Politics
Biden administration wants to speed up deportation for some migrants. How will it work?
The Biden administration proposed a rule Thursday aimed at speeding up the deportation process for migrants who are already ineligible for asylum.
The change isn’t expected to have broad implications, but rather tighten existing rules. It comes as the White House and Democrats play offense on the border and immigration, one of the top issues ahead of the presidential election.
“The proposed rule we have published today is yet another step in our ongoing efforts to ensure the safety of the American public by more quickly identifying and removing those individuals who present a security risk and have no legal basis to remain here,” said Secretary of Homeland Security Alejandro Mayorkas. “We will continue to take action, but fundamentally it is only Congress that can fix what everyone agrees is a broken immigration system.”
What would the new rule do?
Significant immigration court backlogs mean it can take years before migrants who cross the border without authorization are determined to be ineligible for asylum. The new rule would allow asylum officers to make that determination within days.
The rule would move up checks for mandatory bars to asylum, such as criminal history or terrorism links, to the initial stage of the process, allowing immigration officers to quickly reject and deport those who don’t qualify. It would not restrict more people from applying for asylum.
Migrants who intend to apply for asylum must first pass so-called credible fear interviews, which allows them to later make their case before an immigration judge. The regulation would allow asylum officers to check for public safety or national security risks during the credible fear screening.
A senior DHS official who spoke to reporters Thursday on the condition that he not be named said the agency is updating procedures to ensure available information, including information that is classified, is shared as early as possible in the immigration process. The rule allows the agency to save taxpayer money because those who are subject to asylum bars are detained throughout the lengthy immigration court process, the official added.
In 2020, the Trump administration implemented a rule similarly instructing asylum officers to apply asylum bars during credible fear screenings. That rule was blocked by a U.S. District Court in California.
But the Biden administration says this rule is different because it doesn’t require asylum officers to consider bars in all interviews. Instead, asylum officers “would only consider a bar in those cases where there is easily verifiable evidence available” and the officer “is confident that they can consider that bar efficiently at the credible fear stage,” the proposed rule states.
How many people could be affected?
The number of migrants subject to the bars is low, according to the proposed rule. For this fiscal year through April 23, federal records indicate that asylum officers flagged a potential bar in 733 cases. Last fiscal year, asylum officers flagged 1,497 such cases — 3% of all positive credible fear determinations.
When does it take effect?
Proposed rules can take months to finalize, and must go through a public comment period before implementation. That could make for a close timeline before the November election.
The DHS official said the agency will accept comments for 30 days starting May 13 and expects to issue the rule fairly quickly after that.
How are people reacting?
Immigrant rights advocates swiftly condemned the move, saying the change could slow down and weaken the credible fear process. But the DHS official said the rule won’t meaningfully increase the time it takes to interview someone.
Eleanor Acer, senior director for refugee protection at Human Rights First, said the rule would deny asylum hearings to people who could be eligible for protection.
“It is both unrealistic and unconscionable to subject people seeking refuge to legally and factually complex bars to asylum during initial fear screenings where they are not likely to be represented by legal counsel,” she wrote in a statement. “Some of the bars included in the proposed rule have long baffled legal experts and government lawyers, and ensnared people who are innocent of any wrongdoing.”
Meanwhile Rep. Mark Green (R-Tenn.), chair of the House Committee on Homeland Security, said in a statement that the rule doesn’t go far enough to properly vet migrants.
“This rule appears to be an unserious, politically motivated attempt to address a significant problem the Biden administration itself created,” Green wrote.
What else has the Biden administration done to curb border crossings?
Last year, the administration began disqualifying migrants from asylum if they enter the U.S. illegally without first requesting humanitarian protection in another country, such as Mexico, along the way. This effectively blocks most people from accessing asylum if they cross unlawfully.
At the same time, the administration expanded a phone app, CBP One, that lets migrants in Mexico schedule a time to be processed at official ports of entry. Officials also expanded a program that allows migrants from certain countries, such as Venezuela, fly directly to the U.S. if they have a sponsor.
On Wednesday, advocacy groups sued the federal government for records about its policies and practices related to the mobile app, calling it a barrier to asylum because of frequent glitches and months-long waits for an appointment.
What more is the administration considering?
The new asylum rule comes as the administration mulls how else to cut down on illegal border crossings ahead of the election.
Biden said in a Univision interview last month that he is considering whether to invoke a sweeping presidential authority to more broadly restrict asylum without congressional authorization. The action would employ a section of the Immigration and Nationality Act called 212(f), which allows presidents to suspend entry of migrants when deemed detrimental to national interests.
Former President Trump used that authority to justify restrictions including travel bans against people from predominantly Muslim countries.
Politics
Video: Kennedy Center Board Votes to Add Trump to Its Name
new video loaded: Kennedy Center Board Votes to Add Trump to Its Name
transcript
transcript
Kennedy Center Board Votes to Add Trump to Its Name
President Trump’s handpicked board of trustees announced that the John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts would be renamed the Trump-Kennedy Center, a change that may need Congress’s approval.
-
Reporter: “She just posted on X, your press secretary, [Karoline Leavitt,] that the board members of the Kennedy Center voted unanimously to rename it the Trump-Kennedy Center. What is your reaction to that?” “Well, I was honored by it. The board is a very distinguished board, most distinguished people in the country, and I was surprised by it. I was honored by it.” “Thank you very much, everybody. And I’ll tell you what: the Trump-Kennedy Center, I mean —” [laughs] “Kennedy Center — I’m sorry. I’m sorry.” [cheers] “Wow, this is terribly embarrassing.” “They don’t have the power to do it. Only Congress can rename the Kennedy Center. How does that actually help the American people, who’ve already been convinced that Donald Trump is not focused on making their life better? The whole thing is extraordinary.”
By Axel Boada
December 19, 2025
Politics
Judge tosses Trump-linked lawsuit targeting Chief Justice Roberts, dealing setback to Trump allies
NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!
A federal judge on Thursday dismissed a lawsuit filed by a pro-Trump legal group seeking access to a trove of federal judiciary documents, including from a body overseen by Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts – putting an end to a protracted legal fight brought by Trump allies seeking to access key judicial documents.
U.S. District Judge Trevor McFadden, a Trump appointee assigned to the case earlier this year, dismissed the long-shot lawsuit brought by the America First Legal Foundation, the pro-Trump group founded by White House policy adviser Stephen Miller after Trump’s first term; Miller, now back in the White House, is no longer affiliated with AFL.
McFadden ultimately dismissed the case for lack of jurisdiction, saying Thursday that two groups responsible for certain regulatory and administrative functions for the federal judiciary are an extension of the judicial branch, and therefore protected by the same exemptions to federal laws granted to the judiciary.
“Nothing about either entity’s structure suggests the president must supervise their employees or otherwise keep them ‘accountable,’ as is the case for executive officers,” McFadden said.
TRUMP’S EXECUTIVE ORDER ON VOTING BLOCKED BY FEDERAL JUDGES AMID FLURRY OF LEGAL SETBACKS
Supreme Court Justices Samuel Alito, Clarence Thomas, Brett M. Kavanaugh, Amy Coney Barrett, Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts and Justices Elena Kagan and Sonia Sotomayor are seen at the 60th inaugural ceremony on Jan. 20, 2025 in Washington, D.C. (Ricky Carioti /The Washington Post via Getty Images)
Politics
Contributor: Who can afford Trump’s economy? Americans are feeling Grinchy
The holidays have arrived once again. You know, that annual festival of goodwill, compulsory spending and the dawning realization that Santa and Satan are anagrams.
Even in the best of years, Americans stagger through this season feeling financially woozy. This year, however, the picture is bleaker. And a growing number of Americans are feeling Grinchy.
Unemployment is at a four-year high, with Heather Long, chief economist at Navy Federal Credit Union, declaring, “The U.S. economy is in a hiring recession.” And a new PBS News/NPR/Marist poll finds that 70% of Americans say “the cost of living in the area where they live is not very affordable or not affordable at all.”
Is help on the way? Not likely. Affordable Care Act subsidies are expiring, and — despite efforts to force a vote in the House — it’s highly likely that nothing will be done about this before the end of the year. This translates to ballooning health insurance bills for millions of Americans. I will be among those hit with a higher monthly premium, which gives me standing to complain.
President Trump, meanwhile, remains firmly committed to policies that will exacerbate the rising cost of getting by. Trump’s tariffs — unless blocked by the Supreme Court — will continue to raise prices. And when it comes to his immigration crackdown, Trump is apparently unmoved by the tiresome fact that when you “disappear” workers, prices tend to go up.
Taken together, the Trump agenda amounts to an ambitious effort to raise the cost of living without the benefit of improved living standards. But if your money comes from crypto or Wall Street investments, you’re doing better than ever!
For the rest of us, the only good news is this: Unlike every other Trump scandal, most voters actually seem to care about what’s happening to their pocketbooks.
Politico recently found that erstwhile Trump voters backed Democrats in the 2025 governor’s races in New Jersey and Virginia for the simple reason that things cost too much.
And Axios reports on a North Carolina focus group in which “11 of the 14 participants, all of whom backed Trump last November, said they now disapprove of his job performance. And 12 of the 14 say they’re more worried about the economy now than they were in January.”
Apparently, inflation is the ultimate reality check — which is horrible news for Republicans.
Trump’s great talent has always been the audacity to employ a “fake it ‘till you make it” con act to project just enough certainty to persuade the rest of us.
His latest (attempted) Jedi mind trick involves claiming prices are “coming down tremendously,” which is not supported by data or the lived experience of anyone who shops.
He also says inflation is “essentially gone,” which is true only if you define “gone” as “slowed its increase.”
Trump may dismiss the affordability crisis as a “hoax” and a “con job,” but voters persist in believing the grocery scanner.
In response, Trump has taken to warning us that falling prices could cause “deflation,” which he now says is even worse than inflation. He’s not wrong about the economic theory, but it hardly seems worth worrying about given that prices are not falling.
Apparently, economic subtlety is something you acquire only after winning the White House.
Naturally, Trump wants to blame Joe Biden, the guy who staggered out of office 11 months ago. And yes, pandemic disruptions and massive stimulus spending helped fuel inflation. But voters elected Trump to fix the problem, which he promised to do “on Day One.”
Lacking tangible results, Trump is reverting to what has always worked for him: the assumption that — if he confidently repeats it enough times — his version of reality will triumph over math.
The difficulty now is that positive thinking doesn’t swipe at the register.
You can lie about the size of your inauguration crowd — no normal person can measure it and nobody cares. But you cannot tell people standing in line at the grocery store that prices are falling when they are actively handing over more money.
Pretending everything is fine goes over even worse when a billionaire president throws Gatsby-themed parties, renovates the Lincoln Bedroom and builds a huge new ballroom at the White House. The optics are horrible, and there’s no doubt they are helping fuel the political backlash.
But the main problem is the main problem.
At the end of the day, the one thing voters really care about is their pocketbooks. No amount of spin or “manifesting” an alternate reality will change that.
Matt K. Lewis is the author of “Filthy Rich Politicians” and “Too Dumb to Fail.”
-
Iowa4 days agoAddy Brown motivated to step up in Audi Crooks’ absence vs. UNI
-
Iowa6 days agoHow much snow did Iowa get? See Iowa’s latest snowfall totals
-
Maine3 days agoElementary-aged student killed in school bus crash in southern Maine
-
Maryland4 days agoFrigid temperatures to start the week in Maryland
-
Technology1 week agoThe Game Awards are losing their luster
-
South Dakota5 days agoNature: Snow in South Dakota
-
Nebraska1 week agoNebraska lands commitment from DL Jayden Travers adding to early Top 5 recruiting class
-
World1 week agoCoalition of the Willing calls for transatlantic unity for Ukraine