[ad_1]
An American citizen who voted for Donald Trump was detained by armed immigration agents during a stop in Virginia in March. A toddler, his mother and his grandmother, all the American citizens of Puerto Rico, were detained while talking Spanish while boughting in Milwaukee. US citizen members of the Navajo Nation were stopped and questioned in Arizona and New Mexico.
It is just a few of the immigration-related incidents that raised alarm among members of Congress and encouraged them to reach out to the Trump administration for more information.
But more than a dozen representatives, all of them Democrats, told Propublica that they did not receive any response, not even as long as months after seeking information, who asked the fear because the administration pursued a break from the deportations.
“It’s a major concern at a level beyond what Ice does,” Rep. Teresa Leger Fernández of New Mexico told The Outlet.
The fear was increased in the wake of the wrong deportation of the Maryland Father Kilmar Abrega Garcia to a notorious El Salvador prison and the deportation of others who were simply brought from their homes or from the street and sat without court to the same foreign prison.
Trump officials are not just defending court orders, “it does not seem to recognize this administration the power and authority and responsibility” by members of Congress, have added Leger Fernández.
A White House spokeswoman insisted that the administration “work with the congress”, and pointed out the continued resolution that the government kept open and of the Laken Riley Act that enabled the safety of homeland to keep illegal immigrants who committed a crime.
Members of Congress have long been frustrated about the answers of the Laggard administration to their immigration questions; For example, during the Biden Administration, members of the home had to sue homeland safety for more information on a mass immigration parole program.
However, the indifference of immigration officials has now adopted a new urgency, as the Trump administration has always driven the boundaries on the migration policy. Trump’s overall campaign has already involved great supervision and controversies.
The administration acknowledged that he had wrongly deported Abrego Garcia to his homeland, despite a court order that prevented him from sending it.
Despite a ruling of the Supreme Court that the administration should “facilitate” its return, the administration insisted that it does not have the obligation or power to free him from Cecot prison, a human rights observers called a ‘tropical gulag’ for his inhuman conditions and statements from Salvadoran officials.
During a visit to the White House on Monday, Salvadoran president Nayib Bukele also insisted that the power does not have the power to free Abrego Garcia, although the Trump administration pays for the imprisonment of his deported, and asked a question about the possibility ‘unconditionally’.
The Trump administration is now also driving the unprecedented and highly controversial idea of the prison sentence of non-immigrant Americans in foreign prison. Trump, on Monday, told Bukele that he is “all” that “home growth” in El Salvador’s prisons.
In addition to those incorrectly trapped in the deportation-net, the administration has tried to deport legitimate permanent US residents about their roles in the Pro-Palestine campus activism, which, according to critics, violates the protection of the rough for free speech and activism in the first amendment.
Members of Congress are not the only one who feels ignored in their supervisory role towards the administration.
A Federal Court in Washington has considered the administration to keep contempt, after it appears to be a court order to turn the flights to El Salvador in March, amid a challenge for the administration’s use of the Wartime Emergency Alien Vyies Act to quickly locate the summary deportations.
The administration refused to name the officials who communicated the court’s order to the parties involved in government during the controversy of the flight, claiming that information was subject to the privilege of the attorney customer.
[ad_2]
Source link
