ReportWire

Tag: National Guard

  • WATCH: Dem senator who ditched Trump’s SOTU caught praising naked bike riders, ‘patriots’ in frog suits

    [ad_1]

    NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!

    Sen. Ron Wyden, D-Ore., who skipped President Donald Trump’s State of the Union address to attend Democrat counter-programming, hailed a group of frog-clad protesters as “patriots,” crediting them for defeating Trump’s anti-crime efforts in Portland, Oregon.

    “Boy, the frogs are rocking this town,” Wyden said Tuesday night. “I’m with the frogs, and I’m with all of you because political change starts at the grassroots.

    “For weeks, social media was flooded with these wonderful patriots. Videos of unicyclers, naked bike riders, the guy in the chicken suit and a whole lot of frogs.

    Sen. Ron Wyden, D-Ore., and protesters wearing inflatable frog costumes standing in a congressional office (Getty Images)

    “When Donald Trump sent his agents to the streets of Portland, we took on authoritarianism, and we won!”

    The frogs, part of an organization called the Portland Frog Brigade, use “inflatable animal costumes to practice the proven art of peaceful, creative dissent, exercising our right to free expression in defense of the U.S. Constitution and the rule of law,” according to its website.

    In September, as part of a crackdown on crime, the Trump administration announced it would send National Guard troops to Portland among other urban centers across the country. In Portland, the order sparked social unrest and protests, including backlash from local officials.

    “Portland is an American city, not a military target,” Portland Mayor Keith Wilson said in a post on social media.

    “President Trump has directed all necessary troops to Portland, Oregon. The number of necessary troops is zero.”

    Almost immediately, the state launched a legal challenge to the deployment in the case of Oregon v. Trump, arguing that the administration lacked the legal authority to use federal troops to combat local crime.

    US JUDGE EXTENDS ORDER BLOCKING TRUMP’S NATIONAL GUARD DEPLOYMENT IN PORTLAND

    Trump in Congress

    President Donald Trump’s State of the Union address included a handful of top moments, including awards to military veterans and Democrats’ outbursts.  (Kenny Holston/Pool/Getty Images)

    As that legal battle raged inside the courtroom, the city’s person-based crime — such as homicides, kidnappings, sexual offenses and vehicular manslaughter — has fallen marginally every month, according to data from Portland’s Police Bureau.

    From October 2025 to January 2026, person-related crimes are down 18%. Total crime, including property and social crimes like drug offenses, is down 8%.

    But in December, Trump began winding down his deployment to Portland as its legal battle began to run into a series of losses.

    As recently as Feb. 17, the Trump administration ended its efforts to overturn a 9th Circuit order halting Trump’s deployment of the guard to Portland.

    “Oregon National Guard members are currently in transit to Fort Bliss, Texas, where they will demobilize, and the demobilization process will take approximately 7 to 14 days to complete,” the court ruled on Jan. 8, 2026.

    OREGON RESIDENTS SUE HOMELAND SECURITY AFTER TEAR GAS USED ON ANTI-ICE PROTESTERS

    National Guard and protesters in Portland, Oregon

    Federal agents clash with anti-ICE protesters at the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement building Oct. 12, 2025, in Portland, Ore.  (Mathieu Lewis-Rolland/Getty Images)

    CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

    Wyden celebrated the decision.

    The White House did not respond to a request for comment on Wyden’s framing of the administration’s drawdown of the National Guard from Portland.

    Related Article

    Bare-bottomed bikers roll through rain to shout at feds in blue city's latest anti-ICE stunt

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Congressional report: National Guard in DC has cost taxpayers $330 million – WTOP News

    [ad_1]

    The Trump administration’s deployment of the National Guard to D.C. has cost taxpayers more than $330 million, and that figure could nearly double if personnel remain in the District through the end of the year, according to a new congressional report.

    For all the latest developments in Congress, follow WTOP Capitol Hill correspondent Mitchell Miller at Today on the Hill.

    The Trump administration’s deployment of the National Guard to D.C. has cost taxpayers more than $330 million, and that figure could nearly double if personnel remain in the District through the end of the year, according to a new congressional report.

    The report from Democrats on the Senate Homeland Security Committee also states there is no measurable evidence to show whether the presence of National Guard personnel is making D.C. safer.

    Guard personnel have been deployed in the District since last August, when President Donald Trump declared a crime emergency and placed the D.C. police department under federal control.

    “While combating crime must be a priority at all levels of government, it is not clear that the hundreds of millions of dollars spent on deploying the National Guard, purportedly to support this effort, is effective in making the nation’s capital any safer,” the report states.

    Crime has gone down during the Guard’s deployment, but D.C. leaders have pointed out it was trending downward before the president’s declaration.

    How long will Guard personnel remain in DC?

    The length of the Guard’s deployment remains open-ended and is now expected to extend through at least July, when Washington celebrates the America 250 commemoration of the signing of the Declaration of Independence.

    But various officials have indicated that Guard personnel could remain in D.C. through the end of the year.

    If that happens, the report states the cost to taxpayers will be on track to exceed more than $600 million. That is more than the entire budget for D.C. police, which is $599 million for fiscal year 2026.

    More than 2,000 service members from several states are deployed in the District.

    Supporters of the deployment, including Republican members of Congress, say Guard personnel have helped make the city safer by being a visible presence.

    Before winter set in, Guard members were involved in a lot of activities related to “beautification” of the nation’s capital, painting fences, pruning trees and spreading mulch.

    While they are armed, they are not allowed to make arrests. Guard leaders told lawmakers they have been involved in helping to deal with scuffles on the National Mall.

    Two members of the West Virginia National Guard were shot by a gunman just blocks from the White House last year. One of them died and another was seriously injured.

    The report concludes with questions about the effectiveness of the mission and the deployment of Guard members to help deal with crime.

    The report states “it remains unclear, for the price of $332 million (and counting), whether the National Guard has actually made D.C.’s streets safer,” and whether resources would be better spent on their “normal missions,” including responding to disasters across the country.

    Get breaking news and daily headlines delivered to your email inbox by signing up here.

    © 2026 WTOP. All Rights Reserved. This website is not intended for users located within the European Economic Area.

    [ad_2]

    Mitchell Miller

    Source link

  • Justice Department plans to seek death penalty for man accused of shooting National Guard members – WTOP News

    [ad_1]

    The Justice Department said it will seek the death penalty for the man accused of shooting two National Guard members, and killing one of them, near the White House in November.

    (CNN) — The Justice Department said it will seek the death penalty for the man accused of shooting two National Guard members, and killing one of them, near the White House in November.

    The man, Rahmanullah Lakanwal, pleaded not guilty to the nine charges against him — including first-degree murder — during his initial appearance in federal court Wednesday.

    When Judge Amit Mehta pressed prosecutors on whether they would be pursuing additional charges that would allow them to seek the death penalty for Lakanwal, prosecutors waffled, eventually telling the judge they are pursuing “death-eligible charges.”

    According to court documents, Lakanwal traveled from Washington state to the capital city in late November before he ambushed the two officers, shooting them both in the head with a snub-nosed revolver.

    Another National Guard member, having heard the shots, pulled out his service weapon and shot Lakanwal, who fell to the ground and was quickly detained, court records say.

    Sarah Beckstrom, one of the National Guard members who was shot in the back of the head, was pronounced dead the next day. The other member, Andrew Wolfe, is still in recovery.

    Lakanwal worked with the CIA for over a decade in Afghanistan before the US military withdrew from the country. He came to the US in 2021.

    According to court records, Lakanwal had been given the pistol, which prosecutors say was stolen, by an unnamed person after Lakanwal said he needed a firearm to protect himself during his job driving for Uber and Lyft.

    Investigators say that, at the time, Lakanwal had been banned by Uber and had not been employed for around two months before the shooting.

    Initially, he wanted a firearm that could hold as much as a 30-round magazine, court documents say, and when given the revolver, asked “only five rounds?”

    Prosecutors also allege that on the same day that he was given the stolen firearm, Lakanwal went to a sporting goods store and purchased a box of bullets. Two hours later he allegedly searched “Washington, DC” in Google maps and, the next day, searched for the address of the White House.

    Ten days later he allegedly shot the two National Guards members two blocks from the White House.

    His next hearing in the case is scheduled for early May.

    The-CNN-Wire
    ™ & © 2026 Cable News Network, Inc., a Warner Bros. Discovery Company. All rights reserved.

    [ad_2]

    WTOP Staff

    Source link

  • Man Is Shot And Killed During Minneapolis Immigration Crackdown, National Guard Activated – KXL

    [ad_1]

    MINNEAPOLIS (AP) — Federal immigration officers have shot and killed a man in Minneapolis, drawing hundreds of protesters in a city already shaken by another fatal shooting weeks earlier.

    Minneapolis Police Chief Brian O’Hara said a 37-year-old man was killed Saturday but declined to identify him.

    He added that information about what led up to the shooting was limited.

    Department of Homeland Security spokesperson Tricia McLaughlin said in a statement that federal officers were conducting an operation as part of the Trump administration’s immigration crackdown and fired “defensive shots” after a man with a handgun approached them.

    O’Hara said police believe the man was a “lawful gun owner with a permit to carry.”

    More about:

    [ad_2]

    Grant McHill

    Source link

  • Can Trump Really Use the Insurrection Act?

    [ad_1]

    On Thursday, President Donald Trump threatened to invoke the Insurrection Act to send federal troops to Minneapolis to assist ICE agents who have been conducting extensive and violent operations in the city. Clashes between those agents and protesters have intensified over the past ten days, after an ICE agent shot and killed a Minneapolis resident named Renee Good. Trump has previously raised the prospect of using the Insurrection Act—which grants the President vast powers to deploy the military to enforce domestic law—if, he said, courts, governors, or mayors were “holding us up.”

    To talk about the history and text of the Insurrection Act, and exactly what it does and does not allow, I recently spoke by phone with Elizabeth Goitein, the senior director of the Brennan Center for Justice’s Liberty & National Security Program, and an expert on Presidential emergency powers. During our conversation, which has been edited for length and clarity, we also discussed the possible limits courts might place on the President, the arguments over Supreme Court precedents and how they might alternately impede or liberate Trump, and the dangers of the military working as a “force amplifier” for ICE.

    Before the President’s declaration on Thursday that he might invoke the Insurrection Act, for months he had been sending the National Guard to cities, although that seems to have come to an end after a recent Supreme Court ruling. Can you talk about what that ruling said and why it may have stymied the President, at least in terms of the National Guard?

    It actually didn’t stymie the President in terms of the National Guard. It stymied the President in terms of the law he was relying on, which is 10 U.S.C. § 12406. That law does authorize federalization and deployment of the National Guard, but so does the Insurrection Act, and the Supreme Court did not rule on the Insurrection Act. So insofar as the Insurrection Act is still on the table, federalization of the National Guard is still on the table.

    What the Supreme Court held was that Trump could not rely on 10 U.S.C. § 12406 except in situations where he also had legal authority to deploy active-duty armed forces, but where deploying those armed forces would not be sufficient to execute the laws of the United States. And that ruling was based on language in 10 U.S.C. § 12406 saying that the President can federalize the National Guard only if the President is unable with regular forces to execute the law.

    Right, so that was a 6–3 ruling, with Brett Kavanaugh, John Roberts, and Amy Coney Barrett joining the three more liberal justices. The ruling makes it seem that the law is written, or interpreted by the Supreme Court, in a way that suggests that deploying the National Guard is more serious than deploying regular armed forces because you have to exhaust your possibilities with the regular armed forces before mobilizing the National Guard. I think most people listening to this would think, Oh, the National Guard would be less serious than actually sending in a division of the Marines.

    Yes, it is certainly counterintuitive. It seems like pulling out a howitzer when a rifle would suffice, but it’s actually not. You have to look at what was going on in the early nineteen hundreds s when 10 U.S.C. § 12406 was passed. It’s not that the National Guard was considered to be more serious at the time; it’s that the National Guard was thought to be less competent. The National Guard was considered to be unruly, undisciplined, and disorganized, to the point that when they were deployed, it often resulted in bloodshed, or at least that was the perception back then. That’s why the legislative history is what it is.

    But 10 U.S.C. § 12406 is the only law that requires that active-duty armed forces be first, or at least that the President considers using them before going to the National Guard. The Insurrection Act does not have any such requirements. So, under the Insurrection Act, the President could deploy federalized National Guard forces if that’s what he wanted to do.

    Let’s then take a step back. Can you talk about what the Insurrection Act is?

    I think the best way to think about the Insurrection Act is that it’s the primary exception to the Posse Comitatus Act. That’s the law that normally prohibits federal armed forces from participating in civilian law enforcement. The Insurrection Act allows the President to deploy active-duty armed forces or to federalize and deploy National Guard forces to quell civil unrest or to execute the law in a crisis.

    Posse Comitatus was signed into law in 1878. The Insurrection Act is an amalgamation of laws passed between 1792 and 1874. So even the last meaningful update of the Insurrection Act happened before the passage of Posse Comitatus. At the time, it was an authorization, not an exception. The Posse Comitatus Act prohibited federal armed forces from participating in law enforcement unless there is an express statutory or constitutional exception. And the Insurrection Act, which already existed, constitutes such an exception.

    I recently read a piece by Jack Goldsmith basically saying that the Insurrection Act more or less gives the President power to do what he wants—incredibly broad power. Is that your analysis, too?

    Well, it gives the President remarkable power. I don’t think it gives the President the power to do anything he wants. There are criteria in the Insurrection Act for deployment. Those criteria are on their face broad, and the law gives the President significant discretion. However, the Department of Justice has long taken the position that the law is limited by the Constitution and tradition, and so the department has interpreted the Insurrection Act to apply in a much narrower set of circumstances than the actual text of the law would suggest. I think that’s an important gloss.

    Does it matter what the Department of Justice said in the past, given how we’ve seen the D.O.J. act in 2026?

    Well, the Department of Justice tends to argue that it matters what it has said in the past. Now, of course, this Department of Justice might not make that argument, but certainly anyone challenging the invocation of the Insurrection Act will. And they won’t just be saying that the Court should defer to the Department of Justice’s past interpretations. They will be pointing out that those interpretations are in fact grounded in the Constitution and tradition.

    What kind of limits has the department thought were reasonable in the past?

    [ad_2]

    Isaac Chotiner

    Source link

  • The Supreme Court Gets Back to Work

    [ad_1]

    There are distinctive aspects to both of the transgender-athletes cases. For one thing, Hecox has changed her mind about bringing the case—she has said that she no longer wants to play sports at B.S.U., and that the Supreme Court should consider the matter moot. The Justices have said that they will decide on that question after oral arguments. Pepper-Jackson, meanwhile, brought what is known as an “as applied” challenge, meaning that she is not arguing that the ban could never hold up, but that it is unconstitutional and discriminatory as applied to her, given that she transitioned at a young age and took puberty blockers followed by other hormone therapies to forestall standard male puberty. (Last year, in U.S. v. Skrmetti, the Supreme Court upheld Tennessee’s ban on such treatments for minors—a harbinger for this case.) B.P.J. lost at the district-court level but succeeded on appeal in the Fourth Circuit, and has been able to keep playing during the litigation. Her recent relative success as a high schooler in shot-put and discus events has become a point of dispute; her lawyers claim that her prowess has been exaggerated, while the governor of West Virginia complained about her participation in a statewide tournament (where she came in third in the discus event). A central question in the cases is what and whom Title IX, the federal anti-sex-discrimination law that has allowed girls’ and women’s school sports to develop in recent decades, was meant to protect. It is a good bet that the oral arguments will include a grab bag of claims about the physiology of children and adults as well as reflections on the emotional and social meaning of sports and on profound questions of identity and fairness.

    Next week, the Court will hear oral arguments in Trump v. Cook, a case that came to the Justices on the emergency docket—it involves a lower-court judge’s stay of Trump’s removal of Lisa Cook, a Federal Reserve governor, from her position. In a general sense, it is linked to Trump v. Slaughter, the case about the leadership of independent agencies, which was argued in December. In Slaughter, the Justices are expected to allow Trump to fire Rebecca Slaughter, a member of the Federal Trade Commission, without cause (and, in doing so, to overturn Humphrey’s Executor, a precedent from the nineteen-thirties, which allowed Congress to insulate the heads of agencies led by multiple commissioners or governors, such as the F.T.C., from being fired at will by the President). But Cook’s case is different, for a few reasons. The Supreme Court has, in the past, indicated that the Fed’s independence is distinct and worth safeguarding. The Fed’s credibility is also important to both the U.S. and the world economy. And although Trump says that he dismissed Cook for cause, it’s not clear how good his cause was. The Trump Administration accused her of engaging in mortgage fraud; a question in the case is whether the Court is expected to take this claim at face value. (His Administration has levied the same charge against other opponents, such as the New York attorney general, Letitia James. Both James and Cook have denied the allegations.)

    Oral arguments in one of the most consequential cases of the term, Trump v. Barbara, on the question of whether Trump can order the denial of birthright citizenship to certain babies born in the United States, still need to be scheduled. There is perhaps no other case in which the Justices will need to lay their allegiances as bare as in that one. That ruling, too, may not come until the end of June or even early July. What will the Justices be saying if they announce, in the week that the country celebrates the two-hundred-and-fiftieth anniversary of the Declaration of Independence, that the meaning of citizenship has in some way changed? The Court doesn’t seem entirely in Trump’s hands; before Christmas, siding with the state of Illinois, it kept in place a lower court’s order blocking Trump from deploying a federalized National Guard in Chicago and its suburbs. At the same time, the Court managed to leave open questions about what Trump might do with the Guard, and even with the regular military, in the future.

    There is more, including a challenge the Justices will hear, on March 2nd, to a law restricting gun ownership for habitual drug users—a statute under which Hunter Biden, the former President’s son, was convicted, before his father pardoned him. Another case to be scheduled concerns a Mississippi law allowing mail-in ballots to be counted if they arrive up to five days after Election Day, if they are postmarked by Election Day. Perhaps predictably, the discussions around that case have been rife with accusations of voter fraud. Politics and the law are never all that far apart. This spring, in front of this Supreme Court, they may be almost inseparable. ♦

    [ad_2]

    Amy Davidson Sorkin

    Source link

  • Minnesota governor says state must play a role in investigation after ICE agent fatally shoots woman

    [ad_1]

    Minnesota must play a role in investigating the fatal shooting of a Minneapolis woman by an Immigration and Customs Enforcement officer, Gov. Tim Walz insisted Thursday, pushing back against the Trump administration’s decision to keep the investigation solely in federal hands.A day after the unidentified ICE officer shot and killed 37-year-old mother of three Renee Good as she tried to drive away on a snowy Minneapolis street, tensions remained high, with dozens of protesters venting their outrage outside of a federal facility that’s serving as a hub for the administration’s latest immigration crackdown on a major city.Gregory Bovino, a senior U.S. Customs and Border Patrol official who has been the face of the crackdowns in other cities, walked along the long line of officers, looking at the crowd as protesters yelled at him, including a man who shouted, “Border Patrol should be along the border!” Many activists tried to converse with the officers and persuade them that the job they were doing was wrong.“We should be horrified,” protester Shanta Hejmadi said as demonstrators shouted “No More ICE,” “Go Home Nazis,” and other slogans at a line of Border Patrol officers, who responded with tear gas and pepper spray. “We should be saddened that our government is waging war on our citizens. We should get out and say no. What else can we do?”Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem, President Donald Trump and others in his administration characterized the shooting as an act of self-defense and cast Good as a villain, suggesting she used her vehicle as a weapon to attack the officer who shot her.Vice President JD Vance weighed in Thursday, saying the shooting was justified and that Good was a “victim of left-wing ideology.”“I can believe that her death is a tragedy while also recognizing that it is a tragedy of her own making,” Vance said, noting that the officer who killed her was injured while making an arrest last June.But state and local officials and protesters rejected that characterization, with Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey saying video of the shooting shows the self-defense argument to be “garbage.” Video below: VP Vance addresses, answers questions on ICE shooting in Minneapolis An immigration crackdown quickly turns deadlyThe shooting happened on Day 2 of the Trump administration’s immigration crackdown on the Twin Cities of Minneapolis and St. Paul, which the Department of Homeland Security said is the biggest immigration enforcement operation ever. More than 2,000 officers taking part, and Noem said they have already made more than 1,500 arrests.It provoked an immediate response in the city where police killed George Floyd in 2020, with hundreds of people turning up to the scene to vent their outrage at the ICE officers and the school district later canceling classes for the rest of the week as a precaution.Good’s death — at least the fifth tied to an immigration crackdown under Trump — has resonated far beyond Minneapolis, as anti-immigration enforcement protests took place or were expected Thursday in New York City, Seattle, Detroit, Washington, D.C., Los Angeles, Philadelphia, San Antonio, New Orleans and Chicago. Protests were also scheduled for later this week in Arizona, North Carolina, and New Hampshire.Video above: Witness describes Minneapolis shooting involving ICE officerWho will investigate?On Thursday, the Minnesota agency that investigates officer-involved shootings said it was informed that the FBI and U.S. Justice Department would not work with the department, effectively ending any role for the state to determine if crimes were committed. Noem said the state has no jurisdiction.“Without complete access to the evidence, witnesses and information collected, we cannot meet the investigative standards that Minnesota law and the public demands,” Drew Evans, the bureau’s superintendent, said.Walz publicly demanded that the state be allowed to take part, repeatedly emphasizing that it would be “very difficult for Minnesotans” to accept that an investigation that excludes the state could be fair.Walz publicly demanded that the state be allowed to take part, repeatedly emphasizing that it would be “very, very difficult for Minnesotans” to accept that an investigation that excludes the state could be fair.Noem, he said, was “judge, jury and basically executioner” during her public comments about the confrontation.“People in positions of power have already passed judgment, from the president to the vice president to Kristi Noem — have stood and told you things that are verifiably false, verifiably inaccurate,” the governor said.Frey, the mayor, told The Associated Press: “We want to make sure that there is a check on this administration to ensure that this investigation is done for justice, not for the sake of a cover-up.”Video above: Kristi Noem questioned on ICE shootingA deadly encounter seen from several anglesSeveral bystanders captured footage of Good’s killing, which happened in a neighborhood south of downtown.The videos show an officer approaching an SUV stopped across the middle of the road, demanding the driver open the door and grabbing the handle. The Honda Pilot begins to pull forward, and a different ICE officer standing in front of it pulls his weapon and immediately fires at least two shots at close range, jumping back as the vehicle moves toward him.Graphic video shows woman shot by ICE agent in MinneapolisIt isn’t clear from the videos if the vehicle makes contact with the officer, and there is no indication of whether the woman had interactions with ICE agents earlier. After the shooting the SUV speeds into two cars parked on a curb before crashing to a stop.The mayor said he’s working with community leaders to try to keep any protests peaceful.“The top thing that this Trump administration is looking for is an excuse to come in with militarized force, to further occupy our streets, to cause more chaos, to have this kind of civil war on the streets of America in a Democratically run city,” Frey told the AP. “We cannot give them what they want.” ___Associated Press reporters Steve Karnowski, Giovanna Dell’Orto and Mark Vancleave in Minneapolis, Ed White in Detroit, Valerie Gonzalez in Brownsville, Texas, Graham Lee Brewer in Norman, Oklahoma, Michael Biesecker In Washington, Jim Mustian in New York and Ryan Foley in Iowa City, Iowa contributed.

    Minnesota must play a role in investigating the fatal shooting of a Minneapolis woman by an Immigration and Customs Enforcement officer, Gov. Tim Walz insisted Thursday, pushing back against the Trump administration’s decision to keep the investigation solely in federal hands.

    A day after the unidentified ICE officer shot and killed 37-year-old mother of three Renee Good as she tried to drive away on a snowy Minneapolis street, tensions remained high, with dozens of protesters venting their outrage outside of a federal facility that’s serving as a hub for the administration’s latest immigration crackdown on a major city.

    Gregory Bovino, a senior U.S. Customs and Border Patrol official who has been the face of the crackdowns in other cities, walked along the long line of officers, looking at the crowd as protesters yelled at him, including a man who shouted, “Border Patrol should be along the border!” Many activists tried to converse with the officers and persuade them that the job they were doing was wrong.

    “We should be horrified,” protester Shanta Hejmadi said as demonstrators shouted “No More ICE,” “Go Home Nazis,” and other slogans at a line of Border Patrol officers, who responded with tear gas and pepper spray. “We should be saddened that our government is waging war on our citizens. We should get out and say no. What else can we do?”

    Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem, President Donald Trump and others in his administration characterized the shooting as an act of self-defense and cast Good as a villain, suggesting she used her vehicle as a weapon to attack the officer who shot her.

    Vice President JD Vance weighed in Thursday, saying the shooting was justified and that Good was a “victim of left-wing ideology.”

    “I can believe that her death is a tragedy while also recognizing that it is a tragedy of her own making,” Vance said, noting that the officer who killed her was injured while making an arrest last June.

    But state and local officials and protesters rejected that characterization, with Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey saying video of the shooting shows the self-defense argument to be “garbage.”

    Video below: VP Vance addresses, answers questions on ICE shooting in Minneapolis

    An immigration crackdown quickly turns deadly

    The shooting happened on Day 2 of the Trump administration’s immigration crackdown on the Twin Cities of Minneapolis and St. Paul, which the Department of Homeland Security said is the biggest immigration enforcement operation ever. More than 2,000 officers taking part, and Noem said they have already made more than 1,500 arrests.

    It provoked an immediate response in the city where police killed George Floyd in 2020, with hundreds of people turning up to the scene to vent their outrage at the ICE officers and the school district later canceling classes for the rest of the week as a precaution.

    Good’s death — at least the fifth tied to an immigration crackdown under Trump — has resonated far beyond Minneapolis, as anti-immigration enforcement protests took place or were expected Thursday in New York City, Seattle, Detroit, Washington, D.C., Los Angeles, Philadelphia, San Antonio, New Orleans and Chicago. Protests were also scheduled for later this week in Arizona, North Carolina, and New Hampshire.

    Video above: Witness describes Minneapolis shooting involving ICE officer

    Who will investigate?

    On Thursday, the Minnesota agency that investigates officer-involved shootings said it was informed that the FBI and U.S. Justice Department would not work with the department, effectively ending any role for the state to determine if crimes were committed. Noem said the state has no jurisdiction.

    “Without complete access to the evidence, witnesses and information collected, we cannot meet the investigative standards that Minnesota law and the public demands,” Drew Evans, the bureau’s superintendent, said.

    Walz publicly demanded that the state be allowed to take part, repeatedly emphasizing that it would be “very difficult for Minnesotans” to accept that an investigation that excludes the state could be fair.

    Walz publicly demanded that the state be allowed to take part, repeatedly emphasizing that it would be “very, very difficult for Minnesotans” to accept that an investigation that excludes the state could be fair.

    Noem, he said, was “judge, jury and basically executioner” during her public comments about the confrontation.

    “People in positions of power have already passed judgment, from the president to the vice president to Kristi Noem — have stood and told you things that are verifiably false, verifiably inaccurate,” the governor said.

    Frey, the mayor, told The Associated Press: “We want to make sure that there is a check on this administration to ensure that this investigation is done for justice, not for the sake of a cover-up.”

    Video above: Kristi Noem questioned on ICE shooting


    A deadly encounter seen from several angles

    Several bystanders captured footage of Good’s killing, which happened in a neighborhood south of downtown.

    The videos show an officer approaching an SUV stopped across the middle of the road, demanding the driver open the door and grabbing the handle. The Honda Pilot begins to pull forward, and a different ICE officer standing in front of it pulls his weapon and immediately fires at least two shots at close range, jumping back as the vehicle moves toward him.

    Graphic video shows woman shot by ICE agent in Minneapolis

    It isn’t clear from the videos if the vehicle makes contact with the officer, and there is no indication of whether the woman had interactions with ICE agents earlier. After the shooting the SUV speeds into two cars parked on a curb before crashing to a stop.

    The mayor said he’s working with community leaders to try to keep any protests peaceful.

    “The top thing that this Trump administration is looking for is an excuse to come in with militarized force, to further occupy our streets, to cause more chaos, to have this kind of civil war on the streets of America in a Democratically run city,” Frey told the AP. “We cannot give them what they want.”

    ___

    Associated Press reporters Steve Karnowski, Giovanna Dell’Orto and Mark Vancleave in Minneapolis, Ed White in Detroit, Valerie Gonzalez in Brownsville, Texas, Graham Lee Brewer in Norman, Oklahoma, Michael Biesecker In Washington, Jim Mustian in New York and Ryan Foley in Iowa City, Iowa contributed.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Trump Says National Guard Will Leave Portland, Chicago, LA – KXL

    [ad_1]

    WASHINGTON, DC – President Donald Trump announced Wednesday that he is withdrawing National Guard troops from Portland, Chicago, and Los Angeles, marking a significant shift in a controversial domestic deployment that has drawn legal challenges and intense political debate.

    In a social media post on Truth Social, Trump said the Guard would be removed “for now” and suggested that federal forces could return “in a much different and stronger form” if crime rates rise again. He framed the deployments as having helped reduce crime in the three cities but said the timing was right to end the current missions.

    Trump initially deployed Guard units earlier this year as part of a broader push to address what his administration described as rising crime and unrest in Democratic-led cities. The National Guard was sent to Los Angeles in June and plans were made for deployments to Chicago and Portland under federal orders. However, nearly every deployment faced legal challenges.

    A Supreme Court ruling in December blocked the administration’s effort to send troops to the Chicago area, a rare rebuke of Trump’s authority to federalize Guard forces for domestic operations.

    Federal judges in Oregon permanently blocked the Guard’s deployment in Portland, concluding the administration lacked the legal basis to send troops there.

    California Guard units already in Los Angeles had been removed in mid-December following a court ruling, and control of the units has returned to state authorities after additional litigation.

    These legal challenges left many Guard members unable to operate on city streets or engage in enforcement roles. As litigation dragged on, defense officials began scaling back troop presence and sending units home.

    The announcement immediately drew sharp responses from political leaders.

    “Portland’s substantial reduction in crime and violence is credited entirely to the hard work of the Portland Police Bureau, Office of Violence Prevention, innovative public safety programs and community leaders across the city,” read a statement from Mayor Keith Wilson’s office. “We are not clear on the claims made in this social media post, as National Guard troops were garrisoned locally but never deployed in Portland.”

    “My office has not yet received official notification that the remaining federalized Oregon National Guard troops can return home,” said Governor Tina Kotek. “They were never lawfully deployed to Portland and there was no need for their presence. If President Trump has finally chosen to follow court orders and demobilize our troops, that’s a big win for Oregonians and for the rule of law.”

    Democratic mayors and governors in the affected cities have been very vocal critics of Mr. Trump’s deployments, arguing that the use of military forces in domestic law enforcement matters violated constitutional principles and amounted to federal overreach.

    Some state officials celebrated the return of Guard members, calling the deployments unnecessary and legally unfounded.

    Trump, for his part, reiterated his view that the Guard helped suppress crime and hinted that a future administration—or his own, possibly in a different form—might renew or expand the deployments if conditions warrant.

    With the Guard pulling out of Chicago, Los Angeles, and Portland, the immediate federal military footprint in those cities will recede. But the president’s comments suggest federal involvement could resume under different legal authorities or in response to rising crime or unrest, setting the stage for ongoing debate over the role of the military in domestic security.

    Officials in the Department of War and National Guard have not yet released detailed plans for the withdrawal or how units may be repositioned for future missions.

    More about:

    [ad_2]

    Tim Lantz

    Source link

  • After legal setbacks, Trump says he’s dropping National Guard push in Chicago, other cities, for now

    [ad_1]

    CHICAGO — President Donald Trump said he’s dropping – for now – his push to deploy National Guard troops in Chicago, Los Angeles and Portland, Oregon, a move that comes after legal roadblocks hung up the effort.

    Trump said in a social media post Wednesday that he’s removing the Guard troops for now. “We will come back, perhaps in a much different and stronger form, when crime begins to soar again – Only a question of time!” he wrote.

    Troops had already left Los Angeles after the president deployed them earlier this year as part of a broader crackdown on crime and immigration. They had been sent to Chicago and Portland but were never on the streets as legal challenges played out.

    The video in the player above is from a previous report.

    ABC7 Chicago is now streaming 24/7. Click here to watch

    The Supreme Court earlier this month refused to allow the Trump administration to deploy National Guard troops in the Chicago area to support its immigration crackdown, a significant defeat for the president’s efforts to send troops to U.S. cities.

    The justices declined the Republican administration’s emergency request to overturn a ruling by U.S. District Judge April Perry that had blocked the deployment of troops. An appeals court also had refused to step in. The Supreme Court took more than two months to act.

    Three justices – Samuel Alito, Clarence Thomas and Neil Gorsuch – publicly dissented.

    The high court order is not a final ruling but it could affect other lawsuits challenging President Donald Trump’s attempts to deploy the military in other Democratic-led cities.

    “At this preliminary stage, the Government has failed to identify a source of authority that would allow the military to execute the laws in Illinois,” the high court majority wrote.

    Justice Brett Kavanaugh said he agreed with the decision to keep the Chicago deployment blocked, but would have left the president more latitude to deploy troops in possible future scenarios.

    “The Supreme Court essentially has said two things here. It said that the president can federalize deploy the National Guard, but only if the U.S. military has the authority to enforce the laws in question in the first place and otherwise is unable to enforce them. And the Supreme Court is saying these are not the kinds of laws that the U.S. military is generally authorized to enforce,” said ABC7 Chief Legal Analyst Gill Soffer.

    The outcome is a rare Supreme Court setback for Trump, who had won repeated victories in emergency appeals since he took office again in January. The conservative-dominated court has allowed Trump to ban transgender people from the military, claw back billions of dollars of congressionally approved federal spending, move aggressively against immigrants and fire the Senate-confirmed leaders of independent federal agencies.

    Democratic Illinois Gov. JB Pritzker applauded the decision as a win for the state and country.

    “American cities, suburbs, and communities should not have to faced masked federal agents asking for their papers, judging them for how they look or sound, and living in fear that President can deploy the military to their streets,” he said.

    White House spokeswoman Abigail Jackson, on the other hand, said the president had activated the National Guard to protect federal personnel and property from “violent rioters.”

    “Nothing in today’s ruling detracts from that core agenda. The Administration will continue working day in and day out to safeguard the American public,” she said.

    Alito and Thomas said in their dissent that the court had no basis to reject Trump’s contention that the administration needed the troops to enforce immigration laws. Gorsuch said he would have narrowly sided with the government based on the declarations of federal law enforcement officials.

    The administration had initially sought the order to allow the deployment of troops from Illinois and Texas, but the Texas contingent of about 200 National Guard troops was later sent home from Chicago.

    The Trump administration has argued that the troops are needed “to protect federal personnel and property from violent resistance against the enforcement of federal immigration laws.”

    But Perry wrote that she found no substantial evidence that a “danger of rebellion” is brewing in Illinois and no reason to believe the protests there had gotten in the way of Trump’s immigration crackdown.

    Perry had initially blocked the deployment for two weeks. But in October, she extended the order indefinitely while the Supreme Court reviewed the case.

    The U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement facility in the west Chicago suburb of Broadview has been the site of tense protests, where federal agents have previously used tear gas and other chemical agents on protesters and journalists.

    Last month, authorities arrested 21 protesters and said four officers were injured outside the Broadview facility. Local authorities made the arrests.

    The Illinois case is just one of several legal battles over National Guard deployments.

    “Every one of these cases, when they come down, can have an impact on other cases, even if they’re not technically binding in another jurisdiction on a different set of facts. And they’re usually not. Nevertheless, the principles behind them will apply. And since this is the Supreme Court ruling here, it’s very consequential. And other courts are going to have to follow its lead,” Soffer said.

    Illinois Attorney General Kwame Raoul says the court’s ruling could affect other lawsuits challenging the president’s attempt to deploy the military in other Democrat-led cities.

    “We went first before the Supreme Court on this. And so this is an important case not only for the city of Chicago and the state of Illinois, but for the country at large,” Raoul said.

    District of Columbia Attorney General Brian Schwalb is suing to halt the deployments of more than 2,000 guardsmen in the nation’s capital. Forty-five states have entered filings in federal court in that case, with 23 supporting the administration’s actions and 22 supporting the attorney general’s lawsuit.

    More than 2,200 troops from several Republican-led states remain in Washington, although the crime emergency Trump declared in August ended a month later.

    A federal judge in Oregon has permanently blocked the deployment of National Guard troops there, and all 200 troops from California were being sent home from Oregon, an official said.

    A state court in Tennessee ruled in favor of Democratic officials who sued to stop the ongoing Guard deployment in Memphis, which Trump has called a replica of his crackdown on Washington, D.C.

    In California, a judge in September said deployment in the Los Angeles area was illegal. By that point, just 300 of the thousands of troops sent there remained, and the judge did not order them to leave.

    The Trump administration has appealed the California and Oregon rulings to the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.

    “There’s really no reason to think the government is going to throw up its hands. This is a preliminary ruling. It doesn’t dispose of the case. The government will continue to work this out, I’m sure. Or fight it out on appeal and work its way through the system,” Soffer said.

    The Defense department says outside of Illinois, the president has deployed Guard members to Tennessee, Oregon, California and the nation’s capital. But troops are only actively on the streets in Memphis, Los Angeles and Washington, D.C.

    Illinois Gov. JB Pritzker issued a statement on the ruling, saying, “Today is a big win for Illinois and American democracy. I am glad the Supreme Court has ruled that Donald Trump did not have the authority to deploy the federalized guard in Illinois. This is an important step in curbing the Trump Administration’s consistent abuse of power and slowing Trump’s march toward authoritarianism.

    American cities, suburbs, and communities should not have to faced masked federal agents asking for their papers, judging them for how they look or sound, and living in fear that President can deploy the military to their streets. The brave men and women of our National Guard should never be used for political theater and deserve to be with their families and communities, especially during the holidays, and ready to serve overseas or at home when called upon during times of immense need.

    While we welcome this ruling, we also are clear-eyed that the Trump Administration’s pursuit for unchecked power is continuing across the country. Illinois will remain vigilant, defend the rights of our people, and stand up to further abuses of authority by Donald Trump and his cronies.”

    White House spokesperson Abigail Jackson issued a statement, saying, “The President promised the American people he would work tirelessly to enforce our immigration laws and protect federal personnel from violent rioters. He activated the National Guard to protect federal law enforcement officers, and to ensure rioters did not destroy federal buildings and property. Nothing in today’s ruling detracts from that core agenda. The Administration will continue working day in and day out to safeguard the American public.”

    Chicago Mayor Brandon Johnson issued a statement, saying, “We welcome the Supreme Court’s ruling to block the deployment of National Guard personnel to the streets of Chicago, rebuking President Trump’s attempts to militarize and demonize our city.

    I’ve maintained that these threats are unconstitutional from the very beginning. I am encouraged that the Supreme Court shares this view.

    This decision doesn’t just protect Chicago-but protect cities around the country who have been threatened by Trump’s campaign against immigrants and Democratic-led cities.

    We moved swiftly to challenge any deployment in court the moment the president first made his threats. My administration will maintain our commitment to protecting Chicagoans from federal overreach and continue to ensure Donald Trump is held accountable before the law.”

    A Department of Justice spokesperson issued a statement, saying, “The National Guard has been instrumental in President Trump’s historic efforts to reduce crime and protect federal law enforcement as they execute their duties. This Department of Justice remains committed to enforcing our criminal laws and reversing the prior administration’s trend of crime and decline in America’s major cities.”

    Illinois state Rep. and Chairman of the Illinois Freedom Caucus Chris Miller told ABC7 in a statement, “The only people the Supreme Court has ruled in favor of today are illegal immigrants and criminals. JB Pritzker and the Democrats have allowed crime and illegal immigration to rob our citizens of their safety, and their tax dollars. The federal government should intervene by any means necessary. In light of the Christmas season, I would be glad to gift the ‘Republican’ justices in favor of this decision with a spine. I’m sure Santa can get it there by December 25th!”

    Associated Press writers Lindsay Whitehurst and Sophia Tareen in Chicago contributed to this story.

    ABC7’s Cate Cauguiran contributed to this report.

    Copyright © 2025 by The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved.

    [ad_2]

    AP

    Source link

  • How long will the National Guard remain deployed in DC? – WTOP News

    [ad_1]

    National Guard personnel from 10 states continue to carry out patrols in D.C., and it appears troops will remain a familiar sight in the District well into the new year.

    National Guard personnel from 10 states continue to carry out patrols in D.C., and it appears troops will remain a familiar sight in the District well into the new year.

    More than 2,500 National Guard members are deployed in D.C., with about two-thirds of them coming from states led by Republican governors.

    Another third are made up of the D.C. National Guard.

    Their numbers have increased in the wake of last month’s shooting of two National Guard members from West Virginia.

    One of them, Sarah Beckstrom, died. The other, Andrew Wolfe, was seriously injured but is recovering.

    In the wake of the attack, about 500 additional National Guard members have been sent to D.C.

    National Guard members were first deployed in the District in August, under President Donald Trump’s crime surge.

    GOP governors have been supportive of the effort. The National Guard personnel now in D.C. come from Alabama, Arkansas, Georgia, Indiana, Louisiana, Mississippi, Ohio, Oklahoma, South Carolina and West Virginia.

    Troops to continue patrols

    D.C. Attorney General Brian Schwalb has argued in court that the deployment violates the law by usurping local leaders’ power to control local law enforcement.

    But earlier this month, a federal appeals court ruled the deployment can continue, staying a lower-court ruling that stated the troops’ presence should end.

    The ruling means visitors to the nation’s capital, as well as local residents, will see guard members throughout the District in 2026. No date has been set for an end to their deployment.

    Court documents have suggested the guard personnel could remain in D.C. through the summer, when the nation celebrates its 250th birthday in July.

    That is considerably longer than many expected when the president announced the deployment on Aug. 11.

    Deployment draws congressional scrutiny

    Republicans in Congress have strongly supported the president’s decision to deploy troops in D.C., as well as several other cities, where lawmakers believe they can help lower crime.

    But many Democrats argue the president has overstepped his power and is wrongly using the National Guard for political reasons.

    During a recent U.S. Senate hearing, Sen. Gary Peters, a Michigan Democrat, questioned why some D.C. police officers — who are also Guard members — are being taken away from their usual law enforcement duties.

    “Why would you take trained police officers off the street in Washington, D.C., call them up for the guard, and say you can now help beautify the city instead of being on the street fighting crime?” he said. “Does that make any sense?”

    A Pentagon official testified during the hearing that he was not familiar with the specific example Peters cited, but defended the administration’s deployment.

    “There are presence patrols that are taking place constantly to make sure that people feel safe and secure,” said Mark Ditlevson, assistant secretary of defense for homeland defense and hemispheric affairs.

    Small groups of guard personnel continue to be seen in high-profile areas, such as along the National Mall and Union Station. That is likely to continue well into 2026, since the president has given no indication he wants them to leave any time soon.

    Get breaking news and daily headlines delivered to your email inbox by signing up here.

    © 2025 WTOP. All Rights Reserved. This website is not intended for users located within the European Economic Area.

    [ad_2]

    Mitchell Miller

    Source link

  • LIZ PEEK: Five unforgettable lessons we all learned in 2025, but some Democrats still didn’t

    [ad_1]

    NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!

    Americans — celebrate 2025! The year we found out that Democrats have been wrong about nearly everything and that common-sense Americans were right all along. 

    Think that’s an exaggeration? Consider:    

    Climate alarmism is dead. It turns out we need oil and gas

    LET’S TEACH OUR KIDS WHY AMERICA IS WORTH FIGHTING FOR

    Kids march against climate change in New York  (Photo by: Lindsey Nicholson/UCG/Universal Images Group via Getty Images)

    • Big Government spending, a staple of the Democratic Party playbook, leads directly to Big Fraud;
    • DEI programs don’t work;
    • More cops bring safer streets;
    • “Gender-affirming care” is dangerous and wrong.

    1. Climate 

    Perhaps the most consequential change of 2025 was the long-overdue realization that climate alarmism is possibly more dangerous than climate change. When even billoinaire Bill Gates, long-time climate crusader, hangs up his spikes, something profound has shifted. Gates recently wrote a memo admitting climate change “will not lead to humanity’s demise”; the welcome dose of realism from one of the world’s richest human beings comes only a year after he penned a book entitled “How to Avoid a Climate Disaster.”  

    Look how blue state officials are running pell-mell away from climate mandates that have driven electricity costs higher and infuriated voters. 

    Exhibit one is New York Democrat Gov. Kathy Hochul, who recently lifted the damaging de facto ban on natural gas pipeline construction imposed by her predecessor former Gov. Andrew Cuomo.

    DEFINING FAIR PLAY: WHY SWING-STATE DEMOCRATS ARE OUT OF STEP ON PROTECTING WOMEN’S SPORTS  

    After clinging to Cuomo’s disastrous climate agenda for years and watching New York’s electricity rates soar to 40% above the national average, Hochul approved key permits for the Williams Northeast Supply Enhancement (NESE) natural gas pipeline in November, infuriating climate warriors. Hochul said energy needs and grid reliability dictated the change. For a woman who wants to outlaw gas stoves, it was quite an about-face. 

    National Guard members in Washington, DC

    National Guard members patrol in Washington, Nov. 27, 2025.  (Alex Wroblewski/Bloomberg via Getty Images)

    Both Gates and Hochul are in step with the corporate community, which has quietly abandoned environmental goals, as the need for power to fuel AI data banks reigns supreme. The reality is that trillions of dollars of investment in renewable fuels has barely reduced demand for oil, gas and coal.  

    Also, the cost to western nations of suffocating their economies to reduce carbon emissions has become too high, especially since China, India and other developing nations are today’s biggest emitters and abide by no such regulations.  As Gates wrote, the emphasis needs to be on improving lives – both here and around the world – not blindly trying to curb fossil fuels.

    HIGH-RANKING DEMOCRATS ADMIT TO KNOWINGLY ABANDONING WOMEN 

    2. Big government 

    Under President Joe Biden, Democrats spent trillions of dollars unnecessarily, boosting our deficits relative to the economy to levels never before seen except during major wars. The gusher of cash not only fed decades-high inflation, it also opened the door to mammoth fraud, with hundreds of billions of taxpayer dollars going missing.   

    More recently, the nation has discovered a still-developing scandal where the Somali community in Minnesota allegedly stole as much as $9 billion in funds meant to feed hungry children and house the homeless.

    CONSERVATIVE GROUPS DECLARE 2025 A TIPPING POINT ON ‘CLIMATE HYSTERIA’ AS TRUMP UNLEASHES ENERGY AGENDA

    Democrats (and sometimes Republicans) hope to attract voters by doling out money; they know that if citizens become dependent on lavish handouts, they will vote to keep the good times rolling.   

    But someone has to pay for free stuff; that poor sod is the taxpayer, who eventually rebels. As blue states jack taxes higher to feed their welfare machines, they bleed businesses and residents who flee to lower-tax locales like Florida and Texas. Bottom line, Big Government does not work. Never has, never will. 

    3. DEI 

    Early on, President Donald Trump reversed what he called the “illegal and immoral” DEI programs that Biden had required be implemented in every corner of the Federal Government. Biden’s Executive Order, “Advancing Racial Equity and Support for Underserved Communities Through the Federal Government” demanded nearly every Federal agency — including air traffic control and the military — submit “Equity Action Plans,” which led to “immense public waste and shameful discrimination.”     

    Inspired by the president’s pushback against the virtue-signaling programs, corporations, aware that such efforts divide their employees and stoke resentment, quietly let DEI fall by the wayside.  

    Under President Joe Biden, Democrats spent trillions of dollars unnecessarily, boosting our deficits relative to the economy to levels never before seen except during major wars. 

    In February, Accenture’s CEO wrote a memo to staff indicating the huge professional services firm was shelving its DEI program since it had “largely achieved its goals” and “we are and always have been a meritocracy.” Dozens of companies, including Pepsico, Disney, Blackrock, McDonalds, Ford, Walmart and others followed suit. 

    In 2016, Harvard Business School published a report on “Why Diversity Programs Fail”, revealing that decades of mandated diversity efforts had made little progress because, studies showed, “force-feeding can activate bias rather than stamp it out.” That remains the case today.  

    4. Cops help 

    You would think it obvious that putting more cops on the beat brings down crime. But leftists in the U.S. insist, based on ideology rather than common sense or evidence, that law enforcement is the problem and not the cure.

    THE FAR LEFT HAVE TAKEN CONTROL OF THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY PLATFORM, AND IT’S TURNING VOTERS OFF

    Trump deployed the National Guard to the streets of D.C., and they became safer. Hochul activated the National Guard to protect New York’s subways, and, not surprisingly, they became less dangerous. This is not rocket science. 

    CLICK HERE FOR MORE FOX NEWS OPINION

    5. “Gender-affirming care” 

    Allowing young people to permanently change their gender is an atrocity that has blessedly been outlawed in much of Europe and is now restricted in 27 states. Because there remains a group in the U.S. weirdly dedicated to promoting this heinous activity, activists continue to push for its legality. They are suing to overturn the Supreme Court’s ruling in United States v. Skrmetti that a Tennessee law banning gender affirming care did not constitute sex-based discrimination and did not violate the U.S Constitution.  

    The left is adamant that underage kids, often without the knowledge of their parents, should be able to mutilate their own bodies and permanently destroy their reproductive capabilities. It is hard to imagine a crueler campaign.

    CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

    Happily, common sense prevailed on these five issues during 2025. Let us hope that 2026 continues the trend, perhaps delivering wisdom on the recklessness of open borders and the disgrace of our public education system and the complicit teachers unions. 

    Meanwhile, we have much to celebrate! 

    CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM LIZ PEEK

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Supreme Court rules against Trump, bars National Guard deployment in Chicago

    [ad_1]

    The Supreme Court ruled against President Trump on Tuesday and said he did not have legal authority to deploy the National Guard in Chicago to protect federal immigration agents.

    Acting on a 6-3 vote, the justices denied Trump’s appeal and upheld orders from a federal district judge and the U.S. 7th Circuit Court of Appeals that said the president had exaggerated the threat and overstepped his authority.

    The decision is a major defeat for Trump and his broad claim that he had the power to deploy militia troops in U.S. cities.

    In an unsigned order, the court said the Militia Act allows the president to deploy the National Guard only if the regular U.S. armed forces were unable to quell violence.

    The law dating to 1903 says the president may call up and deploy the National Guard if he faces the threat of an invasion or a rebellion or is “unable with the regular forces to execute the laws of the United States.”

    That phrase turned out to be crucial.

    Trump’s lawyers assumed it referred to the police and federal agents. But after taking a close look, the justices concluded it referred to the regular U.S. military, not civilian law enforcement or the National Guard.

    “To call the Guard into active federal service under the [Militia Act], the President must be ‘unable’ with the regular military ‘to execute the laws of the United States,’” the court said in Trump vs. Illinois.

    That standard will rarely be met, the court added.

    “Under the Posse Comitatus Act, the military is prohibited from execut[ing] the laws except in cases and under circumstances expressly authorized by the Constitution or Act of Congress,” the court said. “So before the President can federalize the Guard … he likely must have statutory or constitutional authority to execute the laws with the regular military and must be ‘unable’ with those forces to perform that function.

    “At this preliminary stage, the Government has failed to identify a source of authority that would allow the military to execute the laws in Illinois,” the court said.

    Although the court was acting on an emergency appeal, its decision is a significant defeat for Trump and is not likely to be reversed on appeal. Often, the court issues one-sentence emergency orders. But in this case, the justices wrote a three-page opinion to spell out the law and limit the president’s authority.

    Justice Amy Coney Barrett, who oversees appeals from Illinois, and Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. cast the deciding votes. Justice Brett M. Kavanaugh agreed with the outcome, but said he preferred a narrow and more limited ruling.

    Conservative Justices Clarence Thomas, Samuel A. Alito Jr. and Neil M. Gorsuch dissented.

    Alito, in dissent, said the “court fails to explain why the President’s inherent constitutional authority to protect federal officers and property is not sufficient to justify the use of National Guard members in the relevant area for precisely that purpose.”

    California Gov. Gavin Newsom and Atty. Gen. Rob Bonta filed a brief in the Chicago case that warned of the danger of the president using the military in American cities.

    “Today, Americans can breathe a huge sigh of relief,” Bonta said Tuesday. “While this is not necessarily the end of the road, it is a significant, deeply gratifying step in the right direction. We plan to ask the lower courts to reach the same result in our cases — and we are hopeful they will do so quickly.”

    The U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals had allowed the deployments in Los Angeles and Portland, Ore., after ruling that judges must defer to the president.

    But U.S. District Judge Charles Breyer ruled Dec. 10 that the federalized National Guard troops in Los Angeles must be returned to Newsom’s control.

    Trump’s lawyers had not claimed in their appeal that the president had the authority to deploy the military for ordinary law enforcement in the city. Instead, they said the Guard troops would be deployed “to protect federal officers and federal property.”

    The two sides in the Chicago case, like in Portland, told dramatically different stories about the circumstances leading to Trump’s order.

    Democratic officials in Illinois said small groups of protesters objected to the aggressive enforcement tactics used by federal immigration agents. They said police were able to contain the protests, clear the entrances and prevent violence.

    By contrast, administration officials described repeated instances of disruption, confrontation and violence in Chicago. They said immigration agents were harassed and blocked from doing their jobs, and they needed the protection the National Guard could supply.

    Trump Solicitor Gen. D. John Sauer said the president had the authority to deploy the Guard if agents could not enforce the immigration laws.

    “Confronted with intolerable risks of harm to federal agents and coordinated, violent opposition to the enforcement of federal law,” Trump called up the National Guard “to defend federal personnel, property, and functions in the face of ongoing violence,” Sauer told the court in an emergency appeal filed in mid-October.

    Illinois state lawyers disputed the administration’s account.

    “The evidence shows that federal facilities in Illinois remain open, the individuals who have violated the law by attacking federal authorities have been arrested, and enforcement of immigration law in Illinois has only increased in recent weeks,” state Solicitor Gen. Jane Elinor Notz said in response to the administration’s appeal.

    The Constitution gives Congress the power “to provide for calling forth the militia to execute the laws of the union, suppress insurrections and repel invasions.”

    But on Oct. 29, the justices asked both sides to explain what the law meant when it referred to the “regular forces.”

    Until then, both sides had assumed it referred to federal agents and police, not the standing U.S. armed forces.

    A few days before, Georgetown law professor and former Justice Department lawyer Martin Lederman had filed a friend-of-the-court brief asserting that the “regular forces” cited in the 1903 law were the standing U.S. Army.

    His brief prompted the court to ask both sides to explain their view of the disputed provision.

    Trump’s lawyers stuck to their position. They said the law referred to the “civilian forces that regularly execute the laws,” not the standing army.

    If those civilians cannot enforce the law, “there is a strong tradition in this country of favoring the use” of the National Guard, not the standing military, to quell domestic disturbances, they said.

    State attorneys for Illinois said the “regular forces” are the “full-time, professional military.” And they said the president could not “even plausibly argue” that the U.S. Guard members were needed to enforce the law in Chicago.

    [ad_2]

    David G. Savage

    Source link

  • Supreme Court keeps Trump’s National Guard deployment blocked in the Chicago area, for now

    [ad_1]

    By MARK SHERMAN, Associated Press

    WASHINGTON (AP) — The Supreme Court on Tuesday refused to allow the Trump administration to deploy National Guard troops in the Chicago area to support its immigration crackdown.

    The justices declined the Republican administration’s emergency request to overturn a ruling by U.S. District Judge April Perry that had blocked the deployment of troops. An appeals court also had refused to step in. The Supreme Court took more than two months to act.

    Three justices, Samuel Alito, Clarence Thomas and Neil Gorsuch, publicly dissented.

    [ad_2]

    The Associated Press

    Source link

  • Trump’s National Guard deployment in Washington can continue for now, an appeals court says – WTOP News

    [ad_1]

    A federal appeals court on Wednesday ruled that the National Guard deployment in D.C. can continue for now.

    National Guard patrol in the Lincoln Memorial, Thursday, Dec. 11, 2025, in Washington. The Washington Monument is seen in the background. (AP Photo/Rahmat Gul)(AP/Rahmat Gul)

    WASHINGTON (AP) — A federal appeals court on Wednesday ruled that the National Guard deployment in the nation’s capital can continue for now, staying a lower-court ruling that had ordered an end to the troops’ presence.

    The three-judge panel for U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit ruled that Donald Trump may prevail in his argument that the president “possesses a unique power” to mobilize the Guard in Washington, which is a federal district.

    The ruling stops the implementation of U.S. District Court Judge Jia Cobb’s Nov. 20 opinion and order, and reaffirms that residents and visitors to Washington will routinely see Guard members well into 2026.

    Cobb had ruled that the deployment illegally intrudes on local officials’ authority to direct law enforcement in the District of Columbia.

    Wednesday’s unanimous 32-page ruling went on to say that other factors also favored the Republican administration, including the “disruption to the lives of thousands of service members,” as well as what it said was the president’s interest “in the protection of federal governmental functions and property within the Nation’s capital.”

    The judges found that the district “has not identified any ongoing injury to its statutory interests.”

    The ruling acknowledged that the administration has a strong case for its appeal.

    The deployment began in August after Trump issued an executive order declaring a crime emergency in Washington. Within a month, more than 2,300 National Guard troops from eight states and the district were patrolling the city under the command of the Army secretary. Trump also deployed hundreds of federal agents to assist.

    The city’s attorney general, Brian Schwalb, sued to challenge the Guard deployments. He asked that the White House be barred from deploying Guard troops without the mayor’s consent while the lawsuit played out. Dozens of states took sides in Schwalb’s lawsuit, with their support falling along party lines.

    A spokesperson with Schwalb’s office said the stay was a “preliminary ruling that does not resolve the merits. We look forward to continuing our case in both the district and appellate courts.”

    Cobb had found that while the president did have authority to protect federal functions and property, he could not unilaterally deploy the D.C. National Guard to help with crime control as he saw fit or call in troops from other states. She called for the troops to be sent home after her ruling but put her order on hold for 21 days to allow the appeal by the administration.

    The appeals court issued an administrative stay of Cobb’s ruling Dec. 4. Wednesday’s action lifts that order.

    The court action comes three weeks after two members of the West Virginia National Guard, Spc. Sarah Beckstrom and Staff Sgt. Andrew Wolfe were ambushed as they patrolled a subway station three blocks from the White House. Beckstrom died Nov. 27 from her injuries. Wolfe continues to recover. Rahmanullah Lakanwal, a 29-year-old Afghan national, has been charged with murder. He has pleaded not guilty.

    The administration has called for an additional 500 National Guard members to be deployed to Washington as a result of the shooting.

    The appeals court panel said its decision was “limited in several respects.” For example, it did not address questions such as whether the Guard units were engaged in “law enforcement” activities in violation of federal law.

    Copyright
    © 2025 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, written or redistributed.

    [ad_2]

    WTOP Staff

    Source link

  • New video emerges of DC National Guard shooting as soldier clings to life

    [ad_1]

    NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!

    Dramatic eyewitness video has emerged showing the moment two National Guard members were ambushed in Washington, D.C., in a brazen daylight attack that left one soldier dead and another fighting for his life.

    The footage, taken by an eyewitness in a passing vehicle and obtained by the Wall Street Journal, shows alleged Rahmanullah Lakanwal, 29, with what appears to be a revolver in his hand, as two Guardsmen scramble for cover.

    One Guardsman can then be seen sprinting around a corner down a street and returning fire.

    The horrific scene, which took place about three blocks north of the White House, captures Lakanwal raising his arm. Seconds later, he opened fire on two West Virginia National Guard members, the outlet reported. 

    Screenshots show National Guard members scrambling for cover and returning fire during Wednesday’s ambush near Farragut West Metro station in Washington, D.C. (Obtained by the Wall Street Journal)

    WHITE HOUSE BLASTS MS NOW CORRESPONDENT’S ‘BEYOND SICK’ REACTION TO DC SHOOTING OF NATIONAL GUARDSMEN

    The video then briefly captures the fallen troops lying on the sidewalk. The incident, which has rocked the nation, unfolded on 17th Street NW near Farragut West Metro Station at around 2:15 p.m.

    The shooter fired off 10 to 15 rounds with a .357 revolver, according to federal charging documents cited by Reuters.

    Police said that one of the Guardsmen returned fire, hitting the suspect and ending the ambush.

    Specialist Sarah Beckstrom died from her injuries on Thursday while Staff Sergeant Andrew Wolfe remains in critical condition.  

    Lakanwal entered the United States in September 2021 under Operation Allies Welcome, the Biden administration’s Afghan evacuation and resettlement program. Prosecutors say he traveled across the country shortly before the attack and had no prior criminal record.

    He now faces charges including first-degree murder and two counts of assault with intent to kill while armed. Attorney General Pam Bondi has said the Department of Justice intends to seek the death penalty.

    Side-by-side photos of the victims of the National Guard shooting in DC, with a background of the crime scene.

    National Guard members Sarah Beckstrom, 20, and Andrew Wolfe, 24, were shot in Washington, D.C., on Wednesday. Beckstrom died Thursday at the hospital. (United States Attorney’s Office for the District of Columbia/Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images)

    WHERE THE TRUMP ADMIN’S COURT FIGHT OVER DC NATIONAL GUARD STANDS IN WAKE OF SHOOTING

    Beckstrom and Wolfe are members of the West Virginia National Guard, which was deployed to the nation’s capital to tackle crime in the city following an executive order from President Donald Trump earlier this year.

    Rep. Riley Moore, R-W.Va., said Saturday told “FOX & Friends Weekend” on Saturday that Wolfe is “hanging on,” adding that his family is calling for prayer. 

    “His father is a deputy sheriff in the county next to mine and Andy wanted to follow in [those] footsteps and serve his nation as a National Guardsman,” Moore told “FOX & Friends Weekend.”

    “Andy is hanging on. And he is a fighter and his family has told me that time and time again, he is a fighter,” Moore added. “But above all what they want here is for everybody to continue to pray. I believe in the power of prayer and I can promise you his parents believe in the power of prayer… Please keep praying.”

    police officers and law enforcement blocking off street

    Streets are blocked after reports that two National Guard soldiers were shot near the White House in Washington, Wednesday, Nov. 26, 2025. (AP Photo/Anthony Peltier)

    CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

    West Virginia Gov. Patrick Morrisey also told “Fox & Friends Weekend” on Saturday that, “Andrew is fighting for his life right now, and his family and all of his friends, they’re trying to harvest as many prayers as possible from all across the country, all across the globe, to help him recover.”

    Morrisey said Wolfe’s condition, as of Saturday, “remains very serious.”

    “West Virginia cares very deeply about its Guard. And there’s just a proud tradition of West Virginians who step up from military service. So when something like this happens, it’s really a gut punch to the communities,” Morrisey added. 

    “Most importantly, we need justice to be served. That’s critical. I think West Virginians are counting on that. Americans are counting on that,” he told Fox News.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • FBI: Suspected D.C. shooter had S.D. connection, could face death penalty

    [ad_1]

    Streets are blocked after two National Guard soldiers were shot near the White House in Washington. (Photo by Anthony Peltier/Associated Press)

    Federal authorities Friday are considering the death penalty for a man with San Diego connections who is suspected of shooting two members of a West Virginia National Guard unit in Washington, D.C. — killing one and critically injuring the other.

    During a series of media appearances on Thursday, Attorney General Pam Bondi told reporters she would seek the death penalty against Rahmanullah Lakanwal, 29, an Afghan national who entered the United States in 2021. According to ABC News, Lakanwal applied for asylum in 2024 and it was granted in April under the Trump administration.

    “I will tell you right now, I will tell you early, we will do everything in our power to seek the death penalty against that monster who should not have been in our country,” Bondi said in interviews before it was learned that one of the Guard members, Specialist Sarah Beckstrom, 20, died from her injuries.

    The other Guardsman, Private First Class Andrew Wolfe, 24, was listed in critical condition after undergoing surgery, according to U.S. Attorney Jeanine Pirro.

    FBI Director Kash Patel told reporters, “a search warrant had been executed at the suspect’s last known address in Washington state. Based on what was found at the address, law enforcement was able to find people associated with him in San Diego.”

    “During that process, we seized numerous electronic devices to include cell phones, laptops, iPads and other material that is being analyzed as we speak,” Patel continued. “… Interviews were conducted and are going to be continue to be conducted, and we will go anywhere in the country or the world where the evidence leads us.”

    In an emailed response Thursday, a spokesperson for the FBI’s San Diego office did not provide further details about the case, and referred media outlets to “remarks made during the (earlier) press conference.”

    On Wednesday afternoon, a man now identified as Lakanwal shot the two members of the West Virginia National Guard “in an ambush-style attack” in the nation’s capital.

    Beckstrom died later Thursday, officials said.

    “A few moments ago, Specialist Sarah Beckstrom passed away from the injuries sustained during yesterday’s horrific shooting,” West Virginia Gov. Patrick Morrisey posted Thursday on X. “This is not the result we hoped for, but it is the result we all feared,

    “Sarah served with courage, extraordinary resolve and an unwavering sense of duty to her state and to her nation,” Morrisey wrote. “She answered the call to serve, stepped forward willingly, and carried out her mission with the strength and character that define the very best of the West Virginia National Guard.

    “Today, we honor her bravery and her sacrifice as we mourn the loss of a young woman who gave everything she had in defense of others. We will forever hold her family, her friends and her fellow Guardsmen in our prayers as they grieve what no family should ever have to bear.”

    The shooter is believed to have acted alone.

    CBS reported that CIA officials said Lakanwal “previously worked with the U.S. government, including the CIA, as a member of a partner force in Kandahar that ended in 2021 following the withdrawal from Afghanistan.”

    In addition to the possibility of the death penalty, federal officials said Lakanwal will be charged with three counts of assault with the intent to kill while armed and criminal possession of a weapon.

    Officials said Lakanwal — who is married and has five children — “drove from his residence in (Bellingham) Washington state to the nation’s capital prior to the shooting and targeted the Guardsmen.”

    Patel described the probe as a “coast-to-coast investigation,” and added that officials “are interviewing individuals at the suspect’s home and in San Diego.”

    Following the shooting, the Trump administration suspended processing all immigration requests from Afghans, according to a BBC report.

    The leader of a San Diego-based nonprofit that helps relocate and resettle Afghan allies said Thursday that the Afghan community “should not be scapegoated because of the shooting.”

    “Afghan wartime allies risked their lives for U.S. missions,” said Shawn VanDiver, president and board chairman of AfghanEvac. “This single act does not reflect Afghan values, AfghanEvac partners or the tens of thousands of Afghans building safe, productive lives in the U.S.

    “This individual’s case appears to be a tragic outlier — not a pattern,” he added. “Claims about `vetting failures’ are premature and not supported by evidence.”

    An Afghan group representative sent a statement that strongly condemn the shooting.

    “It is the isolated and irresponsible action of a single individual and in no way represents the Afghan community or the values of Afghan immigrants in the United States,” wrote Lal Gul Lal, on behalf of the Alliance of Afghan Communities in the United States.

    “First and foremost, we extend our deepest condolences to the family of the fallen service member and our prayers for the full recovery of the injured soldier,” Lal added.

    Updated at 8:30 a.m. Nov. 29, 2025

    –City News Service


    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Bustling DC retail district in shock after shooting of National Guard members – WTOP News

    [ad_1]

    Days after the Wednesday shooting of two National Guard members in D.C., businesses and local community members are still processing what happened.

    Washington (CNN) — Fasil Regassa wipes away tears when he talks about Sarah Beckstrom, the 20-year-old National Guard member who was shot Wednesday just a few feet away from his store.

    “I cried when I heard she died,” Regassa told CNN.

    For nine years, Regassa and his wife, immigrants from Ethiopia, have managed a 7-Eleven convenience store just across the street from the shooting scene. When the shooting started, Regassa said, he locked the front doors of his store and rushed the three or four customers inside to a back area for safety.

    In the bustling downtown area of Washington, DC, blocks away from the White House and packed with tourists, chain restaurants, cafes, banks, stores and corporate offices, business community members are still processing the violence and chaos they experienced near the Farragut West Metro Station.

    Beckstrom and fellow guard member Andrew Wolfe, 24, were shot multiple times by a lone gunman just outside the entrance to the metro station. Beckstrom died from her injuries Thursday evening. Both soldiers, members of the West Virginia National Guard, had been deployed to the nation’s capital during President Donald Trump’s law enforcement surge in August of this year.

    Regassa said the presence of National Guard members in this district has made the area “more safe” and described the Guard members who have come into his store for snacks and drinks as “completely nice people.”

    He says he appreciates the guard members and feels the retail area was a more dangerous place before their arrival. He told CNN of an incident in 2020 when he says five assailants overran his store, stole some goods and caused him to suffer a broken leg when one of them crashed down on him as he lay on the floor.

    Rosa Fuentes was also caught up in the chaos of Wednesday afternoon. Fuentes manages the Tatte Bakery & Cafe, less than a block from the shooting scene. When she heard the shots, Fuentes said, she immediately closed and locked the doors of the restaurant and kept customers inside.

    She saw one woman outside running, who she described as crying, “shaking” and “panicking,” and she opened the doors to let her in. “We were scared,” Fuentes said, because “we didn’t know if they had got the guy.”

    Fuentes, who has a 23-year-old daughter, also fought back tears when she reflected on Beckstrom’s death. She said she was crying when she heard the news, “and was thinking about how her parents felt.”

    Fuentes, an immigrant from El Salvador, described the guardsmen who come into her restaurant as nice people, but she has mixed feelings about the Trump administration’s plans to deploy additional guard soldiers to Washington in the wake of the shooting. She initially said she thought it could make the area safer, but added, “I don’t know,” saying that she’s worried about what could happen to the guard members themselves.

    The manager of another cafe nearby, who declined to provide her name or the name of the establishment, said she witnessed the shooting, describing it as “shocking.” She recalled locking the doors of the cafe and getting customers down on the ground in the moments afterward. She said the guardsmen patrolling the area since August have kept a “low profile,” and she is pleased that more of them could be deployed here soon. They’d provide “another layer of protection,” she said.

    Gyanu Sapkota, an immigrant from Nepal who has managed a Subway sandwich shop near Farragut Square for 18 years, told CNN that guard members would often come into his shop during their deployment, and he said Beckstrom and Wolfe looked familiar to him.

    The guard members in the city “are very, very nice,” said Sapkota, who was not at the store during the shooting. “Most were very friendly. Most of them were very young.”

    Before the arrival of the guard members in the tourist-heavy area, Sapkota said he often had problems with people coming into his store and stealing drinks and bags of chips. But he said the presence of the National Guard in the area has made him and his employees feel safer, and he applauded the plan to send more guard troops to DC. “That’s better for us,” Sapkota said.

    Managers of local branches of major banks that operate in Farragut Square, who declined to give their names, described to CNN locking doors and taking cover after the shooting, seeing police converging on the scene and people running past their windows.

    While one of the managers described the shooting as “sad,” he said of the presence of the guard members in the area, “I didn’t want them here.”

    “In my opinion, they’re military folks, and they’re always going to be targeted,” he said. “I just feel there’s ways you can do more in the community to cut violence. I don’t think the National Guard would do that.”

    The manager of another bank described the guard members in the area as friendly, and he said one of them gave him a patch as a kind gesture. But he added, of the possible deployment of additional guard members here, “I don’t think they should bring more of them here. I don’t think it’ll help the situation.”

    Makeshift memorial draws emotional reflections

    On Friday, a makeshift memorial to the victims at the site of the shooting grew by the hour, with people placing flowers, wreaths, flags and notes in an outdoor planter by the entrance to the Farragut West station.

    A 21-year-old Marine, who did not give his name because he’s not authorized to speak to the media, placed a vase of roses, an American flag patch and two challenge coins at the memorial.

    After taking a moment to reflect on the victims, he told CNN he thought the political rhetoric and finger-pointing following the shooting has been “disgusting.”

    “It all needs to stop,” he said. “We need to recognize that a US service member has lost their life.”

    A note was placed that read: “Praying for all Nat’l Guard — thank you for all you do.”

    A man who laid flowers said, while he didn’t agree with the National Guard’s deployment in the city, “she didn’t deserve to die.”

    The-CNN-Wire
    ™ & © 2025 Cable News Network, Inc., a Warner Bros. Discovery Company. All rights reserved.

    [ad_2]

    WTOP Staff

    Source link

  • US halts all asylum claims after National Guard shootings: What to know

    [ad_1]

    The Trump administration has ordered an immediate halt to all asylum decisions nationwide following a fatal shooting near the White House that left a National Guard member dead and another critically injured.

    Joseph Edlow, Director of US Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS), announced late Friday that the agency was pausing all asylum decisions “until we can ensure that every alien is vetted and screened to the maximum degree possible.”

    Officers have been instructed not to approve, deny, or close any asylum application for any nationality, although work on applications can continue up to but not including approval or denial, according to Reuters.

    Newsweek contacted the White House and the USCIS via email for comment outside of regular business hours.

    Loading twitter content…

    Why It Matters

    The asylum freeze marks a significant escalation in Trump’s second-term campaign to restrict both legal and unauthorized immigration, setting up likely legal battles and affecting thousands of awaiting asylum decisions.

    It comes as the US faces scrutiny at home and abroad over its obligations to international asylum and refugee agreements, and underscores the administration’s claim to prioritize national security in the wake of violent incidents involving migrants.

    What To Know

    The USCIS’s latest announcement follows a double shooting that took place near the White House on Wednesday, resulting in the death of specialist Sarah Beckstrom, a 20-year-old member of the West Virginia National Guard.

    The second target, staff sergeant Andrew Wolfe, 24, remains in a critical condition.

    Rahmanullah Lakanwal, the suspect, had entered the US in 2021 through Operation Allies Welcome, a program for Afghans who aided US military forces after having worked with the CIA during the Afghanistan War, according to The Associated Press.

    His asylum was granted earlier this year under the Trump administration, according to a group that assists with the resettlement of Afghans who helped the U.S. in the region, AP reported.

    This is a developing story. More to follow.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • USCIS halts ‘all asylum decisions’ after DC shooting of National Guard members

    [ad_1]

    NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!

    The U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) announced on Friday that it has halted all asylum decisions following the shooting in Washington, D.C., in which an Afghan national was accused of shooting two National Guard members, including one who died from her injuries.

    USCIS Director Joseph B. Edlow said the asylum decisions would be suspended “until we can ensure that every alien is vetted and screened to the maximum degree possible.”

    “The safety of the American people always comes first,” he wrote on X.

    The pause comes amid a broader immigration crackdown signaled by President Donald Trump, who on Thursday vowed to halt migration from “Third World countries” and reverse Biden-era admissions.

    STATE DEPARTMENT ‘IMMEDIATELY’ HALTS ALL AFGHAN PASSPORT VISAS FOLLOWING DEADLY NATIONAL GUARD ATTACK

    National Guard members Sarah Beckstrom, 20, and Andrew Wolfe, 24, were shot in Washington, D.C., on Wednesday. (United States Attorney’s Office for the District of Columbia/Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images)

    Edlow said on Thursday that officials would reexamine green cards issued to immigrants from every “country of concern,” including Afghanistan. USCIS also implemented new national security measures to be considered while vetting immigrants from “high risk” countries.

    “I have directed a full scale, rigorous reexamination of every Green Card for every alien from every country of concern,” he wrote.

    National Guard soldiers shot in DC

    ATF and Secret Service officers are seen after two National Guard soldiers were shot near the White House in Washington, D.C., Wednesday, Nov. 26, 2025.  (Evan Vucci/AP)

    The Department of Homeland Security also said it had already halted all immigration requests from Afghanistan and was in the process of reviewing all asylum cases approved under the Biden administration.

    Additionally, the Department of State has paused all visas for people traveling on Afghan passports in response to the attack against the National Guard members.

    “The Department of State has IMMEDIATELY paused visa issuance for individuals traveling on Afghan passports,” the agency wrote. “The Department is taking all necessary steps to protect U.S. national security and public safety.”

    National Guard member Sarah Beckstrom, 20, of West Virginia, died after the shooting on Wednesday in the nation’s capital, while the second service member wounded in the attack, Andrew Wolfe, 24, is still in critical condition.

    The alleged gunman, Rahmanullah Lakanwal, 29, faces multiple charges, including one count of first-degree murder and two counts of assault with intent to kill while armed. Attorney General Pam Bondi said that the Justice Department would pursue the death penalty against the suspect.

    WHO IS THE DC NATIONAL GUARDSMEN SHOOTING SUSPECT? WHAT TO KNOW ABOUT AFGHAN NATIONAL RAHMANULLAH LAKANWAL

    Photo of National Guard shooting suspect, Rahmanullah Lakanwal

    Undated file photo of Rahmanullah Lakanwal, the suspect in the shooting of two National Guard soldiers in Washington, D.C., November 26, 2025. (Provided by Department of Justice)

    Lakanwal entered the U.S. legally in 2021 under humanitarian parole as part of the Biden administration’s Operation Allies Welcome, following the U.S. withdrawal from Afghanistan.

    He was vetted by the CIA in Afghanistan for his work with the agency and again for his asylum application in the U.S. A senior U.S. official told Fox News he was “clean on all checks” in his background check.

    CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

    Lakanwal had his asylum application approved by the Trump administration earlier this year.

    A report released by the Department of Justice Office of the Inspector General in June found there were “no systemic failures” in Afghan refugee vetting or subsequent immigration pathways.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • State Department ‘immediately’ halts all Afghan passport visas following deadly National Guard attack

    [ad_1]

    NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!

    The Department of State has paused all visas for individuals traveling on Afghan passports after an attack in Washington, D.C., Wednesday targeting National Guard members.

    Rahmanullah Lakanwal, 29, an Afghan national, was charged with first-degree murder among other counts related to the ambush, which has since claimed the life of West Virginia National Guard Army Spc. Sarah Beckstrom and critically wounded U.S. Air Force Staff Sgt. Andrew Wolfe, 24.

    Lakanwal was vetted by the CIA in Afghanistan and granted final asylum approval under President Donald Trump’s administration earlier this year, multiple sources told Fox News Digital.

    “The Department of State has IMMEDIATELY paused visa issuance for individuals traveling on Afghan passports,” the agency wrote in an announcement on social media. “The Department is taking all necessary steps to protect U.S. national security and public safety.”

    Secretary of State Marco Rubio announced the State Department will halt all Afghan passport visas. (Getty Images)

    LAW ENFORCEMENT RESPONDING AFTER 2 NATIONAL GUARD MEMBERS SHOT NEAR WHITE HOUSE

    Secretary of State Marco Rubio also took to X to share the news.

    “President Trump’s State Department has paused visa issuance for ALL individuals traveling on Afghan passports,” Rubio wrote in a post. “The United States has no higher priority than protecting our nation and our people.”

    U.S.-based Afghanistan allies relocation and resettlement nonprofit AfghanEvac denounced Friday’s decision, calling the administration’s move a “violation of federal law.” 

    “It appears Secretary Rubio is attempting to shut down the Afghan Special Immigrant Visa program in direct violation of federal law and standing court orders. He is seemingly acting at the direction of President Trump and Stephen Miller, and there is no doubt this is the outcome they have been driving toward for months,” AfghanEvac President Shawn VanDiver said in a statement. 

    “They are using a single violent individual as cover for a policy they have long planned, turning their own intelligence failures into an excuse to punish an entire community and the veterans who served alongside them.”

    VANCE’S PAST WARNINGS REIGNITE AFTER AFGHAN NATIONAL NAMED AS SUSPECT IN DC GUARD SHOOTING

    police on streets blocked off split with photo of National Guard shooting suspect, Rahmanullah Lakanwal

    Two National Guard soldiers were shot Wednesday blocks from the White House in Washington, D.C. Alleged gunman Rahmanullah Lakanwal has been charged with first-degree murder. (AP Photo/Anthony Peltier; Department of Justice)

    The new policy comes less than a day after the media questioned Trump about how the attack could have taken place after successful vetting.

    “I mean, he went nuts, and that happens. It happens too often with these people,” Trump told reporters from his Mar-a-Lago club in Florida. “There was no vetting or anything. … We have a lot of others in this country, and we’re going to get them out, but they go cuckoo. Something happens to them.”

    Trump noted “when it comes to asylum, when they’re flown in, it’s very hard to get them out. No matter how you want to do it, it’s very hard to get them out. But we’re going to be getting them all out now.”

    Side-by-side photos of the victims of the National Guard shooting in DC, with a background of the crime scene.

    National Guard members Sarah Beckstrom, 20, and Andrew Wolfe, 24, were shot in Washington, D.C., Wednesday. Beckstrom died Thursday at a hospital. (United States Attorney’s Office for the District of Columbia; Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images)

    CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

    U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) Director Joseph B. Edlow also announced Thursday that, at Trump’s direction, there would be a “full-scale, rigorous reexamination” of every green card issued to immigrants from “every country of concern.”

    The 19 countries deemed “high-risk” by the USCIS include Afghanistan, Burma, Chad, the Republic of the Congo, Equatorial Guinea, Eritrea, Haiti, Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Yemen, Burundi, Cuba, Laos, Sierra Leone, Togo, Turkmenistan and Venezuela.

    [ad_2]

    Source link