House Democrats are raising concerns about how race and jury selection may have impacted the guilty verdict in the Karmelo Anthony case, with several arguing the verdict highlights the racism they believe exists in the criminal justice system.

“A travesty, two lives ruined, and what struck me most is that you had an all-white jury,” Rep. Christian Menefee, D-Texas, said when asked his thoughts on the guilty verdict. “You had preemptive strikes that were used in order to achieve an all white jury.”

After Anthony was sentenced to 35 years in prison on Tuesday for the stabbing and killing of 17-year-old Austin Metcalf at a high school track event, many activists and Democratic lawmakers have claimed the trial to be unfair and racist. 

KARMELO ANTHONY VERDICT DRAWS ANTI-WHITE RAGE AND LIES FROM RADICAL DEM CONGRESSWOMAN, ANGRY ACTIVISTS

Many are claiming the jurors were all white, and that this contributed to the rejection of Anthony’s self-defense claim.

“Juries should represent the diversity of this country, and if a white kid was convicted of murder and it was an all-black jury that did the conviction, people would say this is patently unfair,” Menefee said. “So why should it be fair if it’s the other way around?”

But sources close to the trial told Fox News Digital that there were three jurors who were racial minorities. They said that of the 18 total jurors, including alternates, six were minorities. Additionally, four Black men testified in defense of Metcalf, saying Anthony was not provoked in any way to justify stabbing the 17-year-old.

SELF-DEFENSE CLAIM IN AUSTIN METCALF SLAYING IS ‘UPHILL BATTLE’: EXPERT

Supporters of Anthony claim that he stabbed Metcalf as an act of self defense, arguing he did not receive a fair trial. Some activists and Democratic lawmakers have called for further review of the case and urged Anthony to pursue an appeal.

“Here is a case where a young man certainly appears to have been being attacked and defended himself,” Rep. Troy Carter, D-La., said about the case.

“It does bring in light the imbalance in our judicial system, as it relates to African Americans and people of color” Carter continued. “And that’s a shame. So hopefully, there’ll be an opportunity for some appeal and some further discussion.”

“Case after case, after case you see that if it is a young black person, they’re not allowed to be fearful, they’re not allowed self-defense, they don’t get the same standard ground opportunities that other people get,” Menefee said. “But then other races do.”

AUSTIN METCALF’S DAD EXPRESSES EMPATHY FOR KARMELO ANTHONY AS KILLER’S PARENTS SAY ‘THEY DID A NUMBER ON US’

Some lawmakers were less likely to directly blame the trial as unfair due to race, but were still sympathetic toward Anthony and were not blatantly opposed to the idea of looking further into the evidence in the case despite a verdict already being made.

“We’ve got to stop this loss and the killing of these young children, number one,” Rep. Jonathan Jackson, D-Ill., said. “First of all, they need to reopen it and all the evidence needs to come forward.”

“I think it’s an unfortunate circumstance all the way around,” Rep. Shomari Figures, D-Ala., said.

He continued, “You have one young man who was killed. His family will never get to be with him again. You have another young man who, for all intents and purposes, thrown a lot of years of his life. A lot of the years of this life. If he does 35 years, he’ll be 50 — in his 50s — when he gets out. And it’s just totally unfortunate.”

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

Throughout their criticism of the verdict, several lawmakers framed the case as part of a larger debate over race, self-defense claims and equal treatment for minorities under the law.

“The American justice system does not work equally for everybody,” Menefee said.

A federal judge on Friday indefinitely blocked the Trump administration’s $1.776 billion Anti-Weaponization Fund, even as another federal judge earlier this week declined to intervene after the Justice Department said the fund was no longer moving forward.

The court disputes have heightened pressure on the administration to formally dismantle the fund. While Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche told Congress the fund would not move forward, the settlement agreement and departmental directives that created the fund have not been formally rescinded. Critics argue this leaves open the possibility that the fund could still proceed in the future.

U.S. District Judge Leonie Brinkema, a Clinton-appointed judge, extended a court order Friday preventing implementation of the fund, concluding that public assurances from administration officials were insufficient to eliminate concerns that it could later be revived.

Brinkema noted how Trump, “says he’s disappointed that something is not going forward,” suggesting this was evidence that the fund may “rear its head” at some point in the future.

JUDGE TEMPORARILY BLOCKS TRUMP DOJ’S NEARLY $2B ‘ANTI-WEAPONIZATION’ FUND

Over the weekend Trump shared on “Meet the Press” that he’d like to continue with the fund.

“If it was up to me, I’d pay them the kind of money that they deserve. People have been destroyed. Lives have been destroyed,” Trump said.

Brinkema gave the Justice Department a week to put in writing that the Anti-Weaponization Fund is being terminated and will not be reinstated.

The ruling comes days after U.S. District Judge Richard Leon rejected a separate request from Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW) seeking emergency intervention, saying he was willing to rely on Justice Department representations that the fund had effectively been abandoned.

ACTING AG BLANCHE REVEALS FATE OF TRUMP’S ‘ANTI-WEAPONIZATION FUND’ UNDER PRESSURE FROM HOUSE LAWMAKERS

But Leon, a George W. Bush-appointed judge, simultaneously warned administration officials not to treat his decision as permission to revive the program.

“I give the Justice Department this warning: Don’t play possum with me,” Leon said from the bench.

Blanche announced during a hearing earlier this month that the Anti-Weaponization Fund, which was born out of President Donald Trump’s lawsuit settlement with the IRS, would not be proceeding. The fund was intended to compensate alleged victims of government “lawfare,” but its creation sparked immediate backlash from Democrats, who characterized it as a “slush fund” that could ultimately benefit Trump’s political allies and individuals charged in the Jan. 6 Capitol riot.

TRUMP ADMIN PUSHES BACK ON ‘SLUSH FUND’ ATTACKS AGAINST ANTI-WEAPONIZATION FUND AND LAYS OUT WHO QUALIFIES

Justice Department attorney Andrew Block argued before Leon that Blanche’s congressional testimony effectively mooted CREW’s challenge because the government had publicly committed not to move forward.

Leon repeatedly questioned why Blanche has not formally rescinded a May 18 order that established procedures for the fund in the first place, a question Block could not answer.

CREW attorney Nikhel Sus argued the settlement agreement that established the fund remains legally operative and contains upcoming deadlines requiring action.

WAY HARDER THAN IT SHOULD BE: WHY CONGRESS MAY BALK ON $1.7B COMPENSATION FUND

According to Sus, a five-member board overseeing the fund must be established by June 17, while funding transfers are scheduled by July 17.

“On paper, the fund is still a legally operating entity,” Sus argued.

However, Leon ultimately accepted the government’s assurances for now that the fund is moot, but he noted that he can sanction attorneys who make false representations to the court.

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

He also indicated he will continue considering CREW’s request for a preliminary injunction and suggested he could intervene if evidence emerges that the administration is attempting to revive the fund.

WASHINGTON — A year after the Trump administration kicked off its aggressive immigration enforcement tour with military-style raids across greater Los Angeles, federal officials have veered toward a less flashy but broader strategy: making immigrants’ lives harder so they will leave.

The changes range in scale and scope, from disqualifying immigrants from certain jobs to indefinitely pausing the processing of visa applications. They target those lawfully present as well as the undocumented.

Since President Trump’s second term began, the administration has used executive orders and federal regulations to chip away at services or benefits, such as work permits and small business loans, that immigrants could obtain in the past.

Now, immigrants are finding that freedoms — the ones that once made the U.S. a desirable place to start over — are disappearing. Many are retreating back into the shadows as they fear previously routine tasks, such as traveling across states, filing taxes and seeking medical care.

“The priority is to force people to leave the country or not come, regardless of legal status or really any other criteria,” said David Bier, immigration studies director at the Libertarian think tank the Cato Institute. “They’re taking a sledgehammer to the system.”

Trump won the White House in part on his promise to clamp down on illegal immigration, but recent polling shows support for his agenda has waned, especially after immigration agents shot and killed two U.S. citizens in Minneapolis.

In a statement, White House spokesperson Abigail Jackson said Trump’s highest priority has always been the deportation of immigrants with criminal records. The Department of Homeland Security said Trump also prioritizes immigration that strengthens the country financially, socially and culturally.

The number of arrests by ICE agents has declined. On average, ICE arrested about 1,000 immigrants per day in early March, down from a peak average of just under 1,400 in mid-January, agency data show. And there are fewer detained immigrants — facilities across the country held about 60,000 detainees in April, compared to more than 70,000 in late January.

The downturns prompted some Trump loyalists to say the administration is failing to fulfill his signature promise, which is an assertion the administration rejects.

“ICE is NOT slowing down,” said Homeland Security spokesperson Lauren Bis. “Since Day One, DHS law enforcement has been delivering on President Trump’s promise to the American people to arrest and deport criminal illegal aliens.”

At a border security conference last month, Tom Homan, who leads border policy for the White House, suggested immigration agents would return to more muscular enforcement tactics.

“You ain’t seen s— yet,” he told the audience.

But along with focusing on deportations, the administration is deploying other tactics to deter illegal — and legal —immigration.

ICE agents confront protesters on June 8 as they gather outside the federal immigration center at Delaney Hall in Newark, New Jersey, where ICE is housing detained immigrants.

(Spencer Platt / Getty Images)

Curtailing visas

Last month, the Department of Homeland Security announced that “except in extraordinary circumstances,” immigrants seeking lawful permanent residency must leave the U.S. to complete the process. After a backlash, the administration defended the policy, saying it won’t prevent anyone who qualifies for a green card from getting one.

U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, the agency in charge of processing immigration benefits, has upped security screening since Trump took office. The agency says that’s to root out fraud, but critics say all it does is unnecessarily slow down a system that already vets applicants vigorously.

The administration indefinitely banned people from 75 countries from receiving immigrant visas, which allow people to move permanently to the U.S.

In a similar move, the government halted the processing of immigration applications for people from 39 countries and who are already in the U.S. On June 5, a federal judge struck down the policy in a scathing ruling that said the administration “justifies its actions with pretextual concerns of ‘national security’ that mask anti-immigrant sentiments.”

Children of Guatemalan origin, from left, Areimy, Mariela and Enrique, arrive at Miami International Airport on Dec. 4, 2025, as they prepare to leave the United States to reunite with their recently deported parents in Guatemala.

(Chandan Khanna / AFP via Getty Images)

The judge’s ruling may offer relief, but for many immigrants, the effects of the policy are devastating. Armin, a 42-year-old from Iran, said he has racked up more than $15,000 in debt since the pause took effect in December. Armin asked The Times not to fully identify for fear of jeopardizing his immigration case.

The nutritional scientist came to the U.S. in 2019 on a student visa and has a pending green card application under a provision that allows certain highly skilled immigrants to apply for permanent residency without needing an employer to sponsor them.

After receiving his PhD and completing a postdoctoral program, Armin was in between jobs when he received a research grant in November. But with the processing of his work authorization halted, the university that issued the grant said it couldn’t hire him as a research associate. In February, he was turned down for another job.

Armin said he is confused about why the administration won’t differentiate between legal immigrants and those who should be deported.

“I can’t believe it,” he said. “I’m doing research and my research has national interest benefits. You expect support from the government. Unfortunately they don’t differentiate. They don’t care about your resume.”

Bier said the visa policies affect half of all legal immigrants coming from abroad. He published a report in April about how Trump has cut legal immigration far more than illegal immigration, noting that the administration’s policies have led to big drops in visas for international students, high-skilled workers and refugees.

“The legal immigration system is being used as a means to carry out the mass deportation agenda,” he said.

Alessandro Negrete, who lived most of his life in the U.S. undocumented, crosses into Mexico after deciding to leave.

(Robert Gauthier / Los Angeles Times)

Encouraging self-deportation

More than 90,000 immigrants have been granted voluntary departure since the start of the Trump administration, according to federal immigration court data through April that was analyzed by TRAC, a data research organization. Voluntary departure avoids official deportation and can leave open the possibility of an immigrant returning to the U.S. legally.

Homan, who declined to be interviewed for this story, has said self-deportations were part of the administration’s immigration plan all along.

“We knew if we surged unlimited ICE resources in the interior, and we do these operations, that that will force those that are here illegally to leave on their own,” he recently told the Washington Examiner.

Halting work permits

In the past, asylum seekers and others with deportation protections have had the ability to seek permits to work legally in the U.S. But work is now an administration target.

One proposed regulation would prevent asylum seekers from working legally in the U.S. Another proposal, published Friday, would further restrict access to work permits for other immigrants.

Under a rule that took effect last month, asylum seekers pay an annual $102 fee within 30 days of receiving a notice from U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services. If the deadline is missed, their applications will be rejected — with no opportunity to appeal — and they could be placed in deportation proceedings. Those who apply for asylum with the agency have entered the U.S. legally, such as on a visa, and are not undocumented.

Asylum seekers rest at a Tijuana migrant shelter a day after President Trump began his second term in the White House.

(Robert Gauthier/Los Angeles Times)

Advertisement

Conchita Cruz, co-executive director of the Asylum Seeker Advocacy Project, said many asylum applicants have not received notice that the fee is due.

Cruz said she believes the Trump administration is using these changes as an excuse to dismiss people’s asylum claims. While the president has the power to decide whether to offer or rescind humanitarian programs, such as Temporary Protected Status, the right to seek asylum is enshrined in law.

“We’re worried this is a pretext for people to fall out of the asylum system and fall out of the workforce,” she said.

The processing of work permits has already been slowed, leaving many immigrants who still qualify for employment authorization unable to work.

During a House Homeland Security Committee hearing last week, Rep. Lou Correa (D-Santa Ana) asked Homeland Security Secretary Markwayne Mullin to help him speed up the work permit renewals for two police officers who were recently fired by agencies in his district because their DACA status expired.

Mullin said he would help but that Congress ultimately must pass a permanent solution for DACA recipients.

“These are police officers on Main Street, sir,” Correa responded.

“Not all of them are,” Mullin said. “I’m not just going to wave a magic wand and fix them all.”

“You have that magic wand — that’s your job,” Correa said.

It wasn’t just Democrats complaining about slow processing. Rep. Gabe Evans (R-Colo.) similarly asked Mullin for help because many of his constituents — “farm workers, youth ministers, nurses, grocery store business managers” — who have lived and worked in the U.S. legally for decades are now having trouble renewing their visas.

Secretary of Homeland Security Markwayne Mullin, left, and President Trump, center, walk to the motorcade after exiting Air Force One at Joint Base Andrews, Maryland, on May 20.

(Kent Nishimura / AFP via Getty Images)

Calls for mass deportations

Mullin, who took the reins in March after Trump fired his predecessor, Kristi Noem, rolled back some of Noem’s policies, including telling agents to stop entering homes without judicial warrants and canceling some contracts she had initiated.

But the changes and the downturn in arrests have drawn criticism from some fervent Trump supporters.

“Trump’s legacy is tied up in this,” said Mike Howell, a former DHS attorney who founded a group called the Mass Deportation Coalition. “It’s going to be hard to tell a younger voter to get excited to show up when one of their top issues is mass deportation and, a year and a half in, it doesn’t appear it’s going full-steam ahead.”

Howell said enforcement at work sites is critical to scaling up arrests and deportations. That more such operations haven’t happened, he said, is a political decision to appease wealthy donors and special interest groups who don’t want to see their workers deported.

The architect of Trump’s immigration agenda is Stephen Miller, a top White House aid who has called for a “moratorium on immigration from third-world countries,” demanded 3,000 arrests per day and said that immigrants and their descendants “recreate the conditions, and the terrors, of their broken homelands.”

Royce Bernstein Murray, a former Homeland Security official who worked on immigration policy under the Biden administration, said the winding down of flashy enforcement surges has given the administration more time to “focus on tearing down the legal immigration system.”

“This is Stephen Miller’s sweet spot,” she said. “He was never in enforcement — he’s a policy guy. This is really an opportunity for him to make good on all he has planned for years.”

While ICE has, in recent months, returned to its more conventional targeted enforcement tactics, Homan has sought to make clear that mass deportations are still a goal.

“For the people out there saying ‘President Trump’s getting weak on mass deportation,’ you don’t know what the hell you’re talking about,” Homan said at the border expo.

On Monday, Homan told Fox News that he had just reviewed plans for an ICE operation that would surge agents to New York City.