Politics
U.S. Tells Court It Plans to Deport Scientist to Russia
Government lawyers told a federal judge on Wednesday that the Trump administration intends to deport a Harvard scientist back to Russia, a country she fled in 2022, despite her fear that she will be arrested there over her protest of Russia’s war in Ukraine.
Kseniia Petrova, a researcher at Harvard Medical School, has been held in a Louisiana immigration detention facility since February, when she was detained at Boston’s airport for failing to declare scientific samples she was carrying in her luggage.
This is the first time the government has formally stated its plan to deport her to Russia.
In Wednesday’s hearing, Christina Reiss, chief judge of the United States District Court in Vermont, quizzed the government lawyers about their grounds for canceling Ms. Petrova’s visa and detaining her. Judge Reiss went on to schedule a bail hearing on May 28, potentially setting the stage for Ms. Petrova’s release.
The case has drawn the attention of elite scientists around the world, and sent a chill though the community of international academics that surrounded Ms. Petrova at Harvard. Several dozen Harvard students and faculty made the drive to Burlington, Vt., for the hearing.
“For every person that they detain, thousands of others are going to be scared of coming to the country,” said Leo Gerdén, a Harvard senior from Sweden.
Ms. Petrova was detained at Logan Airport on Feb. 16 as she returned from vacation in France, carrying with her sections of frog embryos from an affiliate laboratory, at the request of her supervisor at Harvard.
She has admitted that she failed to declare the samples, but her lawyer has argued that this would ordinarily be treated as a minor infraction, punishable with a fine. Instead, the customs official canceled Ms. Petrova’s J-1 visa on the spot and initiated deportation proceedings.
When Ms. Petrova explained that she had fled her native Russia for political reasons and could not return there, she was processed as an asylum seeker, and sent to Richwood Correctional Center in Monroe, La., where she has remained for nearly three months.
In remarks from the bench, Judge Reiss seemed skeptical that the airport customs agent had possessed the authority to cancel Ms. Petrova’s visa.
“Where is that authority?” she asked. “Where does a customs and border patrol officer have the authority on his or her own to revoke a visa?” she said. “It’s got to be somewhere. Because there is no way that person has kind of an unlimited determination.”
The judge noted that the she had reviewed the statute laying out the grounds for customs officers to find someone inadmissible to the United States, and “I don’t see anything about customs violations.”
Jeffrey M. Hartman, an attorney representing the Department of Justice, said “it’s the secretary of state’s authority” to cancel a visa, and that the secretary has delegated that authority to customs officials.
Judge Reiss asked the government to clarify whether or not it planned to deport Ms. Petrova to Russia.
“You are asking for her removal to Russia?” she asked.
“Yes, your honor,” Mr. Hartman replied.
Ms. Petrova’s attorney filed a petition challenging her detention with the federal court in February, when she was held briefly at a Vermont detention center before being transferred to the immigration detention center in Louisiana.
Mr. Hartman argued that the federal court had no jurisdiction over Ms. Petrova’s detention. He said Ms. Petrova may contest her detention, but only in a Louisiana immigration court.
“It’s not something that a district court can entertain,” he said. “We think the proper venue for that question is Louisiana, where she is detained and where her custodian is.”
“But she is only detained there because you moved her,” said the judge.
Mr. Hartman said that when Ms. Petrova had been asked whether she was carrying biological materials, that she “failed to disclose their full contents,” and was carrying “a baggie with loose vials of this experimental material.”
“The C.B.P. office was our first line of defense against unknown biological materials from a foreign national out of a port of entry,” he said.
Over the past few weeks, federal courts in Vermont have handed down a series of decisions favoring noncitizen academics caught up in President Trump’s immigration crackdown.
On May 9, Tufts doctoral student Rumeysa Ozturk was released from detention on the orders of a judge, William K. Sessions III, who said that her continued detention could chill “the speech of the millions and millions of individuals in this country who are not citizens.”
And on April 30, Judge Geoffrey W. Crawford ordered the release of Mohsen Mahdawi, a student organizer at Columbia University who was detained by immigration authorities during an interview for his naturalization. Both Ms. Ozturk and Mr. Mahdawi were singled out because they had vocally protested Israel’s military campaign in Gaza.
Ms. Petrova’s case has no apparent basis in any political activism. But the attorney general of Massachusetts, Andrea Joy Campbell, who filed an amicus brief in the case, said Ms. Petrova’s detention, like that of Ms. Ozturk, represented “reckless and cruel misuse of power to punish and terrorize noncitizen members of the academic community.”
Ms. Campbell argued that international students bring significant revenue into Massachusetts, and that by creating “an atmosphere of fear,” the Trump administration has threatened the state’s economy.
Ms. Petrova’s attorney, Gregory Romanovsky, has argued that customs officials overstepped their authority by revoking her visa.
Though Customs officials may, in some cases, determine that an individual is inadmissible, he said, they must identify the legal grounds for doing so, such as criminal activity or health concerns. He said failing to declare scientific samples did not meet that test.
“It shouldn’t make her any more inadmissible than cutting in front of the line when she was waiting to be inspected,” Mr. Romanovsky said. “What the government is doing is saying, ‘If you’re an immigrant or a noncitizen and you’re not on your best behavior, we will punish you. We are going to use various immigration provisions to get rid of you.’ ”
Adam Sychla, a postdoctoral research fellow who organized a group of roughly 20 Harvard students and faculty members who traveled from Cambridge to the courthouse in Burlington, Vt., said he had never met Ms. Petrova, but had immediately decided to make the drive.
“Whether I know her personally or not, is immaterial,” he added. “I easily could have met her last week to start a collaboration. Instead, Kseniia is being unfairly detained.”
Miles J. Herszenhorn contributed reporting from Cambridge, Mass.
Politics
Jordan grills Soros-backed DA Descano in heated spat over soft-on-crime policy: ‘This is almost laughable’
NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!
House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, tussled with high-profile Soros-backed Fairfax Commonwealth’s Attorney Stephen Descano over soft-on-crime policies that critics said let illegal immigrant criminals back on the street.
Descano was seated two spots away from Cheryl Minter, mother of Stephanie Minter, who was allegedly murdered by Sierra Leone national Abdul Jalloh at a bus stop not far from George Washington’s Mount Vernon.
Minter’s case, following several similar incidents and the failure by Descano or fellow witness Fairfax County Sheriff Stacey Ann Kincaid to honor ICE detainers, spurred lawmakers to haul them across the river to testify about the rapidly deteriorating safety of what the prosecutor called one of America’s safest counties.
Jordan began by pressing Kincaid on why she “let” illegal immigrant suspect Marvin Morales-Ortiz out of her jail: “Because the guy beside you wouldn’t prosecute him, right?”
HOUSE PANEL SUMMONS SOROS-BACKED FAIRFAX PROSECUTOR OVER RELEASES TIED TO VIOLENT ILLEGAL IMMIGRANT CASES
Fairfax County Commonwealth’s Attorney Steve Descano speaks at an event in Fairfax County, Va. (Sarah Voisin/Getty Images)
“You’d have to talk to him,” Kincaid replied, adding a judge later ordered his release, before bristling at Jordan’s follow-up question about law enforcement morale in Fairfax.
Jordan then turned to Descano, questioning changes to language on his website about considering immigration consequences in charging decisions.
Descano said the excerpt was part of a “campaign” statement and not an actual law enforcement policy, leading Jordan to incredulously ask whether people should believe his campaign statements will translate into policies upon election.
“That’s not what I’m saying,” Descano countered.
“This is almost laughable,” said Jordan. “This is your policy. You said it right here. You told the voters, if you elect me, I will take into account immigration consequences when making, charging and pleading [decisions].”
Descano’s exchange with next Republican to ask questions, Rep. Jeff Van Drew of South Jersey, also quickly escalated into near-shouting.
WAVE OF ALLEGED MIGRANT MURDERS IGNITES FURY ACROSS US AS OFFICIALS WARN OF MORE CARNAGE, CRACKDOWN NEEDED
Van Drew criticized sanctuary policies, including in his home Garden State, and told Minter that his own condolences could not do justice to what happened to her daughter in Descano’s territory.
He called the conditions in sanctuary jurisdictions “bizarro world” and asked the prosecutor if communities are safer when illegal immigrant criminals are deported or when they are released.
“Well, sir, that’s not –” Descano began before Van Drew cut him off. “Yes or no – I’m asking the questions.”
“You’re a human being. You’re sitting next to a woman who lost her daughter. Can you tell me if illegal criminals are removed from the country; if we’re safer,” Van Drew said, prompting a fiery response from Descano:
“To suggest I don’t care about what happens in my community…” he began before more crosstalk ensued.
“Dammit, answer my question,” Van Drew eventually fumed.
GRIEVING VIRGINIA MOTHER TELLS FAR-LEFT PROSECUTOR ‘DO YOUR JOB’ AFTER DAUGHTER STABBED TO DEATH
“Explain to the lady next to you (Cheryl Minter). Abdul Jalloh was charged in your county more than 40 times. Not four times. 40 times. Your office dropped the charges in almost every single case. That’s fact. We have it documented. We can look at it your own. Fairfax County Police Department wrote your office [in] May 2025 saying he had shown a, quote, ‘blatant disregard for human life and was a danger to the community’ and that if he wasn’t detained and deported, he would seriously hurt someone or kill someone,” Van Drew said.
“The very man went out and then killed someone. So the question is, couldn’t’ve we done better there?”
Another panelist also elicited occasional rifts with the lawmakers. Libertarian analyst David Bier of the Cato Institute often defended the idea of counties making their own decisions about whether to cooperate with federal law enforcement.
Part of Bier’s opening statement drew some eyebrows on X, as he appeared to suggest as much as 20% of Fairfax County’s population is deportable – when trying to argue against mass deportation.
CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP
“The first step would be to give up on the mass deportation fantasy. About 1 in 5 Fairfax residents is someone who could be deported or who lives with them. It would destroy neighborhoods, rip Americans away from their spouses, parents, friends, families, customers, employees, employers, nurses, nannies, and teachers,” Bier said.
Bier also accused DHS of ignoring the Laken Riley Act and instead of “racially profiling Americans at Home Depot” and shooting people like Alex Pretti and Renee Good.
SACRAMENTO — Hours before Gov. Gavin Newsom is expected to present his budget plan on Thursday, his office released new projections of a $16.5-billion state revenue windfall over three years and offered a rosy outlook on California’s fiscal position during his final year in office and the year after.
Newsom’s office provided few details about his plan to reduce spending or other adjustments that he would need to propose in combination with the increase in revenue to eliminate projected deficits from 2026-27 through 2027-28.
The unusual early look at his budget proposal comes as Newsom begins to wind down his time at the state Capitol and considers a run for president in 2028.
Two weeks ago, the Legislative Analyst’s Office issued an analysis of state spending that said California could not, in the long term, afford to pay for existing services and the new programs that Newsom and Democratic lawmakers have enacted since he took office in 2019. State spending has outpaced California’s strong revenue growth by about 10%, creating a perennial budget shortfall, defined as a structural deficit.
California’s spending problem threatens to define Newsom’s fiscal legacy and could provide ripe fodder for his critics. If projections of the unexpected tax windfall, which analysts attribute to stock market interest in artificial intelligence companies, bear out, the upswing could mark a lucky break for Newsom.
The governor has largely resisted adopting new across-the-board tax increases or sharply curtailing his expensive policy proposals in order to align state spending with revenue.
His budget proposal includes a call to increase taxes on corporations by limiting state tax credits to no more than $5 million, or 50% of a company’s tax liability, beginning in the tax year 2027. No estimates were offered to explain how much revenue the new cap would bring in to support the state budget.
The preview of his budget has several new spending proposals, including providing $300 million to help low-income Californians keep $0 monthly premiums on healthcare coverage through the Affordable Care Act in response to cuts by the federal government, as well as $100 million to help wildfire victims afford construction loans to rebuild their homes. Two days before Mother’s Day, Newsom also introduced a plan to provide 400 free diapers for every California newborn at select hospitals beginning this summer.
Newsom is expected to present his budget in more detail late Thursday morning in Sacramento.
Denise Powell, a political organizer, won the Democratic primary election in a key Nebraska House district, according to The Associated Press.
She will face Brinker Harding, a Republican city councilman, in the general election, a pivotal contest in a battleground district that comes as Democrats try to recapture control of Congress this fall.
Representative Don Bacon, the Republican incumbent in the district and a frequent critic of President Trump, chose not to run for re-election, setting up a high-profile clash for an open seat in Omaha.
Ms. Powell narrowly triumphed in a competitive Democratic primary that centered on an unusual argument: that electing her chief rival, State Senator John Cavanaugh, could make it easier for Republicans to win the White House in 2028.
The argument stemmed from the way Nebraska allocates its electoral votes in presidential elections. Most states follow a winner-take-all approach, but Nebraska gives just two of its votes to the statewide winner, then gives one to the winner of each of its three congressional districts. In recent elections, the Omaha-area district has typically gone blue in presidential contests and awarded its electoral vote accordingly, even as the two other Nebraska congressional districts typically went to the Republican candidate.
That could make a difference in a close presidential contest.
State Republicans have tried to repeal the so-called blue dot system — named for the blue, liberal dot Omaha represents in a sea of Republican red — but Democrats in the State Legislature have been able to block that effort.
Mr. Cavanaugh’s opponents argued that if he won the House primary and left the State Senate, it would mean one fewer vote to keep the blue dot. Mr. Cavanaugh argued that the system was safe, and that Democrats were likely to be elected in other State Senate seats to compensate for his departure.
The argument may have been enough to help Ms. Powell to victory. A super PAC with ties to Republicans also spent against Mr. Cavanaugh.
-
Health4 minutes agoWill Her Daughter Be Safe at Pali High as It Rebuilds From LA Wildfires?
-
Culture16 minutes agoJudith Barnard, of Best-Selling ‘Judith Michael’ Fame, Dies at 94
-
Lifestyle22 minutes agoThe Family Branding of Sean Duffy’s Road Trip Reality Show
-
Education28 minutes agoUniversity of Chicago Makes Tuition Free for Families Making Under $250,000
-
Technology34 minutes agoUse this map to find the data centers in your backyard
-
World40 minutes agoNon-Jewish professor says he was fired for calling out Hamas supporters in online post
-
Politics46 minutes agoJordan grills Soros-backed DA Descano in heated spat over soft-on-crime policy: ‘This is almost laughable’
-
Health52 minutes agoExperimental obesity drug outperforms traditional weight-loss treatments in early research