said, speaking on his phone from the passenger seat of a car as he hurried to a local TV station.

On Wednesday, he was in Kansas City, Missouri, talking to constituents of Democratic Rep. Emanuel Cleaver. Before that he traveled to Fort Lauderdale, Florida, at the invitation of a grassroots group to speak to a big crowd of people worried about threatened cuts to benefits for seniors.

In Racine on Thursday night he joined a town hall hosted by the progressive coalition group Opportunity Wisconsin. U.S. Rep. Bryan Steil, a Republican who represents the 1st District, was invited, but did not attend.

“Having served in the agency so recently, as its last confirmed commissioner, I just feel a responsibility to speak up,” O’Malley said of his detour from private life to travel the country criticizing President Donald Trump and Elon Musk for cutting Social Security staff and closing offices.

“The only thing that’s going to stop the driving of Social Security into system collapse is the American people rising up,” he added.

When he came into the Social Security Administration in 2023, O’Malley said, a decade of staff reductions had reduced the agency’s workforce to a 50-year low, just as the Baby Boom generation was causing a spike in the number of retirees it was serving. As a result, “every line of service was headed in the wrong direction.”

“The agency needed to turn things around, and to their credit they did it,” he said. O’Malley is full of praise for the federal workers he supervised, who reduced call wait times from 42 and a half minutes on average to 12.8 minutes, along with other improvements. “It’s one of the most highly skilled executive services I’ve ever worked with,” he said, including when he served as mayor of Baltimore and governor of Maryland. The “obsessive compulsive” culture of the agency, as O’Malley affectionately terms it, has meant that over the last 90 years, no one missed a check.

Then came Trump and Musk, who “unleashed a reign of terror on those employees” — “the same people who got us through COVID without ever missing a payment.”

Mass firings, a hostile work environment, and the huge waste of taxpayer money as employees were paid to walk out the door appalled O’Malley.

Instead of rooting out “waste fraud and abuse,” Musk’s DOGE cut the IT department in half, undoing the work O’Malley and his colleagues had done to improve service at the agency. 

As Trump and Musk drive out the people who know how the system works, intermittent IT outages have become a problem. The website for Social Security accounts has gone down. Wait times are skyrocketing. And as the problems get worse, O’Malley said, “ultimately, it will interrupt benefits.”

“I don’t know when it will happen,” he said, “but when it breaks, it will break.”

What is the point of this wanton destruction? 

“I don’t know what the end game is,” O’Malley said.  

Members of Congress in both political parties have told him they think Trump and Musk have set their sights on the $2.6 trillion in the Social Security trust fund in order to make tax cuts for the superwealthy permanent.

Then there’s Musk’s nihilistic ideology, captured in his assertion that “the fundamental weakness of Western civilization is empathy.” 

“There’s no more empathetic program than Social Security,” says O’Malley. “It guarantees widows and orphans and people who are disabled don’t live in poverty. Maybe Musk thinks those are useless members of society who don’t help build his immense wealth. I don’t know.”

Whatever their motives, O’Malley is certain that Musk and Trump must be stopped from a campaign that will end in enormous damage to Americans. 

O’Malley’s message is the opposite of Musk’s — far from being riddled with waste, fraud and abuse, the Social Security administration is a model. Fraud affects less than one-half of 1% of Social Security funds. And far from being wasteful, the program spends 1.2% of its budget on overhead, meaning it could be seen as the most efficient insurance company in the world. Private health insurance companies have notoriously high administrative costs.

Other “Big Lies” O’Malley is out to bust include the whopper that immigrants without legal status are draining resources from the system. In fact, they pay about $26 billion in Social Security tax withholdings to fund benefits they themselves can never access, according to the Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy. Nor are dead people drawing Social Security benefits. “There is no zombie apocalypse,” says O’Malley. Facts and figures supporting the efficiency of Social Security are laid out in plain language on his website, winbackourcountry.com.

The good news is that people are beginning to push back on the idea that Social Security is riddled with abuse and should be made more “efficient.” 

“Congress people are getting a heck of a lot more calls now than they did two months ago,” O’Malley said, “whether it’s from people experiencing long wait times, or having trouble accessing the benefits they’ve worked their whole lives to earn, or who are just seeing what’s happening on the news.”

That pressure is absolutely necessary if we are going to prevent the raiding and destruction of a New Deal program that has served so many people so well for generations. 

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

A Wisconsin cybersecurity expert explains the significance of DOGE access to government data.

The post There is ‘reason to be concerned’ about DOGE’s access to federal data, says cybersecurity expert appeared first on WPR.

Reading Time: 3 minutes

When Neenah resident Tom Frantz got a pair of identical emails last Friday, saying they were from the U.S. Department of Homeland Security, he just shrugged it off at first, believing it was spam.

But then, he said, he read the email more closely and was “really bothered” by the content.

The email said Frantz — a 68-year-old retired college administrator and teacher and American citizen born in western Pennsylvania — was in the United States on humanitarian parole and his parole was being terminated. 

“If you do not depart the United States immediately you will be subject to potential law enforcement actions that will result in your removal from the United States,” the email stated.

“Do not attempt to remain in the United States — the federal government will find you,” it added. “Please depart the United States immediately.”

Frantz has never been on or applied for humanitarian parole. He’s lived in the Fox Valley since moving in 1981 for a job at what is now the University of Wisconsin-Oshkosh at Fox Cities.

Because of the threatening nature of the email and the lack of information about what to do if you were a U.S. citizen who received the notification, Frantz said he decided to do some research. He discovered that an immigration attorney in Massachusetts received a similar letter from immigration officials. 

“I thought, ‘Boy, if an immigration attorney is alarmed about this, then I should be, too, and I should pay attention to what is being said here,’” Frantz said.

He said he was worried about the possibility of immigration officials showing up at his home, arresting him and ultimately deporting him. As a retiree, he said he was also worried about a reference in the letter to losing benefits because he spent years paying into Social Security and Medicare.

“I was not naive enough to believe that the government never makes a mistake,” he said. “But my fear was that it could compound. And if it compounded, then what were the consequences for me?”

Frantz spent much of that Friday debating what to do about the letter. He ultimately decided his best bet would be to reach out to one of his representatives in Congress. On Monday morning, he said he left a voicemail with U.S. Sen. Tammy Baldwin’s office and received a phone call less than an hour later.

“After I contacted Sen. Baldwin’s office, they were working (on) it right away,” Frantz said. “I felt like I had an advocate, somebody who really understood my situation and knew the inner workings of government to try to address it.”

Baldwin’s office got in contact with the Department of Homeland Security and discovered the email was incorrectly sent to Frantz. 

The notice that Frantz received went out to email addresses in the Customs and Border Patrol Home App, according to Baldwin’s office. The emails typically belonged to a person applying for parole or asylum, immigration lawyers, non-governmental organizations and financial supporters of applicants.

Frantz said he did not use the app or fit the description of those categories. He still isn’t quite sure why he received the email. Baldwin’s office says it has been in contact with federal immigration officials to ensure the issue was resolved.

While he says the Department of Homeland Security didn’t apologize to him directly, he says the department did apologize through Baldwin’s office. Frantz said the department reached out with a number of questions, and he got the sense “they were trying to figure out what went wrong.” 

If Baldwin’s office hadn’t worked with him, Frantz said he planned to reach out to U.S. Sen. Ron Johnson’s office and the office of Rep. Glenn Grothman.

“Had none of them responded … I probably would start carrying around different forms of identification, birth certificate and other stuff, to prove citizenship,” Frantz said. 

The Department of Homeland Security, Immigration and Customs Enforcement and Customs and Border Protection did not immediately respond to a request for comment regarding Frantz’s situation and why he received the notification.

In a statement, Baldwin criticized the Trump administration’s handling of the situation, which could have resulted in the wrongful detention or deportation of a Wisconsin resident.

“This is completely illegal — President Trump is trying to deport an American-born, law-abiding citizen and has provided absolutely no justification,” Baldwin said in a statement. “The President cannot kick Americans out of the country just because he wants — no one is above the law, including the President.”

In reflecting on the situation, Frantz said he’s lucky because he knew how to find help. He said he expects that more U.S. citizens likely received similar emails by mistake. 

“If I’m getting this, and that attorney in Massachusetts also got it, there’s probably a lot of other people who got this,” he said. “We don’t know how many people are on the distribution list.”

“I think it’s important that people stay vigilant and that they take emails seriously. Don’t click on the links, but investigate them,” Frantz added. “If it looks legitimate, I would definitely treat it as legitimate, and I would seek assistance from officials.”

This story was originally published by WPR.

‘The federal government will find you’: Immigration officials wrongfully told a Fox Valley man to leave the US is a post from Wisconsin Watch, a non-profit investigative news site covering Wisconsin since 2009. Please consider making a contribution to support our journalism.