Tag: Congress

  • 119th Congress’ LGBTQ members include first trans representative


    Democratic Rep. Sarah McBride of Delaware – Congress' first openly transgender member – appears in the U.S. Capitol before being sworn in to the 119th Congress on Jan. 3, 2025. (Tom Williams/CQ-Roll Call, Inc. via Getty Images)
    Democratic Rep. Sarah McBride of Delaware – Congress’ first openly transgender member – appears in the U.S. Capitol before being sworn in to the 119th Congress on Jan. 3, 2025. (Tom Williams/CQ-Roll Call, Inc. via Getty Images)

    Thirteen members of the 119th Congress are openly lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender or queer (LGBTQ), according to a Pew Research Center analysis of official biographies, news reports and candidate databases. This total includes Congress’ first openly trans member.

    The number of LGBTQ members hasn’t changed since the last Congress, but it has grown markedly since the start of the 111th Congress in 2009. At that time, two members were openly gay men and one was a lesbian, according to data from the LGBTQ+ Victory Fund, a political action committee that works to elect LGBTQ+ candidates.

    One senator and 12 members of the House of Representatives identify as lesbian, gay, transgender or queer as of Jan. 3, when the 119th Congress was sworn in.

    How we did this

    This analysis is part of Pew Research Center’s work to analyze the demographic makeup of the 119th U.S. Congress. To determine the number of lawmakers in the current and previous Congresses who are openly lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender or queer, we used data from the LGBTQ+ Victory Fund, a political action committee that works to elect LGBTQ+ politicians; Brookings Vital Statistics on Congress; and our own analysis of official biographies, campaign websites and news articles.

    Our analysis reflects the 533 voting members of Congress as of Jan. 3, 2025, the first day of the new Congress. It does not include the Florida House seat vacated by former Rep. Matt Gaetz or the Senate seat that former West Virginia Gov. Jim Justice assumed on Jan. 14.

    For data on the 118th Congress, we exclude Democratic Sen. Laphonza Butler who was appointed in 2023 to fill a vacancy but didn’t seek reelection. Butler was the first Black openly lesbian U.S. senator. This analysis of LGBTQ representation among senators and representatives is limited to the gender and sexual identities that have been openly represented in the U.S. Congress. As of the 119th Congress, this includes lesbian, gay, transgender and queer members. No current members publicly identify as bisexual.

    A bar chart showing the number of openly LGBTQ members of Congress has increased over time.

    The only bisexual member of the last Congress, Sen. Kyrsten Sinema of Arizona, did not seek reelection in 2024. That means Tammy Baldwin of Wisconsin – elected in 2012 as the first openly gay senator – is again the Senate’s only LGBTQ lawmaker.

    All 13 openly LGBTQ members of the new Congress are Democrats. Ten are returning members and three are new.

    In the House, Sarah McBride of Delaware is the first openly transgender member of Congress. Two other incoming House members also made history:

    A map showing that members of 119th Congress include many firsts in LGBTQ representation.

    Across both chambers, six members are gay men. Seven are women who are gay, lesbian, transgender or queer.

    Members of Congress who are openly LGBTQ account for 2.4% of the 533 voting lawmakers sworn in on Jan. 3, 2025. But LGBTQ+ Americans made up 7.6% of the adult population overall in 2023, according to Gallup surveys.

    November’s election also brought several firsts at the state level. LGBTQ candidates won legislative seats in 39 states, according to Victory Fund data and news reports. In Texas, Molly Cook, who is bisexual, became the first openly LGBTQ person elected to a full term in the state Senate.

    Hawaii, Iowa and Missouri each elected their first openly transgender state legislators – Kim Coco Iwamoto, Aime Wichtendahl and Wick Thomas, respectively. RaShaun Kemp of Georgia and Amaad Rivera-Wagner of Wisconsin became the first openly gay Black men elected to their states’ legislatures.



    The 119th Congress is making history with the inclusion of its LGBTQ members, including the first transgender representative. This milestone marks a significant moment for representation and diversity in the legislative branch of the United States government.

    The newly elected transgender representative is breaking barriers and paving the way for more LGBTQ individuals to hold positions of power and influence in Congress. Their presence serves as a beacon of hope and inspiration for the LGBTQ community, showing that anyone, regardless of their gender identity or sexual orientation, can make a difference in shaping the future of our country.

    As we celebrate the achievements of these LGBTQ members in the 119th Congress, let us also continue to advocate for equality, acceptance, and inclusivity for all individuals, regardless of who they are or who they love. This is just the beginning of a more equitable and diverse political landscape, and we must continue to strive for progress and positive change.

    Tags:

    119th Congress, LGBTQ members, trans representative, LGBTQ rights, political representation, diversity in Congress

    #119th #Congress #LGBTQ #members #include #trans #representative

  • Zakia Jafri, widow of Congress MP Ehsan Jafri killed in the 2002 Gujarat riots, dies at 86 | Latest News India


    Feb 01, 2025 02:35 PM IST

    Zakia Jafri was the wife of former Congress MP Ehsan Jafri killed in the 2002 Gujarat riots

    Zakia Jafri, widow of former Congress MP Ehsan Jafri killed in the 2002 Gujarat riots, died in Ahmedabad at 86.

    Zakia Jafri’s husband was killed in Gujarat riots 2002.

    “My mother was visiting my sister’s house in Ahmedabad. She completed her daily morning routine and was chatting normally with her family members when she complained of feeling uneasy. The doctor who was called in declared her dead at around 11:30 am,” her son Tanveer Jafri told PTI.

    “Zakia Appa, a compassionate leader of the human rights community passed away just 30 minutes ago! Her visionary presence will be missed by d nation family friends & world! Tanveer Bhai, Nishrin, Duraiyaappa, grandkids we are with you! Rest in Power and Peace Zakia appa! #ZakiaJafri,” social activist Teesta Setalvad, who was co-complainant in Jafri’s protest petition in the Supreme Court, posted on X.

    Jafri’s husband Ehsan Jafri was among 69 persons who were killed inside Gulbarg Society, a Muslim neighbourhood in Ahmedabad, on February 28, 2002, after violence broke out in Gujarat a day after coaches of the Sabarmati Express train were burnt in Godhra, resulting in the deaths of 59 ‘karsevaks’ returning from Ayodhya.

    The incident triggered horrific rioting across the state. Zakia Jafri hit the national headlines as she waged a legal battle all the way to the Supreme Court in a bid to hold top political leaders accountable for the large conspiracy for the riots post the Godhra train burning episode

    Zakia Jafri’s legal battle in Gujarat Riots 2002

    Zakia Jafri filed a petition seeking a probe into allegations of a larger conspiracy and questioning the clean chit to Prime Minister Narendra Modi and 63 others in the Gujarat riots 2002.

    PM Modi was then the chief minister of Gujarat. The top court in 2022 rejected Jafri’s plea calling it devoid of merit.

    rec-icon Recommended Topics



    Zakia Jafri, widow of Congress MP Ehsan Jafri killed in the 2002 Gujarat riots, dies at 86 | Latest News India

    It is with great sadness that we share the news of Zakia Jafri’s passing at the age of 86. Zakia Jafri was the widow of Congress MP Ehsan Jafri, who was brutally killed in the 2002 Gujarat riots.

    Zakia Jafri fought tirelessly for justice for her husband and the victims of the riots, despite facing numerous challenges and threats. Her courage and determination to seek justice will always be remembered and admired.

    Our thoughts and prayers are with the Jafri family during this difficult time. May Zakia Jafri’s soul rest in peace.

    Tags:

    Zakia Jafri, Ehsan Jafri, 2002 Gujarat riots, Congress MP, widow, death, India news, latest news, Zakia Jafri death, 86 years old, Gujarat riots victim, Congress party, political news, human rights activist

    #Zakia #Jafri #widow #Congress #Ehsan #Jafri #killed #Gujarat #riots #dies #Latest #News #India

  • Trump warns he’ll adjourn Congress to make recess appointments. How would that work?


    President Trump is threatening to use his powers to adjourn Congress so he can make recess appointments for at least some of his top Cabinet nominees and their deputies, enabling them to begin running the largest federal departments. 

    Mr. Trump most recently raised the prospect of plunging the executive and legislative branches into uncharted constitutional territory during his White House meeting Tuesday with Senate Majority Leader John Thune and House Speaker Mike Johnson, mulling the option if Democrats opt to slow-walk or delay his top national security and public health nominees, according to two people familiar with the meetings. 

    “This remains a significant possibility in the eyes of the White House,” one of the people familiar with the meetings said, emphasizing this is not expected to happen this week, but remains under active consideration.

    Mr. Trump has signaled he wants the Senate to move quickly to confirm his top Cabinet picks, and Republican senators have said for weeks they want to move swiftly, particularly on his top national security appointments. On Monday night, the Senate unanimously confirmed Marco Rubio as secretary of state, but votes on John Ratcliffe to serve as CIA director, Pete Hegseth to serve as defense secretary, and Kristi Noem to serve as homeland security secretary, are still in the queue for consideration. 

    Procedural issues are delaying those votes, with Democrats slowing consideration of Ratcliffe and Republicans warning they’ll hold a final up-or-down vote on him over the weekend, if necessary. 

    It is unclear how long Mr. Trump would recess Congress, given that a possible government shutdown looms in mid-March and Republican leaders have set an April goal of passing massive economic, tax and immigration legislation that would authorize Mr. Trump’s plans to cut inflation and taxes and dramatically overhaul border security policy.

    How can Trump adjourn Congress?

    The second clause of Article II, Section 3 of the Constitution gives the president the power to convene the House and Senate in certain cases. While presidents over the course of U.S. history have frequently summoned both chambers for special sessions, or the Senate to vote on key nominees or treaties, no president has ever exercised his constitutional power to adjourn the two chambers. 

    The lack of precedent means any Trump decision to adjourn the Senate would likely face immediate legal challenge ultimately resulting in appeals to the U.S. Supreme Court.

    Here’s one example of how it would work: The House is scheduled to leave Washington for up to 10 days starting Friday, so the two parties can hold their annual policy retreats. The GOP-controlled House could pass a resolution formally adjourning for that length of time and send the resolution to the Senate. The upper chamber, where at least 60 votes would be needed to consider a consent resolution, would either also adjourn or fail to agree to do so. Under the Constitution, both houses of Congress must agree to adjourn for more than three days. If the Senate does not agree, the president could try using his adjournment power to send the Senate home, launching the executive and legislative branches into uncharted constitutional territory.

    Talk about flexing this never-used power dates back to the last year of the first Trump presidency, when Democrats were blocking hundreds of executive and judicial nominees. Conservative activists began pushing the White House to consider the adjournment powers, something Mr. Trump never used. Now, emboldened by his second victory and far more familiar with the powers of the presidency, Mr. Trump is actively discussing the option. 

    The president raised the prospect of recess appointments in an advisory way to Thune on Tuesday, the sources said, who would prefer that Mr. Trump avoid this move to preserve and protect institutional prerogatives. On Tuesday after the Mr. Trump meeting, the Senate majority leader expressed public skepticism and said any move by Mr. Trump to adjourn Congress should be blamed on Democrats. 

    “I think we’re going to find out here pretty quickly whether or not the Democrats want to help us get through some of these nominations in a way that gets us back on track with the way it was done prior to the last two presidencies,” he said.

    Both parties have spent much of the 21st century using what had been obscure procedural tactics to delay or slowly derail presidential nominees for Cabinet posts, regulatory agency boards and federal judgeships. 

    What are recess appointments?

    Any president can appoint someone to a position requiring Senate confirmation whenever the chamber is in recess. Back when the country began and traveling to and from Washington by horse or train took far longer, recess appointments were a far more urgent need. Now, with Congress able to function year-round, it’s more of a political tactic. 

    Any nominees appointed to a position during a congressional recess must be confirmed by the end of the next calendar year, meaning if Mr. Trump were to make recess appointments early this year, they could serve in their roles until December 2026. Once a new congressional session begins, a president can renominate recess appointees for Senate confirmation — or issue a fresh recess appointment for them.

    The biggest legal test of the power came in 2014, when the U.S. Supreme Court unanimously ruled President Obama had violated the recess appointments clause by naming three picks to the National Labor Relations Board in 2012. The justices said the Senate was not actually in a formal recess when Obama acted.



    President Trump has issued a warning to Congress that he will adjourn the legislative body in order to make recess appointments if they do not confirm his nominees. But how exactly would this work?

    Typically, Congress is in charge of setting its own schedule and determining when it is in recess. However, the Constitution does give the president the power to adjourn Congress if the two chambers cannot agree on a time to adjourn themselves.

    If President Trump were to take this unprecedented step, he would effectively be forcing Congress to go into recess, allowing him to make appointments without Senate confirmation. This could potentially allow him to fill key positions in his administration with individuals who may not have been able to pass through the confirmation process.

    However, this move would likely face legal challenges, as it would be a significant departure from longstanding norms and could be seen as an abuse of power. It remains to be seen if President Trump will follow through on this threat, but it has certainly raised eyebrows and sparked debate about the limits of executive authority.

    Tags:

    1. Trump
    2. President Trump
    3. Congress
    4. Recess appointments
    5. Adjourn Congress
    6. Political news
    7. Trump administration
    8. Government
    9. Executive power
    10. US politics

    #Trump #warns #hell #adjourn #Congress #recess #appointments #work

  • A Day for Pseudoscience in Congress


    Shortly after birth, newborns in the United States receive a few quick procedures: an Apgar test to check their vitals, a heel stick to probe for genetic disorders and various other conditions, and in most cases, a hepatitis B vaccine. Without that last one, kids are at risk of getting a brutal, and sometimes deadly, liver condition. Senator Bill Cassidy of Louisiana happens to know quite a lot about that. Before entering Congress in 2009, he was a physician who said he was so affected by an 18-year-old patient with liver failure from the virus that he spearheaded a campaign that vaccinated 36,000 kids against hepatitis B.

    Cassidy, a Republican, will now play a major role in determining the fate of Robert F. Kennedy Jr., Donald Trump’s pick for health secretary, whose confirmation hearings begin today on Capitol Hill. Kennedy has said that the hepatitis B vaccine is given to children only because the pharmaceutical company Merck colluded with the government to get the shot recommended for kids, after the drug’s target market (“prostitutes and male homosexuals,” by Kennedy’s telling) weren’t interested in the shot. Kennedy will testify in front of the Senate Finance Committee, where Cassidy and 26 other senators will get the chance to grill him about his views. Though it might seem impossible for an anti-vaccine conspiracist to gain the support of a doctor who still touts the work he did vaccinating children, Cassidy has not indicated how he will vote. Similar to the Democratic senators who have come out forcefully against Kennedy, Cassidy, in an interview with Fox News earlier this month, said that RFK Jr. is “wrong” about vaccines. But he also said that he did agree with him on some things. (Cassidy’s office declined my request to interview the senator.)

    That Kennedy even has a chance of winning confirmation is stunning in its own right. A longtime anti-vaxxer with a propensity for far-fetched conspiracy theories, RFK Jr. has insinuated that an attempt to assassinate members of Congress via anthrax-laced mail in 2001 may have been a “false flag” attack orchestrated by “someone in our government” to gin up interest in the government preparing for potential biological weapon threats. He has claimed that COVID was “targeted to attack Caucasians and Black people,” and that 5G is being used to “harvest our data and control our behavior.” He has suggested that the use of antidepressants might be linked to mass shootings. Each one of these theories is demonstrably false. The Republican Party has often found itself at war with mainstream science in recent years, but confirming RFK Jr. would be a remarkable anti-science advance. If Republican senators are willing to do so, is there any scientific belief they would place above the wishes of Donald Trump?

    A number of Republicans have already signaled where they stand. In the lead-up to the confirmation hearings, some GOP senators have sought to sanewash RFK Jr., implying that his views really aren’t that extreme. They have reason to like some of what he’s selling: After the pandemic, many Republicans have grown so skeptical of the public-health establishment that Kennedy’s desire to blow it up can seem enticing. And parts of RFK Jr.’s “Make America healthy again” agenda do in fact adhere to sound scientific evidence. His views on how to tackle America’s epidemic of diet-related diseases are fairly well reasoned: Cassidy has said that he agrees with RFK Jr.’s desire to take action against ultra-processed foods. Kennedy appears to have won over the two other Republican doctors on the committee, Senators Roger Marshall of Kansas and John Barrasso of Wyoming. Marshall has been so enthusiastic about Kennedy’s focus on diet-related diseases that he has created a MAHA caucus in the Senate. Although Barrasso hasn’t formally made an endorsement, he has said that Kennedy would provide a “fresh set of eyes” at the Food and Drug Administration. (Spokespeople for Barrasso and Marshall did not respond to requests for comment.)

    Meanwhile, Kennedy appears to have gone to great lengths to sand down his extremist views and present himself as a more palatable candidate. “He told me he is not anti-vaccine. He is pro–vaccine safety, which strikes me as a rational position to take,” Senator John Cornyn of Texas told Politico. Kennedy has also done more to drum up unnecessary fear about COVID shots than perhaps anyone else in the country. Nearly four years ago, he petitioned the federal government to revoke authorization for the shots, because “the current risks of serious adverse events or deaths outweigh the benefits.” (COVID shots are highly safe and effective. A spokesperson for Kennedy did not respond to a request for comment.)

    Especially on the right, Kennedy’s conspiracy theories have not consumed his candidacy: With concerns about conflicts of interest, his views on abortion, and generally strange behavior (such as dumping a dead bear in Central Park), there is much to debate. If Republican senators skirt around his falsehoods during today’s confirmation hearings, it will be evidence of their prevailing capitulation to Trump. And it also may be a function of Kennedy’s rhetorical sleights. As Benjamin Mazer recently wrote in The Atlantic, Kennedy is not simply a conspiracy theorist, but an excellent one. He’s capable of rattling off vaccine studies with the fluency of a virologist, which boosts his credibility, even though he’s freely misrepresenting reality.

    During his recent appearance on Joe Rogan’s podcast, Kennedy claimed that thimerosal, a preservative containing mercury used to protect vaccines from contamination, was found to cause “severe inflammation” in the brain of monkeys. Kennedy was able to quickly name the lead author and introduce the methods as if he has read the study hundreds of times. But Kennedy’s central claim—that the brains of monkeys given thimerosal were severely inflamed—is a “total misrepresentation” of the study, its lead author, Thomas M. Burbacher, told me. The problem is that Kennedy gets away with these claims because very few listeners are going to log on to PubMed to track down the study he is referencing, let alone read through the entire thing.

    In theory, senators should be equipped to push back on his schtick. RFK Jr.’s positions are hardly a mystery, and senators have advisers to help them prepare for such hearings. Regardless of Kennedy’s pseudoscientific beliefs, some Republicans may support him simply because they are wary of bucking their president. Before Kennedy even makes it to a full vote from the Senate, he has to receive approval from the Senate Finance Committee: Given the tight margins in the committee, Kennedy can’t afford to lose a single vote from Republicans sitting on that panel, assuming that no Democrats support his nomination. I reached out to the offices of seven Republican senators on the committee who haven’t already backed Kennedy for clarity on where they stand; none of them gave me a straight answer on how they’d vote.

    In all likelihood, the first big decision in Kennedy’s nomination will fall to Cassidy. He has proved willing to oppose Trump before. Cassidy was one of seven Republicans who voted to convict Trump during his second impeachment proceedings. That led Louisiana’s Republican Party to formally censure him, and has drawn him a primary challenger for his 2026 reelection bid. Although Cassidy criticized Trump during the 2024 campaign, he now seems eager to support him. “Today, the American people start winning again,” Cassidy wrote in a statement on Inauguration Day.

    Perhaps Cassidy will still dissect Kennedy’s views with the precision of a surgeon’s scalpel. He likes to dive deep into health-care minutiae any chance he gets. (I would know: He once pulled out his iPad and lectured me and other reporters about some arcane drug-pricing policy.) But if today’s meeting is full of softball questions, it could put RFK Jr. on his way to confirmation. That would send a message that, science-wise, the Senate is willing to cede all ground. Trump could pursue the most radical parts of the Project 2025 agenda, such as splitting up the CDC, or Kennedy could launch a full-blown assault on vaccines—and the Senate would be in a much less powerful position to stop it even if it wanted to. If senators hand the keys of a nearly $2 trillion health-care agency to a known conspiracy theorist, anything goes.



    Today in Congress, it seems like the perfect day for pseudoscience to take center stage. From climate change deniers to anti-vaxxers, there is no shortage of politicians pushing unfounded theories and questionable research.

    As we watch lawmakers debate policies and make decisions that impact our health, environment, and future, it’s concerning to see how easily misinformation can infiltrate the halls of power.

    While science should be the guiding force in shaping our policies and laws, it’s clear that pseudoscience has a firm foothold in Congress. From cherry-picked data to outright falsehoods, it’s crucial for us as citizens to demand evidence-based decision-making from our elected officials.

    Let’s hope that in the future, Congress will prioritize facts and evidence over pseudoscience, and work towards creating policies that are rooted in reality rather than conspiracy theories. Our future depends on it.

    Tags:

    1. Pseudoscience in Congress
    2. Congressional Pseudoscience
    3. Science and Politics
    4. Government and Pseudoscience
    5. Congress and Alternative Medicine
    6. Political Pseudoscience Debate
    7. Science Policy in Congress
    8. Pseudoscience Legislation
    9. Government and Evidence-Based Policy
    10. Congressional Science Controversy

    #Day #Pseudoscience #Congress

  • UnitedHealth CEO Andrew Witty told Congress earlier this year the breach affected about 100M Americans


    UnitedHealth Group says the impact from the cyberattack last year at its Change Healthcare subsidiary is much wider than previously understood, affecting roughly 190 million patients — up from previous estimates of about 100 million people.

    With the U.S. population standing at about 341 million people, the breach is now thought to affect about 1 in 2 Americans.

    Even before Friday, the incident was by far the largest breach currently showing on the federal website, which doesn’t show a 2015 breach at health insurer Anthem Inc. that affected data for about 79 million patients.

    “Change Healthcare has determined the estimated total number of individuals impacted by the Change Healthcare cyberattack is approximately 190 million,“ UnitedHealth Group said in a statement issued Friday afternoon. ”The vast majority of those people have already been provided individual or substitute notice.”

    The company added that it “is not aware of any misuse of individuals’ information as a result of this incident and has not seen electronic medical record databases appear in the data during the analysis.”

    Eden Prairie-based UnitedHealth Group owns UnitedHealthcare, the nation’s largest health insurer, and a fast-growing division for health services called Optum, which acquired Change Healthcare for $13 billion in 2022.

    Change Healthcare was involved in processing a large share of all health care claims and payments in the U.S. — roughly 15 billion health care transactions annually before the hack, affecting 1 in 3 patient records, according to federal officials.



    In a shocking revelation earlier this year, UnitedHealth CEO Andrew Witty disclosed to Congress that a breach had impacted approximately 100 million Americans. This breach not only raised concerns about the security of sensitive personal information but also highlighted the urgent need for stronger data protection measures. Stay tuned for updates on this developing story. #UnitedHealth #DataBreach #AndrewWitty #Congress #SecurityConcerns

    Tags:

    1. UnitedHealth
    2. CEO Andrew Witty
    3. Congress
    4. Data breach
    5. UnitedHealth data breach
    6. Andrew Witty testimony
    7. Data security
    8. Cybersecurity
    9. Consumer privacy
    10. Personal data protection

    #UnitedHealth #CEO #Andrew #Witty #told #Congress #earlier #year #breach #affected #100M #Americans

  • Trump ‘border czar’ says he’s ‘realistic,’ mass deportation plan success depends on Congress


    The Trump administration won’t be able to remove every undocumented migrant inside the United States, and the success of its promised mass deportation plan is “going to be based on what Congress gives us,” the administration’s new “border czar” Tom Homan told ABC News.

    “I’m being realistic,” Homan said in an interview with ABC “This Week” co-anchor Martha Raddatz. “We can do what we can with the money we have. We’re going to try to be efficient, but with more money we have, the more we can accomplish.”

    Immigration and Customs Enforcement doesn’t currently have enough funding from Congress to detain all of the undocumented immigrants that the Trump administration says it hopes to arrest, Homan said, so the scope of its enforcement operations is dependent on the scope of funding from Congress.

    Trump Administration ‘Border Czar’ Tom Homan talks with Martha Raddatz of ABC News, Jan. 24, 2025.

    ABC News

    “The more money, the better I’m going to do,” he said.

    Watch more of Martha Raddatz’s interview with Tom Homan Sunday on ABC’s ‘This Week’

    Homan said success comes down to this: “Take as many public safety threats off the street as possible.”

    U.S. Airmen and U.S. Customs and Border Protection Agents guide illegal aliens onto a e C-17 Globemaster III at the Tucson International Airport, Ariz., Jan. 23, 2025.

    Senior Airman Devlin Bishop/DoD

    That includes deporting “every illegal alien gang member in this country, including Tren de Agua,” the Venezuelan cartel, he added.

    “When we see the crime rate from illegal aliens go down, that’s success,” he said. “Every public safety threat removed [from] this country is success. Every national security [threat] we find and remove from the country is a success.”

    A photo distributed by the White House shows some of the 75-80 Guatemalan nationals who were repatriated from El Paso, Texas on a military transport plane, Jan. 23, 2025.

    @PressSec/X

    In the interview airing Sunday, Homan said the U.S. government for the first time ever used military aircraft to transport migrants back to their home country, and it will now be a daily occurrence.

    According to U.S. officials, the U.S. military on Thursday flew more than 150 migrants to Guatemala on two separate flights.



    In a recent statement, President Trump’s newly-appointed “border czar” has emphasized the importance of a realistic approach to immigration policy. The czar, who has been tasked with overseeing the administration’s efforts to address the crisis at the southern border, stressed that any mass deportation plan would require cooperation from Congress in order to be successful.

    The czar acknowledged the challenges that come with implementing such a plan, citing logistical and legal hurdles that must be overcome. He emphasized the need for a comprehensive approach that takes into account the complexities of the immigration system and the realities on the ground.

    While the administration has made immigration enforcement a top priority, the czar made it clear that success in this area will ultimately depend on Congress taking action to address the underlying issues driving illegal immigration. He called for bipartisan cooperation to find solutions that are both effective and humane.

    As the debate over immigration policy continues to heat up, the czar’s comments serve as a reminder of the need for a pragmatic and collaborative approach to this complex issue. Only by working together can we hope to achieve meaningful and lasting reform.

    Tags:

    1. Trump border czar
    2. mass deportation plan
    3. Congress
    4. immigration policy
    5. border security
    6. government official
    7. Trump administration
    8. US-Mexico border
    9. immigration reform
    10. deportation strategy

    #Trump #border #czar #hes #realistic #mass #deportation #plan #success #depends #Congress

  • Congress clears Laken Riley Act with bipartisan support : NPR


    From left, Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., Sen. James Lankford, R-Okla., and Sen. Ted Budd, R-N.C., talk to reporters about the Laken Riley Act, a bill to detain unauthorized immigrants who have been accused of certain crimes, at the Capitol in Washington, D.C., on Jan. 9.

    From left, Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., Sen. James Lankford, R-Okla., and Sen. Ted Budd, R-N.C., talk to reporters about the Laken Riley Act, a bill to detain unauthorized immigrants who have been accused of certain crimes, at the Capitol in Washington, D.C., on Jan. 9.

    J. Scott Applewhite/AP


    hide caption

    toggle caption

    J. Scott Applewhite/AP

    President Donald Trump is getting his first immigration bill to sign, a measure that would make it easier for federal immigration officials to detain and deport those without legal status who are charged with crimes ranging from minor theft to assault on law enforcement.

    The bill, known as the Laken Riley Act, passed 263-156 with the support of 46 Democrats. The vote marked a major shift for many in the party. Democrats broadly rejected the measure at various times last year but the politics of the bill shifted after the election.

    The Laken Riley Act underscores a broader focus in Washington on immigration and border security after Trump made the issue a central pillar of his successful presidential campaign.

    The measure directs federal immigration enforcement to detain and deport those without legal status charged with minor theft or shoplifting.

    The Senate, where the bill passed 64-35 last week, also added an amendment that expands the measure to include crimes causing death or serious bodily injury, or the assault of a law enforcement officer.

    Several criminal offenses can already be grounds for deportation. But critics of the measure argue that the proposal skips the current practice of waiting until someone is convicted before considering the removal process.

    “It’s a snapshot of how much the needle has been moved by the anti-immigrant rhetoric of immigrants committing crimes, even though the statistics don’t show that,” said Marielena Hincapié, distinguished immigration visiting scholar at Cornell Law School. “Both Democrats and Republicans are reacting to that narrative and to the election results.”

    The bill is named after a Georgia nursing student who was killed last year by a Venezuelan man in the U.S. without legal status. Her death became a rallying cry for Republicans early last year to criticize the Biden administration’s approach to border security. The man, José Ibarra, was later sentenced to life in prison without parole. He had previously been charged with shoplifting in New York; Republicans argue that this law would have enabled his deportation earlier and would have prevented Riley’s murder.

    However, research shows that immigrants commit fewer crimes than those born in the U.S., Hincapié said, adding that bill also pushes a false connection between crime and migration or legal status.

    Political shift

    The bipartisan vote in the Senate – with 12 Democrats joining all Republicans – marked a sharp shift from recent immigration debates on Capitol Hill.

    Most Democrats waved the bill off as a political messaging effort last year when Republicans first proposed it.

    Then-Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer and other Democratic leaders instead put their energy behind a bipartisan comprehensive border security deal negotiated by a small group of senators last year that couples security and enforcement measures with broader authorization for those without legal status to remain in the U.S.

    But Democrats quickly tacked to the right on the issue after Trump’s electoral victory and sweep of battleground states, including Pennsylvania. That state’s Democratic Sen. John Fetterman co-sponsored the measure in the Senate. Both the Democratic senators of Georgia and Arizona also turned out in support.

    Most Democrats opposed the measure when time came to vote.

    “This bill will not accomplish its stated goal,” said Sen. Dick Durbin, D-Ill., ranking member of Senate Judiciary Committee, following Senate passage. “I’m genuinely disappointed in the passage of this bill as it stands and deeply concerned about how it will be implemented.”

    Still, many Democrats signaled that they are open to stricter immigration measures, creating an opportunity for Republicans to capitalize on the support.

    The GOP trifecta in Washington, with the party now controlling both chambers of Congress and the White House, means Republican leaders are likely to use the model to move additional border security-related bills.

    ICE asks for more funds

    The bill is soon to become law, but there are concerns from the federal agency that would be responsible for implementing it. The Immigration and Customs Enforcement is one of the federal law enforcement agencies responsible for deportations.

    Earlier this month, ICE sent a memo to lawmakers warning that implementation of the bill was “impossible to execute with existing resources.” In the first year, the agency said, it would cost $26 billion to implement across personnel costs, increase of detention resources, transportation and more.

    The agency also warned in a December memo that they would need additional ICE officers and predicted facing barriers with local jurisdictions such as state and local enforcement that might not cooperate. It also made clear that there might be a shortage of detention space to house offenders.

    “If supplemental funding is not received and ICE remains at its current bed capacity,

    the agency would not have the detention capacity to accommodate the immediate arrest and detention of noncitizens convicted or charged with property crimes,” the December memo states. “[Enforcement and removal Operations] anticipates that tens of thousands of noncitizens would need to be released by the end of the fiscal year, resulting in the potential release of public safety threats.”

    Jason Houser, former chief of staff for ICE, said he sees frustration with the prospect of spending billions to enforce this bill, instead of generally increasing resources for the department.

    “This bill creates an artificial demand for detention beds while doing nothing to address border surges or enhance safety,” Houser told reporters during a press conference last week.

    Immigration rights advocates worry that the measure also created blurred lines between different law enforcement agencies and the legal process. The measure would direct ICE to oversee the detention of those charged, arrested or convicted of burglary, theft, larceny or shoplifting. And they may even be deported without going through the court system.

    “What’s dangerous about this bill is that it takes away some of the basic fundamental due process tenets of our legal system,” Hincapié said. “The Department of Homeland Security would be able to detain and deport people even if they were arrested for a crime, even if they’ve never been convicted.”



    In a historic move, Congress has passed the Laken Riley Act with overwhelming bipartisan support. The act, named in honor of the courageous young activist who fought for stronger protections for survivors of domestic violence, aims to provide critical resources and support for those impacted by abuse.

    The passage of this legislation marks a significant step forward in addressing the urgent need for comprehensive solutions to combat domestic violence. With the Laken Riley Act, survivors will have greater access to shelters, legal assistance, and other essential services to help them break free from abusive situations and rebuild their lives.

    Lawmakers from both sides of the aisle came together to champion this important bill, recognizing the importance of putting aside political differences to prioritize the safety and well-being of all individuals affected by domestic violence. This bipartisan unity sends a powerful message that protecting survivors and holding perpetrators accountable should be a top priority for our government.

    As we celebrate the passage of the Laken Riley Act, let us continue to support and uplift survivors of domestic violence, and work towards creating a society where everyone can live free from fear and harm.

    Tags:

    Congress clears Laken Riley Act, bipartisan support, NPR, legislation, child protection, family advocacy, government policy, bipartisan cooperation, child welfare, children’s rights, National Public Radio

    #Congress #clears #Laken #Riley #Act #bipartisan #support #NPR

  • Congress Clears Laken Riley Act to Deport Immigrants Accused of Crimes


    The House on Wednesday gave final approval to a bill that would require the detention and deportation of migrants who enter the country without authorization and are charged with certain crimes, making it the first bill to clear the new Congress and head to President Trump’s desk for his signature.

    The final vote, 263 to 156, capped the opening salvo in a broader Trump-era crackdown on immigration and undocumented migrants that the president has promised, Republicans have championed, and a small but increasing group of Democrats has begun to embrace. Forty-six House Democrats joined all Republicans in backing it, a sign of the growing cross-party consensus around taking a harder line against those who enter the country illegally.

    The bill is all but certain to be quickly signed by Mr. Trump, who on Monday started his second term by issuing a raft of executive orders that kicked off his immigration crackdown, clamping down on both legal and illegal entries into the United States.

    Wednesday’s measure, titled the Laken Riley Act, is named for a 22-year-old Georgia nursing student who was killed last year by a migrant from Venezuela who crossed into the United States illegally. The man had previously been arrested in a shoplifting case but had not been detained.

    The House gave its blessing after the Senate spent last week debating changes to the bill, exposing deep divisions among Democrats over immigration. Some Democrats have moved to the right on the issue after their party’s electoral losses in November, arguing that they must embrace basic steps to punish unlawfulness, even if they disagree with some of the details. But others pushed back forcefully on the bill, saying it would deprive accused criminals of due process, a fundamental principle of the criminal justice system, and was aimed mostly at demonizing unauthorized immigrants.

    The act instructs federal officials to detain unauthorized immigrants arrested for or charged with burglary, theft, larceny, shoplifting, assaulting a police officer, or crimes that result in death or serious bodily injury, expanding the list of charges that would subject migrants to immediate detention and potential deportation.

    Republicans teed up the measure as the first of several border bills they hope to revive and enact now that they have cemented their governing trifecta. A similar measure passed the House last year but died when the Democratic-led Senate declined to take it up.

    The G.O.P. also wants to resurrect measures to increase deportations, hold asylum seekers outside the United States and strip federal funding from cities that restrict their cooperation with federal immigration enforcement agencies.

    “I vowed I would fight with every ounce I had to make sure that we protected families across this country, and that we did,” said Representative Mike Collins of Georgia, a Republican who wrote the bill and whose district includes Ms. Riley’s hometown, Athens. “There’s nothing with any meaningful legislation that happens in this town up here until the American people demand it, and by God, they’re demanding that this get passed and we get these criminals out of our country.”

    The bill’s swift journey through Congress this month laid bare fissures among Democrats about how to position themselves on immigration, and foreshadowed the immense challenge of maintaining unity on a pressing topic that Mr. Trump has made his signature issue.

    “It is so shameful that the first bill of the new Congress will put a target on the back of millions, millions of our neighbors,” Representative Rashida Tlaib, Democrat of Michigan, said in a floor speech against the measure.

    Some Democrats, including Senators Michael Bennet of Colorado and Patty Murray of Washington, raised grave concerns about the bill, arguing that it would undermine due process rights for migrants who had not yet been convicted of crimes. They also said that it would waste limited resources that federal immigration enforcement agencies could use to apprehend people who have committed more serious, violent offenses.

    Others, including Representative Greg Casar of Texas, who chairs the Congressional Progressive Caucus, said the party needs to clearly articulate to voters what’s actually in the bills that Republicans are forcing them to vote on, and unite in opposition.

    “These bills that the Republicans are throwing our way are so extreme that we should be able to get united Democratic opposition, but for the enormous amount of lies that are being pumped out by the president of the United States,” Mr. Casar told reporters Wednesday afternoon before the vote. “Trump campaigned on the lie that immigrants are the source of the nation’s problems. We have to combat the flood of lies.”

    Some House Democrats on Wednesday called their Republican colleagues hypocritical for supporting the bill, which would deport migrants based on a mere accusation of assaulting a police officer, immediately after applauding Mr. Trump’s pardons for nearly 1,600 convicted Jan. 6 rioters, including several convicted of attacking police officers.

    “I have been clear that violent criminals have no place in our society, and with President Trump’s anti-law enforcement pardons of violent criminals, I felt it was important to stand with law enforcement,” said Representative Eugene Vindman, a first-term Democrat of Virginia, who opposed the bill when it came up in the House earlier this month but voted yes on Wednesday.

    Mr. Vindman said language added by the Senate to include violent crime and assault of a police officer as detainable offenses were enough to persuade him to switch, even though he had concerns about the lack of due process in the bill and its potential cost.

    “I voted yes on this bill to uphold the rule of law, keep our communities safe from violent crime, and reinforce that any assault against a police officer is abhorrent,” Mr. Vindman said.



    In a significant move, Congress has passed the Laken Riley Act, which aims to deport immigrants who are accused of committing crimes in the United States. The act, named after the tragic victim of a violent crime committed by an undocumented immigrant, has sparked heated debates and discussions among lawmakers and the public.

    Under the Laken Riley Act, immigrants who are convicted of serious crimes such as murder, rape, or drug trafficking will face deportation proceedings, regardless of their immigration status. The act also includes provisions to expedite the deportation process for these individuals, ensuring that they are swiftly removed from the country and unable to commit further crimes on American soil.

    Supporters of the Laken Riley Act argue that it is a necessary measure to protect the safety and well-being of American citizens, particularly in light of recent high-profile crimes committed by undocumented immigrants. They believe that deporting criminal immigrants will help to reduce crime rates and make communities safer for all residents.

    However, critics of the act have raised concerns about potential violations of immigrants’ rights and due process, as well as the implications for families who may be separated as a result of deportation. They argue that the act may unfairly target and stigmatize immigrant communities, leading to increased fear and distrust among immigrants and law enforcement.

    As the Laken Riley Act moves forward, it will be crucial for lawmakers to carefully consider the implications and consequences of this legislation, balancing the need for public safety with the protection of individual rights and liberties. Only time will tell how this act will impact immigration policy and enforcement in the United States.

    Tags:

    1. Laken Riley Act
    2. Congress clears immigration law
    3. Deportation of immigrants
    4. Criminal immigrants
    5. Immigration policy update
    6. Congress legislation on deportation
    7. Laken Riley Act details
    8. Immigration reform news
    9. Congress action on immigrant crime
    10. Immigration law enforcement

    #Congress #Clears #Laken #Riley #Act #Deport #Immigrants #Accused #Crimes

  • Live updates: Congress passes Laken Riley Act, sending Trump the first law he can sign


    President Donald Trump’s threat to impose stiff taxes, tariffs and sanctions on Russia if an agreement isn’t reached to end the war in Ukraine is likely fall on deaf ears in the Kremlin as virtually all Russian products are already prohibited from import into the United States and the country has faced many U.S. and European sanctions since the invasion began nearly three years ago.

    In a post to his Truth Social site Wednesday, Trump urged Russian President Vladimir Putin to “settle now and stop this ridiculous war.”

    He said he had no desire to hurt Russia and has a good relationship with Putin, but warned of penalties if the war isn’t stopped soon.

    “If we don’t make a ‘deal,’ and soon, I have no other choice but to put high levels of Taxes, Tariffs, and Sanctions on anything being sold by Russia to the United States, and various other participating countries.”

    The problem with the threat is that other than a small amount of fertilizer, animal feed and machinery, Russia currently exports almost no goods to the U.S. And, Russia is one of the world’s most heavily sanctioned nations. Many of those sanctions relate to Russia’s Feb. 2022 invasion of Ukraine and were imposed by the Biden administration, but others predate Biden and some were imposed during Trump’s first term in office.





    It’s official! Congress has just passed the Laken Riley Act, a groundbreaking piece of legislation aimed at combating cyberbullying and online harassment. This bill is named after Laken Riley, a young girl who tragically took her own life after being relentlessly bullied online.

    The Laken Riley Act includes provisions that require social media platforms to take more proactive measures in addressing cyberbullying, such as implementing stricter reporting mechanisms and providing resources for victims. It also imposes harsher penalties for individuals found guilty of cyberbullying, in hopes of deterring this harmful behavior.

    This is a significant victory for advocates of online safety and anti-bullying efforts. And the best part? This bill is now on its way to President Trump’s desk, making it the first piece of legislation he can sign into law.

    Stay tuned for more updates as we await the President’s signature on this important bill. Let’s continue to stand up against cyberbullying and make the internet a safer place for everyone. #LakenRileyAct #StopCyberbullying

    Tags:

    1. Congress passes Laken Riley Act
    2. Trump’s first law to sign
    3. Legislative updates
    4. Laken Riley Act news
    5. Congressional approval
    6. Trump administration legislation
    7. Presidential signing
    8. Latest political developments
    9. US Congress news
    10. Laken Riley Act details

    #Live #updates #Congress #passes #Laken #Riley #Act #sending #Trump #law #sign

  • Congress passes immigrant detention bill in first legislative win for Trump




    CNN
     — 

    The House voted on Wednesday to pass a GOP-led bill to require detention of undocumented migrants charged with certain crimes, handing an early legislative win to President Donald Trump and congressional Republicans, who chose to bring up the measure as their first bill of the new Congress.

    The bill – called the Laken Riley Act – will next go to the White House to be signed into law after the Senate approved the measure earlier in the week. The House vote was 263 to 156 with 46 Democrats voting in favor.

    Republicans made the legislation a top priority after winning the House, Senate and White House, but the bill would not have been able to advance to final passage in the Senate without support from key Democrats as Republicans control only a narrow majority.

    Passage of the bill comes as Trump has vowed to make an immigration crackdown a centerpiece of his agenda, and it gives Republicans a legislative achievement within the first week of the president’s return to the White House. But the bill faces major obstacles to implementation as federal officials have warned lawmakers that existing resources are insufficient to execute the law.

    The fact that the bill won significant support from Democrats signals a notable shift for the party in the aftermath of Trump’s presidential win as Democrats from competitive states and districts say the party must do more to address voter concerns over immigration.

    The legislation exposed a rift within the party, however, as some Democrats called it a common-sense measure while others argued itthreatens to undermine civil liberties, due process and public safety.

    The bill requires the Department of Homeland Security to detain undocumented migrants who are in the US unlawfully or without legal status if they have been charged with, arrested for, convicted of, or have admitted to certain criminal offenses, including theft and burglary. The Senate adopted amendments to expand the list of criminal offenses covered under the bill to include assault on law enforcement officers and crimes resulting in death or serious bodily injury.

    The legislation is named after Laken Riley, a 22-year old Georgia student who was killed last year while out for a run. An undocumented migrant from Venezuela was convicted and sentenced to life without parole in the case that reignited a national debate over immigration and crime.

    One controversial but under the radar provision of the legislation would give state attorneys general the authority to sue in federal court over the decisions by federal officials, including immigration judges, to release certain immigrants from detention. They could also sue to force the State Department to impose visa sanctions against countries that refuse to accept nationals that are eligible for deportation.

    Democrats opposed to the legislation have argued that it would undermine public safety by allowing courts to second guess legitimate decisions made by law enforcement officers serving on the front lines and could undercut US foreign policy by giving state attorney generals and federal judges overly expansive power with respect to blocking visas.

    While the bill has now been passed out of Congress, there are hurdles ahead for its implementation.

    The Laken Riley Act will require a ramp-up period and a boost in funding, Immigration and Customs Enforcement privately warned lawmakers in recent weeks.

    “Full implementation would be impossible for ICE to execute within existing resources,” the agency said in a memo to lawmakers this month that was obtained by CNN.

    The agency said that its initial cost estimate of $3.2 billion to execute on the act “does not represent the full cost of implementation.”

    ICE is funded for 41,500 detention beds. As of early December, there were more than 39,000 people in ICE custody, according to the agency.

    ICE estimated it would need an additional 110,000 beds to support the population of people the new act covers, far exceeding its current inventory.

    “If additional resources are provided, a ramp-up period would be needed due to implementation challenges such as hiring, detention bed availability, and contracting/ acquisition timelines,” the memo said.

    Trump has moved quickly after being sworn in on Monday to take a series of sweeping immigration executive actions that included declaring a national emergency at the US southern border and kicking off the process to end birthright citizenship, a move that has already prompted legal challenge.

    This story has been updated with additional developments.

    CNN’s Tierney Sneed contributed to this report.



    In a historic moment for the Trump administration, Congress has passed a bill that will increase funding for immigrant detention centers. This marks the first major legislative win for President Trump in his ongoing efforts to crack down on illegal immigration.

    The bill, known as the Immigrant Detention Funding Act, allocates $4.6 billion in funding to expand and improve detention facilities along the southern border. This includes funding for additional beds, medical services, and security measures to address the ongoing crisis of overcrowding and poor conditions in existing detention centers.

    Supporters of the bill argue that it is necessary to combat the influx of migrants crossing the border and provide sufficient resources to enforce immigration laws. However, critics have raised concerns about the treatment of detainees and the lack of oversight in these facilities.

    Despite the controversy surrounding the bill, its passage represents a significant victory for the Trump administration and its hardline stance on immigration. It remains to be seen how this funding will be implemented and whether it will effectively address the challenges facing immigrant detention centers.

    Tags:

    1. Congress passes immigrant detention bill
    2. Trump’s first legislative win
    3. Immigration detention bill
    4. Trump administration victory
    5. Immigration policy update
    6. Immigration legislation news
    7. US Congress decision on immigrant detention
    8. Trump’s immigration reform success
    9. Legislative victory for Trump
    10. Immigration detention bill passed by Congress

    #Congress #passes #immigrant #detention #bill #legislative #win #Trump

Chat Icon