Connect with us

Politics

San Diego is now the top border region for migrant arrivals

Published

on

San Diego is now the top border region for migrant arrivals

For the first time in decades, San Diego has become the top region along the southern border for migrant arrivals.

Migrant arrests in San Diego reached 8,989 for the week ending April 16, according to figures the agency posted on X. Meanwhile, Tucson — which previously had been the top region for crossings — had 7,500 arrests for the week ending April 19.

The numbers appear to be growing. San Diego Chief Border Patrol Agent Patricia McGurk-Daniel wrote on X that 9,513 migrants were arrested as of Tuesday, a 36% increase from two weeks prior.

San Diego hasn’t been the top region for migrant arrests since at least October 1999, according to monthly agency figures. The last full year San Diego was the top region was 1997.

Advertisement

The shift is significant, said Adam Isacson, director for defense oversight at the Washington Office on Latin America, a research and advocacy organization.

It reflects changes in smuggling routes, which were consistent for many years but have begun to shift every few months since 2021, in part because of the post-pandemic increase in global migration to the U.S.

According to yearly agency data, San Diego saw the highest numbers of migrants from 1973 to 1997, then Tucson took the top spot until 2012.

The Rio Grande Valley in Texas saw the most migrants starting in 2013, and monthly agency figures dating back to 2020 show that trend continued until May 2022, except for a month when Del Rio had the highest numbers.

Since then, different regions along the border have received the most migrant arrivals every few months — Del Rio, then El Paso, then Rio Grande, then Tucson. If weekly trends continue, San Diego could become the fifth.

Advertisement

People who crossed the US/Mexico border are held at a border patrol processing center located below the Eagle Pass International Bridge.

(Robert Gauthier/Los Angeles Times)

Isacson said smugglers used to tell migrants where to cross, based on relations with organized crime and corrupt officials. But that seems to be changing, he said.

The shift also has to do with the increase in cellphone usage among migrants, Isacson said. He said migrants get information from “TikTok and WhatsApp and what you hear in shelters along the way, what other migrants tell you on the road.”

Advertisement

“They’re getting news in a way that you couldn’t really get it before,” he said.

Texas’ share of arrests is the lowest it has been since October 2019, Isacson said. That’s in part because the government of Mexico has upped enforcement against migrants traveling atop freight trains through the country up toward Texas.

Mexican officials have a harder time disrupting migration to Baja California, said a senior Customs and Border Protection official who asked for anonymity to speak freely.

That’s because unlike many border towns across Texas, Tijuana is a prominent metropolitan area. Migrants use legitimate travel means to get there — some come by bus, others fly direct if Mexico doesn’t require a visa for people from their country of origin.

Crossings tend to take place inland, where it’s harder for Border Patrol to quickly respond.

Advertisement

The Department of Homeland Security — which oversees the border protection agency — is working to revoke visas or impose visa sanctions for charter transport companies involved in moving people toward the border, the official said.

The agency expects the trend to hold for weeks and is shifting personnel and other resources to the region in response, the official said. Some migrants are also being transferred to other regions that are seeing fewer arrivals and have more processing capacity.

The Biden administration recently allocated $45 million to California programs that help migrants who have crossed the southern border.

Advertisement

Politics

Judge Again Delays Guantánamo’s First Death-Penalty Terror Trial

Published

on

Judge Again Delays Guantánamo’s First Death-Penalty Terror Trial

The military judge in the U.S.S. Cole bombing case on Monday reset the start of jury selection to Oct. 19, more than 26 years after the suicide bombing in a port in the Middle East killed 17 U.S. sailors and wounded dozens of others.

Col. Matthew Fitzgerald, an Army judge, said that government agencies were unlikely to process classified evidence in time for what was to be a June 1 start date for the national security trial at Guantánamo Bay, Cuba.

A Saudi citizen, Abd-al Rahim al-Nashiri is accused of orchestrating the attack on the U.S. Navy destroyer off Aden, Yemen, on Oct. 12, 2000 as an acolyte of Osama bin Laden. The death penalty case has been shadowed by the Central Intelligence Agency’s use of torture on the defendant.

Judges at the U.S. naval station in Cuba have set and then abandoned about 10 earlier trial start dates. Pretrial litigation has gone on so long, since Mr. Nashiri was charged in 2011, that three previous judges and all of the initial defense and prosecution lawyers retired from the case or left it for personal or professional reasons.

Mr. Nashiri was captured in Dubai in October 2002. First, he spent about 1,390 days in the custody of the C.I.A., which subjected him to waterboarding, forced nudity, extreme isolation, rectal and other forms of abuse, primarily in secret prisons in Afghanistan and Thailand, according to agency and Senate reports.

Advertisement

The Cole bombing, by two Al Qaeda recruits who blew themselves up on a small, explosives- laden skiff, was a precursor of the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks, and Mr. Nashiri’s case is on track to become the first capital trial at Guantánamo Bay.

A judge in each case has ruled against the use of a defendant’s confessions because they were contaminated by their years in the C.I.A.’s brutal detention and interrogation program — out of reach of the courts, defense lawyers and International Red Cross.

The defendants were moved to Guantánamo in September 2006 and interrogated by federal agents to build cases against them without warnings against self-incrimination and the right to consult a lawyer.

The Cole trial is expected to last at least six months, and would start on Oct. 19 with the military shuttling 50 U.S. officers at a time there from a pool of 350 men and women to establish a jury of 12 with six alternate members. Guantánamo is so small, a 45-square-mile base with about 4,500 residents and limited guest quarters, that it would be logistically difficult to bring the entire pool down.

Advertisement

Last week, prosecutors in the Sept. 11 case asked a military judge to set deadlines for starting the four-man conspiracy trial in May 2027. Prosecutors had earlier proposed Jan. 11, 2027, but concluded it was not practical even before arguing for it to Lt. Col. Michael Schrama, their presiding judge.

Colonel Schrama said Monday that he would look at setting a trial schedule after he rules on some key pretrial evidentiary motions, probably over the summer, involving Khalid Shaikh Mohammed, who is accused of being the mastermind of the plot, and two other defendants.

Both cases have dragged on so long in part because no court case in U.S. history has dealt with the volume of classified information involved in this case, which is guarding secret government activities and surveillance that started with the war against terrorism.

Some Navy shipmates who survived the Cole attack and the relatives of victims of both the Cole and Sept. 11 attacks have died waiting for the trials to begin. Family members have been traveling to the base since the arraignment in 2011 to watch pretrial proceedings.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Politics

Stacey Abrams hit with subpoena in alleged campaign finance violations saga: ‘No one is above the law’

Published

on

Stacey Abrams hit with subpoena in alleged campaign finance violations saga: ‘No one is above the law’

NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!

FIRST ON FOX: The Georgia Senate is ramping up its investigation into alleged campaign finance violations tied to Stacey Abrams’ voter outreach group, with a top lawmaker vowing to “follow the facts wherever they lead” as subpoenas have been issued to Abrams and other key figures.

The Senate Special Committee on Investigations announced Monday that Abrams, along with New Georgia Project leaders Lauren Groh-Wargo and Nsé Ufot, must appear before lawmakers at the State Capitol at 10 a.m. on Friday.

“This committee has a responsibility to follow the facts wherever they lead,” said Republican state Sen. Greg Dolezal, the committee’s vice chairman. “Georgia law requires transparency and accountability in our elections.”

The subpoenas stem from findings by the Georgia State Ethics Commission that the New Georgia Project and its affiliated Action Fund violated campaign finance laws during the 2018 election cycle.

Advertisement

STACEY ABRAMS-FOUNDED VOTER ACTIVIST GROUP HIT WITH MASS LAYOFFS AFTER RECORD-BREAKING ETHICS FINE

Stacey Abrams, Democratic candidate for governor of Georgia, speaks to reporters at Georgia State University in Atlanta on Nov. 7, 2022. (Elijah Nouvelage/Getty Images)

The groups admitted to 16 violations earlier this year and agreed to pay a $300,000 fine, the largest campaign finance penalty in Georgia history.

New Georgia Project shut down and dissolved in 2025 following mounting financial and legal troubles.

The Republican lawmakers explain in the press release that the goal of the probe is to figure out who was involved in the decision-making behind the violations, along with specifics on how the funds were managed and who was aware of the activity.

Advertisement

WHITE HOUSE UNLEASHES ON STACEY ABRAMS IN LATEST CLASH OVER TRUMP’S ELECTION ORDER

“The people of Georgia deserve to know who was involved, what decisions were made and how millions of dollars flowed through organizations that admitted to violating our campaign finance laws,” Dolezal said.

Georgia’s Republican Lt. Gov. Burt Jones said in the release, “No one is above the law in Georgia.” 

He added: “When organizations secretly spend millions to influence elections while evading disclosure requirements, it undermines confidence in our democratic process. The Senate will continue pursuing the truth and ensuring accountability, regardless of political party or influence.”

Former Georgia House Rep. Stacey Abrams attends the Fort Valley GOTV Community Fish Fry at the Agricultural Technology Conference Center in Fort Valley, Georgia, on Oct. 13, 2024. (Julia Beverly/Getty Images)

Advertisement

The lawmakers say that additional hearings and witness testimony are expected in the coming weeks.

“Today, the Georgia State Senate delivered a subpoena for me to testify in a partisan, performative hearing designed to intimidate and disarm voting rights advocates across Georgia and the nation,” Abrams wrote in a response to the subpoena posted on X. “Despite the hollow, cynical intent, I will indeed do so on a mutually agreeable date.”

“It is not lost on me that I am being summoned days after the U.S. Supreme Court gutted protections for minority voting power and after I testified against the unconscionable voter suppression process unfolding across several Southern states.”

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

Abrams, the two-time Democratic gubernatorial nominee in battleground Georgia, ruled out another run for governor earlier this year, saying that instead she’ll focus on her work fighting what she warns is the nation’s move toward authoritarianism under President Trump.

Advertisement

Abrams, a former Democratic Party leader in the Georgia state legislature and a nationally known voting-rights advocate, narrowly lost to Republican Gov. Brian Kemp in the 2018 gubernatorial election. She lost her 2022 rematch with Kemp by nearly eight points.

Fox News Digital’s Paul Steinhauser contributed to this report

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Politics

Oversight chair seeks information from OpenAI’s Sam Altman about potential financial conflicts

Published

on

Oversight chair seeks information from OpenAI’s Sam Altman about potential financial conflicts

The chair of the House Oversight Committee has sent a letter to OpenAI Chief Executive Sam Altman requesting information about potential conflicts of interest between Altman’s personal investments and his operation of the company.

The letter, sent Friday, comes amid a high-stakes legal battle currently playing out in an Oakland federal courtroom between onetime partners Altman and Elon Musk, the world’s richest man, who in 2015 co-founded the AI company best known for creating ChatGPT.

The company was first established solely as a nonprofit corporation and the letter sent to Altman by Rep. James Comer (R-Ky.), the chair of the Oversight committee, indicates that the committee is “investigating potential conflicts of interest involving capital from nonprofit corporations invested in startups and other for-profit companies.”

Comer has requested by May 22 a briefing from the company official responsible for oversight of potential conflicts involving company officers and directors, including Altman, as well as all documents related to conflict of interest policies and guidance for those executives.

While OpenAI was created as a nonprofit designed to responsibly harness the power of the emerging artificial intelligence technology, the company created a for-profit subsidiary in 2019 and three years later released ChatGPT, which jumpstarted widespread adoption of the technology.

Advertisement

Musk, the chief executive of Tesla, left OpenAI’s board in 2018, one year before the creation of the for-profit arm. He is arguing that Altman and another co-founder, Greg Brockman, betrayed the original mission of the nonprofit organization, driven by their desire to “cash in” on the technology.

Musk added Microsoft, a significant investor in OpenAI, to the lawsuit in 2024. OpenAI is rumored to be gearing up to go public later this year or early next, and was recently valued at $852 billion.

Musk has said that he invested $38 million in the OpenAI nonprofit, but he does not stand to benefit from a potential OpenAI public offering.

He created a rival company, xAI, in 2023 that was later folded into his company SpaceX.

In the lawsuit, Musk is seeking $150 billion in damages, for Altman to be removed from the company and for the company to be fully returned to its nonprofit status.

Advertisement

Musk’s complaint also alleges that Altman engaged in self-dealing by directing OpenAI to pursue deals with companies in which he also held a personal stake, including nuclear fusion power company Helion.

Comer’s letter cites reporting that Altman’s pursuit of a Helion deal, which is still ongoing, would come at a lofty valuation of the power-company, boosting the company’s worth and the value of Altman’s investment.

Altman was briefly forced to step down from leadership of OpenAI in 2023 in part due to concerns about potential conflicts between his personal investments and his operation of the company, but was soon reinstated.

While the company’s board created an audit committee to investigate the potential conflicts of Altman and other officers, the findings were never disclosed.

Comer has requested that Altman turn over all documents and communication related to that audit committee.

Advertisement

Representatives for OpenAI did not immediately respond to requests for comment.

Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending