Politics
Trump’s orders have upended U.S. immigration. What legal routes remain?
Promising the largest deportation effort in U.S. history, President Trump, in his first days in office, has released a dramatic series of executive orders and other policy changes that will reshape the country’s immigration system — and the experience of what it means to live in the U.S. as an immigrant, particularly one who is undocumented.
There are an estimated 13 million to 15 million undocumented immigrants in the U.S., including more than 2.5 million in California.
That includes people who crossed the border illegally, people who overstayed their visas and people who have requested asylum. It does not include people who entered the country under various temporary humanitarian programs, or who have obtained Temporary Protected Status, which gives people the right to live and work in the U.S. temporarily because of disasters or strife in their home countries.
However, many of the people who came to the U.S. using those legal pathways could also be at risk of deportation, because of other actions the Trump administration has taken.
What exactly has the Trump administration done?
Trump has signed multiple executive orders targeting immigration that, as the Migration Policy Institute noted, do one of three things: sharply limit legal pathways for entering the U.S., bolster enforcement efforts to seal off the U.S.-Mexico border or promote aggressive sweeps to round up and deport people living in the U.S. illegally. Some of the orders have already been challenged in court, and advocates said others could be soon.
Among the most consequential orders:
- The president declared a “national emergency” at the southern border, which will enable him to deploy military troops there.
- He moved to end birthright citizenship, which has long been guaranteed by the 14th Amendment. The American Civil Liberties Union and more than 20 states, including California, have sued, arguing the order is unconstitutional. In a ruling issued in one of those cases on Jan. 23, a federal judge temporarily halted the order while the legal challenges play out.
- He suspended the refugee admissions program as of Jan. 27 for at least 90 days. Last fiscal year, the U.S. resettled more than 100,000 refugees, the highest number in three decades.
Has the new administration done anything else that affects immigration?
Yes. Among the significant actions:
- Hours after Trump took office, his new administration shut down the CBP One mobile app. The Biden administration had expanded use of CBP One to create a more orderly process of applying for asylum. Migrants could use the app, once they reached Mexican soil, to schedule appointments with U.S. authorities at legal ports of entry to present their bids for asylum and provide biographical information for screening.
- In a related action, the administration has given Immigration and Customs Enforcement officials the power to quickly deport about 1.4 million immigrants who were granted legal entry to the U.S. for up to two years through two Biden-era programs: migrants who came in through the CBP One program and were granted parole status as they await hearings on their asylum pleas; and migrants fleeing Cuba, Nicaragua, Venezuela and Haiti who were granted temporary parole while seeking asylum.
- In a notice posted Jan. 21, the administration said it would empower immigration authorities to fast-track deportations of people in the country illegally without a judicial hearing. The ACLU has sued to try to halt the plan.
- The Department of Homeland Security has rescinded long-standing guidelines prohibiting immigration agents from making arrests in “sensitive” locations such as schools, hospitals and churches.
- Benjamine Huffman, the acting secretary of the Department of Homeland Security, has declared a “mass influx” of illegal immigrants at the southern border, which authorizes the department to deputize state and local law enforcement officers to conduct immigration enforcement.
- ICE has begun conducting publicized immigration raids in many cities, including New York and Chicago. The administration said it was targeting undocumented people with criminal records. But in a briefing this week, White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt said the administration views all undocumented immigrants as criminals, because they have violated immigration laws.
So, what are the numbers? Have more people been deported since Trump took office?
ICE authorities this week have been posting daily figures on the agency’s X account citing the number of undocumented immigrants arrested, including 1,179 on Jan. 27 and 969 on Jan. 28. Axios reported this week that ICE made 3,500 arrests during Trump’s first week in office. During Biden’s final year in office, the arrest number was about 350 a week.
It is too soon to evaluate deportation numbers. On Jan. 27, ICE posted on X that: “In one week, law enforcement officials have removed and returned 7,300 illegal aliens.”
If that pace continues, and ICE removes 7,300 immigrants every week for a year, that would result in the forced removal of more than 350,000 people. That figure would outpace removals during the Biden administration. But during the Obama administration, ICE removals peaked at nearly 410,000 in fiscal year 2012. Obama’s enforcement policies targeted undocumented immigrants with criminal records and people who had recently crossed the border without authorization, according to the Migration Policy Institute, while placing low priority on people with established roots in U.S. communities and without criminal records.
What are the current avenues for legal immigration?
- People who have a close family member who is a U.S. citizen can still apply. But if the Trump administration resurrects travel bans barring people from certain countries from entering the U.S., that could limit applications to certain nationalities.
- People deemed to have valuable skills can apply for temporary or permanent employment visas, although in many cases there are years-long waits for such visas. Employers can petition for temporary work visas for foreign nationals for specific jobs. Permanent work visas are capped at 140,000 per year, a figure that includes the immigrants plus their eligible spouses and minor, unmarried children, according to the American Immigration Council.
- Immigrants from countries with low rates of immigration to the U.S. are eligible for a green-card lottery.
- Visas are still available for parents adopting a child from another country.
What’s going on with Dreamers?
While Trump tried to rescind Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals, or DACA, during his first administration, he has not yet touched the program this time around.
The Obama-era program grants a renewable work permit and temporary reprieve from deportation to certain people who came to the U.S. as children. An estimated 537,730 people had DACA protection as of September, with the vast majority being from Mexico, according to the Migration Policy Institute.
The legality of the program remains mired in the federal courts.
What are sanctuary policies, and why is the Trump administration targeting them?
There isn’t one clear definition of a sanctuary policy. The term generally applies to policies that limit state and local officials from cooperating with federal authorities on civil immigration enforcement duties.
California’s 2017 sanctuary law, the California Values Act, prohibits state and local law enforcement agencies from investigating, interrogating and arresting people simply for immigration enforcement purposes. The law does not prevent federal authorities from carrying out those enforcement duties in California. And it does allow local police to cooperate with federal immigration officials in limited circumstances, including in cases involving immigrants convicted of certain violent felonies and misdemeanors.
Under L.A.’s sanctuary city law, city employees and city property may not be used to “investigate, cite, arrest, hold, transfer or detain any person” for the purpose of immigration enforcement. An exception is made for law enforcement investigating serious offenses. L.A. Unified’s sanctuary policy prohibits staff from voluntarily cooperating in an immigration enforcement action, including sharing information about a student’s immigration status.
An executive order issued on Trump’s first day in office threatens to withhold federal funds from sanctuary jurisdictions that seek to interfere with federal law enforcement operations. A memo from the Department of Justice, meanwhile, said state and local officials could be investigated and prosecuted for not complying with Trump’s crackdown on immigration enforcement.
California Atty. Gen. Rob Bonta has called the pronouncement “a scare tactic,” and vowed legal action “if the Trump administration’s vague threats turn to illegal action.”
If immigration authorities make mass arrests, does the U.S. have space to detain all the immigrants?
That depends on several factors.
On average, nearly 40,000 people have been locked up in ICE detention centers on a daily basis during fiscal year 2025. There is probably capacity in the system for additional detainees, but how much isn’t entirely clear, according to Eunice Cho, senior staff attorney with the ACLU National Prison Project.
What is clear is that the administration intends to expand the ICE detention footprint. On Wednesday, Trump directed his administration to begin using the U.S. Navy base at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, for the detention of 30,000 “high priority” immigrants. The military also is allowing ICE to detain undocumented immigrants at Buckley Space Force Base in Colorado, according to multiple news reports.
ICE operates six detention facilities in California, with capacity for nearly 7,200 detainees, and is pressing to expand. Agency officials are looking for space to accommodate 850 to 950 people within two hours of its San Francisco regional field offices, a development first reported by CalMatters.
The agency is also looking to increase detention capacity in Arizona, New Mexico, Washington and Oregon, according to federal documents obtained by CalMatters.
ICE facilities, which are largely run by private prison corporations, have been dogged by allegations of poor medical care and inhumane treatment. A 2019 law that would have banned private immigration facilities in California was overturned by the federal courts.
Times staff writers Kate Linthicum, Brittny Mejia, Andrea Castillo and Rachel Uranga contributed to this report.
new video loaded: Virginia Voters Approve New Map Favoring Democrats
By Shawn Paik
April 22, 2026
NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!
Sparks flew on Capitol Hill as Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., accused Federal Reserve nominee Kevin Warsh of being a potential “sock puppet” for President Donald Trump.
Warsh, tapped by Trump in January to lead the Federal Reserve, faced a two-and-a-half-hour confirmation hearing before the Senate Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs Committee.
If confirmed, he would take the helm of the world’s most powerful central bank, shaping interest rates, borrowing costs and the financial outlook for millions of American households for the next four years.
WHO IS KEVIN WARSH, TRUMP’S PICK TO SUCCEED JEROME POWELL AS FED CHAIR?
Kevin Warsh, nominee for chairman of the Federal Reserve, listens to ranking member Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., make an opening statement during his Senate Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs Committee confirmation hearing on Tuesday, April 21, 2026. (Tom Williams/CQ-Roll Call, Inc via Getty Images)
In her opening remarks, Warren sharply criticized Warsh’s record and questioned his independence, arguing he is “uniquely ill-suited for the job as Fed chair” and warning he could give Trump influence over the central bank.
She accused Warsh of enabling Wall Street during the 2008 financial crisis, which fell during his tenure as a Federal Reserve governor when he served from 2006 to 2011.
“In our meeting last week, we discussed the 2008 financial crash, where 8 million people lost their jobs, 10 million people lost their homes and millions more lost their life savings,” Warren said. “Giant banks, however, got hundreds of billions of dollars in bailouts… and he said to me that he has no regrets about anything he did.”
She added that Warsh “worked tirelessly to arrange multibillion-dollar bailouts” for Wall Street CEOs, with nothing for American families.
The hearing grew more tense as Warren pivoted to ethics concerns, pressing Warsh over his undisclosed financial holdings and questioning him over links to business dealings connected to the late convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein.
The two spoke over each other and raised their voices in a heated exchange on Capitol Hill.
WARSH’S $226 MILLION FORTUNE UNDER SCRUTINY AS FED NOMINEE FACES SENATE CONFIRMATION
Sen. Elizabeth Warren: The Fed has been plagued by deeply disturbing ethics scandals in recent years. It’s critical that the next chair have no financial conflicts — none. You have more than $100 million in investments that you have refused to disclose. So let me ask: do the Juggernaut Fund or THSDFS LLC invest in companies affiliated with President Trump or his family, companies tied to money laundering, Chinese-controlled firms, or financing vehicles linked to Jeffrey Epstein?
Kevin Warsh: Senator, I’ve worked closely with the Office of Government Ethics and agreed to divest all of my financial assets.
Warren: Could you answer my question, please? You have more than $100 million in undisclosed assets. Are any of those investments tied to the entities I just mentioned? It’s a yes-or-no question.
Warsh: I have worked tirelessly with ethics officials and agreed to sell all of my assets before taking the oath of office.
Warren: Are you refusing to tell us if you have investments in vehicles linked to Jeffrey Epstein? You just won’t say?
Warsh: What I’m telling you is those assets will be sold if I’m confirmed.
Warren: Will you disclose how you plan to divest these assets? The public might question your motives if, for example, someone who profits from predicting Fed policy cuts you a $100 million check as you take office.
Sen. Elizabeth Warren questions Kevin Warsh during his Senate Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs Committee confirmation hearing on Tuesday, April 21, 2026. (Tom Williams/CQ-Roll Call, Inc via Getty Images)
Warsh: I’ve reached a full agreement with the Office of Government Ethics and will divest those assets before taking the oath.
Warren: I’m asking a very straightforward question. Will you disclose how you divest those assets?
Warsh: As I’ve said, I’ve worked with ethics officials.
Warren: I’ll take that as a no.
In a separate exchange, Warren invoked Trump’s past statements about the Fed and challenged Warsh to prove his independence in real time.
She insisted that Warsh answer whether he believes Trump won the 2020 presidential election and if he would name policies of the president with which he disagrees. The hopeful future Fed chair dodged the question and said he would remain apolitical, if confirmed.
THE ONE LINE IN WARSH’S TESTIMONY SIGNALING A BREAK FROM THE FED’S STATUS QUO
Warren: Donald Trump has made clear he does not want an independent Fed. He has said, “Anybody that disagrees with me will never be Fed chairman.” He’s also said interest rates will drop “when Kevin gets in.” Let’s check out your independence and your courage. We’ll start easy. Mr. Warsh, did Donald Trump lose the 2020 election?
Warsh: Senator, we should keep politics out of the Federal Reserve.
Warren: I’m asking a factual question.
Warsh: This body certified the election.
Warren: That’s not what I asked. Did Donald Trump lose in 2020?
Warsh: The Fed should stay out of politics.
Warren: In our meeting, you said you’re a “tough guy” who can stand up to President Trump. So name one aspect of his economic agenda you disagree with.
CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP
Kevin Warsh listens to a question during a Senate Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs Committee confirmation hearing on Tuesday, April 21, 2026. (Graeme Sloan/Bloomberg via Getty Images)
Warsh: That’s not something I’m prepared to do. The Fed should stay in its lane.
Warren: Just one place where you disagree.
Warsh: I do have one disagreement — he said I looked like I was out of central casting. I think I’d look older and grayer.
Warren: That’s adorable. But we need a Fed chair who is independent. If you can’t answer these questions, you don’t have the courage or the independence.
On March 28, a sunny Saturday in southwestern Utah, Jack Hoopes and his wife, Lorna, brought their homemade signs to the local “No Kings” rally.
The couple joined a crowd of 1,500 or so marching through the main picnic area of a park in downtown St. George. Their signs — cut-out words on a black background — chided lawmakers for failing to stand up to President Trump and urged America to “make lying wrong again.”
After about an hour, the two were ready to go home. They got in their silver Volvo SUV, but before pulling away, Jack Hoopes decided to swing past the demonstration, which was still going strong. He tooted his horn, twice, in a show of solidarity.
That’s when things took a curious turn.
A police officer parked in the middle of the street warned Hoopes not to honk; at least that’s what he thinks the officer said as Hoopes drove past the chanting crowd. When he spotted two familiar faces, Hoopes hit the horn a third time — a friendly, howdy sort of honk. “It wasn’t like I was being obnoxious,” he said, “or laying on the horn.”
Hoopes turned a corner and the cop, lights flashing, pulled him over. He asked Hoopes for his license and registration. He returned a few moments later. A passing car sounded its horn. “Are you going to stop him, too?” Hoopes asked.
That did not sit well. The officer said he’d planned to let Hoopes off with a warning. Instead, he charged the 71-year-old retired potato farmer with violating Utah’s law on horns and warning devices. He issued a citation, with a fine punishable up to $50.
Hoopes — a law school graduate and prosecutor in the days before he took up potato farming — is fighting back, even though he estimates the legal skirmishing could cost him considerably more than the maximum fine. The ticket might have resulted from pique on the officer’s part. But Hoopes doesn’t think so. He sees politics at play.
“I’ve beeped my horn for [the pro-law enforcement] Back the Blue. I’ve beeped my horn for Black Lives Matter,” Hoopes said. “I’ve seen a lot of people honk for Trump and for MAGA.”
He’s also seen plenty of times when people honked their horns to celebrate high school championships and the like.
But Hoopes has never heard of anyone being pulled over, much less ticketed, for excessive or unlawful honking. “I think it’s freedom of expression,” he said.
Or should be.
Jack and Lorna Hoopes made their own protest signs to bring to the “No Kings” rally in St. George, Utah.
(Mikayla Whitmore / For The Times)
St. George is a fast-growing community of about 100,000 residents set amid the jagged red-rock peaks of the Mojave Desert. It’s a jumping-off point for Zion National Park, about 40 miles east, and a mecca for golf, hiking and mountain-bike riding.
It’s also Trump Country.
Washington County, where St. George is located, gave Trump 75% of its vote in 2024, with Kamala Harris winning a scant 23%. That emphatic showing compares with Trump’s 59% performance statewide.
St. George is where Hoopes and his wife live most of the time. When summer and its 100-degree temperatures hit, they retreat to southeast Idaho. The couple get along well with their neighbors in both places, Hoopes said, even though they’re Democrats living in ruby-red country. It’s not as though they just tolerate folks, or hold their noses to get by.
“Most of my friends are conservative,” Hoopes said. “Some of the Trump people are very good people. We just have a difference of opinion where our country is going.”
He was speaking from a hotel parking lot in Arizona near Lake Havasu while embarked on an annual motorcycle ride through the Southwest: four days, a dozen riders, 1,200 miles. Most of his companions are Trump supporters, Hoopes said, and, just like back home, everyone gets on fine.
“Right?” he called out.
“No!” a voice hollered back.
Actually, Hoopes joked, his charitable road mates let him ride along because they consider him handicapped — his disability being his political ideology.
Hoopes is not exactly a hellion. In 2014, he and his wife traveled to Africa to participate in humanitarian work and promote sustainable agriculture in Kenya and Uganda. In 2020, they worked as Red Cross volunteers helping wildfire victims in Northern California.
Virtually his entire life has been spent on the right side of the law, though Hoopes allowed as how he has racked up a few speeding tickets over the years. (His career as a prosecutor lasted four years and involved three murder cases in the first 12 months before he left the legal profession behind and took up farming.)
He’s never had any problems with the police in St. George. “They seem to be decent,” Hoopes said.
A department spokesperson, Tiffany Mitchell, said illicit honking is not a widespread problem in the placid, retiree-heavy community, but there are some who have been cited for violations. She denied any political motivation in Hoopes’ case.
“He must’ve felt justified,” Mitchell said of the officer who issued the citation. “I can’t imagine that politics had anything to do with it.”
And yes, she said, honking a horn can be a political statement protected by the 1st Amendment. “But, just like anything else, it can turn criminal,” Mitchell said, and apparently that’s how the officer felt on March 28 “and that’s the direction he took it.”
The matter now rests before a judge, residing in a legal system that has lately been tested and twisted in remarkable ways.
Jack Hoopes’ case is now before a judge in St. George, Utah.
(Mikayla Whitmore / For The Times)
As he left an initial hearing earlier this month, Hoopes said his phone pinged with a fresh headline out of Washington. Trump’s Justice Department, it was reported, was asking a federal appeals court to throw out the convictions of 12 people found guilty of seditious conspiracy for their roles in the Jan. 6, 2021, insurrection.
“We have a president that pardons people that broke into the Capitol and defecated” in the hallways and congressional offices, Hoopes said. “Police officers died because of it, and yet I get picked up for honking my horn?”
Hoopes’ next court appearance, a pretrial conference, is set for July 15.
-
Politics5 minutes agoVideo: Virginia Voters Approve New Map Favoring Democrats
-
Business11 minutes agoOil Prices Rise as Investors Weigh Cease-Fire Extension
-
Science17 minutes agoPace of N.I.H. Funding Slows Further in Trump’s Second Year
-
Health23 minutes agoAging in Place: How Technology Might Help You Grow Old at Home
-
Culture35 minutes agoBook Review: ‘Israel: What Went Wrong?,’ by Omer Bartov
-
Lifestyle41 minutes agoStreet Style Look of the Week: Airy Beachy Clothes
-
Education47 minutes agoÉcole des Sables, Africa’s Premier Dance School, Faces a Precarious Future
-
Technology53 minutes agoIt’s amazing how good Alienware’s $350 OLED monitor is