update - Trump and Harvard close to 1/2 billion $$$ settlement
- Thread starter mandrill
- Start date
ORLANDO, Fla. (AP) — Federal and state officials in Florida must produce agreements showing which government agency or private contractor has legal authority to detain people or perform immigration officer roles at “Alligator Alcatraz,” the immigration detention facility in the Everglades, a federal judge said Monday.
Officials must provide by Thursday all written agreements and contracts showing who has legal custody of the hundreds of detainees at the facility that was hastily constructed more than a month ago on an isolated airstrip in South Florida's Everglades wilderness, said U.S. District Judge Rodolfo Ruiz, an appointee of President Donald Trump.
Ruiz's order was part of an ongoing civil rights lawsuit against the state and federal governments by immigration attorneys who say “Alligator Alcatraz” detainees' constitutional rights are being violated since they are barred from meeting lawyers, are being held without any charges, and a federal immigration court has canceled bond hearings.
Who has authority over the detention center has been a murky issue since it opened at the beginning of July.
The federal government and Florida had asked that any disclosures be limited to agreements between U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement and three Florida agencies — the Florida Highway Patrol, the Florida National Guard and the Florida Department of Law Enforcement.
The detainees' attorneys had requested documents showing who was responsible for removal proceedings, as well as information on the number of employees at “Alligator Alcatraz,” but Ruiz said those requests from the detainees' lawyers were too broad.
The lawsuit is the second to challenge “Alligator Alcatraz.” Environmental groups have sued federal and state officials, asking that the project be halted because the process didn’t follow state and federal environmental laws. A hearing on that lawsuit is set for Wednesday.
Separately, the Archdiocese of Miami said it celebrated the first Mass at the detention center on Saturday following weeks of negotiations.
“I am pleased that our request to provide for the pastoral care of the detainees has been accommodated,” Archdiocese of Miami Archbishop Thomas Wenski said Monday in a statement.
___
Kate Payne in Tallahassee, Florida, contributed to this report.
___
Judge orders Florida, federal officials to produce 'Alligator Alcatraz' agreements
Officials must provide by Thursday all written agreements and contracts showing who has legal custody of the hundreds of detainees at the facility that was hastily constructed more than a month ago on an isolated airstrip in South Florida's Everglades wilderness, said U.S. District Judge Rodolfo Ruiz, an appointee of President Donald Trump.
Ruiz's order was part of an ongoing civil rights lawsuit against the state and federal governments by immigration attorneys who say “Alligator Alcatraz” detainees' constitutional rights are being violated since they are barred from meeting lawyers, are being held without any charges, and a federal immigration court has canceled bond hearings.
Who has authority over the detention center has been a murky issue since it opened at the beginning of July.
The federal government and Florida had asked that any disclosures be limited to agreements between U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement and three Florida agencies — the Florida Highway Patrol, the Florida National Guard and the Florida Department of Law Enforcement.
The detainees' attorneys had requested documents showing who was responsible for removal proceedings, as well as information on the number of employees at “Alligator Alcatraz,” but Ruiz said those requests from the detainees' lawyers were too broad.
The lawsuit is the second to challenge “Alligator Alcatraz.” Environmental groups have sued federal and state officials, asking that the project be halted because the process didn’t follow state and federal environmental laws. A hearing on that lawsuit is set for Wednesday.
Separately, the Archdiocese of Miami said it celebrated the first Mass at the detention center on Saturday following weeks of negotiations.
“I am pleased that our request to provide for the pastoral care of the detainees has been accommodated,” Archdiocese of Miami Archbishop Thomas Wenski said Monday in a statement.
___
Kate Payne in Tallahassee, Florida, contributed to this report.
___
Judge orders Florida, federal officials to produce 'Alligator Alcatraz' agreements
A federal judge has ruled that President Donald Trump‘s attempt to reshape the Federal Trade Commission by firing Democratic commissioner Rebecca Slaughter was unlawful — delivering a significant setback in the president’s ongoing battle against the “deep state.”
Trump’s FTC purge challenged in court
Donald Trump received a massive legal blow. (Tingey Injury Law Firm/Unsplash)© Knewz (CA)
Earlier this year, President Trump abruptly dismissed two Democratic FTC commissioners, Slaughter and Alvaro Bedoya, in a move that drew criticism from Democratic lawmakers. Critics said it undermined the FTC’s independence and could set a dangerous precedent for other agencies. Now, a federal court has struck down that decision, calling Trump’s actions illegal. The Trump administration has since appealed the ruling.
Trump’s move was ‘unlawful’
Judge calls Donald Trump’s firing move “unlawful.” (MEGA)© Knewz (CA)
In her opinion, U.S. District Judge Loren AliKhan wrote that Trump’s dismissal of Slaughter violated federal protections designed to shield independent agencies from political pressure. “That is not how Congress structured it,” AliKhan wrote, adding that the Trump administration appeared to want the FTC to function as “a subservient agency subject to the whims of the President and wholly lacking in autonomy.”
What is the FTC?
Only three members are serving on the FTC currently. (ipse dixit/Unsplash)© Knewz (CA)
The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) is an independent agency responsible for consumer protection. It is led by five commissioners, with no more than three allowed from the same political party to ensure bipartisan oversight. Currently, only three commissioners are serving. Trump previously announced his intent to nominate Andrew Ferguson as chair, signaling a shift from Lina Khan, the outgoing progressive chair.
Slaughter’s response to court victory
Rebecca Slaughter responds to the news. (MEGA)© Knewz (CA)
In a public statement following the ruling, Slaughter emphasized the importance of protecting independent agencies from political interference. “As the Court recognized today, the law is clear, and I look forward to getting back to work,” she wrote. “The for-cause removal protections that apply to my colleagues and me at the FTC also protect other independent economic regulators like the SEC [Securities and Exchange Commission], the FDIC [Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation], and the Federal Reserve.”
Judge delivers legal blow to Trump's 'deep state' war
Trump’s FTC purge challenged in court
Donald Trump received a massive legal blow. (Tingey Injury Law Firm/Unsplash)© Knewz (CA)
Earlier this year, President Trump abruptly dismissed two Democratic FTC commissioners, Slaughter and Alvaro Bedoya, in a move that drew criticism from Democratic lawmakers. Critics said it undermined the FTC’s independence and could set a dangerous precedent for other agencies. Now, a federal court has struck down that decision, calling Trump’s actions illegal. The Trump administration has since appealed the ruling.
Trump’s move was ‘unlawful’
Judge calls Donald Trump’s firing move “unlawful.” (MEGA)© Knewz (CA)
In her opinion, U.S. District Judge Loren AliKhan wrote that Trump’s dismissal of Slaughter violated federal protections designed to shield independent agencies from political pressure. “That is not how Congress structured it,” AliKhan wrote, adding that the Trump administration appeared to want the FTC to function as “a subservient agency subject to the whims of the President and wholly lacking in autonomy.”
What is the FTC?
Only three members are serving on the FTC currently. (ipse dixit/Unsplash)© Knewz (CA)
The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) is an independent agency responsible for consumer protection. It is led by five commissioners, with no more than three allowed from the same political party to ensure bipartisan oversight. Currently, only three commissioners are serving. Trump previously announced his intent to nominate Andrew Ferguson as chair, signaling a shift from Lina Khan, the outgoing progressive chair.
Slaughter’s response to court victory
Rebecca Slaughter responds to the news. (MEGA)© Knewz (CA)
In a public statement following the ruling, Slaughter emphasized the importance of protecting independent agencies from political interference. “As the Court recognized today, the law is clear, and I look forward to getting back to work,” she wrote. “The for-cause removal protections that apply to my colleagues and me at the FTC also protect other independent economic regulators like the SEC [Securities and Exchange Commission], the FDIC [Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation], and the Federal Reserve.”
Judge delivers legal blow to Trump's 'deep state' war
President Donald Trump is trying to deport a Russian man who passed the U.S. screening process for asylum. The U.S. government has also taken away his son.
Aaron Reichlin-Melnick, a senior fellow at the American Immigration Council, posted an excerpt of a New York Times report revealing that the man fled to the United States after his wife was locked up for her political views.
Pavel Snegir and his 11-year-old son, Aleksandr, already passed the initial screening and confirmed that if Snegir is sent back to Russia, he will likely be tortured.
Want more breaking political news? Click for the latest headlines at Raw Story.
"But the Trump admin is still trying to deport him anyway, and has taken away his son until he agrees to be deported," wrote Reichlin-Melnick.
Snegir and his son had been in ICE custody, but in May he was taken to an airport in San Diego. He was told he could take his son to the court hearing in New York. But once they were at the airport, Snegir was scared to board the plane, convinced he was about to be deported back to Russia.
"Later that day, after the flight had left, an ICE official told him he would be separated from his son because he refused to be deported," the report said.
Snegir said he refused to give the government his child. ICE followed with threats he'd be thrown "to the ground, handcuffed and taken away if he did not relent."
He didn't move and "everything she promised happened," Snegir recalled.
His son witnessed the whole ordeal. He previously watched his mother be taken by the Russian government, too.
Now, ICE is telling Snegir that he can self-deport back to Russia, or they'll deport him anyway, without his son. They claimed he may never see his son again.
Snegir relented, but the following day, he was approved under the protection screening, which means ICE can deport him, but he can't be sent to Russia.
This week, the administration also published its guidance on birthright citizenship, which will allow ICE to enter maternity wards and demand papers from families after their infants are born. If the parents can't prove their citizenship, the government can take the newborn away from its parents and deport it to whatever country it wants, one legal analyst described.
Read the full report here.
ICE seizes 11-year-old to force dad’s deportation — despite torture risk
Aaron Reichlin-Melnick, a senior fellow at the American Immigration Council, posted an excerpt of a New York Times report revealing that the man fled to the United States after his wife was locked up for her political views.
Pavel Snegir and his 11-year-old son, Aleksandr, already passed the initial screening and confirmed that if Snegir is sent back to Russia, he will likely be tortured.
Want more breaking political news? Click for the latest headlines at Raw Story.
"But the Trump admin is still trying to deport him anyway, and has taken away his son until he agrees to be deported," wrote Reichlin-Melnick.
Snegir and his son had been in ICE custody, but in May he was taken to an airport in San Diego. He was told he could take his son to the court hearing in New York. But once they were at the airport, Snegir was scared to board the plane, convinced he was about to be deported back to Russia.
"Later that day, after the flight had left, an ICE official told him he would be separated from his son because he refused to be deported," the report said.
Snegir said he refused to give the government his child. ICE followed with threats he'd be thrown "to the ground, handcuffed and taken away if he did not relent."
He didn't move and "everything she promised happened," Snegir recalled.
His son witnessed the whole ordeal. He previously watched his mother be taken by the Russian government, too.
Now, ICE is telling Snegir that he can self-deport back to Russia, or they'll deport him anyway, without his son. They claimed he may never see his son again.
Snegir relented, but the following day, he was approved under the protection screening, which means ICE can deport him, but he can't be sent to Russia.
This week, the administration also published its guidance on birthright citizenship, which will allow ICE to enter maternity wards and demand papers from families after their infants are born. If the parents can't prove their citizenship, the government can take the newborn away from its parents and deport it to whatever country it wants, one legal analyst described.
Read the full report here.
ICE seizes 11-year-old to force dad’s deportation — despite torture risk
Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton announced plans to ask a court to determine whether Democrats who fled the state to prevent Republican redistricting efforts had "vacated" their office.
After Democrats denied the Texas House of Representatives a two-thirds quorum for the second day in a row on Tuesday, Paxton released a statement on his intentions to have their seats declared vacant.
"Democrats have abandoned their offices by fleeing Texas, and a failure to respond to a call of the House constitutes a dereliction of their duty as elected officials," Paxton said. "Starting Friday, any rogue lawmakers refusing to return to the House will be held accountable for vacating their office. The people of Texas elected lawmakers, not jet-setting runaways looking for headlines. If you don't show up to work, you get fired."
The statement went on to insist that Democrats were "refusing to perform their duties in a manner that amounts to abandonment of office."
"If the runaway members of the legislative minority do not return to the House and resume performance of their duties by the deadline, Attorney General Paxton will seek judicial relief confirming that their office is vacant," the statement said.
On Monday, House Speaker Dustin Burrows (R) signed civil arrest warrants for the missing Democrats.
Ken Paxton seeks court order declaring that Dem 'runaways' vacated their seats
After Democrats denied the Texas House of Representatives a two-thirds quorum for the second day in a row on Tuesday, Paxton released a statement on his intentions to have their seats declared vacant.
"Democrats have abandoned their offices by fleeing Texas, and a failure to respond to a call of the House constitutes a dereliction of their duty as elected officials," Paxton said. "Starting Friday, any rogue lawmakers refusing to return to the House will be held accountable for vacating their office. The people of Texas elected lawmakers, not jet-setting runaways looking for headlines. If you don't show up to work, you get fired."
The statement went on to insist that Democrats were "refusing to perform their duties in a manner that amounts to abandonment of office."
"If the runaway members of the legislative minority do not return to the House and resume performance of their duties by the deadline, Attorney General Paxton will seek judicial relief confirming that their office is vacant," the statement said.
On Monday, House Speaker Dustin Burrows (R) signed civil arrest warrants for the missing Democrats.
Ken Paxton seeks court order declaring that Dem 'runaways' vacated their seats
BOSTON (AP) — A federal judge on Tuesday blocked the Trump administration from reallocating $4 billion meant to help communities protect against natural disasters.
U.S. District Judge Richard G. Stearns in Boston granted a preliminary injunction sought by 20 Democrat-led states while their lawsuit over the funding moves ahead.
A spokesperson for the Federal Emergency Management Agency did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
Massachusetts Attorney General Andrea Campbell said in a statement that she would continue fighting to make sure “communities can adequately prepare for natural disasters.”
Massachusetts and the other states that brought the lawsuit argued FEMA lacked the authority to end the Building Resilient Infrastructure and Communities program and redirect more than $4 billion of its funding. The program aims to harden infrastructure around the country against potential storm damage.
FEMA initially announced it was ending the program, but later said in a court filing that it was evaluating it.
Noting money for the program was allocated by Congress, the states’ lawsuit says any attempt to redirect it would run afoul of the Constitution.
A lawyer for the government, Nicole O’Connor, argued at a hearing in July that the funds can be used both for disaster recovery and disaster prevention and that FEMA should have discretion to use the money how it sees fit.
In his ruling, Stearns said he was not convinced Congress had given FEMA any discretion to redirect the funds. The states had also shown that the “balance of hardship and public interest” was in their favor.
“There is an inherent public interest in ensuring that the government follows the law, and the potential hardship accruing to the States from the funds being repurposed is great,” Stearns wrote. “The BRIC program is designed to protect against natural disasters and save lives.”
The program has provided grants for a range of disaster management projects, including strengthening electrical grids, constructing levees for flood protection and relocating vulnerable water treatment facilities. Many of the projects are in rural communities.
FEMA said in a news release in April that it was “ending” the program, but the agency’s acting chief, David Richardson, later said in a court filing that FEMA was merely evaluating whether to end or revise it.
Stearns said it appeared FEMA had decided to end the program and was “inching towards a fait accompli,” noting it had cancelled new funding opportunities and told stakeholders they shouldn't expect any unobligated funding.
The states, including California, New York and Washington, argued that the threat of losing the funding alone had put numerous projects at risk of being cancelled, delayed or downsized. And they warned ending the program would be highly imprudent.
“By proactively fortifying our communities against disasters before they strike, rather than just responding afterward, we will reduce injuries, save lives, protect property, and, ultimately, save money that would otherwise be spent on post-disaster costs,” they wrote in the suit filed in July.
FEMA said in a court filing that an injunction on its use of the funds could hamper its ability to respond to major disasters.
But Stearns said the administration could come back to him to release funding should a disaster of “unprecedented proportions” occur.
Jack Brook And Michael Casey, The Associated Press
Federal judge rules Trump administration cannot reallocate billions meant for disaster mitigation
U.S. District Judge Richard G. Stearns in Boston granted a preliminary injunction sought by 20 Democrat-led states while their lawsuit over the funding moves ahead.
A spokesperson for the Federal Emergency Management Agency did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
Massachusetts Attorney General Andrea Campbell said in a statement that she would continue fighting to make sure “communities can adequately prepare for natural disasters.”
Massachusetts and the other states that brought the lawsuit argued FEMA lacked the authority to end the Building Resilient Infrastructure and Communities program and redirect more than $4 billion of its funding. The program aims to harden infrastructure around the country against potential storm damage.
FEMA initially announced it was ending the program, but later said in a court filing that it was evaluating it.
Noting money for the program was allocated by Congress, the states’ lawsuit says any attempt to redirect it would run afoul of the Constitution.
A lawyer for the government, Nicole O’Connor, argued at a hearing in July that the funds can be used both for disaster recovery and disaster prevention and that FEMA should have discretion to use the money how it sees fit.
In his ruling, Stearns said he was not convinced Congress had given FEMA any discretion to redirect the funds. The states had also shown that the “balance of hardship and public interest” was in their favor.
“There is an inherent public interest in ensuring that the government follows the law, and the potential hardship accruing to the States from the funds being repurposed is great,” Stearns wrote. “The BRIC program is designed to protect against natural disasters and save lives.”
The program has provided grants for a range of disaster management projects, including strengthening electrical grids, constructing levees for flood protection and relocating vulnerable water treatment facilities. Many of the projects are in rural communities.
FEMA said in a news release in April that it was “ending” the program, but the agency’s acting chief, David Richardson, later said in a court filing that FEMA was merely evaluating whether to end or revise it.
Stearns said it appeared FEMA had decided to end the program and was “inching towards a fait accompli,” noting it had cancelled new funding opportunities and told stakeholders they shouldn't expect any unobligated funding.
The states, including California, New York and Washington, argued that the threat of losing the funding alone had put numerous projects at risk of being cancelled, delayed or downsized. And they warned ending the program would be highly imprudent.
“By proactively fortifying our communities against disasters before they strike, rather than just responding afterward, we will reduce injuries, save lives, protect property, and, ultimately, save money that would otherwise be spent on post-disaster costs,” they wrote in the suit filed in July.
FEMA said in a court filing that an injunction on its use of the funds could hamper its ability to respond to major disasters.
But Stearns said the administration could come back to him to release funding should a disaster of “unprecedented proportions” occur.
Jack Brook And Michael Casey, The Associated Press
Federal judge rules Trump administration cannot reallocate billions meant for disaster mitigation
Cue the new underground midwife network.
That should keep people of colour from giving birth in hospitals, which I imagine is their goal.
I wish I remembered what thread it was where someone kept not understanding that this is what was going to happen with expedited removal when they just scrapped due process.
The question here really is whether this remains bluster or not.
I'd like to think Trump and co feel it would backfire on them with everything going on, but it might just encourage them to try it out of desperation.
The Trump administration has suspended $584 million in federal grants for the University of California, Los Angeles, nearly double the amount that was previously thought, the school’s chancellor announced Wednesday.
UCLA is the first public university whose federal grants have been targeted by the administration over allegations of civil rights violations related to antisemitism and affirmative action. The Trump administration has frozen or paused federal funding over similar allegations against private colleges.
“If these funds remain suspended, it will be devastating for UCLA and for Americans across the nation,” Chancellor Julio Frenk said Wednesday in a statement, noting the groundbreaking research that has come out of the university.
The departments affected rely on funding from the National Science Foundation, the National Institutes of Health and the Department of Energy, Frenk said.
The U.S. Department of Education did not immediately respond to an email from The Associated Press requesting comment.
The Trump administration recently announced the U.S. Department of Justice’s Civil Rights Division found UCLA violated the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment and Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 “by acting with deliberate indifference in creating a hostile educational environment for Jewish and Israeli students.”
The announcement came as UCLA reached a $6 million settlement with three Jewish students and a Jewish professor who sued the university, arguing it violated their civil rights by allowing pro-Palestinian protesters in 2024 to block their access to classes and other areas on campus.
The university has said that it is committed to campus safety and inclusivity and will continue to implement recommendations.
The new UC president, James B. Milliken, said in a statement Wednesday that it has agreed to talks with the administration over the allegations against UCLA.
"These cuts do nothing to address antisemitism," Milliken said. “Moreover, the extensive work that UCLA and the entire University of California have taken to combat antisemitism has apparently been ignored.”
Milliken said the “cuts would be a death knell for innovative work that saves lives, grows our economy, and fortifies our national security. It is in our country’s best interest that funding be restored.”
As part of the lawsuit settlement, UCLA said it will contribute $2.3 million to eight organizations that combat antisemitism and support the university's Jewish community. It also has created an Office of Campus and Community Safety, instituting new policies to manage protests on campus. Frenk, whose Jewish father and grandparents fled Nazi Germany to Mexico and whose wife is the daughter of a Holocaust survivor, launched an initiative to combat antisemitism and anti-Israeli bias.
Last month, Columbia University agreed to pay $200 million as part of a settlement to resolve investigations into the government’s allegations that the school violated federal antidiscrimination laws. The agreement also restores more than $400 million in research grants.
The Trump administration plans to use its deal with Columbia as a template for other universities, with financial penalties that are now seen as an expectation.
_____
This story corrects that Columbia agreed to pay $200 million last month and not last week.
Julie Watson, The Associated Press
UCLA says Trump administration has frozen $584 million in grants, threatening research
UCLA is the first public university whose federal grants have been targeted by the administration over allegations of civil rights violations related to antisemitism and affirmative action. The Trump administration has frozen or paused federal funding over similar allegations against private colleges.
“If these funds remain suspended, it will be devastating for UCLA and for Americans across the nation,” Chancellor Julio Frenk said Wednesday in a statement, noting the groundbreaking research that has come out of the university.
The departments affected rely on funding from the National Science Foundation, the National Institutes of Health and the Department of Energy, Frenk said.
The U.S. Department of Education did not immediately respond to an email from The Associated Press requesting comment.
The Trump administration recently announced the U.S. Department of Justice’s Civil Rights Division found UCLA violated the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment and Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 “by acting with deliberate indifference in creating a hostile educational environment for Jewish and Israeli students.”
The announcement came as UCLA reached a $6 million settlement with three Jewish students and a Jewish professor who sued the university, arguing it violated their civil rights by allowing pro-Palestinian protesters in 2024 to block their access to classes and other areas on campus.
The university has said that it is committed to campus safety and inclusivity and will continue to implement recommendations.
The new UC president, James B. Milliken, said in a statement Wednesday that it has agreed to talks with the administration over the allegations against UCLA.
"These cuts do nothing to address antisemitism," Milliken said. “Moreover, the extensive work that UCLA and the entire University of California have taken to combat antisemitism has apparently been ignored.”
Milliken said the “cuts would be a death knell for innovative work that saves lives, grows our economy, and fortifies our national security. It is in our country’s best interest that funding be restored.”
As part of the lawsuit settlement, UCLA said it will contribute $2.3 million to eight organizations that combat antisemitism and support the university's Jewish community. It also has created an Office of Campus and Community Safety, instituting new policies to manage protests on campus. Frenk, whose Jewish father and grandparents fled Nazi Germany to Mexico and whose wife is the daughter of a Holocaust survivor, launched an initiative to combat antisemitism and anti-Israeli bias.
Last month, Columbia University agreed to pay $200 million as part of a settlement to resolve investigations into the government’s allegations that the school violated federal antidiscrimination laws. The agreement also restores more than $400 million in research grants.
The Trump administration plans to use its deal with Columbia as a template for other universities, with financial penalties that are now seen as an expectation.
_____
This story corrects that Columbia agreed to pay $200 million last month and not last week.
Julie Watson, The Associated Press
UCLA says Trump administration has frozen $584 million in grants, threatening research
When you send money to the mob once you should assume they will come back for more later.
Rep. Adriano Espaillat (D-NY) claimed on Wednesday that he and two other House Democrats had been “trapped” at an Immigration and Customs Enforcement detention center in New York by an officer that refused to identify themself, keeping he and his colleagues, “in essence, incarcerated.”
In a social media post on X, Espaillat said that he, along with Reps. Dan Goldman (D-NY) and Nydia Valazquez (D-NY), attempted to visit the Sunset Park Detention Center in Brooklyn in an effort to observe the treatment of detained migrants.
“We know for a fact there’s over 100 immigrants that are being detained here, and we have the jurisdiction and the responsibility to come here and have oversight over this operation,” Espaillat said in a video posted to social media.
“We were greeted by a masked agent who refused to give us his name, who refused to show his face, and who proceeded to lock the door, keeping us, in essence, incarcerated, because we cannot go in or out until we get further notice.”
Espaillat cited law that bestows upon members of Congress the right to visit migrant detention centers operated by the Department of Homeland Security without prior notice, though said he was still denied entry into the facility. He also said that he and his Democratic colleagues had been prevented from leaving the facility grounds after the unnamed officer locked an exterior gate.
“We have been trapped in here by a masked agent with no name ... whom we cannot determine who it is because he refuses to show his face,” Espaillat said.
“So we’re trapped here, we spoke to the supervisors here to let them know that we are duly-elected members of Congress, and Section 527 allows us the oversight responsibilities to go in there and see what is going on with the detention of immigrants.”
In June, the entire New York City congressional delegation – including Espaillat, Goldman and Valazquez, signed onto an letter to DHS demanding the right to visit detention centers, a letter that apparently went either unread or ignored.
As of Wednesday afternoon, it’s unclear whether the three New York Democrats remained trapped on the grounds of the detention facility.
“This blatant lack of respect towards the legislative branch is a deterioration of checks and balances, all while they hide their atrocities from the public,” Espaillat wrote in a social media post. “The people demand answers, and immigrants deserve humanity.”
Watch the video below or use this link here.
'We've been trapped!' Democratic lawmakers say ICE 'incarcerated' them at detention center
In a social media post on X, Espaillat said that he, along with Reps. Dan Goldman (D-NY) and Nydia Valazquez (D-NY), attempted to visit the Sunset Park Detention Center in Brooklyn in an effort to observe the treatment of detained migrants.
“We know for a fact there’s over 100 immigrants that are being detained here, and we have the jurisdiction and the responsibility to come here and have oversight over this operation,” Espaillat said in a video posted to social media.
“We were greeted by a masked agent who refused to give us his name, who refused to show his face, and who proceeded to lock the door, keeping us, in essence, incarcerated, because we cannot go in or out until we get further notice.”
Espaillat cited law that bestows upon members of Congress the right to visit migrant detention centers operated by the Department of Homeland Security without prior notice, though said he was still denied entry into the facility. He also said that he and his Democratic colleagues had been prevented from leaving the facility grounds after the unnamed officer locked an exterior gate.
“We have been trapped in here by a masked agent with no name ... whom we cannot determine who it is because he refuses to show his face,” Espaillat said.
“So we’re trapped here, we spoke to the supervisors here to let them know that we are duly-elected members of Congress, and Section 527 allows us the oversight responsibilities to go in there and see what is going on with the detention of immigrants.”
In June, the entire New York City congressional delegation – including Espaillat, Goldman and Valazquez, signed onto an letter to DHS demanding the right to visit detention centers, a letter that apparently went either unread or ignored.
As of Wednesday afternoon, it’s unclear whether the three New York Democrats remained trapped on the grounds of the detention facility.
“This blatant lack of respect towards the legislative branch is a deterioration of checks and balances, all while they hide their atrocities from the public,” Espaillat wrote in a social media post. “The people demand answers, and immigrants deserve humanity.”
Watch the video below or use this link here.
'We've been trapped!' Democratic lawmakers say ICE 'incarcerated' them at detention center
