Washington
Judge rules Trump administration must allow court challenges for Venezuelan migrants sent to El Salvador prison
WASHINGTON (AP) — A federal judge ruled last Monday that the Trump administration must give legal due process to Venezuelan migrants flown to a notorious prison in El Salvador, either by providing court hearings or returning them to the U.S.
U.S. District Judge James Boasberg ordered the government to come up with a plan within two weeks for the men, who have since been returned to Venezuela in a prisoner swap.
“Plaintiffs should not have been removed in the manner that they were, with virtually no notice and no opportunity to contest the bases of their removal, in clear contravention of their due-process rights,” Boasberg wrote.
It’s the latest development in a case that’s been a legal flashpoint in the administration’s sweeping crackdown on immigration. It started in March, after Trump invoked an 18th century wartime law to send Venezuelan migrants accused of being gang members to a mega-prison known as the Terrorism Confinement Center, or CECOT.
Two planeloads of men were flown to the prison, despite a verbal order from Boasberg for the aircraft to turn around. Boasberg subsequently started a contempt investigation, though the dramatic battle between the judicial and executive branches has been paused by an appeals court.
The administration has denied violating his order. The White House did not have immediate comment on Monday’s ruling.
More than 200 migrants were released back to Venezuela in a prisoner swap with the U.S. in July.
The ruling from Boasberg, who was appointed to the federal bench by Democratic President Barack Obama, opens a path for them to challenge the allegation that they’re members of the Tren de Aragua gang and subject to removal under the Alien Enemies Act.
“This critical ruling makes clear that the Trump administration cannot simply spirit people off to a notorious foreign prison with zero due process and simply walk away. There are consequences,” said ACLU attorney Lee Gelernt, who represents the migrants.
Toronto
Lawyer linked to a former Olympic snowboarder accused of drug trafficking gets bail
TORONTO (AP) — A Canadian lawyer accused of playing a key role in an international drug smuggling network involving a former Olympic snowboarder was granted bail on Tuesday ahead of his extradition hearing to the United States.
Deepak Paradkar, 62, was arrested with several other Canadians last month on a U.S. extradition request and as part of an FBI investigation targeting the former Canadian Olympic snowboarder Ryan Wedding, now accused of leading a violent criminal organization.
Authorities are offering up to $15 million for information leading to the arrest of Wedding, who’s on the FBI’s 10 Most Wanted list. He’s believed to be living in Mexico under the protection of the Sinaloa cartel. Authorities say he is working with the cartel to funnel massive quantities of drugs into Canada and the U.S.
Wedding and his co-conspirators are accused of posting a photograph of a murder witness on the internet so the man could be identified and killed. The man was shot in the head in a restaurant in Medellín, Colombia, in January.
Paradkar is alleged to have introduced Wedding to traffickers who moved drugs through North America and directed intelligence gathering after drugs were seized by law enforcement. The Thornhill, Ontario, lawyer is said to have advised the former athlete in the case of the murder witness.
Federal prosecutors in the U.S. opposed Paradkar’s release on bail in Canada, saying he has an “extraordinary” incentive to flee if released on bail as he faces multiple life sentences if found guilty in the U.S.
Paradkar’s defense argued that he has no ties to any other country and put his family’s finances on the line to support his release.
Ontario Superior Court Justice Peter Bawden said in his decision that he found it “very unlikely” Paradkar, who has no criminal record, would attempt to go underground in Canada. The judge also pointed to Paradkar’s ailing health and testimony from his wife that she would ensure he complies with the bail conditions.
It is unclear when the extradition hearing will take place.
Rhode Island
Federal judge says Trump administration must restore disaster money to Democratic states
PROVIDENCE, R.I. (AP) — A federal judge has blocked the Trump administration’s attempt to reallocate federal Homeland Security funding away from states that refuse to cooperate with certain federal immigration enforcement.
U.S. District Judge Mary McElroy ruling solidified a win for the coalition of 12 attorneys general that sued the administration earlier this year after being alerted that their states would receive drastically reduced federal grants due to their “sanctuary” jurisdictions.
In total, the U.S. Department of Homeland Security and the Federal Emergency Management Agency reduced more than $233 million from Connecticut, Delaware, the District of Columbia, Massachusetts, Minnesota, New York, Rhode Island, Vermont, and Washington. The money is part of a $1 billion program where allocations are supposed to be based on assessed risks, with states then largely passing most of the money on to police and fire departments.
The cuts were unveiled shortly after a separate federal judge in a different legal challenge ruled it was unconstitutional for the federal government to require states to cooperate on immigration enforcement actions to get FEMA disaster funding.
In her 48-page ruling, McElroy found that the federal government was weighing states’ police on federal immigration enforcement on whether to reduce federal funding for the Homeland Security Grant Program and others.
“What else could defendants’ decisions to cut funding to specific counterterrorism programming by conspicuous round numbered amounts — including by slashing off the millions-place digits of awarded sums — be if not arbitrary and capricious? Neither a law degree nor a degree in mathematics is required to deduce that no plausible, rational formula could produce this result,” McElroy wrote.
The Trump-appointed judge then ordered the Department of Homeland Security to restore the previously announced funding allocations to the plaintiff states.
“Defendants’ wanton abuse of their role in federal grant administration is particularly troublesome given the fact that they have been entrusted with a most solemn duty: safeguarding our nation and its citizens,” McElroy wrote. “While the intricacies of administrative law and the terms and conditions on federal grants may seem abstract to some, the funding at issue here supports vital counterterrorism and law enforcement programs.”
McElroy notably cited the recent Brown University attack, where a gunman killed two students and injured nine others, as an event where the $1 billion federal program would be vital in responding to such a tragedy.
“To hold hostage funding for programs like these based solely on what appear to be defendants’ political whims is unconscionable and, at least here, unlawful,” the Rhode Island-based judge wrote in her ruling, issued little more than a week after the Brown shooting.
Emails seeking comment were sent to the DHS and FEMA.
“This victory ensures that the Trump Administration cannot punish states that refuse to help carry out its cruel immigration agenda, particularly by denying them lifesaving funding that helps prepare for and respond to disasters and emergencies,” said Massachusetts Attorney General Andrea Joy Campbell in a statement.
Illinois
DOJ sues governor over laws protecting immigrants at courthouses and hospitals
CHICAGO (AP) — The Department of Justice filed a lawsuit Monday against Illinois Gov. JB Pritzker over new state laws aimed at protecting immigrants at courthouses, hospitals and day cares.
Pritzker signed a set of laws earlier this month that ban civil arrests at and around courthouses statewide and require hospitals, day care centers and public universities to have procedures for handling civil immigration operations and protecting personal information.
The laws, which took effect immediately, also provide legal steps for people whose constitutional rights were violated during the federal enforcement action in the Chicago area, including $10,000 in damages for someone unlawfully arrested while attempting to attend a court proceeding.
Immigration and legal advocates have applauded the legislation, saying many immigrants were avoiding courthouses, hospitals and schools out of fear of being detained.
Lawrence Benito, executive director of the Illinois Coalition for Immigrant and Refugee Rights, called the laws “a brave choice.”
“Our collective resistance to ICE and CBP’s violent attacks on our communities goes beyond community-led rapid response — it includes legislative solutions as well,” he said at the time.
The Justice Department argues that Pritzker and Attorney General Kwame Raoul, who are both named in the lawsuit and both Democrats, violated the U.S. Constitution with the laws, which they say “threaten the safety of federal officers,” according to a statement Monday evening. The lawsuit is part of an effort by U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi to identify state and local laws the agency says impede federal immigration operations.
A spokesperson said Raoul and his staff are reviewing the complaint. Pritzker’s office did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
When signing the bills, Pritzker acknowledged that they might be challenged in court.
“No doubt, they have the ability to go to court about it, but I believe this is not just a good law, but a great law,” Pritzker said.
The U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement’s “Operation Midway Blitz,” which appears to have largely wound down for now, arrested more than 4,000 people. Data on those arrested from early September through mid-October showed only 15% had criminal records, with traffic offenses, misdemeanors or nonviolent felonies comprising the vast majority.
Judge rules Trump administration must allow court challenges for Venezuelan migrants sent to El Salvador prison
WASHINGTON (AP) — A federal judge ruled last Monday that the Trump administration must give legal due process to Venezuelan migrants flown to a notorious prison in El Salvador, either by providing court hearings or returning them to the U.S.
U.S. District Judge James Boasberg ordered the government to come up with a plan within two weeks for the men, who have since been returned to Venezuela in a prisoner swap.
“Plaintiffs should not have been removed in the manner that they were, with virtually no notice and no opportunity to contest the bases of their removal, in clear contravention of their due-process rights,” Boasberg wrote.
It’s the latest development in a case that’s been a legal flashpoint in the administration’s sweeping crackdown on immigration. It started in March, after Trump invoked an 18th century wartime law to send Venezuelan migrants accused of being gang members to a mega-prison known as the Terrorism Confinement Center, or CECOT.
Two planeloads of men were flown to the prison, despite a verbal order from Boasberg for the aircraft to turn around. Boasberg subsequently started a contempt investigation, though the dramatic battle between the judicial and executive branches has been paused by an appeals court.
The administration has denied violating his order. The White House did not have immediate comment on Monday’s ruling.
More than 200 migrants were released back to Venezuela in a prisoner swap with the U.S. in July.
The ruling from Boasberg, who was appointed to the federal bench by Democratic President Barack Obama, opens a path for them to challenge the allegation that they’re members of the Tren de Aragua gang and subject to removal under the Alien Enemies Act.
“This critical ruling makes clear that the Trump administration cannot simply spirit people off to a notorious foreign prison with zero due process and simply walk away. There are consequences,” said ACLU attorney Lee Gelernt, who represents the migrants.
Toronto
Lawyer linked to a former Olympic snowboarder accused of drug trafficking gets bail
TORONTO (AP) — A Canadian lawyer accused of playing a key role in an international drug smuggling network involving a former Olympic snowboarder was granted bail on Tuesday ahead of his extradition hearing to the United States.
Deepak Paradkar, 62, was arrested with several other Canadians last month on a U.S. extradition request and as part of an FBI investigation targeting the former Canadian Olympic snowboarder Ryan Wedding, now accused of leading a violent criminal organization.
Authorities are offering up to $15 million for information leading to the arrest of Wedding, who’s on the FBI’s 10 Most Wanted list. He’s believed to be living in Mexico under the protection of the Sinaloa cartel. Authorities say he is working with the cartel to funnel massive quantities of drugs into Canada and the U.S.
Wedding and his co-conspirators are accused of posting a photograph of a murder witness on the internet so the man could be identified and killed. The man was shot in the head in a restaurant in Medellín, Colombia, in January.
Paradkar is alleged to have introduced Wedding to traffickers who moved drugs through North America and directed intelligence gathering after drugs were seized by law enforcement. The Thornhill, Ontario, lawyer is said to have advised the former athlete in the case of the murder witness.
Federal prosecutors in the U.S. opposed Paradkar’s release on bail in Canada, saying he has an “extraordinary” incentive to flee if released on bail as he faces multiple life sentences if found guilty in the U.S.
Paradkar’s defense argued that he has no ties to any other country and put his family’s finances on the line to support his release.
Ontario Superior Court Justice Peter Bawden said in his decision that he found it “very unlikely” Paradkar, who has no criminal record, would attempt to go underground in Canada. The judge also pointed to Paradkar’s ailing health and testimony from his wife that she would ensure he complies with the bail conditions.
It is unclear when the extradition hearing will take place.
Rhode Island
Federal judge says Trump administration must restore disaster money to Democratic states
PROVIDENCE, R.I. (AP) — A federal judge has blocked the Trump administration’s attempt to reallocate federal Homeland Security funding away from states that refuse to cooperate with certain federal immigration enforcement.
U.S. District Judge Mary McElroy ruling solidified a win for the coalition of 12 attorneys general that sued the administration earlier this year after being alerted that their states would receive drastically reduced federal grants due to their “sanctuary” jurisdictions.
In total, the U.S. Department of Homeland Security and the Federal Emergency Management Agency reduced more than $233 million from Connecticut, Delaware, the District of Columbia, Massachusetts, Minnesota, New York, Rhode Island, Vermont, and Washington. The money is part of a $1 billion program where allocations are supposed to be based on assessed risks, with states then largely passing most of the money on to police and fire departments.
The cuts were unveiled shortly after a separate federal judge in a different legal challenge ruled it was unconstitutional for the federal government to require states to cooperate on immigration enforcement actions to get FEMA disaster funding.
In her 48-page ruling, McElroy found that the federal government was weighing states’ police on federal immigration enforcement on whether to reduce federal funding for the Homeland Security Grant Program and others.
“What else could defendants’ decisions to cut funding to specific counterterrorism programming by conspicuous round numbered amounts — including by slashing off the millions-place digits of awarded sums — be if not arbitrary and capricious? Neither a law degree nor a degree in mathematics is required to deduce that no plausible, rational formula could produce this result,” McElroy wrote.
The Trump-appointed judge then ordered the Department of Homeland Security to restore the previously announced funding allocations to the plaintiff states.
“Defendants’ wanton abuse of their role in federal grant administration is particularly troublesome given the fact that they have been entrusted with a most solemn duty: safeguarding our nation and its citizens,” McElroy wrote. “While the intricacies of administrative law and the terms and conditions on federal grants may seem abstract to some, the funding at issue here supports vital counterterrorism and law enforcement programs.”
McElroy notably cited the recent Brown University attack, where a gunman killed two students and injured nine others, as an event where the $1 billion federal program would be vital in responding to such a tragedy.
“To hold hostage funding for programs like these based solely on what appear to be defendants’ political whims is unconscionable and, at least here, unlawful,” the Rhode Island-based judge wrote in her ruling, issued little more than a week after the Brown shooting.
Emails seeking comment were sent to the DHS and FEMA.
“This victory ensures that the Trump Administration cannot punish states that refuse to help carry out its cruel immigration agenda, particularly by denying them lifesaving funding that helps prepare for and respond to disasters and emergencies,” said Massachusetts Attorney General Andrea Joy Campbell in a statement.
Illinois
DOJ sues governor over laws protecting immigrants at courthouses and hospitals
CHICAGO (AP) — The Department of Justice filed a lawsuit Monday against Illinois Gov. JB Pritzker over new state laws aimed at protecting immigrants at courthouses, hospitals and day cares.
Pritzker signed a set of laws earlier this month that ban civil arrests at and around courthouses statewide and require hospitals, day care centers and public universities to have procedures for handling civil immigration operations and protecting personal information.
The laws, which took effect immediately, also provide legal steps for people whose constitutional rights were violated during the federal enforcement action in the Chicago area, including $10,000 in damages for someone unlawfully arrested while attempting to attend a court proceeding.
Immigration and legal advocates have applauded the legislation, saying many immigrants were avoiding courthouses, hospitals and schools out of fear of being detained.
Lawrence Benito, executive director of the Illinois Coalition for Immigrant and Refugee Rights, called the laws “a brave choice.”
“Our collective resistance to ICE and CBP’s violent attacks on our communities goes beyond community-led rapid response — it includes legislative solutions as well,” he said at the time.
The Justice Department argues that Pritzker and Attorney General Kwame Raoul, who are both named in the lawsuit and both Democrats, violated the U.S. Constitution with the laws, which they say “threaten the safety of federal officers,” according to a statement Monday evening. The lawsuit is part of an effort by U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi to identify state and local laws the agency says impede federal immigration operations.
A spokesperson said Raoul and his staff are reviewing the complaint. Pritzker’s office did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
When signing the bills, Pritzker acknowledged that they might be challenged in court.
“No doubt, they have the ability to go to court about it, but I believe this is not just a good law, but a great law,” Pritzker said.
The U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement’s “Operation Midway Blitz,” which appears to have largely wound down for now, arrested more than 4,000 people. Data on those arrested from early September through mid-October showed only 15% had criminal records, with traffic offenses, misdemeanors or nonviolent felonies comprising the vast majority.
