Podcasts about nationality act

The latest episode of the Center for Immigration Studies podcast examines a recent U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) memo emphasizing that adjustment of status - the process allowing certain aliens, either temporary visa holders or unlawfully present, who are eligible for permanent residence to obtain it without leaving the United States - is a discretionary benefit and not a guaranteed alternative to consular processing abroad.The discussion between Senior Legal Fellow George Fishman and Director of Policy Studies Jessica Vaughan is accompanied by a new report and a policy blog on the subject.Among the key findings:Congress created adjustment of status under section 245 of the new Immigration and Nationality Act in 1952 largely to eliminate the need for temporary visa holders already in the United States to travel outside the U.S. for immigrant visa processing to permanent status.In FY2023, which is the most recent year for which statistics on adjustment of status admissions are available, the number of adjustments was 608,260 out of 1,172,910 total immigrant admissions, or 52 percent. Of these adjustments, by far the largest share were in the category of Immediate Relatives (315,830). In contrast, in 2023 only 146,880 people adjusted in all the employment categories combined, although this represented 75 percent of all employment LPR admissions.The policy change is expected to have its greatest impact on certain family-based applicants, including some who overstayed visas, violated the terms of admission, or entered illegally and received parole.While USCIS has broad discretion in adjustment decisions, courts have held that such discretion is not unlimited and may be reviewed for abuse of discretion.Existing legal precedent does not clearly support treating the mere act of seeking adjustment of status as a negative factor weighing against an applicant.USCIS has indicated that it may exercise discretion and offer some applicants the opportunity to adjust if it is in the national interest, such as in the case of applicants with meaningful employment or for humanitarian considerations.Fishman's report concludes that the legal significance of the directive will depend on how USCIS implements it in practice. If denial rates rise substantially or applications are denied absent meaningful adverse factors, litigation challenging those decisions is likely to follow (if federal courts allow legal challenges to adjustment denials outside of removal proceedings).Vaughan argues that the policy could strengthen the integrity of the immigration system as overstayers and parolees will no longer apply for fear of being caught for extended unlawful presence.HostMark Krikorian is the Executive Director of the Center for Immigration Studies.GuestsJessica Vaughan is the Director of Policy Studies at the Center for Immigration Studies.George Fishman is a Senior Legal Fellow at the Center for Immigration Studies.LinksUSCIS Upends the Status Quo for Adjustment of StatusUSCIS Blocks Green Card Shortcut for Overstayers and ParoleesIntro MontageVoices in the opening montage:Sen. Barack Obama at a 2005 press conference.Sen. John McCain in a 2010 election ad.President Lyndon Johnson, upon signing the 1965 Immigration Act.Booker T. Washington, reading in 1908 from his 1895 Atlanta Exposition speech.Laraine Newman as a "Conehead" on SNL in 1977.Hillary Clinton in a 2003 radio interview.Cesar Chavez in a 1974 interview.House Speaker Nancy Pelosi speaking to reporters in 2019.Prof. George Borjas in a 2016 C-SPAN appearance.Sen. Jeff Sessions in 2008 comments on the Senate floor.Candidate Trump in 2015 campaign speech.Charlton Heston in "Planet of the Apes".

DOCKET ALERTS:   The House Judiciary Committee wants to change the US Attorney statute to say what Attorney General Bondi claimed it did in court. This would involve the Senate voluntarily surrendering their power to vote on nominees, so … lotsa luck. Back in New Jersey, prosecutors say they'll seek superseding indictments in cases with Alina Habba's name on them, to remove the stink of illegitimacy.   The DOJ has quietly settled a trollsuit filed by red states and rightwing trolls, including Robert Kennedy, alleging social media censorship by the Biden administration. The Supreme Court already dropkicked this case once, so the parties agreed to simply declare victory and go home.   And Sam Bankman-Fried finds new ways to piss off judges and be sooooo weird, this time with help from his mom.   MAIN SHOW:   The DOJ settled a bogus lawsuit filed by former national security advisor Mike Flynn. His malicious prosecution claims had already been tossed by a federal judge, but she let him amend his complaint again, and by then Trump was back in the White House. Is this a new template for MAGA criminals to back the truck up to the Treasury and start filling it with taxpayer cash? The January 6 defendants sure seem to think so! We'll compare a newly filed case by rioters with a suit filed by pardoned Proud Boys.   And we've got a deep dive into the birthright citizenship case Trump v. Barbara, which will be argued at the Supreme Court this Wednesday.   Kennedy v. Biden https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/67089647/kennedy-v-biden/?order_by=desc   Missouri v. Biden https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/63290154/missouri-v-biden/?order_by=desc   US v. Bankman-Fried https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/66631292/united-states-v-bankman-fried   Tarrio v. US [Proud Boys Bivens Suit] https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/70474277/tarrio-v-united-states-of-america   Sullivan v. US [J6ers FTCA Suit] https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/73101995/sullivan-v-united-states/   Flynn v. US [Flynn FTCA] https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/66930673/flynn-v-united-states   Dred Scott v. Sandford, 60 US 393 (1857) https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=3231372247892780026   US v. Wong Kim Ark, 169 US 649 (1898) https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=3381955771263111765   Indian Citizenship Act of 1924 https://www.archives.gov/files/historical-docs/doc-content/images/indian-citizenship-act-1924.pdf   Indian Law Scholars' Amicus Brief [via SCOTUS] https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/25/25-365/399370/20260226125541217_Barbara%20Amicus%20Brief.pdf   The Nationality Act of 1940 [student Note] https://www.jstor.org/stable/1335062   Trump v. Barbara https://www.supremecourt.gov/search.aspx?filename=/docket/docketfiles/html/public/25-365.html   Show Links: https://www.lawandchaospod.com/ BlueSky: @LawAndChaosPod Threads: @LawAndChaosPod Twitter: @LawAndChaosPod

VR32 - As the economic effects of Trump's war of choice in the Middle East begin to hit home, his party is playing the one card it has going into the midterms: the promise of fully restoring open white supremacy to the US immigration system. We begin with a sampler platter of amuse douche from a recent episode of Tim Pool's podcast–mercifully free of Tim Pool–to get a sense of how the MAGA right is talking about immigration reform these days. Matt then gives a brief history lesson about the openly racist origins of the Immigration Act of 1924 and the Cold War origins of the 1965 Hart-Celler bill which Republicans are now trying to repeal before we dive into the main course: a recent piece in The Federalist written in support of Rep. Andy Ogle's Assimilation Act. Why do these people hate families so much? Can Congress really end birthright citizenship? And can you really build an entire thinkpiece entirely out of red flags? Join us this week on Vapid Response Wednesday to find out. The National Visa Bulletin's website Whom We Shall Welcome (1952) The Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965 It's Long Past Time To Scrap Hart-Celler And Insist That Immigrants Assimilate (John Daniel Davidson, The Federalist; 5/15/2026) Watch us on YouTube! Check out the OA Linktree for all the places to go and things to do!

A new episode of the Center for Immigration Studies' podcast, Parsing Immigration Policy, examines the issuing of employment authorization documents (EADs), the use of executive discretion in granting work permits, and a proposed regulation affecting asylum applicants.The episode features CIS Director of Regulatory Affairs and Policy Elizabeth Jacobs and Senior Legal Fellow George Fishman discussing how millions of immigrants, including illegal aliens, parole recipients, TPS beneficiaries, DACA recipients, asylum applicants, and temporary visa holders, have received work permits without Congress's authorization.According to CIS estimates, roughly 15 million individuals currently possess work authorization and 4.3 million illegal aliens may be eligible for work permits. As a result, USCIS reports that it faces more than 1.7 million pending EAD applications.The discussion also focuses on a recent DHS regulation that would tighten eligibility for asylum-based work permits by increasing the waiting period from 180 to 365 days and barring applicants who are prima facie ineligible for asylum from receiving employment authorization and requiring the agency to pause acceptance of asylum-based EAD applications when affirmative asylum processing times exceed 180 days. Currently, processing times average over 1,200 days, while a new affirmative asylum applicant could expect to wait decades, according to DHS, before receiving a final decision on their claim.The episode explains that lengthy asylum processing times have created strong incentives for individuals to file asylum claims primarily to obtain work authorization and remain in the United States for extended periods while cases are pending. USCIS currently faces massive asylum and EAD backlogs, contributing to longer processing times across the immigration system.The conversation also examines broader legal questions surrounding executive authority to issue work permits under the Immigration and Nationality Act and whether decades of expanding administrative interpretation have effectively allowed the executive branch to operate an immigration system outside the numerical and statutory limits established by Congress.In his closing commentary, Mark Krikorian, the Center's executive director and podcast host highlights Acting ICE Director Todd Lyons' recent announcement that ICE identified more than 10,000 foreign students in the Optional Practical Training (OPT) program who claimed employment with “highly suspect employers” and that this represents “only the tip of the iceberg.” OPT, which allows foreign graduates to work in the United States for up to 12 months, or up to 36 months for STEM graduates, was created through executive action rather than congressional authorization. The Center has called for the elimination of the program many times in the past.HostMark Krikorian is the Executive Director of the Center for Immigration Studies.GuestsElizabeth Jacobs is the Director of Director of Regulatory Affairs and Policy at the Center for Immigration Studies. George Fishman is a Senior Legal Fellow at the Center for Immigration Studies.LinksDHS Proposes to Amend Asylum Work-Permit Rules to Reduce Fraud and AbuseDOJ: Asylum Applicants Are Skipping Immigration Court at Record Levels; Their goal all along was work permits, not protectionDHS Issues New Regulation to Automatically Extend the Validity Period of Many Work PermitsWork Authorization Expansion Attracts and Embeds Illegal ImmigrantsGovernment Data Reveal Millions of New Work Permits Issued in 2009OPT Needs to EndIntro MontageVoices in the opening montage:Sen. Barack Obama at a 2005 press conference.Sen. John McCain in a 2010 election ad.President Lyndon Johnson, upon signing the 1965 Immigration Act.Booker T. Washington, reading in 1908 from his 1895 Atlanta Exposition speech.Laraine Newman as a "Conehead" on SNL in 1977.Hillary Clinton in a 2003 radio interview.Cesar Chavez in a 1974 interview.House Speaker Nancy Pelosi speaking to reporters in 2019.Prof. George Borjas in a 2016 C-SPAN appearance.Sen. Jeff Sessions in 2008 comments on the Senate floor.Candidate Trump in 2015 campaign speech.Charlton Heston in "Planet of the Apes".

The creation of Medicare and Medicaid in 1965 enabled millions of Americans to meaningfully access healthcare for the first time — and dramatically increased demand for doctors. The passage of the Hart-Celler Immigration and Nationality Act a few months later enabled tens of thousands of immigrant physicians to migrate to the US. Since then, immigrant physicians have comprised between 25 — 40% of the physician workforce. Our guest on this episode is Professor Eram Alam, associate professor of history at Harvard. Alam specializes in the history of medicine, race, migration, and health during the twentieth century. In 2025, she published The Care of Foreigners: How Immigrant Physicians Changed US Healthcare.Over the course of our conversation, Professor Alam traces the legal, economic, and geopolitical factors that led to the US depending on immigrant physicians to care for many of the country's most vulnerable populations. We explore how American attitudes toward immigration have shifted over time and how the current state of politics has created a jarring disconnect: many patients depend on care from immigrant physicians and yet continue to view immigrants as un-American. Finally, Professor Alam reminds us how remembering everyone feels a little out of place, can help us see the person in front of us more fully. In this episode, you'll hear about: 3:00 - Dr. Alam's work as a professor and historian of healthcare and medicine7:30 - The background for Dr. Alam's book The Care of Foreigners. 13:00 - The story behind the 1965 legislation that led to the mass employment of physician immigrants in the US22:10 - How the role of immigrant physicians in the US healthcare system complicates the idea of meritocracy in medicine29:00 - The ways in which US immigration policy has changed the experience for foreign-born doctors over time 33:45 - Dr. Alam's view of how current immigration crackdowns fit into the larger historical narrative of US immigration 45:36 - How dehumanizing political rhetoric surrounding immigrants can blind us to the humanity of those who care for us53:26 - The unifying power in acknowledging discomfort in ourselves and othersIf you enjoyed this episode, please subscribe, rate, and review our show, available for free on Spotify, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts. If you know of a doctor, patient, or anyone working in health care who would love to explore meaning in medicine with us on the show, feel free to leave a suggestion in the comments or send an email to info@thedoctorsart.com.Copyright The Doctor's Art Podcast 2026

I never thought I'd be glued to the Supreme Court docket like this, but here we are, listeners, in the thick of it. Just last fall, the justices heard arguments in a blockbuster case straight out of President Donald Trump's playbook: whether his Executive Order 14160 violates the Citizenship Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment and the Immigration and Nationality Act. Rutgers Law School professors are calling it one of the most pivotal issues of 2026, as it challenges who gets U.S. citizenship by birth—potentially rewriting birthright rules that have stood for over a century. Imagine the ripple effects on families, borders, and elections if the Court sides with the challengers.But that's not all unfolding in these past few days. On April 21, Yankee Institute reported how Connecticut lawmakers are playing a risky game, pushing bills to tweak laws mid-litigation. Take Senate Bill 450—it's aimed right at an active lawsuit over the state's 2021 move to scrap religious exemptions for school vaccines. The bill declares that Connecticut's Religious Freedom Restoration Act won't apply to immunizations, even in pending cases, yanking the legal standard out from under the court's feet. Critics say it's a pattern: lawmakers repealing rules while courts decide if they were broken, raising red flags on accountability. Is it legal? Courts will say, but it smells like dodging scrutiny.Shifting to tax battles with echoes of big penalties, The National Law Review detailed IRS moves from April 6. Taxpayers in Hirsch v. US Tax Court are begging the Supreme Court to extend the 2024 SEC v. Jarkesy ruling, demanding jury trials for civil fraud penalties topping $15 million—tied to faked US Virgin Islands residency claims. A win could hobble IRS audits everywhere. Meanwhile, the IRS proposed overhauling its Voluntary Disclosure Program, swapping a one-time 75% fraud penalty for 20% accuracy-related hits spread over six years, plus a 90-day payback deadline. Practitioners cheer ditching the huge lump sum but warn cumulative costs could still sting.And labor law's buzzing too. JD Supra notes the National Labor Relations Board is back in action this April, with Crystal Stowe Carey as General Counsel since January, issuing guidance to protect workers' rights. Yet nominations like James Macy's on April 13 keep it in flux, shadowed by Supreme Court fights over agency independence.Whew, from citizenship showdowns to mid-case law tweaks, these legal fires are burning hot. What's next? Stay tuned, because the courts never sleep.Thanks for tuning in, listeners. Come back next week for more, and this has been a Quiet Please production—for more, check out Quiet Please Dot A I.Some great Deals https://amzn.to/49SJ3QsFor more check out http://www.quietplease.aiThis content was created in partnership and with the help of Artificial Intelligence AIThis episode includes AI-generated content.

I never thought I'd be glued to my screen at 6 AM on April 22, 2026, watching the legal world spin around President Donald Trump like a whirlwind, but here we are, listeners. Just yesterday, on April 21, the U.S. Department of Justice dropped a bombshell in Montgomery, Alabama—a federal grand jury indicted the Southern Poverty Law Center on 11 counts of wire fraud, false statements to a federally insured bank, and conspiracy to commit concealment money laundering. Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche and FBI Director Kash Patel announced it from Washington, with the FBI and IRS Criminal Investigation leading the probe. Two forfeiture actions aim to claw back the alleged proceeds, though it's all allegations for now, and a conviction could strip away their ill-gotten gains, according to the Justice Department's press release.But that's not all keeping Trump's legal orbit buzzing these past few days. Shift over to the Supreme Court, where his Executive Order 14160—aimed at redefining birthright citizenship under the Fourteenth Amendment—is hanging by a thread. SCOTUSblog reports that during two hours of oral arguments in Trump v. Barbara last week, justices gave the administration's push an icy stare, hinging on a novel take on "domicile." The government argues a mother's domicile should limit citizenship for kids born on U.S. soil, but without that buy-in, the order likely crumbles. Rutgers Law School professors predict a pivotal ruling this term, clashing with the Immigration and Nationality Act, and we might not hear until late June.Meanwhile, Trump's immigration enforcement machine keeps humming. Vasquez Law in Smithfield, North Carolina, details how fresh 2026 executive orders ramp up electronic monitoring, tighten green card rules for applicants, and boost local-federal cop cooperation from Florida to nationwide. Dreamers and undocumented folks face expedited removals, prioritized by public safety risks—policies echoing back to 2016 but supercharged now to protect Americans, as their blog outlines in a grim timeline from initial encounters to appeals dragging months.And don't sleep on the DOL front—Mayer Brown notes that on April 15, the Department of Labor released Technical Release 2026-01, sparked by Trump's December 2025 executive order. It cracks down on ERISA retirement plans' proxy voting and advisory services, ensuring fiduciary duty aligns with worker interests.From Alabama indictments to Supreme Court showdowns, Trump's legal moves are reshaping enforcement, citizenship, and more, proving the past week's drama is just the latest chapter. Thanks for tuning in, listeners—come back next week for more. This has been a Quiet Please production, and for more, check out Quiet Please Dot A I.Some great Deals https://amzn.to/49SJ3QsFor more check out http://www.quietplease.aiThis content was created in partnership and with the help of Artificial Intelligence AIThis episode includes AI-generated content.

I never thought I'd be glued to my screen this early on a crisp April morning in 2026, but here I am, coffee in hand, scrolling through the latest legal fireworks swirling around President Donald Trump. Just days ago, on April 1st, the Supreme Court chambers in Washington, D.C., echoed with oral arguments in Trump v. United States, a blockbuster case challenging Executive Order 14160. Rutgers Law School professors are calling it one of the most pivotal issues of the year, as it questions whether Trump's order redefining birthright citizenship under the Fourteenth Amendment and the Immigration and Nationality Act holds water. Picture this: the justices grilling lawyers over who qualifies as a U.S. citizen by birth, with Trump's team arguing it bolsters national security while opponents cry foul on constitutional grounds. Rutgers Law highlights how this could reshape immigration law overnight, sending shockwaves through families across America.But that's not all keeping me up at night. Fast-forward to April 7th, and G37 Chambers' International Legal News roundup drops a bombshell from the White House. They're defending Trump amid Middle East tensions, stating outright that "the US President, Donald Trump was making the entire region safer." It's tied to broader foreign policy moves, like Syria's new Investment Arbitration Centre in Damascus, launched post-Assad to lure investors—moves Trump champions as stabilizing the chaos. Guernica 37's weekly updates from the International Criminal Court and European Court of Human Rights paint a picture of global legal chess, with Trump's administration pushing back hard.Shifting gears to the courts back home, the Southern District of New York is heating up with a wild twist on sanctions. The National Law Review reports that the U.S. Department of the Treasury's Office of Foreign Assets Control issued then revoked a license for legal fees to defend former Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro and his wife, Cilia Flores de Maduro. They're on the SDN List, facing narcotics and firearms charges after a dramatic U.S. Army rendition via Operation Southern Spear. Maduro's lawyers are firing back, claiming it guts their Sixth Amendment right to counsel and Fifth Amendment due process—echoes that make you wonder if similar sanction snags could ever loop in U.S. political heavyweights like Trump.Meanwhile, the Supreme Court's fall 2025 arguments in Fernandez v. United States and Rutherford v. United States linger like a storm cloud, potentially curbing judges' power on compassionate releases for prisoners. Rutgers Law notes this could trap countless inmates in "extraordinary and compelling" limbo, a reform battle Trump-era policies have fueled.As the sun rises here on April 15th, these threads weave a tapestry of power, borders, and justice that's anything but sleepy. From the Supreme Court's marble halls to Damascus streets, Trump's legal orbit keeps the world spinning.Thanks for tuning in, listeners. Come back next week for more, and this has been a Quiet Please production. For more, check out Quiet Please Dot A I.Some great Deals https://amzn.to/49SJ3QsFor more check out http://www.quietplease.aiThis content was created in partnership and with the help of Artificial Intelligence AI

On April 1, the Supreme Court heard oral arguments in the case of Trump v. Barbara, which centered on a challenge to the president's executive order signed on Jan. 20, 2025, that attempted to end birthright citizenship. Over the course of two hours, the justices questioned U.S. Solicitor General D. John Sauer and the ACLU's Cecillia Wang on how the order comports with the 14th Amendment's Citizenship Clause, the ambassadors and tribal exceptions, the Immigration and Nationality Act, precedent set in the Court's 1898 decision in Wong Kim Ark, and more. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

I never thought I'd be glued to my screen at 6 AM on this crisp April 13th, 2026, watching the legal world swirl around President Donald Trump like a storm over Mar-a-Lago. But here we are, listeners, with the U.S. Supreme Court diving headfirst into his bold Executive Order 14160, challenging the very heart of birthright citizenship. According to Rutgers Law School's analysis of key issues to watch in 2026, this order seeks to redefine who qualifies for U.S. citizenship by birth, potentially clashing with the Citizenship Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment and the Immigration and Nationality Act. Oral arguments heated up just days ago on April 1st, as reported in coverage from the Maine Supreme Judicial Court proceedings, where lawyers like Peter J. Brann for the Senate President and David M. Kallin for the League of Women Voters of Maine squared off against Timothy C. Woodcock for the Republican National Committee. The stakes? A doctrinal earthquake that could reshape immigration law for generations.Just last week, on April 7th, G37 Chambers' International Legal News roundup from March 30 to April 3 highlighted the White House defending Trump, stating he was making the entire Middle East region safer amid foreign policy firestorms. But back home, the courts are buzzing. Picture this: the Supreme Court also just rejected Colorado's ban on conversion therapy in a March 31st update noted by Rutgers Law professors, a win for broader civil rights debates that echo Trump's administration priorities on limiting judicial overreach.Meanwhile, in a twist tying sanctions to legal battles, the U.S. Department of the Treasury's Office of Foreign Assets Control, or OFAC, issued then revoked a license for paying defense attorneys in the Southern District of New York case against former Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro and his wife Cilia Flores de Maduro, per G37 Chambers. They're on the SDN List, facing narcotics and firearm charges after a dramatic U.S. Army Operation Southern Spear rendition. Their lawyers argue it violates Sixth Amendment rights to counsel and Fifth Amendment due process—echoes of constitutional fights Trump knows all too well from his own past tussles.And don't sleep on Trump v. CASA, Inc., where the Supreme Court in June ruled that universal injunctive relief likely exceeds federal courts' equitable authority, as detailed in Goodwin's emerging issues report for 2026. This curbs sweeping injunctions, handing a victory to executive actions like Trump's. With the D.C. Circuit eyeing CFPB overhauls under acting director Russell Vought, who wants to slash 88% of staff, these rulings signal a federal retrenchment aligning with Trump's deregulatory push.As the sun rises over Washington, D.C., these battles paint Trump as the epicenter of 2026's legal drama—citizenship clashes, sanction skirmishes, and court curbs on power. It's a high-wire act, listeners, blending policy wins with constitutional showdowns.Thanks for tuning in, and come back next week for more. This has been a Quiet Please production, and for more, check out Quiet Please Dot A I.Some great Deals https://amzn.to/49SJ3QsFor more check out http://www.quietplease.aiThis content was created in partnership and with the help of Artificial Intelligence AI

# Legal Matters Involving Donald Trump: April 2026 UpdateWelcome back, listeners. We're diving straight into some significant legal developments that are unfolding right now involving former President Donald Trump and his administration's actions in 2026.The most pressing issue centers on an executive order that's creating waves across the legal establishment. According to reporting from a legal industry update on April 6th, 2026, the Trump administration has accused several major law firms of weaponizing the legal system against the former president. The firms in question include Perkins Coey, Wilmer Hale, Jenner and Block, and Susman Godfrey. What's remarkable here is the overwhelming response from the legal community itself. More than 800 law firms filed what's called Friends of the Court briefs with the US Court of Appeals for the DC Circuit, urging the court to reject the administration's appeal related to this executive order. That's not all. Over 200 law professors and more than 50 law student organizations also filed amicus briefs supporting these firms. Only five conservative groups filed briefs backing the administration's position. Oral arguments in this case are scheduled to begin on May 14th, making this one of the most closely watched legal battles of the moment.Another major legal issue involves citizenship itself. According to Rutgers Law School's analysis of 2026 legal issues, the Supreme Court is currently considering whether President Trump's Executive Order 14160 violates the Citizenship Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment and the Immigration and Nationality Act. This executive order seeks to redefine who may acquire U.S. citizenship by birth, representing one of the most consequential legal questions the high court will address this term.Meanwhile, in Florida specifically, there's an unusual development regarding gun rights. According to WUSF's reporting on Florida legal issues, the state's Attorney General James Uthmeier has taken the unusual step of refusing to defend a Florida law that prevents people under age 21 from buying rifles and other long guns. This law passed nearly eight years ago following the mass shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland. The National Rifle Association has challenged this law, and the U.S. Supreme Court is deciding whether to take up that challenge. The fact that Florida's own attorney general won't defend the state's law adds a remarkable layer of complexity to this case.These developments paint a picture of an administration actively engaged in multiple legal battles, from questions about executive authority and citizenship to disputes with the legal profession itself. The coming weeks and months will reveal how these cases unfold and what implications they'll have for the broader legal landscape.Thank you so much for tuning in, listeners. Be sure to come back next week for more legal updates and analysis. This has been a Quiet Please production. For more, visit Quiet Please dot A I.Some great Deals https://amzn.to/49SJ3QsFor more check out http://www.quietplease.aiThis content was created in partnership and with the help of Artificial Intelligence AI

Over the past year, like no other time in recent memory, immigration law and enforcement has been in the spotlight. Guest William Menard is a longtime immigration attorney and a managing partner at the California immigration law firm Root Law Group. He's also the host of the immigration-focused podcast “The American Immigrant.”  Asylum and deportation cases may get the headlines, but the field of immigration law is broad, including the impact on families, employment, and the needs of American businesses. And the added twist is that while attorneys handle these cases and study the laws, often the earliest hearings are held before a non-lawyer, saddling attorneys with an extra emphasis on clear communication. The Immigration and Nationality Act provides a lot of freedom to administrators making immigration-related decisions, and policies can vary from federal administration to administration, granting the U.S. Attorney General wide latitude. Attorneys litigating immigration cases are constantly challenged to keep up with the latest policies. Often, the old rules don't apply.  Hear how an immigration attorney is navigating shifting policies and working to serve clients. As Menard says, “We've got to work harder.” Plus, a quick tip from corporate attorney Lauren Williams on “keeping your poker face” in court. “Your face is an important part of your advocacy because everyone is watching it … Stay composed.” Have a question, comment, or suggestion for an upcoming episode? Get in touch at MRogson@SkywardInsurance.com or JAReederJr@gmail.com. Resources: Immigration and Nationality Act American Bar Association American Bar Association Litigation Section

In this episode, Michael dives into the contentious issue of birthright citizenship, questioning the current interpretation and its national security implications. He discusses the potential consequences of the Supreme Court's decision, citing the example of European nations that have struggled with mass migration. Michael introduces an unlikely ally, Harvard Law professor emeritus Alan Dershowitz, who argues that Congress has the power to define who is subject to the jurisdiction of the United States. Michael presents options for Congress to take action, including amending the Immigration and Nationality Act and targeting birth tourism.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

A case in which the Court will decide whether a noncitizen who is stopped on the Mexican side of the U.S.-Mexico border “arrives in the United States” within the meaning of Immigration and Nationality Act, 8 U.S.C. 1101 et seq., which provides that a noncitizen who “arrives in the United States” may apply for asylum and must be inspected by an immigration officer.

Each month, a panel of constitutional experts convenes to discuss the Court’s upcoming docket sitting by sitting. The cases covered in this preview are listed below.Watson v. Republican National Committee, (March 23) - Election Law; Issue(s): Whether the federal election-day statutes, 2 U.S.C. § 7, 2 U.S.C. § 1, and 3 U.S.C. § 1, preempt a state law that allows ballots that are cast by federal election day to be received by election officials after that day.Keathley v. Buddy Ayers Construction, Inc., (March 24) - Labor and Employment Law; Issue(s): Whether the doctrine of judicial estoppel can be invoked to bar a plaintiff who fails to disclose a civil claim in bankruptcy filings from pursuing that claim simply because there is a potential motive for nondisclosure, regardless of whether there is evidence that the plaintiff in fact acted in bad faith.Noem v. Al Otro Lado, (March 24) - Immigration Law; Issue(s): Whether an alien who is stopped on the Mexican side of the U.S.–Mexico border “arrives in the United States” within the meaning of the Immigration and Nationality Act, 8 U.S.C. 1101 et seq., which provides that an alien who “arrives in the United States” may apply for asylum and must be inspected by an immigration officer.Flower Foods, Inc. v. Brock, (March 25) - Labor and Employment Law; Issue(s): Whether workers who deliver locally goods that travel in interstate commerce — but who do not transport the goods across borders nor interact with vehicles that cross borders — are “transportation workers” “engaged in foreign or interstate commerce” for purposes of the exemption in Section 1 of the Federal Arbitration Act.Abouammo v. United States, (March 30) - Proper Venue, Criminal Law; Issue(s): Whether venue is proper in a district where no offense conduct took place, so long as the statute’s intent element “contemplates” effects that could occur there.Jules v. Andre Balazs Properties, (March 30) - Jurisdiction; Issue(s): Whether a federal court that initially exercises jurisdiction and stays a case pending arbitration maintains jurisdiction over a post-arbitration Section 9 or 10 application where jurisdiction would otherwise be lacking.Pitchford v. Cain, (March 31) - Criminal Appellate Litigation; Issue(s): Whether, under the standards set forth in the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996, 28 U.S.C. § 2254(d), the Mississippi Supreme Court unreasonably determined that petitioner waived his right to rebut the prosecutor's asserted race-neutral reasons for exercising peremptory strikes against four black jurors.Trump v. Barbara, (April 1) - Birthright Citizenship, Fourteenth Amendment; Whether Executive Order No. 14,160 complies on its face with the citizenship clause of the 14th Amendment and with 8 U.S.C. § 1401(a), which codifies that clause.Featuring:Lisa L. Dixon, Executive Director, Center for Election ConfidenceHon. Mike Hurst, Partner, Phelps Dunbar LLPZac Morgan, Senior Litigation Counsel, Washington Legal FoundationEric Wessan, Solicitor General, Iowa Office of the Attorney General(Moderator) Oliver Dunford, Senior Attorney, Pacific Legal Foundation

20 Minutes of Shorts. The Re-Migration Act, Long COVID Symptoms are Actually Vaccine Injuries, Julie Kelly J6 Prosecutions, COVID Vax- Billions of Brains Injured, College Grads Unemployed   21 million Americans went to college and still earn less than $20 an hour. The proposed Re-Migration Act to revoke Citizenship since 1965 If citizenship was obtained through false statements, omissions, visa fraud, welfare fraud, or concealed criminal history. Professor Sucharit Bhakdi on COVID Vax- "We're seeing billions of people whose brains are not working anymore." Long COVID symptoms—exhaustion, brain fog, insomnia, fatigue—are actually vaccine injuries. FEMINISM WAS CREATED TO END CHRISTIANITY? JULIE KELLY J6 Long COVID symptoms—exhaustion, brain fog, insomnia, fatigue—are actually vaccine injuries.   Post Peter St Onge, Ph.D. @profstonge 21 million Americans went to college and still earn less than $20 an hour. College grads now make up a record 25% of unemployed. And their unemployment rate is now higher than high school grads. College degrees ain't what they used to be.   Post Andrew Branca Show @TheBrancaShow This isn't radical—it's black-letter immigration law being restated. The proposed Re-Migration Act of 2025/2026 (H.R. ___) amends the Immigration and Nationality Act to require DHS and USCIS to review naturalizations issued since 1965 for fraud, criminal concealment, or ineligibility. The legal standard is simple: preponderance of the evidence (51%). If citizenship was obtained through false statements, omissions, visa fraud, welfare fraud, or concealed criminal history, it can be revoked—because fraud voids consent ab initio. That principle has existed for decades. Naturalization is not magic. It is a conditional legal status dependent on truthful disclosure and lawful conduct. If someone lied at the visa stage, lied at the green-card stage, or lied at naturalization, the chain collapses—and denaturalization follows as a matter of law. That's not punishment. It's correction of fraud.   FEMINISM WAS CREATED TO END CHRISTIANITY? “The dragon, I really think, is feminism.” - Author Carrie Gress explains that until we get to the heart of what's feeding abortion, which is she says is “really feminism” we're not going to be able to not going to be able to end it. JackoWilliams64 @JackoWilliams64 JackoWilliams64 reposted Real America's Voice (RAV) @RealAmVoice @Bannons_WarRoom   JULIE KELLY: The Biden DOJ did not want to give full access to security footage from J6 because it would have shown the truth! This is why Parler was shut down! It was FILLED with clips of what police did to protestors that day. JackoWilliams64 reposted Bannon's WarRoom @Bannons_WarRoom @julie_kelly2   Professor Sucharit Bhakdi: "I am no longer optimistic anymore. And the reason is very simple." "I'm afraid that these mRNA vaccines have already done their job." "We're seeing billions of people whose brains are not working anymore." Post healthbot @thehealthb0t   Everything the media told you about Long COVID is a lie. COVID Vaccines alter T-Cells, causing VAIDS. Yale study on “post-vaccination syndrome” reveals Long COVID symptoms—exhaustion, brain fog, insomnia, fatigue—are actually vaccine injuries. Post Dr. Dawn Michael @DawnsMission

This Day in Legal History: 18th Amendment to the US ConstitutionOn January 16, 1919, the 18th Amendment to the United States Constitution was ratified, marking a pivotal moment in American legal history by establishing the prohibition of alcoholic beverages. The amendment prohibited “the manufacture, sale, or transportation of intoxicating liquors” for consumption in the United States and its territories. It was the culmination of decades of temperance activism, led by organizations such as the Women's Christian Temperance Union and the Anti-Saloon League, which argued that alcohol was responsible for societal problems including crime, poverty, and domestic violence.The amendment passed Congress in December 1917, but ratification by the states was required for it to take effect. That threshold was reached on January 16, 1919, when Nebraska became the 36th state to ratify it. One year later, on January 17, 1920, the Volstead Act—the federal statute enforcing the amendment—went into effect, ushering in the Prohibition era.However, the law led to unintended consequences. Rather than curbing alcohol consumption, it fueled the rise of organized crime, as bootleggers and speakeasies flourished across the country. Enforcement proved difficult and inconsistent, and public support for prohibition waned through the 1920s.Ultimately, the 21st Amendment repealed the 18th Amendment on December 5, 1933, making it the only constitutional amendment ever to be entirely repealed. The legacy of the 18th Amendment remains significant as a historical experiment in moral legislation and the limits of constitutional power.A federal judge in Virginia will soon decide whether Dominion Energy can resume construction on its $11.2 billion Coastal Virginia Offshore Wind project, which was halted by the Trump administration last month. The Interior Department paused five offshore wind projects on December 22, citing classified concerns about radar interference and national security. Dominion is now challenging that pause in court, arguing that it violated procedural and due process laws and is causing the company significant financial harm—around $5 million in daily losses. Dominion has already invested nearly $9 billion in the project, which began construction in 2023 and is planned to power 600,000 homes.Similar legal challenges from other developers, including Orsted and Equinor, have already succeeded in federal courts in Washington, allowing their Northeast offshore wind projects to proceed. Those decisions raise the stakes for Dominion's case, which could influence the broader offshore wind industry amid continued hostility from the Trump administration toward the sector. Trump has long criticized wind energy as costly and inefficient. While the outcomes of these lawsuits may let projects move forward, industry uncertainty remains due to ongoing legal battles and political opposition.US judge to weigh Dominion request to restart Virginia offshore wind project stopped by Trump | ReutersA federal judge in Boston, William Young, said he will issue an order to protect non-citizen academics involved in a lawsuit challenging the Trump administration's deportation of pro-Palestinian student activists. The upcoming order would block the government from altering the immigration status of the scholars who are parties to the case, absent court approval. Young emphasized that any such action would be presumed retaliatory and would require the administration to prove it had a legitimate basis.The lawsuit stems from Trump's executive orders in early 2025 directing agencies to crack down on antisemitism, which led to arrests and visa cancellations for several students, including Columbia graduate Mahmoud Khalil and Tufts student Rumeysa Ozturk. These moves targeted those expressing pro-Palestinian or anti-Israel views on campus. Young previously ruled that these actions violated the First Amendment by chilling free speech rights of non-citizen academics.In his comments, Young described Trump as “authoritarian” and sharply criticized what he called the administration's “fearful approach to freedom.” He limited his forthcoming order to members of academic groups like the AAUP and Middle East Studies Association, rejecting a broader nationwide block as too expansive. Meanwhile, the administration, which plans to appeal Young's earlier ruling, accused the judge of political bias.US judge to shield scholars who challenged deporting of pro-Palestinian campus activists | ReutersA federal judge in California has dismissed a lawsuit filed by the U.S. Justice Department seeking access to the state's full, unredacted voter registration list. Judge David Carter ruled that the department's claims were not strong enough under existing civil rights and voting laws, and that turning over detailed voter data—such as names, birth dates, driver's license numbers, and parts of Social Security numbers—would violate privacy protections.Carter emphasized that centralizing such sensitive information at the federal level could intimidate voters and suppress turnout by making people fear misuse of their personal data. The lawsuit, filed in September by the Trump administration, targeted California and other Democrat-led states for allegedly failing to properly maintain voter rolls, citing federal law as justification for demanding the data.California Secretary of State Shirley Weber welcomed the decision, stating her commitment to defending voting rights and opposing the administration's actions. The DOJ had reportedly been in discussions with the Department of Homeland Security to use voter data in criminal and immigration probes. Critics argue the push was driven by baseless claims from Trump and his allies that non-citizens are voting in large numbers.US judge dismisses Justice Department lawsuit seeking California voter details | ReutersWhy can't people harmed by ICE just sue the agents themselves?U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) is a federal agency under the Department of Homeland Security, created in 2003. It enforces immigration laws and investigates criminal activities involving border control, customs, and immigration. ICE derives its authority from various federal statutes, including the Immigration and Nationality Act, and its agents operate with broad discretion during enforcement actions.Suing ICE agents or the agency itself is legally difficult. Individuals cannot usually sue federal agents directly because of sovereign immunity, a legal doctrine that protects the government and its employees from lawsuits unless explicitly allowed by law. One such exception is the Federal Tort Claims Act (FTCA) of 1946, which permits lawsuits against the federal government when its employees cause injury or damage while acting within the scope of their employment. Under the FTCA, victims can bring wrongful death or negligence claims, as Renee Good's family is now considering.However, FTCA claims are limited. Plaintiffs cannot seek punitive damages or a jury trial, and compensation is capped based on state law where the incident occurred. The government is also shielded from liability for discretionary decisions made by its employees—meaning if the ICE agent used judgment during the incident and it's deemed reasonable, the claim can be dismissed. In Good's case, the government will likely argue self-defense.Suing ICE agents personally is even harder. The Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents case in 1971 created a narrow legal path for suing federal officials for constitutional violations, but courts have since restricted its use. In 2022, the Supreme Court ruled that Bivens does not apply to border agents conducting immigration enforcement, further insulating ICE officers from personal liability.Criminal prosecution of federal agents is also rare. State prosecutors may bring charges, but only if they can prove the agent acted clearly outside the scope of their duties and in an objectively unlawful way—a high bar that is seldom met.This week's closing theme is by Ludwig van Beethoven. Beethoven, one of the most influential composers in Western music history, revolutionized the classical tradition with works that bridged the Classical and Romantic eras.This week's theme is Franz Liszt's transcription of Beethoven's Symphony No. 5 in C minor, Op. 67 — specifically, the first movement, Allegro con brio, catalogued as S.464/5. As one of the most iconic works in classical music, Beethoven's Fifth needs little introduction, but hearing it through Liszt's fingers offers a fresh perspective on its brilliance. In this solo piano version, Liszt doesn't simply condense Beethoven's orchestral power—he reimagines it, capturing the storm, structure, and spirit of the original with astonishing fidelity and virtuosity.The movement begins with the unforgettable four-note “fate” motif, its rhythmic insistence rendered on the piano with punch and precision. From there, Liszt unfolds Beethoven's dramatic argument, demanding the pianist conjure the textures of a full orchestra with nothing but ten fingers and a well-calibrated pedal. Every surging crescendo, sudden silence, and harmonic twist remains intact, though filtered through Liszt's Romantic sensibility and pianistic imagination.It's a piece that asks as much of the performer as it does of the listener—requiring clarity, power, and emotional depth. As a transcription, it's both a tribute and a transformation, placing Beethoven's revolutionary energy in the hands of a single interpreter. We chose this movement not just for its fame, but for how it exemplifies two musical giants in dialogue—Beethoven, the architect of modern symphonic form, and Liszt, the artist who made the orchestra speak through the piano.Without further ado, Beethoven's Symphony No. 5 in C minor, Op. 67 — the first movement, Allegro con brio. Enjoy! This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.minimumcomp.com/subscribe

While many countries now allow multiple citizenship, Japan maintains a single-nationality principle.Documentary filmmaker Megumi Nishikura reflects on how Japan's Nationality Act affects people living across borders. - ドキュメンタリー映画『ハーフ』から10年以上。 日本の“社会の現実”を世界に伝えてきたドキュメンタリー映像監督・西倉めぐみさんが、 次に取り上げるテーマは日本の「国籍法」。

Donate (no account necessary) | Subscribe (account required) Join Bryan Dean Wright, former CIA Operations Officer, as he dives into today's top stories shaping America and the world. In this Monday Headline Brief of The Wright Report, Bryan covers the nation's grief and anger after the Washington terror attack, the deepening crisis within America's immigration system, and President Trump's most sweeping border actions yet. He also examines the political backlash, the debate over assimilation, and the global pressures shaping events from Europe to Venezuela. America Mourns and Demands Answers: Staff Sgt. Andrew Wolfe remains in critical condition while Specialist Sarah Beckstrom is laid to rest after last week's terror attack in Washington. DHS confirmed the attacker, Rahmanullah Lakanwal, was a former CIA-backed Afghan Zero Unit fighter who was radicalized after arrival in the United States. Investigators say he drifted between Washington State, Arizona, and the East Coast with little oversight, revealing systemic vetting failures across multiple administrations.   Vetting Breakdown Exposed: Inspector General reports show that over two hundred thousand Afghans brought into the country during the 2021 evacuation were admitted with almost no reliable databases, poor ID verification, and limited interagency cooperation. None received continual vetting after entry. Bryan explains why "strict vetting" is a political myth and why U.S. systems remain unable to verify criminal history, ideology, or cultural fit for many migrants.   Trump Orders the Most Sweeping Immigration Freeze in Decades: The President has paused all asylum applications, halted Afghan visa processing, and instructed his team to permanently pause migration from Third World nations to reset the system. Green card and citizenship requests from nineteen countries are suspended. Trump is also considering the denaturalization of foreign-born citizens who fail loyalty or cultural compatibility standards. Legal scholars note that Section 212(f) of the Immigration and Nationality Act grants the President broad authority to take such steps.   Political Firestorm and Cultural Divide: Republicans and most Independents support a historic crackdown, while Democrats accuse Trump of racism and xenophobia. Some leaders, including Representative Jasmin Crockett and Representative Debbie Wasserman Schultz, blamed the National Guard deployments for the attack. Bryan argues that many progressive lawmakers reject assimilation because they reject the idea of American culture itself, pointing to recent examples in education, media, and politics.   College Degrees Lose Appeal: New polling shows only 33 percent of Americans believe a four-year degree is worth the cost. Interest in vocational training and maritime careers is rising as tuition increases outpace wages. Maritime academies report that graduates earn more than $200,000 a year after six months of work.   The Autopen Controversy: President Trump announced he is canceling all executive actions signed by Joe Biden through the autopen, citing concerns that Biden did not authorize their use. The Justice Department may soon bring cases that will force the Supreme Court to clarify the legality of autopen approvals.   Debate Over Unlawful Orders Heats Up: Reports claim Secretary of War Pete Hegseth ordered a second strike on a cartel boat. Hegseth denies it. Senator Mark Kelly suggested troops should rely on intuition when evaluating orders, which critics warn could lead to chaos and politicized discipline. The issue may shape U.S. operations in the Caribbean.   Global Flashpoints: Venezuela and Europe: Trump rejected demands from Venezuela's Nicolás Maduro for guaranteed amnesty and military control as part of an exit deal. Maduro may attempt a guerrilla resistance if forced out. In Europe, Islamist protests are disrupting Christmas markets in Belgium and Germany, where security costs have surged. France's populist movement is surging in polls as crime tied to migrants fuels public frustration. Portugal's populist party Chega is also now tied for first place in national polling.   Medical News: A major UK study finds that weight loss drugs like Mounjaro and Zepbound must be taken long-term to maintain results, with many patients regaining most of the weight after stopping treatment.   "And you shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free." - John 8:32     Keywords: Washington DC terror attack Afghan Zero Unit, Rahmanullah Lakanwal vetting failure, Trump asylum freeze Section 212f, de-naturalization debate immigration reform, Jasmin Crockett Guard criticism, Debbie Wasserman Schultz Trump blame, college degree value drop vocational training, autopen Biden executive actions, Hegseth double tap allegation, Venezuela Maduro exit talks, Belgium Germany Christmas market threats, France National Rally Bardella, Portugal Chega Ventura, GLP-1 weight loss drug study UK

For more than 60 years, the United States has trained fewer physicians than it needs, relying instead on the economically expedient option of soliciting immigrant physicians trained at the expense of other countries. The passage of the Hart–Celler Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965 expedited the entry of foreign medical graduates (FMGs) from postcolonial South Asia and sent them to provide care in shortage areas throughout the United States. Although this arrangement was conceived as temporary, over the decades it has become a permanent fixture of the medical system, with FMGs comprising at least a quarter of the physician labor force since the act became law. This cohort of practitioners has not been extensively studied, rendering the impacts of immigration and foreign policy on the everyday mechanics of US health care obscure. In The Care of Foreigners: How Immigrant Physicians Changed US Healthcare, Dr. Alam foregrounds global dynamics embedded in the medical system to ask how and why Asian physicians—and especially practitioners from South Asia—have become integral to US medical practice and ubiquitous in the US public imaginary. Drawing on transcripts of congressional hearings; medical, scientific, and social scientific literature; ethnographies; oral histories; and popular media, Dr. Alam explores the enduring consequences of postcolonial physician migration. Combining theoretical and methodological insights from a range of disciplines, this book analyzes both the care provided by immigrant physicians as well as the care extended to them as foreigners. Our guest is: Dr. Eram Alam, who specializes in the history of medicine, with a particular emphasis on globalization, race, migration, and health during the twentieth century. She is an assistant professor in the Department of the History of Science at Harvard University. She received her PhD in History and Sociology of Science from the University of Pennsylvania, and holds a BA and BS from Northwestern University and a MA from the University of Chicago. Our host is: Dr. Christina Gessler, who is a developmental editor, and the producer of the Academic Life podcast. She writes the show's newsletter at ChristinaGessler.Substack.com Listeners may enjoy this playlist: Where Is Home? Immigration Realities Secret Harvests Who Gets Believed The House on Henry Street Womanist Bioethics Welcome to Academic Life, the podcast for your academic journey—and beyond! You can support the show by sharing episodes, or by donating here. Join us again to learn from more experts inside and outside the academy, and around the world. Missed any of the 275+ Academic Life episodes? Find them here. And thank you for listening! Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/american-studies

For more than 60 years, the United States has trained fewer physicians than it needs, relying instead on the economically expedient option of soliciting immigrant physicians trained at the expense of other countries. The passage of the Hart–Celler Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965 expedited the entry of foreign medical graduates (FMGs) from postcolonial South Asia and sent them to provide care in shortage areas throughout the United States. Although this arrangement was conceived as temporary, over the decades it has become a permanent fixture of the medical system, with FMGs comprising at least a quarter of the physician labor force since the act became law. This cohort of practitioners has not been extensively studied, rendering the impacts of immigration and foreign policy on the everyday mechanics of US health care obscure. In The Care of Foreigners: How Immigrant Physicians Changed US Healthcare, Dr. Alam foregrounds global dynamics embedded in the medical system to ask how and why Asian physicians—and especially practitioners from South Asia—have become integral to US medical practice and ubiquitous in the US public imaginary. Drawing on transcripts of congressional hearings; medical, scientific, and social scientific literature; ethnographies; oral histories; and popular media, Dr. Alam explores the enduring consequences of postcolonial physician migration. Combining theoretical and methodological insights from a range of disciplines, this book analyzes both the care provided by immigrant physicians as well as the care extended to them as foreigners. Our guest is: Dr. Eram Alam, who specializes in the history of medicine, with a particular emphasis on globalization, race, migration, and health during the twentieth century. She is an assistant professor in the Department of the History of Science at Harvard University. She received her PhD in History and Sociology of Science from the University of Pennsylvania, and holds a BA and BS from Northwestern University and a MA from the University of Chicago. Our host is: Dr. Christina Gessler, who is a developmental editor, and the producer of the Academic Life podcast. She writes the show's newsletter at ChristinaGessler.Substack.com Listeners may enjoy this playlist: Where Is Home? Immigration Realities Secret Harvests Who Gets Believed The House on Henry Street Womanist Bioethics Welcome to Academic Life, the podcast for your academic journey—and beyond! You can support the show by sharing episodes, or by donating here. Join us again to learn from more experts inside and outside the academy, and around the world. Missed any of the 275+ Academic Life episodes? Find them here. And thank you for listening! Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/public-policy

For more than 60 years, the United States has trained fewer physicians than it needs, relying instead on the economically expedient option of soliciting immigrant physicians trained at the expense of other countries. The passage of the Hart–Celler Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965 expedited the entry of foreign medical graduates (FMGs) from postcolonial South Asia and sent them to provide care in shortage areas throughout the United States. Although this arrangement was conceived as temporary, over the decades it has become a permanent fixture of the medical system, with FMGs comprising at least a quarter of the physician labor force since the act became law. This cohort of practitioners has not been extensively studied, rendering the impacts of immigration and foreign policy on the everyday mechanics of US health care obscure. In The Care of Foreigners: How Immigrant Physicians Changed US Healthcare, Dr. Alam foregrounds global dynamics embedded in the medical system to ask how and why Asian physicians—and especially practitioners from South Asia—have become integral to US medical practice and ubiquitous in the US public imaginary. Drawing on transcripts of congressional hearings; medical, scientific, and social scientific literature; ethnographies; oral histories; and popular media, Dr. Alam explores the enduring consequences of postcolonial physician migration. Combining theoretical and methodological insights from a range of disciplines, this book analyzes both the care provided by immigrant physicians as well as the care extended to them as foreigners. Our guest is: Dr. Eram Alam, who specializes in the history of medicine, with a particular emphasis on globalization, race, migration, and health during the twentieth century. She is an assistant professor in the Department of the History of Science at Harvard University. She received her PhD in History and Sociology of Science from the University of Pennsylvania, and holds a BA and BS from Northwestern University and a MA from the University of Chicago. Our host is: Dr. Christina Gessler, who is a developmental editor, and the producer of the Academic Life podcast. She writes the show's newsletter at ChristinaGessler.Substack.com Listeners may enjoy this playlist: Where Is Home? Immigration Realities Secret Harvests Who Gets Believed The House on Henry Street Womanist Bioethics Welcome to Academic Life, the podcast for your academic journey—and beyond! You can support the show by sharing episodes, or by donating here. Join us again to learn from more experts inside and outside the academy, and around the world. Missed any of the 275+ Academic Life episodes? Find them here. And thank you for listening! Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/politics-and-polemics

For more than 60 years, the United States has trained fewer physicians than it needs, relying instead on the economically expedient option of soliciting immigrant physicians trained at the expense of other countries. The passage of the Hart–Celler Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965 expedited the entry of foreign medical graduates (FMGs) from postcolonial South Asia and sent them to provide care in shortage areas throughout the United States. Although this arrangement was conceived as temporary, over the decades it has become a permanent fixture of the medical system, with FMGs comprising at least a quarter of the physician labor force since the act became law. This cohort of practitioners has not been extensively studied, rendering the impacts of immigration and foreign policy on the everyday mechanics of US health care obscure. In The Care of Foreigners: How Immigrant Physicians Changed US Healthcare, Dr. Alam foregrounds global dynamics embedded in the medical system to ask how and why Asian physicians—and especially practitioners from South Asia—have become integral to US medical practice and ubiquitous in the US public imaginary. Drawing on transcripts of congressional hearings; medical, scientific, and social scientific literature; ethnographies; oral histories; and popular media, Dr. Alam explores the enduring consequences of postcolonial physician migration. Combining theoretical and methodological insights from a range of disciplines, this book analyzes both the care provided by immigrant physicians as well as the care extended to them as foreigners. Our guest is: Dr. Eram Alam, who specializes in the history of medicine, with a particular emphasis on globalization, race, migration, and health during the twentieth century. She is an assistant professor in the Department of the History of Science at Harvard University. She received her PhD in History and Sociology of Science from the University of Pennsylvania, and holds a BA and BS from Northwestern University and a MA from the University of Chicago. Our host is: Dr. Christina Gessler, who is a developmental editor, and the producer of the Academic Life podcast. She writes the show's newsletter at ChristinaGessler.Substack.com Listeners may enjoy this playlist: Where Is Home? Immigration Realities Secret Harvests Who Gets Believed The House on Henry Street Womanist Bioethics Welcome to Academic Life, the podcast for your academic journey—and beyond! You can support the show by sharing episodes, or by donating here. Join us again to learn from more experts inside and outside the academy, and around the world. Missed any of the 275+ Academic Life episodes? Find them here. And thank you for listening! Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/new-books-network

For more than 60 years, the United States has trained fewer physicians than it needs, relying instead on the economically expedient option of soliciting immigrant physicians trained at the expense of other countries. The passage of the Hart–Celler Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965 expedited the entry of foreign medical graduates (FMGs) from postcolonial South Asia and sent them to provide care in shortage areas throughout the United States. Although this arrangement was conceived as temporary, over the decades it has become a permanent fixture of the medical system, with FMGs comprising at least a quarter of the physician labor force since the act became law. This cohort of practitioners has not been extensively studied, rendering the impacts of immigration and foreign policy on the everyday mechanics of US health care obscure. In The Care of Foreigners: How Immigrant Physicians Changed US Healthcare, Dr. Alam foregrounds global dynamics embedded in the medical system to ask how and why Asian physicians—and especially practitioners from South Asia—have become integral to US medical practice and ubiquitous in the US public imaginary. Drawing on transcripts of congressional hearings; medical, scientific, and social scientific literature; ethnographies; oral histories; and popular media, Dr. Alam explores the enduring consequences of postcolonial physician migration. Combining theoretical and methodological insights from a range of disciplines, this book analyzes both the care provided by immigrant physicians as well as the care extended to them as foreigners. Our guest is: Dr. Eram Alam, who specializes in the history of medicine, with a particular emphasis on globalization, race, migration, and health during the twentieth century. She is an assistant professor in the Department of the History of Science at Harvard University. She received her PhD in History and Sociology of Science from the University of Pennsylvania, and holds a BA and BS from Northwestern University and a MA from the University of Chicago. Our host is: Dr. Christina Gessler, who is a developmental editor, and the producer of the Academic Life podcast. She writes the show's newsletter at ChristinaGessler.Substack.com Listeners may enjoy this playlist: Where Is Home? Immigration Realities Secret Harvests Who Gets Believed The House on Henry Street Womanist Bioethics Welcome to Academic Life, the podcast for your academic journey—and beyond! You can support the show by sharing episodes, or by donating here. Join us again to learn from more experts inside and outside the academy, and around the world. Missed any of the 275+ Academic Life episodes? Find them here. And thank you for listening! Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/medicine

For more than 60 years, the United States has trained fewer physicians than it needs, relying instead on the economically expedient option of soliciting immigrant physicians trained at the expense of other countries. The passage of the Hart–Celler Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965 expedited the entry of foreign medical graduates (FMGs) from postcolonial South Asia and sent them to provide care in shortage areas throughout the United States. Although this arrangement was conceived as temporary, over the decades it has become a permanent fixture of the medical system, with FMGs comprising at least a quarter of the physician labor force since the act became law. This cohort of practitioners has not been extensively studied, rendering the impacts of immigration and foreign policy on the everyday mechanics of US health care obscure. In The Care of Foreigners: How Immigrant Physicians Changed US Healthcare, Dr. Alam foregrounds global dynamics embedded in the medical system to ask how and why Asian physicians—and especially practitioners from South Asia—have become integral to US medical practice and ubiquitous in the US public imaginary. Drawing on transcripts of congressional hearings; medical, scientific, and social scientific literature; ethnographies; oral histories; and popular media, Dr. Alam explores the enduring consequences of postcolonial physician migration. Combining theoretical and methodological insights from a range of disciplines, this book analyzes both the care provided by immigrant physicians as well as the care extended to them as foreigners. Our guest is: Dr. Eram Alam, who specializes in the history of medicine, with a particular emphasis on globalization, race, migration, and health during the twentieth century. She is an assistant professor in the Department of the History of Science at Harvard University. She received her PhD in History and Sociology of Science from the University of Pennsylvania, and holds a BA and BS from Northwestern University and a MA from the University of Chicago. Our host is: Dr. Christina Gessler, who is a developmental editor, and the producer of the Academic Life podcast. She writes the show's newsletter at ChristinaGessler.Substack.com Listeners may enjoy this playlist: Where Is Home? Immigration Realities Secret Harvests Who Gets Believed The House on Henry Street Womanist Bioethics Welcome to Academic Life, the podcast for your academic journey—and beyond! You can support the show by sharing episodes, or by donating here. Join us again to learn from more experts inside and outside the academy, and around the world. Missed any of the 275+ Academic Life episodes? Find them here. And thank you for listening! Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/south-asian-studies

For more than 60 years, the United States has trained fewer physicians than it needs, relying instead on the economically expedient option of soliciting immigrant physicians trained at the expense of other countries. The passage of the Hart–Celler Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965 expedited the entry of foreign medical graduates (FMGs) from postcolonial South Asia and sent them to provide care in shortage areas throughout the United States. Although this arrangement was conceived as temporary, over the decades it has become a permanent fixture of the medical system, with FMGs comprising at least a quarter of the physician labor force since the act became law. This cohort of practitioners has not been extensively studied, rendering the impacts of immigration and foreign policy on the everyday mechanics of US health care obscure. In The Care of Foreigners: How Immigrant Physicians Changed US Healthcare, Dr. Alam foregrounds global dynamics embedded in the medical system to ask how and why Asian physicians—and especially practitioners from South Asia—have become integral to US medical practice and ubiquitous in the US public imaginary. Drawing on transcripts of congressional hearings; medical, scientific, and social scientific literature; ethnographies; oral histories; and popular media, Dr. Alam explores the enduring consequences of postcolonial physician migration. Combining theoretical and methodological insights from a range of disciplines, this book analyzes both the care provided by immigrant physicians as well as the care extended to them as foreigners. Our guest is: Dr. Eram Alam, who specializes in the history of medicine, with a particular emphasis on globalization, race, migration, and health during the twentieth century. She is an assistant professor in the Department of the History of Science at Harvard University. She received her PhD in History and Sociology of Science from the University of Pennsylvania, and holds a BA and BS from Northwestern University and a MA from the University of Chicago. Our host is: Dr. Christina Gessler, who is a developmental editor, and the producer of the Academic Life podcast. She writes the show's newsletter at ChristinaGessler.Substack.com Listeners may enjoy this playlist: Where Is Home? Immigration Realities Secret Harvests Who Gets Believed The House on Henry Street Womanist Bioethics Welcome to Academic Life, the podcast for your academic journey—and beyond! You can support the show by sharing episodes, or by donating here. Join us again to learn from more experts inside and outside the academy, and around the world. Missed any of the 275+ Academic Life episodes? Find them here. And thank you for listening! Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/academic-life

For more than 60 years, the United States has trained fewer physicians than it needs, relying instead on the economically expedient option of soliciting immigrant physicians trained at the expense of other countries. The passage of the Hart–Celler Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965 expedited the entry of foreign medical graduates (FMGs) from postcolonial South Asia and sent them to provide care in shortage areas throughout the United States. Although this arrangement was conceived as temporary, over the decades it has become a permanent fixture of the medical system, with FMGs comprising at least a quarter of the physician labor force since the act became law. This cohort of practitioners has not been extensively studied, rendering the impacts of immigration and foreign policy on the everyday mechanics of US health care obscure. In The Care of Foreigners: How Immigrant Physicians Changed US Healthcare, Dr. Alam foregrounds global dynamics embedded in the medical system to ask how and why Asian physicians—and especially practitioners from South Asia—have become integral to US medical practice and ubiquitous in the US public imaginary. Drawing on transcripts of congressional hearings; medical, scientific, and social scientific literature; ethnographies; oral histories; and popular media, Dr. Alam explores the enduring consequences of postcolonial physician migration. Combining theoretical and methodological insights from a range of disciplines, this book analyzes both the care provided by immigrant physicians as well as the care extended to them as foreigners. Our guest is: Dr. Eram Alam, who specializes in the history of medicine, with a particular emphasis on globalization, race, migration, and health during the twentieth century. She is an assistant professor in the Department of the History of Science at Harvard University. She received her PhD in History and Sociology of Science from the University of Pennsylvania, and holds a BA and BS from Northwestern University and a MA from the University of Chicago. Our host is: Dr. Christina Gessler, who is a developmental editor, and the producer of the Academic Life podcast. She writes the show's newsletter at ChristinaGessler.Substack.com Listeners may enjoy this playlist: Where Is Home? Immigration Realities Secret Harvests Who Gets Believed The House on Henry Street Womanist Bioethics Welcome to Academic Life, the podcast for your academic journey—and beyond! You can support the show by sharing episodes, or by donating here. Join us again to learn from more experts inside and outside the academy, and around the world. Missed any of the 275+ Academic Life episodes? Find them here. And thank you for listening! Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Good afternoon, I'm _____ with today's episode of EZ News. Tai-Ex opening The Tai-Ex opened down 174-points this morning from Friday's close, at 23,260 on turnover of 5.8-billion N-T. The market fell into negative territory in Friday after the U-S imposed a 20-per cent tariff on Taiwan's imports. Analysts say investors were caught off guard, as many had been anticipating Taiwan would get a 15-per cent tariff like Japan and South Korea and investors are concerned the higher levy (稅款) will make Taiwan exporters less competitive. Southern Taiwan sees over 2 meters of rain in 7 days The Central Weather Administration says over 2-meters of rainfall fell in parts the south from between July 28 to 9AM on Sunday. According to the administration, Kaohsiung's Taoyuan District saw total rainfall of 220-centimeters, while some 206-centimeters was recorded in Sandimen Township in Pingtung. The weather administration's forecast center says three factors have been contributing to the continuous intensive rainfall in the south. Those being successive southwestern air currents that moved landward, southwesterly winds brought in unstable air that developed into convection currents (對流…) .. .. and the southwesterly winds sweeping into southern Taiwan's mountainous areas causing intense rain in those areas. Village chief in Hualien dismissed over Chinese nationality A village chief in Hualien has dismissed from office over her China nationality status. The move means Teng Wan-hua has becoming the first local official to have been removed from office (撤職) for that reason. Teng served as chief of Xuetian Village in Hualien Fuli Township. According to the Ministry of the Interior, she is one of five village or borough chiefs who were found in January to hold China nationality in violation of the Nationality Act. Teng is denying any wrongdoing - saying she holds an R-O-C Taiwan passport, and not a Chinese one and also doesn't have P-R-C nationality. Israeli Minister Prays at Jerusalem Holy Site A far-right Israeli minister has visited and prayed at Jerusalem's most sensitive holy site, sparking regional condemnation. The visit by Itamar Ben-Gvir threatens to escalate tensions and complicate international efforts to halt Israel's nearly two-year military offensive in Gaza. Palestinian leaders, along with Jordan and Saudi Arabia, have condemned the visit as incitement. The visit followed Hamas' release of videos showing emaciated Israeli hostages that have caused an uproar (騷亂；騷動) in Israel. Meanwhile, hospitals in Gaza say 33 more Palestinians have been killed by Israeli fire while seeking food aid. Israel faces global criticism over famine-like conditions in the besieged strip. UK Oasis Fan Falls to Death During Concert Oasis has expressed shock and sadness after a man fell to his death during their concert at Wembley Stadium in London. The Metropolitan Police said officers and paramedics responded to reports of an injured person just before 10:30 Saturday night. A man in his 40s was found with injuries consistent with (符合) a fall and was pronounced dead at the scene. The police have urged anyone who witnessed the incident or captured it on video to contact them. Oasis offered condolences to the victim's family and friends. Their first tour in 16 years began July 4 in Cardiff, Wales. NZ Woman Faces Charges After Girl Found in Suitcase A New Zealand woman faces a child neglect charge after a bus driver found a 2-year-old girl in a suitcase. Authorities say the incident happened Sunday when the driver noticed movement in the luggage compartment (車廂) during a stop in Kaiwaka, north of Auckland. A detective reports the child was very hot but otherwise unharmed. The girl was taken to a hospital and remained there Sunday night. The woman, whose name has not been released, was charged with ill-treatment or neglect of a child and was due in court Monday. That was the I.C.R.T. EZ News, I'm _____. -- Hosting provided by SoundOn

Carolyn Sideco's story begins in The Philippines. Her dad, Tony Sideco, was born on the island of Cebu in 1938. Her mom, Linda, was born in Paniqui in 1942. By the time Carolyn's mom was born, the Japanese occupied The Philippines. Young Tony worked for the electric company, which sent him to Paniqui. He soon met his wife-to-be there when he boarded at Carolyn's grandmother's house. It wasn't an overnight romance. The way Tony (who joined his wife in the room with me and Carolyn as we recorded) tells it, he had eyed Linda for so long that he went cross-eyed. Linda was her parents' first daughter, and she came after five older brothers. So she was always afforded chaperones. After Linda, her parents had three more girls. One of those girls, Carolyn's aunt, lives next-door to where we recorded, a tradition of intergenerationality the family carried with them when they migrated to the US. Tony came to the United States first in the late Sixties, shortly after Carolyn and her twin sister were born. His migration was motivated by the so-called “American dream.” Carolyn's version is different, though. She thinks it had more to do with the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965, which effectively did away with nationality quotas. By the time Tony arrived, several members of both his and his wife's family were already here, many of them in the Outer Sunset. When baby Carolyn, her sister, and their mom arrived, they first lived on 45th Avenue in The Sunset with her aunt and uncle. Then the family moved to 39th Avenue to be on their own. This was the house that Carolyn grew up in, and the one we recorded this podcast in. A community of Paniquieños already existed all around them. In hindsight, Carolyn thinks it was a lot easier for folks like her parents to move halfway around the world because they landed, in essence, in an expat community. Her mom didn't have to learn English so urgently when she arrived, to cite just one example. Several of those families are still around, spread around the North Peninsula. Some also still live in San Francisco, like Carolyn. Carolyn talks about various aspects of her life that now, in hindsight as an adult, meant she rarely felt different from those around her. She says that in her adult life, meeting folks her parents' age who didn't have the same accent as her parents really opened her eyes. Today, Carolyn is the president of Paniquieñans USA, an organization as old as she is. Then we get back to Carolyn's personal story. Her and her twin, Rosalyn, joined their mom to go to the US when they were two. She shares a cute story of how their mom loved a party so much that she would celebrate their birthday every second day of the month (their birthday is Feb. 2). Because of this, Carolyn grew up thinking that birthdays happen every month. She was five when her family moved out of her uncle and aunt's place on 45th and into their childhood home on 39th Avenue, and Carolyn remembers it well. We talk briefly about the real estate agent who sold them the house and how little they paid (“$24,000,” Tony Sideco, who was in the room with us that day, chimes in—that's the equivalent of roughly $173K today). Linda Sideco found work at Little Sisters of the Poor Convalescent Home on Lake Street, where Carolyn would sometimes visit her. Both of Carolyn's parents worked graveyard shifts. The young couple were able to save for a year for the down payment on their new home. We take a sidebar for Carolyn to talk about the difference in how service and healthcare work are valued in The Philippines vs. how they're valued in the US. Carolyn then shares a story of how, when she was in the fourth grade, she and her twin sister started going to a new school in their neighborhood. Prior to this, they were bussed. At her new school, they asked Carolyn if she wanted to play volleyball. But to join the team, she needed to pay five dollars. She ran four blocks home to ask her mom for the money, but turns out she wouldn't give it to young Carolyn, who was so upset that she cried until her mom relented. She did well at volleyball and even made friends through her new sport. She felt so good about it all that she thought, ‘This is why dad brought us here.' It was the beginning of what would become a lifelong involvement with sports. We end Part 1 with Carolyn's foray into many different sports and all the women along the way who inspired her. Check back next week for Part 2 and the official last episode of Season 7 of Storied: San Francisco. We recorded this podcast at Carolyn's childhood home in The Sunset in June 2025. Photography by Jeff Hunt

The concept of birthright citizenship dates to English Common Law, and it was codified in 1868 by the ratification of the 14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, and was upheld in 1898 in a Supreme Court ruling called United States v. Wong Kim Ark, and it was further strengthened in 1940 when Congress passed the Nationality Act. President Trump signed an Executive Order that claim “The 14th Amendment has never been interpreted to extend citizenship universally to everyone born within the United States,” and says that only children born of at least one citizen parent will be a U.S. citizen. We get some clarity and context with two immigration attorneys, one with the ACLU and the other who has worked on immigration law for nearly 50 years.

Immigration. It's a topic that ignites passion, confusion, and often division. These days, the word “immigrant” can split a room in half and not always politely. 

But here's the truth: whether documented or undocumented, immigrants have always been part of the American story. They've built railroads, harvested crops, launched companies, cared for families—not just their own—and they've done all this while paying billions in taxes.ImmigrationNation of immigrantsTimeline of immigration policyWho benefits from all these immigration reforms?Today's undocumented labor.How the US benefited from immigrants.How to Fix it?Want to adopt my foster puppy? Contact Angel City PittsCatch me at the Laugh Factory CovinaSunday, July 20, 2025 at 7:00 pmGet your tickets HEREMusic by Loghan LongoriaFollow us on instagram: Sergio Novoa My Limited View PodReferences:Center for American Progress“The Economic Benefits of Passing the Dream and Promise Act” (2021)➤ Shows legalization of undocumented immigrants could increase U.S. GDP by $1.7 trillion over 10 years.https://www.americanprogress.org/article/economic-benefits-passing-dream-promise-act/Pew Research Center“Facts on U.S. Immigrants” (2024)➤ Provides updated estimates of the undocumented population (~10.5 million) and their demographics.https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2023/11/02/5-facts-about-u-s-immigrants/Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy (ITEP)“Undocumented Immigrants' State & Local Tax Contributions” (2017)➤ Shows undocumented immigrants contribute over $11 billion in state and local taxes.https://itep.org/undocumented-immigrants-state-local-tax-contributions-2/U.S. Department of Labor – National Agricultural Workers Survey➤ Indicates 50–70% of farmworkers are undocumented.https://www.dol.gov/agencies/eta/national-agricultural-workers-surveyMigration Policy Institute“Immigrant Health-Care Workers in the United States” (2021)➤ Foreign-born workers represent a significant portion of U.S. doctors, nurses, and STEM professionals.https://www.migrationpolicy.org/research/immigrant-health-care-workers-united-statesDepartment of Homeland Security – Entry/Exit Overstay Report (2020)➤ Most new undocumented immigrants are visa overstays, not border crossers.https://www.dhs.gov/publication/entryexit-overstay-reportU.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS)➤ Explains employment-based green card quotas (140,000 annually including dependents).https://www.uscis.gov/working-in-the-united-states/permanent-workersNational Foundation for American Policy“Immigrant Entrepreneurs and U.S. Billion-Dollar Companies” (2022)➤ Immigrants founded over 55% of billion-dollar U.S. startups.https://nfap.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/07/Immigrant-Founders-of-Billion-Dollar-Companies.NFAP-Policy-Brief.July-2022.pdfCongressional Research Service (CRS)“U.S. Immigration Policy: Chart Book of Key Trends” (Updated 2023)➤ Offers a comprehensive overview of immigration policy history and trends.https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/R/R42988U.S. Department of Justice – Executive Office for Immigration Review (EOIR)➤ Reports on immigration court backlog, which exceeds 1 million cases.https://www.justice.gov/eoir/page/file/1412106/downloadU.S. Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS)“Annual Report of the Immigration and Naturalization Service” (1954)➤ Official report documenting the scale of Operation Wetback and the number of deportations.https://www.uscis.gov/history-and-genealogy/historic-annual-reportsLibrary of Congress – U.S. Immigration Legislation OnlineImmigration and Nationality Act of 1952 (McCarran-Walter Act)➤ Details the legal framework that criminalized unauthorized entry and enabled mass deportations.https://guides.loc.gov/immigration-legislationSmithsonian Institution – National Museum of American History“Operation Wetback: A Tragic History of Deportation”➤ Overview of Operation Wetback and its social/humanitarian consequences.https://americanhistory.si.edu/blog/operation-wetbackUniversity of Texas Press – Kelly Lytle Hernández“Migra! A History of the U.S. Border Patrol” (2010)➤ Deep dive into the history and racial motivations behind U.S. immigration enforcement, including Operation Wetback.https://utpress.utexas.edu/9780292718592/PBS – Latino Americans Documentary SeriesEpisode: “Prejudice and Pride”➤ Includes firsthand accounts of deportations and family separations under Operation Wetback.https://www.pbs.org/latino-americans/en/episode-guide/Migration Policy Institute“Immigration Enforcement in the United States: The Rise of a Formidable Machinery” (2013)➤ Provides historical context and data for enforcement policies including Operation Wetback.https://www.migrationpolicy.org/research/immigration-enforcement-united-states-rise-formidable-machinery

What does it mean to truly belong in America?  Michael Luo, executive editor at The New Yorker and author of Strangers in the Land, joins Redeeming Babel's director of content, DT Slouffman, to explore the Asian American experience—from the legacy of the Chinese Exclusion Act to the rise in anti-Asian hate during the COVID-19 pandemic. Drawing from personal stories and a viral moment that sparked national conversation, Luo confronts the “perpetual foreigner” stereotype and envisions a more inclusive vision of American identity. DT and Michael unpack how race, immigration, and belonging continue to shape all of our lives. Send written questions or voice memos for “Ask Curtis” episodes to: askcurtis@redeemingbabel.org Send Campfire Stories to: info@redeemingbabel.org   Resources mentioned in this episode: Michael Luo's An Open Letter to the Woman Who Told My Family to Go Back to China Kirkus Reviews: A Vast History Began With One Sidewalk Encounter  Chinese Exclusion Act, 1882 The Burlingame-Seward Treaty, 1868 Immigration and Nationality Act, 1965 Pew Research: Asian American discrimination in the COVID-19 pandemic Pew Research: A third of Asian Americans changed daily routine due to threats   More From Michael Luo: Michael Luo's Strangers in the Land: Exclusion, Belonging, and the Epic Story of the Chinese in America  Michael Luo's latest articles at The New Yorker Follow Michael Luo on Instagram Follow Michael Luo on X (formerly Twitter)   Follow Us: Good Faith on Instagram Good Faith on X (formerly Twitter) Good Faith on Facebook   Sign up: Redeeming Babel Newsletter

The history of immigration law in the US is a two and a half century parade of heinous, racist, and xenophobic laws. I'm starting to suspect that borders were always about white supremacy, empire, colonialism, and capitalist hegemony. This is a sample of a premium episode. Sign up to listen to the entire episode. patreon.com/wetwired The only exceptions were a few laws passed that merely repealed horrific ones, or traded some decency and humanity for political convenience; still in service of empire or capitalist hegemony. The Alien and Sedition Acts authorized the detention or deportation of people seen as posing political threats to the United States and those from “hostile” nations. Among the acts was the Alien Enemies Act, which authorized the President to detain, relocate, or deport immigrants from hostile countries in a time of war. This was only 8 years after the first law in the US that defined eligibility for citizenship by naturalization, in 1790. Congress limited this right to “free white persons,” meaning white, property-owning men. The framework of US immigration policy hasn't substantively changed since The Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965. Arbitrary numbers cap the number of people who can move to the US, by the accident of their birth in another country. Capital and wealthy people can move freely, of course.

This year marks 60 years since the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965 legislation changed who could come to America.Now, local leaders gathered in Indianapolis to celebrate its impact, especially on Indiana's growing Asian American and Pacific Islander population.Before 1965, immigration from Asia was almost entirely banned, but during the civil rights era, the new Act replaced a quota system and opened the door for families to build their lives in Indiana.See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Ann gives her take on the El Salvador hype that Democrats are blowing up. The Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965 was the Dems plan to start letting horrible people in. Ann explains what will happen to Letitia James.

Letitia James had a mission to target President Trump and his family for a Civil Fraud Tax Case way before the election. The Trump Administration is breaking down the numbers on Letitia James possible Mortgage Fraud. White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt said Kilmar Abrego Garcia won't be coming back to the USA. Mark Breaks down what the Democrats are running with as a narrative for their party regarding Garcia. Mark Interviews Economist Steve Moore. Steve explains to Mark the reasons Fed Chair Jerome Powell should be fired. The Supreme Court could make that happen to. Gas prices are falling. Gayle King thinks she's a hero for going up to space a few days ago. Harvard's reputation is getting worse week after week. Rachel Morin's mother was a special guest at The White House Briefing yesterday, to talk about the death of her child. Mark Interviews Author Ann Coulter. Ann gives her take on the El Salvador hype that Democrats are blowing up. The Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965 was the Dems plan to start letting horrible people in. Ann explains what will happen to Letitia James.

Gas prices are falling. Gayle King thinks she's a hero for going up to space a few days ago. Harvard's reputation is getting worse week after week. Rachel Morin's mother was a special guest at The White House Briefing yesterday, to talk about the death of her child. Mark Takes Your Calls! Mark Interviews Author Ann Coulter. Ann gives her take on the El Salvador hype that Democrats are blowing up. The Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965 was the Dems plan to start letting horrible people in. Ann explains what will happen to Letitia James.

Gas prices are falling. Gayle King thinks she's a hero for going up to space a few days ago. Harvard's reputation is getting worse week after week. Rachel Morin's mother was a special guest at The White House Briefing yesterday, to talk about the death of her child. Mark Takes Your Calls! Mark Interviews Author Ann Coulter. Ann gives her take on the El Salvador hype that Democrats are blowing up. The Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965 was the Dems plan to start letting horrible people in. Ann explains what will happen to Letitia James. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Letitia James had a mission to target President Trump and his family for a Civil Fraud Tax Case way before the election. The Trump Administration is breaking down the numbers on Letitia James possible Mortgage Fraud. White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt said Kilmar Abrego Garcia won't be coming back to the USA. Mark Breaks down what the Democrats are running with as a narrative for their party regarding Garcia. Mark Interviews Economist Steve Moore. Steve explains to Mark the reasons Fed Chair Jerome Powell should be fired. The Supreme Court could make that happen to. Gas prices are falling. Gayle King thinks she's a hero for going up to space a few days ago. Harvard's reputation is getting worse week after week. Rachel Morin's mother was a special guest at The White House Briefing yesterday, to talk about the death of her child. Mark Interviews Author Ann Coulter. Ann gives her take on the El Salvador hype that Democrats are blowing up. The Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965 was the Dems plan to start letting horrible people in. Ann explains what will happen to Letitia James. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Ann gives her take on the El Salvador hype that Democrats are blowing up. The Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965 was the Dems plan to start letting horrible people in. Ann explains what will happen to Letitia James. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

In this episode of Passing Judgment, host Jessica Levinson sits down with Emily Bazelon to unpack pressing legal issues. They examine two major deportation cases, focusing on a Supreme Court order for the Trump administration to rectify a wrongful deportation, while assessing the broader context of executive authority in immigration. They also delve into President Trump's use of the Impoundment Act, analyzing the balance of power over federal funding. This conversation sheds light on current challenges to constitutional law and American democracy. Here are three key takeaways you don't want to miss:Deportation Cases: The conversation begins with the case of Mister Abrego Garcia, who was mistakenly deported and the legal battle concerning his return to the U.S. Emily Bazelon discusses how the Trump administration is disobeying a court order to bring him back and the broader implications of this defiance on American constitutional law and the rule of law.Mahmoud Khalil Case: Another deportation case discussed relates to Columbia University graduate student Mahmoud Khalil, with focus on the broad discretionary powers of the Secretary of State under the Immigration and Nationality Act and potential constitutional issues of free speech and due process.Impoundment Act and Presidential Powers: The discussion shifts to President Trump's actions regarding federal funding and the constitutional debate over Congress's power of the purse. Emily Bazelon explains how this ties into the Impoundment Control Act of 1974, highlighting the tension between legislative intent and executive authority.Follow Our Host and Guest: @LevinsonJessicaEmily Bazelon

This Day in Legal History: Fair Housing ActOn this day in legal history, April 11, 1968, President Lyndon B. Johnson signed the Civil Rights Act of 1968 into law, a pivotal expansion of civil rights protections in the United States. Commonly referred to as the Fair Housing Act, the legislation was enacted just days after the assassination of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., whose legacy of nonviolent activism heavily influenced its passage. The law made it illegal to discriminate in the sale, rental, financing, or advertising of housing based on race, color, religion, or national origin.It aimed to dismantle the systemic barriers that had long segregated American cities and suburbs, including redlining, racially restrictive covenants, and other discriminatory practices. Title VIII of the Act directly addressed these inequities and empowered the federal government to enforce fair housing standards for the first time. Though political resistance to housing integration had stalled similar legislation for years, the national mourning following Dr. King's death shifted public and congressional sentiment.Johnson, in a nationally televised address, described the signing as a tribute to Dr. King's life and a necessary step toward realizing the full promise of civil rights in America. Subsequent amendments expanded protections to include sex, disability, and familial status, making the Fair Housing Act one of the most comprehensive civil rights laws on the books. Enforcement mechanisms, however, remained a challenge, and litigation over housing discrimination has continued into the present day.The law has been central to major legal battles over zoning laws, gentrification, and access to affordable housing. It also laid the groundwork for subsequent legislation aimed at combating economic and racial segregation. While the Act did not instantly eliminate housing discrimination, it marked a legal turning point that recognized the home as a critical site of equality and opportunity.A small team from the Department of Government Efficiency (DGE), created under Elon Musk's initiative to reduce government spending and staffing, has arrived at the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. (FDIC), according to an internal email from the agency. While the team is working with FDIC leadership to identify internal efficiencies, it does not have access to sensitive or confidential bank data, including resolution plans, deposit insurance records, or examination materials. The FDIC emphasized that the DGE operatives are full-time federal employees working under formal interagency agreements and have not sought access to confidential information.DGE has previously drawn concern from industry participants during its visit to the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau due to fears over data exposure. The FDIC oversees highly sensitive information about major U.S. banks and their failure plans, which regulators rely on during crises. The number and identity of DGE team members at the FDIC have not been disclosed, and the agency declined to comment further.The agency is also preparing for staff reductions, following the Trump administration's deferred resignation program that has already led to the loss of 500 FDIC employees. Additional buyouts and formal layoffs are expected soon. The timing of DGE's involvement comes as global markets react to new tariffs announced by President Trump, prompting concerns from former officials about weakening regulators' ability to respond to potential financial instability.DOGE Arrives at FDIC but Doesn't Have Access to Bank Data (2)At least three major law firms—Kirkland & Ellis, Latham & Watkins, and Simpson Thacher & Bartlett—are in talks with the Trump administration to reach a joint agreement that would commit over $300 million in pro bono services to causes favored by the White House. The potential deal is also intended to resolve federal investigations into the firms' diversity programs, which the administration has scrutinized for alleged discriminatory practices. If finalized, the arrangement would bring the total pledged in pro bono services from various firms to at least $640 million.President Trump, speaking at a Cabinet meeting, hinted that a handful of firms remain in negotiations, emphasizing that many firms have already paid significant sums or made concessions. He stated that he expects lawyers from participating firms to assist with policy efforts such as implementing tariffs and expanding coal mining.The administration has previously targeted several firms with executive orders for representing causes or clients viewed as oppositional to Trump's agenda. These orders have included punitive measures such as revoking security clearances and restricting federal access. Some firms—like Perkins Coie and Jenner & Block—have successfully blocked these actions in court, while others like Paul Weiss settled by agreeing to pro bono contributions. Firms such as Skadden and Milbank preemptively negotiated similar deals.Trump Talks Deal With Three Massive Law Firms as Others FightA U.S. immigration judge is set to rule today on whether Mahmoud Khalil, a Palestinian student activist at Columbia University, can be deported. Khalil, who holds Algerian citizenship and became a lawful U.S. permanent resident last year, was arrested last month at his New York City apartment and transferred to an immigration jail in rural Louisiana. Secretary of State Marco Rubio has called for Khalil's removal under the 1952 Immigration and Nationality Act, arguing that his presence in the U.S. poses foreign policy risks due to his role in pro-Palestinian campus protests.Rubio's letter to the court claims Khalil was involved in “antisemitic protests and disruptive activities” but does not accuse him of any crimes. Instead, Rubio argues the government can revoke legal status based solely on speech or associations if deemed harmful to U.S. interests. Khalil's attorneys say the case is an attempt to punish constitutionally protected speech and have called the letter politically motivated and authoritarian in tone.They are requesting to subpoena and depose Rubio as part of their defense. The immigration court hearing the case operates under the Department of Justice and is separate from the federal judiciary. Khalil is also suing in a New Jersey federal court, alleging that his arrest, detention, and transfer far from his legal team and family were unconstitutional.US immigration judge to decide whether Columbia student Mahmoud Khalil can be deported | ReutersPresident Trump signed a bill nullifying a revised IRS rule that would have broadened the definition of a “broker” to include decentralized cryptocurrency exchanges, or DeFi platforms. The rule, finalized in the final weeks of the Biden administration, was part of a broader IRS effort to tighten crypto tax enforcement and was rooted in the 2021 Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act. It would have required DeFi platforms to report user transactions to both the IRS and the users themselves.The crypto industry strongly opposed the rule, arguing that DeFi platforms do not function like traditional brokers and lack access to user identities, making compliance impossible. Centralized exchanges like Coinbase and Kraken, by contrast, already meet these reporting requirements as intermediaries. Both the House and Senate voted in March to repeal the IRS rule through the Congressional Review Act, which allows Congress to overturn recent federal regulations with a majority vote.Trump, who has positioned himself as a pro-crypto candidate, had campaigned on promises to support digital asset innovation. Since taking office, he has formed a federal cryptocurrency working group and signed an executive order to establish a national bitcoin reserve.Trump signs bill to nullify expanded IRS crypto broker rule | ReutersThis week's closing theme takes us back to April 13, 1850, when Richard Wagner's opera Lohengrin premiered in Weimar under the baton of his friend and supporter, Franz Liszt. Wagner, one of the most influential and controversial figures in classical music, was then in political exile, and unable to attend the debut of what would become one of his most iconic works. Known for his revolutionary approach to opera—melding music, drama, and mythology—Wagner crafted Lohengrin as a sweeping, mystical tale of a knight of the Holy Grail who arrives in a swan-drawn boat to defend the innocent Elsa of Brabant. The opera's shimmering textures, leitmotif-driven score, and spiritual overtones would set the stage for his later monumental works like Tristan und Isolde and the Ring Cycle.Lohengrin remains best known for its third-act bridal chorus—“Here Comes the Bride”—but the opera's deeper themes of identity, trust, and the cost of forbidden questions give it lasting emotional and philosophical weight. Set in a quasi-medieval world laced with mystery, the opera tells of a hero who must depart the moment his name is asked, leaving love suspended in silence. Wagner's orchestration in Lohengrin is luminous and patient, often evoking shimmering water and distant prophecy, with long-breathed phrases that seem to float above time.As a closing theme for this week, Lohengrin invites reflection—on belief, on leadership, and on how history so often pivots on names, silence, and the tension between loyalty and doubt. Its premiere on April 13th marks not only a moment in Wagner's evolution as a composer but also a cultural point of departure, where German Romanticism began leaning toward something darker and more transcendental. We end the week, then, with the slow unfurling of Lohengrin's prelude: a gentle, ascending shimmer that begins almost imperceptibly, and rises—like the swan on the river—toward the unknown.This week, we close with the prelude to Lohengrin by Richard Wagner—music of undeniable beauty from a composer whose legacy includes both brilliance and deeply troubling beliefs. We share it for its artistry, not its ideology. Without further ado, Richard Wagner's Lohengrin, the prelude. Enjoy! This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.minimumcomp.com/subscribe

This Day in Legal History: Nevada Re-Legalizes GamblingOn March 19, 1931, Nevada Governor Fred B. Balzar signed a bill legalizing gambling, a decision that would reshape the state's economy and identity. At the time, Nevada was struggling through the Great Depression, and state lawmakers saw legalized gambling as a way to generate revenue and attract tourism. The measure made Nevada the first U.S. state to formally embrace commercial gaming, setting the stage for the rise of Las Vegas as the world's gambling capital.Initially, the law allowed for small-scale gaming operations, but over time, it evolved into a massive industry. In the 1940s and 1950s, organized crime syndicates invested heavily in Las Vegas casinos, fueling both the city's expansion and its reputation for vice. By the 1960s, corporate interests took over, bringing legitimacy and regulation to the industry. Today, Nevada's gaming industry generates billions in revenue and remains a cornerstone of its economy.The legalization of gambling also influenced other states, many of which later followed Nevada's lead by authorizing casinos and lotteries to boost their own economies. However, the decision was not without controversy—critics argued it would lead to crime and social problems. Despite these concerns, the success of legalized gambling in Nevada proved that, with regulation, gaming could be a major economic driver.Governor Balzar's decision on this day in 1931 not only changed Nevada but also helped shape the broader American gaming industry, making March 19 a landmark date in legal and economic history.A federal judge has halted Elon Musk and the Department of Government Efficiency (DGE) from further efforts to shut down the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID), ruling that their actions likely violated the U.S. Constitution. Judge Theodore Chuang's preliminary ruling orders the restoration of USAID employees' computer access after Musk and DGE had placed thousands on leave and blocked agency systems. The lawsuit, filed by USAID employees, argues that Musk unlawfully took control of the agency without Senate confirmation, exceeding executive authority.President Trump, who had appointed Musk as an adviser, responded by vowing to appeal, calling the ruling an example of judicial overreach. While Chuang agreed that Musk's actions were unconstitutional, he did not reverse the termination of USAID contracts, which had already crippled global humanitarian operations. In a related case, another judge ordered the administration to release $671 million in frozen payments to USAID contractors, though the government has delayed full compliance. Secretary of State Marco Rubio confirmed that over 80% of USAID's programs were being eliminated.US judge finds Musk's USAID cuts likely unconstitutional, blocks him from making more cuts | ReutersA federal judge rejected the Trump administration's attempt to dismiss a legal challenge brought by Mahmoud Khalil, a Columbia University student arrested by immigration authorities for his role in pro-Palestinian protests. However, Judge Jesse Furman ruled that he lacked jurisdiction and transferred the case to New Jersey, where Khalil was detained when his lawyers first filed the challenge. The ruling did not address Khalil's request for bail.Khalil, a lawful permanent resident of Palestinian descent, was arrested on March 8 outside his Manhattan residence. His lawyers argue that his detention was retaliatory and violated his First Amendment rights. The Trump administration has justified his removal under a rarely used provision of the 1952 Immigration and Nationality Act, allowing deportation if a noncitizen is deemed a threat to U.S. foreign policy. Secretary of State Marco Rubio cited Khalil's participation in "pro-Hamas events" as justification, though Khalil denies any ties to Hamas and claims he was a mediator in the protests.Legal experts note that this law was previously ruled unconstitutional by the late Judge Maryanne Trump Barry, though that decision was later overturned on a technicality. Khalil's case has become central to debates over immigration enforcement and free speech, particularly as Trump pushes for deporting noncitizens involved in campus protests.Judge denies Trump bid to toss Columbia student's challenge to arrest | ReutersChief Justice John Roberts issued a mild rebuke to President Donald Trump for calling for the impeachment of a federal judge, stating that impeachment is not an appropriate response to a judicial ruling. While Roberts' statement affirms judicial independence, it does little to address the broader issue: Trump's rhetoric is not just about disagreement with a ruling—it is part of a broader effort to delegitimize the judiciary and erode checks on executive power.Roberts has a history of making these kinds of statements, such as his 2018 remark that "we do not have Obama judges or Trump judges." But mere words are insufficient when Trump and his allies actively undermine the rule of law. The administration's refusal to comply with Judge James Boasberg's order halting deportations under a rarely used 18th-century law is more than a policy dispute—it is an act of defiance that inches toward a constitutional crisis. If the courts' authority is disregarded, the judiciary's power is only as strong as its willingness to enforce its rulings.Trump's call for impeachment is not an isolated outburst. It coincides with a broader push by his allies, including Elon Musk and congressional Republicans, to frame judges as enemies of democracy. Given rising threats against judges, the Chief Justice's response should have gone beyond a procedural reminder to file an appeal. A firm defense of judicial enforcement and the rule of law, backed by action from the courts, is needed—because if the judiciary allows itself to be treated as an advisory body rather than an independent branch of government, mere statements will not protect it.US Chief Justice Roberts rebukes Trump's attack on judge | ReutersIn my column this week, I talked about grocery taxes–or more accurately their potential elimination in some states. With grocery prices remaining high, some states are considering eliminating grocery sales taxes entirely to ease financial burdens on residents. However, a blanket repeal could strain already-tight state budgets, especially as federal funding for social programs faces potential cuts. Instead of eliminating the tax entirely, targeted approaches—such as income-based exemptions or allowing municipalities to retain and reinvest grocery tax revenue—offer more sustainable relief.Income-based exemptions would ensure that low-income households receive the most benefit while maintaining revenue streams for essential services. For example, Idaho already provides grocery tax credits for low-income taxpayers, and a more efficient model could exempt qualifying households from paying the tax at checkout, reducing their financial strain. This method would prevent a full repeal that could destabilize state budgets while addressing the regressive nature of grocery taxes.States struggling with budget shortfalls from past tax cuts, like Arizona and West Virginia, serve as cautionary tales. Arizona's 2021 flat tax contributed to a $1.6 billion deficit, forcing cuts to higher education, while West Virginia's aggressive post-pandemic tax cuts created funding gaps that could disproportionately affect vulnerable populations. Removing grocery taxes without a revenue replacement could lead to similar outcomes.Alternatively, allowing local governments to retain grocery taxes and use the revenue for food assistance, childcare subsidies, or public transportation could provide relief without compromising state services. Since different municipalities have varying fiscal needs, this approach would offer flexibility while ensuring that low-income families receive targeted aid.A well-designed policy would balance tax relief with financial responsibility, preventing unintended consequences like service cuts that ultimately harm those who need assistance the most.States Shouldn't Cut Grocery Taxes Entirely, Just Refine Them This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.minimumcomp.com/subscribe

Brought to you by Trade Coffee! Get 40% off your first order with Trade at drinktrade.com/OA! OA1137 - The arrest and detention of U.S. lawful permanent resident Mahmoud Kahlil in direct retaliation for his Constitutionally-protected speech and association as a campus organizer at Columbia University is the single greatest violation of any one individual's right committed by the second Trump administration to date. Matt explains how an obscure Cold War-era provision of the Immigration and Nationality Act is being used for in one of the only times in modern history to justify the Trump administration's attempt to revoke Kahlil's residency, and why this unprecedented assault on Khalil's most basic civic and political  rights should concern us all. Finally, in today's footnote: A January 6th defendant who has won so much that he is truly tired of winning. DHS Deputy Secretary Troy Edgar defends Mahmoud Khalil arrest : NPR (3/14/25) “The Allegation Here is Not That He Was Breaking the Law,” Matt Cameron DEPORTNATION (3/12/25) “Everything That Just Happened to Mahmoud Khalil Might (But Should Not) Be Legal,” Matt Cameron DEPORTNATION (3/11/25) “Reply to the Government's Opposition to Sanctions,” U.S. v. Pope (3/6/25) Check out the OA Linktree for all the places to go and things to do!  To support the show (and lose the ads!), please pledge at patreon.com/law!

On February 25, 2025, the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) announced new registration requirements for certain non-citizens residing in the United States. This announcement was published in accordance with President Trump's January 20, 2025 executive order, Protecting the American People Against Invasion, which requires the Department of Homeland Security to ensure non-citizens register with the government under section 262 of the Immigration and Nationality Act, 8 USC 1302.   

On Thursday's Mark Levin Show, WJNO's Brian Mudd fills in for Mark.  The federal budget is the key to making America great again. There are two ways to shrink the federal government: identifying and cutting wasteful programs and agencies, and pushing for legislation to defund them, leveraging their reliance on congressional budgets. This dual approach highlights DOGE's significant role in demonstrating effective strategies for reducing government size. According to DOGE's initial findings, 20% of federal spending—equating to $1.4 trillion—is lost to waste, fraud, and/or abuse, compared to just 3% in the private sector. What does this disparity reveal about the efficiency of government operations? DOGE is exactly what we've been waiting for.  Also, DHS Secretary Kristi Noem has invoked the Immigration and Nationality Act, giving individuals aged 14 and older who are illegally in the country a final chance to act responsibly. They can admit their illegal status, register, and leave without penalty, preserving their ability to return legally in the future. Those who fail to register will face criminal charges. The best way to combat illegal immigration – end the incentives. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

This election has featured a lot of talk about ‘immigration' and ‘the border' but has been short on specifics. In this episode, you'll get those specifics. Specifically, you'll learn what was in H.R. 2, a Republican bill passed by the House, and you'll learn what was in the so-called bipartisan border bill which was killed by Donald Trump's loyalists in the Senate and which Kamala Harris has promised to revive as President. Which bill would actually solve the problems? Please Support Congressional Dish – Quick Links Contribute monthly or a lump sum via Support Congressional Dish via (donations per episode) Send Zelle payments to: Donation@congressionaldish.com Send Venmo payments to: @Jennifer-Briney Send Cash App payments to: $CongressionalDish or Donation@congressionaldish.com Use your bank's online bill pay function to mail contributions to: Please make checks payable to Congressional Dish Thank you for supporting truly independent media! Background Sources Recommended Congressional Dish Episodes Current Immigration Process Visas Accessed October 22, 2024. U.S. Department of State, Bureau of Consular Affairs. Accessed October 22, 2024. Boundless. Accessed October 22, 2024. Boundless. October 22, 2024. USAGov. September 3, 2024. U.S. Department of State, Bureau of Consular Affairs. Asylum August 1, 2024. USAFacts. Ted Hesson and Mica Rosenberg. June 5, 2024. Reuters. Accessed October 22, 2024. Migration Policy Institute. Unauthorized Immigration John Gramlich. October 1, 2024. Pew Research Center. Jeffrey S. Passel and Jens Manuel Krogstad. July 22, 2024. Pew Research Center. Backlog December 18, 2023. TRAC Immigration. Immigrant Detention Eunice Cho. August 7, 2023. American Civil Liberties Union. Irwin County Detention Center November 15, 2022. Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs, Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations. Jonathan Raymond. November 15, 2022. 11 ALIVE. May 20, 2021. WABE. Molly O'Toole. May 20, 2021. The LA Times. C. Carlos Carreiro Immigration Detention Center in Bristol County, MA Ben Berke. May 21, 2021. The Public's Radio. December 15, 2020. Office of the Massachusetts Attorney General Civil Rights Division. Etowah County Detention Center in Gadsden, Alabama Erin Wise. April 15, 2022. ABC 33 40 News. Ted Hesson and Mica Rosenberg. March 25, 2022. Reuters. March 25, 2022. BirminghamWatch. March 25, 2022. U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement. Paul Moses. June 8, 2018. The Daily Beast. Glades County Detention Center in Moore Haven, Florida February 2, 2022. Freedom for Immigrants. Debbie Wasserman Schultz et al. February 1, 2022. South Texas Family Residential Center Accessed October 22, 2024. OpenSecrets. Sandra Sanchez. Updated June 24, 2024. Border Report. Ted Hesson. June 10, 2024. Reuters. Penalties for Illegally Entering Countries World Population Review. Bipartisan Border Bill Failure Ariana Figueroa. May 24, 2024. Missouri Independent. Catherine Rampell. May 23, 2024. The Washington Post. Mary Clare Jalonick and Stephen Groves. February 7, 2024. AP News. Mary Clare Jalonick and Stephen Groves. February 7, 2024. AP News. The Bills H.R. 2 Outline Division A - Border Wall Would require the Secretary of Homeland Security to resume “all activities” related to constructing a border wall between the US and Mexico that were planned by the Trump administration. Wall would have to be at least 900 miles long, and include not only a physical wall, but also surveillance towers, radars, seismic acoustic detection sensors, and 24 hour drone monitoring. Would require killing all carrizo cane and salt cedar plants along the Rio Grande River by releasing non-stinging wasps imported from Spain and France into the area. Would waive “all legal requirements” that would stand in the way of of building the wall. Division B - Immigration Enforcement and Foreign Affairs Would make it illegal to process asylum claims of individuals who: do not enter at official ports of entry. crossed through another country on their way to the US and did not apply to live there and receive an official denial in each country they entered before entering the US. have been convicted of misdemeanor offenses, allowing the Secretary of Homeland Security or Attorney General to add disqualifying acts without approval from Congress and no court reviews allowed. Would allow the Secretary of Homeland Security to take away the authorization for an individual who has been accepted into the US through the asylum process to work legally in the US. Work permits would only be authorized for 6 months at a time. Would reopen detention centers that were closed by the Biden Administration. Title V - Protection of Children Would require the DHS Secretary to return unaccompanied children back to their home countries if they are not trafficking victims and do not have a fear of Return. Would authorize immigration officers to withdraw a child's application to be admitted into the United States regardless of the child's ability or desire to do so. Would require the DHS to collect information - name, social security number, DOB, address, contact info, and immigration status - of people who will be taking custody of immigrant children. Within 30 days of receiving that information, if they determine that individual is not legally in the United States, must initiate removal proceedings. Would change the law so that these people have “access” to lawyers instead of having lawyers to represent them. Title VI - Visa Overstay Penalties Would Increase fines for illegally entering the United States from $50-250 to $500-1000 Would create new penalties for overstaying visas: First offense: fines up to $1,000 or up to 6 months in prison, or both Repeat offenses: fines up to $2,000 or up to 2 years in prison, or both S.4361 Outline Division A - Border Security & Combatting Fentanyl Supplemental Appropriations $6.3 billion to border patrol. $6 billion to Immigration and Customs Enforcement. ~$2.4 billion for deportations. ~$1.6 billion for prisons (the goal in the bill is for ICE to be able to detain 46,500 humans at all times). ~$1.2 billion for services to help people navigate the immigration and asylum system, and to help people leave the country if denied visas (). ~$415 million to hire more ICE agents (goal is to hire 800 more agents). ~$200 million for counter fentanyl investigations. ~$4 billion to US Citizenship and Immigration Services with most going towards hiring more staff. ~ $1.2 billion to the State Department $850 million for “humanitarian needs in the Western Hemisphere” to reduce migration (with the idea being that if their home countries are less dangerous, then people won't want to come here as often) $230 million to pay other countries to accept deported individuals. $440 million, most of which would be spent on Immigration Judge Teams which include lawyers, court administrators, staff, and court costs. Would expand the number of border patrol and ICE officers authorized to issue a notice to appear, reducing the workload of the judges. Would allow protection determination proceedings to take place in any federally owned or leased building that is not property owned, leased or managed by ICE or border patrol and is “a reasonable distance” from the migrants current residence, expanding the locations where the cases can be heard beyond the already too crowded court buildings. Division B - Border Act Title I - Capacity Building For five years: would give the Secretary of Homeland Security the authority to appoint people to positions within the Refugee, Asylum, and International Operation Directorate, the Field Operations Directorate, and the Service Center Operations Directorate of US Citizenship and Immigration Services if the Secretary determines that a critical hiring need exists. would give the Secretary of Homeland Security the authority to appoint ICE deportation officers if the Secretary determines that a critical hiring need exists. Would provide a permanent authority for the DHS Secretary to re-hire a former employee to any position in ICE, Border Patrol, or US Citizenship & Immigration Services. Would give asylum officers a 15% pay raise. Would require annual training for border patrol officers about the law, de- escalation techniques, and migrant and agent safety measures. Title III - Securing America For three years, the Secretary of Homeland Security would be given the authority “in the Secretary's sole and unreviewable discretion” to declare a “border emergency” and remove any migrant who doesn't have pre-determined permission to enter the United States or doesn't present themselves at a port of entry in accordance with a process approved by the DHS Secretary. Title IV - Promoting Legal Immigration Would set up a special process to more easily admit no more than 10,000 refugees who worked with the United States from Afghanistan. Would allow the spouse, fiancé, or child of an admitted migrant to join them in the United States and receive employment authorizations. Would slightly increase the number of visas for family members that would be issued in years 2025 through 2029 (512,000 instead of 480,000 = ~ 6% increase). Audio Sources August 22, 2024 29:45 Vice President Kamala Harris: And let me be clear. After decades in law enforcement, I know the importance of safety and security, especially at our border. Last year, Joe and I brought together Democrats and conservative Republicans to write the strongest border bill in decades. The Border Patrol endorsed it. But Donald Trump believes a border deal would hurt his campaign. So he ordered his allies in Congress to kill the deal. Well, I refuse to play politics with our security. Here is my pledge to you: As President, I will bring back the bipartisan border security bill that he killed. And I will sign it into law. July 18, 2024 April 18, 2018 Senate Judiciary Committee, Subcommittee on Border Security and Immigration Witness: James McHenry, Director, Executive Office for Immigration Review, U.S. Department of Justice Clips 2:42 Sen. John Cornyn (R-TX): Earlier administrations, both Republican and Democrat, have struggled with how to reduce the case backlogs in the immigration courts. And, unfortunately, Congress has never provided the full extent of immigration judges and support staff truly needed to eliminate the backlogs. As a result, backlogs continue to grow, from 129,000 cases in fiscal 1998 to a staggering 684,000 as of February 2018. 3:27 Sen. John Cornyn (R-TX): Aliens in removal proceedings sometimes wait for years before they ever appear before an immigration judge. For example, as of February 2018 courts in Colorado have the longest time for cases sitting on their docket more than 1,000 days -- almost three years. In my home state of Texas, the current wait is 884 days -- almost two and a half years. 28:45 James McHenry: A typical immigration court proceeding has two stages, or two parts. The first is the determination of removability. The Department of Homeland Security brings charges and allegations that an alien has violated the immigration laws. The judge, the immigration judge, first has to determine whether that charge is sustained, and that will be based on the factual allegations that are brought, so the judge will make determinations on that. If there is a finding that the alien is removable, then the case proceeds to a second phase. If the judge finds the alien is not removable, then the case is terminated. At the second phase, the immigration judge gives the alien an opportunity to apply for any protection or relief from removal that he or she may be eligible for under the Immigration and Nationality Act. This will involve the setting of a separate hearing at which the respondent may present evidence, they may present witnesses, they have the right to cross-examine witnesses brought by the department, and they will bring up whatever factual bases there is for their claim of relief or protection. At the end of that hearing, the immigration judge will assess the evidence, will assess the testimony, will look at the law, and will render a decision. The judge may either grant the application, in which case the respondent will get to remain in the United States. The judge may deny the application but give the respondent an opportunity to voluntarily depart at their own expense and sometimes after paying a bond, or the immigration judge may order the alien removed. 41:50 Senator Mike Lee (R-UT): I believe you recently testified in front of the House Judiciary Committee that it would take about 700 immigration judges in order to be able to address the backlog and address the current case load. Is that correct? James McHenry: Yeah, last fall the president proposed adding additional immigration judges, up to a number of 700. If we can get 700 on board, especially with our performance measures, we could complete over 450,000 cases a year. That would eviscerate the backlog. Sen. Mike Lee (R-UT): So, 700 would do it…. End of Episode Announcements Andrew Heaton's New Book: Music by Editing Production Assistance

In this Friday news roundup, Victor Davis Hanson and cohost Sami Winc discuss anti-Trump rhetoric and debate performance, the new SAVE Act, Keir Starmer's cabinet and leftism, Biden interview with Stephanopoulos, Biden taps the long-running Immigration and Nationality Act to deport, Eva Marie Saint at 100, and Ozempic has many applications.See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Donate (no account necessary) | Subscribe (account required) Join Bryan Dean Wright, former CIA Operations Officer, on The Wright Report for an in-depth analysis of today's most critical news shaping America and the world. In this episode, Bryan dives into: Biden's Border Crackdown: President Biden aims to limit illegal crossings starting today using presidential powers from the 1952 Immigration and Nationality Act. Critics doubt the plan's effectiveness, and we break down the key elements and political implications. Global Briefs: Quick updates spanning New Caledonia, Japan, Israel, and more. Highlights include France's efforts to stabilize New Caledonia, Japan's wooden satellite initiative, an Israeli innovation in solar panels, and the AI search for a "girlfriend" for the loneliest plant in South Africa. Tune in for analysis, facts, and what these stories mean for you.   "And you shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free." - John 8:32