Connect with us

Politics

Inside Trump’s Search for a Health Threat to Justify His Immigration Crackdown

Published

on

Inside Trump’s Search for a Health Threat to Justify His Immigration Crackdown

President-elect Donald J. Trump is likely to justify his plans to seal off the border with Mexico by citing a public health emergency from immigrants bringing disease into the United States.

Now he just has to find one.

Mr. Trump last invoked public health restrictions, known as Title 42, in the early days of the pandemic in 2020, when the coronavirus was tearing across the globe. As he prepares to enter office again, Mr. Trump has no such public health disaster to point to.

Still, his advisers have spent recent months trying to find the right disease to build their case, according to four people familiar with the discussions. They have looked at tuberculosis and other respiratory diseases as options and have asked allies inside the Border Patrol for examples of illnesses that are being detected among migrants.

They also have considered trying to rationalize Title 42 by arguing broadly that migrants at the border come from various countries and may carry unfamiliar disease — an assertion that echoes a racist notion with a long history in the United States that minorities transmit infections. Mr. Trump’s team did not respond to a request for comment.

Advertisement

The plan to invoke the border restrictions based on sporadic cases of illness or even a vague fear of illness — rather than a major disease outbreak or pandemic — would amount to a radical use of the public health measure in pursuit of an immigration crackdown. Even when the coronavirus was spreading, the use of the health authority to turn away migrants prompted scrutiny from the courts and public health officials.

But Mr. Trump’s immigration advisers, led by Stephen Miller, his pick to be deputy chief of staff, believe they are entering a political environment that will welcome more aggressive border enforcement, particularly after some Democrats embraced using restrictions like Title 42, according to people familiar with the planning. President Biden used it to turn away thousands of migrants before eventually deciding to lift it, well after his public health advisers said the restrictions were no longer useful for the purpose of stopping the spread of disease.

Title 42, which is part of the Public Service Act of 1944, grants power to health authorities to block people from entering the United States when it is necessary to avert a “serious danger” posed by the presence of a communicable disease in foreign countries.

Mr. Miller has long considered Title 42 a key tool for his goal of shuttering the border to migration. He has essentially been on a yearslong quest to find enough examples of diseases among migrants to justify the use of the law.

Even before the spread of the coronavirus, Mr. Miller asked aides to keep tabs on American communities that welcomed migrants to see if diseases broke out there. He seized on an outbreak of mumps in immigration detention facilities in 2019 to push for using the public health law to seal the border. He was talked down in most of the cases by cabinet secretaries and lawyers — until the advent of the coronavirus.

Advertisement

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, not the White House, is responsible for assessing whether the public health rule is necessary at the border. And even when the pandemic spread throughout the United States, C.D.C. officials pushed back on the Trump White House’s position that turning away migrants was an effective way to prevent the spread of diseases.

Martin Cetron, the director of the agency’s Division of Global Migration and Quarantine, told a House committee that the implementation of the border restrictions “came from outside the C.D.C. subject matter experts” and was “handed to us” by the White House.

When Mr. Biden came into office, he initially kept the public health rule in place at the border, even when C.D.C. officials told his top aides there was no clear public health rationale for keeping the border shut to asylum seekers. Both the Biden and Trump administrations argued the rule was needed to prevent the spread of diseases in detention facilities at the border. But Mr. Biden’s top White House aides were privately concerned that lifting the rule would lead to a surge in migration.

During his second stint in the White House, Mr. Trump’s team will focus on avoiding such pushback. He is intent on installing loyalists throughout his administration who are unlikely to try to stop his more aggressive proposals.

In an interview with The New York Times in 2023, Mr. Miller sounded confident that the public would be accepting of Mr. Trump’s invoking Title 42. He said the new administration intended to use the law, citing “severe strains of the flu, tuberculosis, scabies, other respiratory illnesses like R.S.V. and so on, or just a general issue of mass migration being a public health threat and conveying a variety of communicable diseases.”

Advertisement

Mr. Trump’s attempt to deter migration based on public health, even without a clear disease to justify its use, is just one expected piece of a flurry of Day 1 executive actions that his team is developing to crack down on immigration.

Mr. Trump’s advisers have also discussed declaring a national emergency to free up Department of Defense funds and move military personnel, aircraft and other resources to the border. They also want to revive a policy that forced migrants to wait in Mexico, rather than the United States, until their immigration court date — although they would need Mexico to agree to such a deal.

Mr. Trump’s immigration advisers received a briefing on such border restrictions — as well as the use of the public health emergency restrictions — during a recent meeting with homeland security officials as a part of the transition between administrations, according to a person familiar with the matter. After exiting a meeting with Senate Republicans on Wednesday evening, Mr. Trump said he would close the border on his first day in office.

Some immigration experts have questioned how effective the public health rule was in driving down border crossings.

From the time Title 42 was enacted in 2020 until it was lifted in 2023, border officials expelled people more than 2.5 million times. Biden administration officials have publicly argued that the use of Title 42 at the southern border drove an increase in migrants attempting to cross the border multiple times, a practice known as recidivism.

Advertisement

Blas Nuñez-Neto, a White House official, said that in that way, Title 42 “may have” actually led to an increase in border crossings that the administration struggled to handle.

The current state at the border has been particularly calm, especially when compared to the numbers seen a year ago. Border agents made more than 47,000 arrests in December, according to a senior U.S. Customs and Border Protection official, a major drop from the previous year when nearly 250,000 such arrests were made.

Biden officials put into place a measure banning asylum for those who crossed the southern border starting this summer. It can only be lifted if crossing numbers drop to a certain threshold for several weeks, something that still has yet to happen.

Maggie Haberman and Jonathan Swan contributed reporting.

Advertisement

Politics

Republicans light cigars, cigarettes on burning photos of Khamenei to show support for Iranian protesters

Published

on

Republicans light cigars, cigarettes on burning photos of Khamenei to show support for Iranian protesters

NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!

Republican lawmakers are jumping on a social media trend to show their support for the anti-regime protesters in Iran.

Sen. Tim Sheehy, R-Mont., and Rep. Claudia Tenney, R-N.Y., posted photos of themselves using burning photos of Ayatollah Ali Khamenei to light up a cigarette and a cigar respectively. Both lawmakers used the caption “Smoke ’em if you got ’em.”

The lawmaker’s images mirror a social media trend in which people are using burning photos of Khamenei to light cigarettes and cigars. The trend emerged as the people of Iran hold increasingly intense protests against the Islamic regime. The movement against the regime has seen increasing support from abroad as world leaders back the people of Iran.

FREED IRANIAN PRISONER SAYS ‘IN TRUMP, THE ISLAMIC REPUBLIC HAS MET ITS MATCH’

Advertisement

People gather during a protest on Jan. 8, 2026, in Tehran, Iran. (Anonymous/Getty Images)

Khamenei’s regime has started to crack down on protests and even instituted a sweeping internet blackout to try to quell the unrest. Some have posited that the internet blackout was also meant to impede the spreading of information about and visuals of abuses committed against protesters by regime-backed forces.

Recently, exiled Iranian crown prince Reza Pahlavi has publicly urged President Donald Trump and the U.S. to back protesters in Iran as they fight the decades-old regime.

Sheehy told Fox News Digital that he takes the issue personally, saying that Iran has participated in the torturing, kidnapping and killing of Americans across the globe, “including friends of mine.”

“The Iranian regime are a bunch of murderous b——- who have been chanting ‘death to America’ for the past 46 years. They have backed up this chant by kidnapping, torturing, and killing thousands of Americans all over the world, including friends of mine. For me, it’s personal; it’s time to take out the trash,” Sheehy said in a statement provided to Fox News Digital via email.

Advertisement

Sen. Tim Sheehy, R-Mont., showed his solidarity with the people of Iran by hopping on a social media trend in which she used a burning photo of Ayatollah Ali Khamenei to light a cigarette. (Courtesy of Sen. Tim Sheehy’s Office)

US HOSTAGES IN IRAN FACE HEIGHTENED RISK AS PROTESTS SPREAD, EXPERTS SAY NUMBER HELD MAY EXCEED ESTIMATES

The senator also expressed his solidarity with the people of Iran and encouraged them to keep fighting the regime.

“To the Iranian people — we applaud your courage, keep fighting, and know we fully support your brave efforts to topple this evil regime,” he added.

Tenney’s office also spoke with Fox News Digital about the congresswoman’s post, praising the bravery of the people of Iran for standing up to the regime. Additionally, Tenney’s office expressed the congresswoman’s solidarity with the Iranian people.

Advertisement

“The bravery of the Iranian people in the face of decades of oppression by a brutal, extremist regime is extraordinary. Men and women across Iran are risking their lives to stand up to authoritarian mullahs who have denied them basic freedoms for generations,” Tenney’s office said in a statement to Fox News Digital.

Rep. Claudia Tenney, R-N.Y., showed her solidarity with the people of Iran by hopping on a social media trend in which she used a burning photo of Ayatollah Ali Khamenei to light a cigar. (Courtesy of Rep. Claudia Tenney’s Office)

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

“The congresswoman stands firmly with the Iranian people and their demand for dignity and self-determination, and believes their courage must be recognized and amplified. Today, the Iranian people finally have an ally in the White House, President Trump, who has made clear that the United States stands with those fighting for freedom against tyranny,” Tenney’s office added.

Trump has been vocal about his support for the people of Iran and has warned that the U.S. would be ready to step in if the regime used violence against protesters.

Advertisement

“Iran is looking at FREEDOM, perhaps like never before,” the president wrote in a Truth Social post on Jan. 10. “The USA stands ready to help!!!”

Continue Reading

Politics

California launches investigation into child porn on Elon Musk’s AI site

Published

on

California launches investigation into child porn on Elon Musk’s AI site

California announced an investigation into Elon Musk’s artificial intelligence company xAI on Wednesday, with Gov. Gavin Newsom saying that the social media site owned by the billionaire is a “breeding ground for predators to spread nonconsenual sexually explicit AI deepfakes.”

Grok, the xAI chatbot, includes image-generation features that allow users to morph existing photos into new images. The newly created images are then posted publicly on X.

In some cases, users have created sexually explicit or nonconsensual images based on real people, including altered depictions that appear to show individuals partially or fully undressed. Others have generated images that appear to show minors, prompting criticism that there are not sufficient guardrails to prohibit the creation of child pornography.

The social media site has previously said “we take action against illegal content on X, including Child Sexual Abuse Material (CSAM), by removing it, permanently suspending accounts, and working with local governments and law enforcement as necessary. Anyone using or prompting Grok to make illegal content will suffer the same consequences as if they upload illegal content.”

Newsom called the sexualized images being created on the platform “vile.” Atty. Gen. Rob Bonta said his office will use “all tools at our disposal to keep Californians safe.”

Advertisement

“The avalanche of reports detailing the non-consensual, sexually explicit material that xAI has produced and posted online in recent weeks is shocking,” Bonta said in a statement Wednesday. “This material, which depicts women and children in nude and sexually explicit situations, has been used to harass people across the internet. I urge xAI to take immediate action to ensure this goes no further. We have zero tolerance for the AI-based creation and dissemination of nonconsensual intimate images or of child sexual abuse material.”

Newsom signed a pair of bills in 2024 that made it illegal to create, possess or distribute sexually charged images of minors even when they’re created with computers, not cameras. The measures took effect last year.

Assembly Bill 1831, authored by Assemblymember Marc Berman (D-Menlo Park), expanded the state’s child-porn prohibition to material that “contains a digitally altered or artificial-intelligence-generated depiction [of] what appears to be a person under 18 years of age” engaging in or simulating sexual conduct. Senate Bill 1381, authored by Sen. Aisha Wahab (D-Hayward), amended state law to more clearly prohibit using AI to create images of real children engaged in sexual conduct, or using children as models for digitally altered or AI-generated child pornography.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Politics

Video: Supreme Court May Allow States to Bar Transgender Athletes

Published

on

Video: Supreme Court May Allow States to Bar Transgender Athletes

new video loaded: Supreme Court May Allow States to Bar Transgender Athletes

transcript

transcript

Supreme Court May Allow States to Bar Transgender Athletes

The Supreme Court heard two cases from West Virginia and Idaho on Tuesday. Both concerned barring the participation of transgender athletes in girls’ and women’s sports teams.

“It is undisputed that states may separate their sports teams based on sex in light of the real biological differences between males and females. States may equally apply that valid sex-based rule to biological males who self-identify as female. Denying a special accommodation to trans-identifying individuals does not discriminate on the basis of sex or gender identity or deny equal protection.” “West Virginia argues that to protect these opportunities for cisgender girls, it has to deny them to B.P.J. But Title IX and the Equal Protection Clause protect everyone. And if the evidence shows there are no relevant physiological differences between B.P.J. and other girls, then there’s no basis to exclude her.” “Given that half the states are allowing it, allowing transgender girls and women to participate, about half are not, why would we at this point, just the role of this court, jump in and try to constitutionalize a rule for the whole country while there’s still, as you say, uncertainty and debate, while there’s still strong interest in other side?” “This court has held in cases like V.M.I. that in general, classification based on sex is impermissible because in general, men and women are simply situated. Where that’s not true is for the sorts of real, enduring, obvious differences that this court talked about in cases like V.M.I., the differences in reproductive biology. I don’t think the pseudoscience you’re suggesting has been baked.” “Well, it’s not pseudo. It’s good science.” “It’s not pseudoscience to say boys’ brain development happens at a different stage than girls does.” “Well, with all respect, I don’t think there’s any science anywhere that is suggested that these intellectual differences are traceable to biological differences.” “Can we avoid your whole similarly situated argument that you run because I don’t really like it that much either? And I’m not trying to prejudice anyone making that argument later. But I mean, I think it opens a huge can of worms that maybe we don’t need to get into here.”

Advertisement
The Supreme Court heard two cases from West Virginia and Idaho on Tuesday. Both concerned barring the participation of transgender athletes in girls’ and women’s sports teams.

By Meg Felling

January 13, 2026

Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending