Sunday, February 02, 2025

AMERIKA

Opinion - The president’s education order: Trump wants to indoctrinate, too


Jonathan Zimmerman, opinion contributor
THE HILL
Fri, January 31, 2025 

President Trump this week issued an order barring federal funding of “the indoctrination of children.” And in its first sentence, he declared that schools should “instill a patriotic admiration for our incredible nation.”

Got that? He said he would ban indoctrination, and then he called for more of it.

Welcome to the topsy-turvy world of Trump and education, where nothing is quite as it seems. On the one hand, Trump wants to eliminate the federal Department of Education on the grounds that schooling should be a state and local concern. At the same time, though, he is imposing new federal doctrines about what schools should teach.

Witness Trump’s ban on Critical Race Theory, which he called “an inherently racist policy.” That’s one view of it. But Trump wants to impose his view, all in the guise of fighting indoctrination.

Or consider the 1776 Project, which Trump created during his first term in office to counter the New York Times’ 1619 Project. As per its name, which refers to the year that the first enslaved Africans arrived on our shores, the 1619 Project roots American history in slavery and racism.

By contrast, the 1776 Project highlights America’s timeless virtues: freedom, liberty, opportunity, and so on. President Joe Biden revoked it when he took office, but Trump re-established it this week “to promote patriotic education.”

It’s Trump’s story. And, again, he wants to impose it on everyone else.

Let’s be clear: In the classroom, indoctrination is always a danger. We have all had teachers who presented their own political biases as the gospel truth; in the worst cases, they insisted that students echo them to get a good grade.

In a recent survey of 850 high school students published by Education Next, 36 percent reported being taught “often” or “almost daily” that “America is a fundamentally racist nation.” And 34 percent said that teachers told them often or almost daily that “police officers are inherently racist against Black Americans.”

Does that mean they’re being indoctrinated into the canons of Critical Race Theory, which holds that racist practices and beliefs are baked into American institutions? Not necessarily.

Over half of the students also said they were taught often or almost daily that “the U.S. has made a lot of progress toward racial equality in the last 50 years,” and 42 percent said they were taught that “the U.S. is a global leader when it comes to ensuring equal rights for all citizens.”

We can’t tell how the teachers are instructing these ideas from the student survey. If teachers are presenting them as fact — and requiring students to repeat them — then they’re indeed guilty of indoctrination. But if they present these matters as questions — and challenge students on their answers — the teachers are doing exactly what they should.

If students say America is a racist country, their teacher should ask why it elected a Black president. And if they say it’s a beacon of racial equality, they should be asked why Black Americans are more likely to be poor or incarcerated.

That’s education, not indoctrination. But it could be prohibited by Trump, who charged that schools are teaching “radical, anti-American ideologies” that make white children feel ashamed of themselves. Would an honest dialogue about race run afoul of Trump’s order? We don’t know, which is why teachers might simply avoid the subject.

Trump also threatened to pull funding from schools teaching “gender ideology,” especially the idea that a person’s gender identity can differ from their assigned sex at birth. To be sure, Americans are deeply divided on that question. And again, Trump wants to indoctrinate his own answer: Gender is binary and immutable.

Finally, Trump’s order said that the federal government would “investigate and punish” antisemitism on America’s college campuses. Does that mean professors and students who protest Israel’s war in Gaza would face penalties?

Again, we don’t know. All we know is that the Trump’s administration would get to define antisemitism and impose its will on everyone else. And if that’s not indoctrination, I don’t know what is.

The best teachers I had made me think for myself. And the best way to fight Trump’s order is to rededicate ourselves to that ideal. We should present the 1619 Project and the 1776 Project to our students, and let them sort out the differences. And we should ask them questions, instead of giving them answers.

You can’t fight indoctrination if you’re doing it yourself. Just ask Donald Trump.

Jonathan Zimmerman teaches education and history at the University of Pennsylvania. He serves on the advisory board of the Albert Lepage Center for History in the Public Interest.

Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. 


Education Department employees placed on paid leave as part of Trump administration’s DEI purge

Alayna Treene, Rene Marsh and Veronica Stracqualursi, 
CNN
Sun, February 2, 2025 


The Department of Education headquarters in Washington, DC, as seen on September 9, 2019.


Dozens of employees at the Education Department were placed on paid administrative leave Friday as part of the Trump administration’s larger effort to rid the federal workforce of employees associated with diversity, equity, inclusion and accessibility efforts, two sources familiar with the move told CNN.

The department sent letters to employees informing them that their email accounts were being suspended but that they would continue to receive paychecks for an indefinite period, the sources said.

The department cited guidance from the White House’s Office of Personnel and Management, issued on January 21, that directed government agencies to notify “all employees of DEIA offices that they are being placed on paid administrative leave effective immediately as the agency takes steps to close/end all DEIA initiatives, offices and programs.”

The agency is the latest to face upheaval amid the White House’s efforts to weed out DEI programs within the government and reshape the federal workforce in President Donald Trump’s image.

At least 55 Education Department employees, including senior-level career workers who have served at the agency for decades, were notified Friday night that they’d been placed on paid leave, according to the American Federation of Government Employees, the union representing the agency’s career officials.

“Effective January 31, 2025, you will be placed on administrative leave with full pay and benefits pursuant to the President’s executive order on DEIA and further guidance from OPM,” the letter says, according to a copy obtained by CNN. “This administrative leave is not being done for any disciplinary purpose.”

According to the union, these employees do not hold job titles nor official duties related to DEIA, but they included staffers such as civil rights attorneys who handle student discrimination and antisemitism complaints; an employee working in a grant office; and a member of the artificial intelligence team helping the department understand AI in education.

But Sheria Smith, union president for Department of Education career employees, told CNN the employees placed on paid leave had attended a two-day diversity training seminar in 2019 during the first Trump administration “that was required for senior-level employees and strongly encouraged for others,” as well as similar training under the Biden administration. Others affected had either participated in a one-day lunch training on DEI or had volunteered with an agency group or committee that plans programs such as Black History Month celebrations.

The diversity training for Education Department employees was encouraged during the first Trump administration under then-Education Secretary Betsy DeVos, whose goal was for 400 employees to attend the sessions, according to the union.

Because of the large participation in the 2019 training seminar, the union is worried that hundreds more Department of Education staffers could be affected.

“We’ve filed several requests for information with the agency to get a clear understanding of what’s happening and how many employees overall will be impacted,” Smith told CNN, but the union has not received any additional information.

CNN reached out to the Department of Education for comment but did not receive a response.

The New York Times first reported on the letters sent to Education Department employees informing them that they were being put on paid administrative leave.

The White House last month ordered government DEI employees to be placed on administrative leave and ended the use of DEI in hiring and federal contracting.

“The mission of the agency is stalled because this administration has forced these people to stop performing work for the American people,” Smith told CNN.

Agency leaders were also instructed to ask employees to report any efforts to “disguise these programs” in federal jobs and contract descriptions since the November election.



Meta's WhatsApp says spyware company Paragon targeted users in two dozen countries

Raphael Satter
Updated Fri, January 31, 2025

Illustration shows Whatsapp logo


By Raphael Satter

WASHINGTON (Reuters) -An official with Meta Platforms' popular WhatsApp chat service said Israeli spyware company Paragon Solutions had targeted scores of its users, including journalists and members of civil society.

The official said on Friday that WhatsApp had sent Paragon a cease-and-desist letter following the hack. In a statement, WhatsApp said the company "will continue to protect people's ability to communicate privately."

Paragon declined to comment.

The WhatsApp official told Reuters it had detected an effort to hack approximately 90 users.

The official declined to say who, specifically, was targeted. But he said those targeted were based in more than two dozen countries, including several people in Europe. He said WhatsApp users were sent malicious electronic documents that required no user interaction to compromise their targets, a so-called zero-click hack that is considered particularly stealthy.


The official said WhatsApp had since disrupted the hacking effort and was referring targets to Canadian internet watchdog group Citizen Lab. The official declined to discuss how it determined that Paragon was responsible for the hack. He said law enforcement and industry partners had been informed, but declined to give details.

The FBI did not immediately return a message seeking comment.

Citizen Lab researcher John Scott-Railton said the discovery of Paragon spyware targeting WhatsApp users "is a reminder that mercenary spyware continues to proliferate and as it does, so we continue to see familiar patterns of problematic use."

Spyware merchants such as Paragon sell high-end surveillance software to government clients and typically pitch their services as critical to fighting crime and protecting national security.

But such spy tools have repeatedly been discovered on the phones of journalists, activists, opposition politicians, and at least 50 U.S. officials, raising concerns over the unchecked proliferation of the technology.


Paragon - which was reportedly acquired by Florida-based investment group AE Industrial Partners last month - has tried to position itself publicly as one of the industry's more responsible players.

Its website advertises "ethically based tools, teams, and insights to disrupt intractable threats," and media reports citing people familiar with the company say Paragon only sells to governments in stable democratic countries.

Natalia Krapiva, senior tech-legal counsel at the advocacy group Access Now, said Paragon had the reputation of being a better spyware company, "but WhatsApp's recent revelations suggest otherwise."

"This is not just a question of some bad apples — these types of abuses (are) a feature of the commercial spyware industry."

AE did not immediately return a message seeking comment.

(Reporting by Raphael Satter in Washington and James Pearson in London; Editing by Jan Harvey and Rod Nickel)
Opinion - How American tech companies built China into an AI powerhouse

Paul Rosenzweig, opinion contributor
THE HILL
Sat, February 1, 2025 



The United States advantage in artificial intelligence is in question following the recent news that DeepSeek — a small Chinese startup — developed a better, more efficient large language AI model for billions less and in a fraction of the time it took leading American tech companies like Meta and Microsoft to do so themselves.

It’s a stunning development — one that has called into question the assumptions of American AI leaders. But the real issue isn’t just that American companies are falling behind from a technical standpoint, it’s that China’s AI ascension was in part enabled by American tech companies building, operating and growing their AI capabilities in the country.

Inadvertent or not, American companies have provided China with everything it needs to gain a competitive advantage.

One American company, for example, Microsoft, has made China its second home for AI development — operating AI research facilities directly in China that helped to make Chinese AI what it is today.


Indeed, Microsoft spent years helping to create China’s AI industry, by, for example, developing AI technologies at its Beijing research lab and in conjunction with Chinese military universities. A little over a year ago, the company gave the China access to almost 40 new Azure features — including many AI functions, and it recently signed agreements with Chinese propaganda outlets to provide them with AI technology to better target propaganda dissemination.

Perhaps more importantly, most tech companies operating in China have to comply with China’s National Cybersecurity Law, which requires them to store Chinese user data on mainland servers, providing an access route for Chinese intelligence and state security agencies. This includes giving the government access to source code, encryption keys and backdoor access.

How China processes that data and leverages it is heavily veiled by the Chinese government, but it’s well-known that China uses it for the benefit of its private sector and directly against its adversaries. Microsoft admitted that China’s cybersecurity laws on vulnerability disclosures have led to an increase in China-based nation-state threat actors exploiting zero-day vulnerabilities. Surely China has every reason to leverage these laws to exploit Microsoft’s AI products as well.

Microsoft isn’t the only company that operates in China. Indeed, Oracle, Amazon Web Services and Meta all have similarly spent years building and operating AI partnerships in China. But Microsoft has a uniquely massive presence in China and is one of the largest providers of technology to the U.S. government, which makes its activities in China potentially harmful to the U.S. private sector and perilous to U.S. national security.

Americans have every right to question China’s rapid AI ascension because it could have easily been different. Ironically, Microsoft itself showed that there is a path to building the U.S. AI industry without simultaneously building China’s through its deal with Emirati firm G42.


The deal, which the U.S. government approved last year, authorized the export of advanced AI chips to a Microsoft-operated facility in the United Arab Emirates as part of a partnership between Microsoft and G42. It expanded the reach and use of American AI technology through close coordination between the U.S. government and the private sector and reaffirmed a strong partnership with a close ally, all while leveraging clear and transparent export controls that mitigated China’s ability to access Microsoft’s AI.

But what is past is past. The damage, such as it is, has been done and Chinese AI advances are now a matter of fact. But there’s no excuse for the government to allow the situation to continue and for U.S. tech companies to be researching advanced AI in China.

To help the U.S. take back its position as the unquestioned AI leader, the government should take action to review the actions of American companies that have sensitive AI operations in China and work to diminish the partnerships that are helping China directly compete with the U.S.

Paul Rosenzweig is the founder of Red Branch Consulting PLLC, a homeland security and cybersecurity consulting company, and a senior advisor to The Chertoff Group. Rosenzweig formerly served as deputy assistant secretary for Policy in the Department of Homeland Security.

Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved.


DeepSeek Failed Every Single Security Test, Researchers Found

Victor Tangermann
FUTURISM
Sat, February 1, 2025 




Security researchers from the University of Pennsylvania and hardware conglomerate Cisco have found that DeepSeek's flagship R1 reasoning AI model is stunningly vulnerable to jailbreaking.

In a blog post published today, first spotted by Wired, the researchers found that DeepSeek "failed to block a single harmful prompt" after being tested against "50 random prompts from the HarmBench dataset," which includes "cybercrime, misinformation, illegal activities, and general harm."

"This contrasts starkly with other leading models, which demonstrated at least partial resistance," the blog post reads.

It's a particularly noteworthy development considering the sheer amount of chaos DeepSeek has wrought on the AI industry as a whole. The company claims its R1 model can trade blows with competitors including OpenAI's state-of-the-art o1, but at a tiny fraction of the cost, sending shivers down the spines of Wall Street investors.


But the company seemingly has done little to guard its AI model against attacks and misuse. In other words, it wouldn't be hard for a bad actor to turn it into a powerful disinformation machine or get it to explain how to create explosives, for instance.

The news comes after cloud security research company Wiz came across a massive unsecured database on DeepSeek's servers, which included a trove of unencrypted internal data ranging from "chat history" to "backend data, and sensitive information."

DeepSeek is extremely vulnerable to an attack "without any authentication or defense mechanism to the outside world," according to Wiz.

The Chinese hedge fund-owned company's AI made headlines for being far cheaper to train and run than its many competitors in the US. But that frugality may come with some significant drawbacks.

"DeepSeek R1 was purportedly trained with a fraction of the budgets that other frontier model providers spend on developing their models," the Cisco and University of Pennsylvania researchers wrote. "However, it comes at a different cost: safety and security."

AI security company Adversa AI similarly found that DeepSeek is astonishingly easy to jailbreak.

"It starts to become a big deal when you start putting these models into important complex systems and those jailbreaks suddenly result in downstream things that increases liability, increases business risk, increases all kinds of issues for enterprises," Cisco VP of product, AI software and platform DJ Sampath told Wired.

However, it's not just DeepSeek's latest AI. Meta's open-source Llama 3.1 model also flunked almost as badly as DeepSeek's R1 in a comparison test, with a 96 percent attack success rate (compared to dismal 100 percent for DeepSeek).

OpenAI's recently released reasoning model, o1-preview, fared much better, with an attack success rate of just 26 percent.

In short, DeepSeek's flaws deserve plenty of scrutiny going forward.

"DeepSeek is just another example of how every model can be broken — it’s just a matter of how much effort you put in," Adversa AI CEO Alex Polyakov told Wired. "If you’re not continuously red-teaming your AI, you’re already compromised."

PYRRHIC VICTORY

In win for Trump, oil giant Shell walks away from major New Jersey offshore wind farm

A LOSS FOR THE PLANET

JENNIFER McDERMOTT
Fri, January 31, 2025 



In the first serious fallout from President Donald Trump's early actions against offshore wind power, oil and gas giant Shell is walking away from a major project off the coast of New Jersey.

Shell told The Associated Press it is writing off the project, citing increased competition, delays and a changing market.

“Naturally we also take regulatory context into consideration,” spokesperson Natalie Gunnell said in an email.

Shell co-owns the large Atlantic Shores project, which has most of its permits and would generate enough power for 1 million homes if both of two phases were completed. That’s enough for one-third of New Jersey households.


It's unclear whether Shell's decision kills the project — partner EDF-RE Offshore Development says it remains committed to Atlantic Shores.

On his first day in office, Trump signed an executive order singling out offshore wind for contempt with a temporary halt on all lease sales in federal waters and a pause on approvals, permits and loans. Perhaps most of interest to Shell, the order directs administration officials to review existing offshore wind energy leases and identify any legal reasons to terminate them.

Large offshore wind farms have been making electricity for three decades in Europe, and more recently in Asia. They are considered by experts to be an essential part of addressing climate change because they can take the place of fossil fuel plants, if paired with battery storage. New Jersey has set a goal of generating 100% of its energy from clean sources by 2035.

The Biden administration approved plans to build the Atlantic Shores project in two phases in October, but construction has not begun. Oliver Metcalfe, head of wind research at BloombergNEF, said the partners are facing significant uncertainty about their lease, and other developers are watching what happens with Atlantic Shores closely. “We’re in uncertain territory here,” he added.

Offshore wind foes, who are particularly vocal and well-organized in New Jersey, celebrated Shell’s withdrawal. Republican Rep. Jeff Van Drew, of New Jersey, helped the Trump team draft the executive order. He said Shell’s decision is a “big win” for New Jersey’s coastline and economy but “this fight is not over.”


Robin Shaffer, president of Protect Our Coast NJ, said that without Shell's financial backing, it appears the project is “dead in the water.”

Shell is writing off a nearly $1 billion investment. It announced its decision on Thursday, as it reported a 16% decline in full-year earnings of $23.7 billion from $28.3 billion. Most of its business is oil and gas.

Danish wind developer Orsted was close to beginning work on two offshore wind farms in New Jersey but scrapped the project in Oct. 2023 after deciding it would not be economical.

A lot of clean energy is cheap now, but offshore wind is still among the most expensive. That can make these projects less attractive to investors, absent strong policy support, said Coco Zhang, vice president for environmental, social and governance research at ING.

“The potential uncertainty that the executive order has brought to the market, it cannot be ignored,” she said.


The Biden administration sought to ramp up offshore wind as a climate change solution, setting national goals to deploy offshore wind energy, holding lease sales and approving nearly a dozen commercial-scale offshore wind energy projects.

___

The Associated Press’ climate and environmental coverage receives financial support from multiple private foundations. AP is solely responsible for all content. Find AP’s standards for working with philanthropies, a list of supporters and funded coverage areas at AP.org.








Air Traffic Controllers At California Airport Ready To Walk Off The Job Due To $18,000 Cut To Benefits

Lawrence Hodge
Fri, January 31, 2025

Image: Gorodenkoff (Shutterstock)

Mere days after Trump gutted the FAA and one of the worst aviation disasters in over 20 years occurred in U.S. airspace, chaos could be looming at another airport on the West Coast. A Northern California airport will lose its air traffic controllers after workers and airport officials couldn’t come to an agreement over pay.

News outlets in San Francisco report that the tower at San Carlos Airport, a small airport in the flightpath of San Francisco International Airport, will be understaffed starting February 1. The reason is a dispute over a new contract that was negotiated with the FAA. This new contract didn’t include a cost of living increase for the workers. Because of that, the workers declined the contract. From The San Francisco Standard:

The crisis emerged after Robinson Aviation, or RVA, won the Federal Aviation Administration contract for the airport over longtime provider Serco but declined to match the $18,000 housing stipend controllers receive to offset Bay Area living costs. The FAA and RVA did not immediately respond to requests for comment.

“RVA offered a match for hourly pay but did not provide for a stipend for [housing],” said Davi Howard, San Mateo County airport spokesman and former air traffic controller. “The controllers turned down the offer.”

Airport officials issued a statement saying that while airport operations will continue normally, the tower will be understaffed. “The Airport, in collaboration with SCAPA and SCFC, has been in continuous communication with the FAA regarding the transition of air traffic service providers for the San Carlos Federal Contract Tower. This morning, we were informed by FAA Headquarters that the SQL tower will be unstaffed (ATC-Zero) starting Saturday, February 1st,” the statement reads. It’s not all bleak, though. Officials say there’s currently last minute negotiations between the two parties so that airport operations can resume normally. Just in case those negotiations fall through, officials say they “requested temporary staffing” from the FAA to cover the positions but were declined.

Things are serious, however, and it’s even gotten the attention of some local lawmakers. In a statement to NBC News, U.S. Rep. Kevin Mullin (D-San Mateo) said he’s on the side of the workers and that officials should account for the area’s high cost of living in salary negotiations. “It is well known that the San Francisco Bay Area has a high cost of living, and federal agencies need to account for regional differences when evaluating how to establish contracts for critical services,” said Mullin.
HERE COME THE PRIVATE PRISONS INC.

Trump's stepped-up immigration arrests escalate need for more detention space

Suzanne Gamboa
NBC NEWS
Fri, January 31, 2025 

U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents detain a suspect during a multiagency targeted enforcement operation in Lyons, Ill., on Sunday.

As arrests of immigrants increase, the administration is scrambling to make sure it has the room to house its detainees and keep President Donald Trump’s promise to deport them.

Trump’s "border czar," Tom Homan, told NBC News that Immigration and Customs Enforcement needs 100,000 beds total, more than double what it has currently. Trump alluded to the need for more room when he ordered the Pentagon and the Department of Homeland Security on Wednesday to prepare 30,000 beds at Guantánamo Bay for who he said would be detainees posing the greatest threat to Americans’ safety.

An immigration detention room is used to hold people until they are deported, and it “is really kind of a backbone of the mass deportation plan,” said Jesse Franzblau, a senior policy analyst with the National Immigrant Justice Center.

“That’s why we see [ICE] floating numbers. They talk about doubling the space to hold people in these ICE jails,” Franzblau said.
ADVERTISEMENT


The Biden administration made an average of 282 immigration arrests per day in September 2024, the most recent ICE data available.

So far, using seven days of data, the Trump administration’s daily average is 791.

Homan said his instructions to officers and agents were “arrest as many as you can.”

The Trump administration launched its mass deportations operation despite ICE’s $230 million budget shortfall. The first bill Trump signed this term, the Laken Riley Act, requires ICE to detain undocumented immigrants who are arrested or face charges or who have been convicted of “burglary, theft, larceny, or shoplifting.” But it didn’t include new money to detain those additional immigrants, which DHS said in December it would need.

As of January, ICE reported it had at least 106 facilities nationwide. Congress appropriated funding to detain an average of 41,500 people a day, at a cost of about $3.4 billion.

That was an increase over fiscal year 2023, when Congress provided funding to detain a daily average of 34,000 people, costing about $2.9 billion. The House is in the midst of trying to hammer out a budget bill that would include money for Trump and his immigration crackdown; congressional Republicans have put the price tag at about $100 billion.

The cost of each ICE detention bed is $57,378 per year, per bed, according to DHS data.

Daily detention numbers reached a height of 50,000 average daily population under the first Trump administration, but fell to about 20,000 when Covid hit.
A vast network

The thousands of immigrants taken into custody each year are often locked up in a vast network of facilities, some owned by the federal government and state or local governments but most contracted from private entities.

The American Civil Liberties Union discovered through open government requests that the Biden administration was seeking to expand detention space nationwide.

The Trump administration has already begun to supplement the space it’s using.

DHS is using facilities at Buckley Space Force Base in Aurora, Colorado, for processing immigrants with criminal charges or convictions who were arrested in ICE operations in the state. The military made the space available, possibly to be used for a previously planned operation in Aurora.

The Trump administration has instructed the Justice Department to investigate for potential prosecution state or local officials who resist enforcement of federal immigration laws.

Some states, such as Illinois, have limited or ended immigration detention. New Jersey banned the building of new immigration detention centers, though private companies have sued to block that law. But other local and state governments have long had contracts with ICE for detention space.

Sheriff Scott Hildenbrand in Geauga County, Ohio, said his department has had a contract for 15 to 20 years with ICE to hold immigrant detainees. Hildenbrand said ICE brought in 20 people who’d been arrested over the weekend, raising the detainee population to 58, but since then, ICE removed six people from the jail.

He said as far as he knew, none of those brought in were wanted on local warrants.

“They called us and asked ‘Do you have room for 20?’ and brought them in,” Hildenbrand told NBC News.

Hildenbrand said the immigrant population in the jail has generally been steady.

He said his facility has 182 beds and typically can take in as many as 60 to 70 immigrants, depending on how many other people are in the jail who are not ICE detainees. The county is paid $100 a day for each detainee.

The immigration detention system has been a continuous target of criticism from immigrant advocates and government watchdogs over conditions including lack of access to attorneys and substandard medical care as well as issues of cost and effectiveness.

The section of the Guantánamo Bay detention facility that Trump wants to use has been housing adults and families with young children interdicted at sea as they’ve tried to flee to the U.S. It is separate from the military prison where the U.S. placed detainees after the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks.

The refugee families detained there have included people and children from Cuba who have tried to escape the Cuban government, according to the International Refugee Assistance Project, IRAP, which documented in a report the conditions and some of the experiences of adults and children held there.

In its report, IRAP said former clients, detained refugees and former staff described the building where they were incarcerated as dilapidated with mold and sewage problems. They reported that families with young children were housed with single adults. Those held are unable to have confidential phone calls with attorneys and are punished if they discuss being mistreated.

Many who are kept in the Guantánamo Bay facility must remain there until a third country agrees to accept them — even if they have family in the U.S. — and are kept for years, the report states. Some countries such as Cuba and Venezuela don’t accept the return of their citizens deported from the U.S.

“We have report on report on conditions in these detention facilities that don’t provide basic health care, shackle women when pregnant, have not had protections for communicable diseases such as Covid,” said Raha Wala, a vice president of the National Immigration Law Center.

“We saw a movement to Guantánamo,” Wala said about Trump’s directive, “which is the legal equivalent of a black hole.”

This article was originally published on NBCNews.com




The ‘Right Way’ to Immigrate Just Went Wrong

Gisela Salim-Peyer
Fri, January 31, 2025


Migrants from Venezuela, who had their asylum appointments with U.S. officials cancelled hours after President Donald Trump's inauguration, look out at the closed border with the U.S. from a government-run shelter in Juarez, Mexico, on Tuesday, January 21, 2025.


According to Tom Homan, President Donald Trump’s “border czar,” the administration’s deportation policies apply only to people who are “in the country illegally,” not to the “millions of people standing in line, taking the test, doing their background investigation, paying the fees, that want to come in the right way.”

This week, more than half a million Venezuelans who’d done things “the right way” discovered that the distinction might not matter. They’d filled out forms, paid up to $545 in fees, and waited anywhere from two to 12 months to secure Temporary Protected Status, which allows them to live and work in the United States. And yet, on Wednesday, Secretary of Homeland Security Kristi Noem announced that these 600,000 Venezuelans would be stripped of that status and subject to deportation as of September 10.

The rules for TPS seemed simple enough. Venezuelan nationals who were on U.S. soil before a certain date were eligible. Ukrainians have their own date—as do Hondurans, Haitians, Syrians, Ethiopians, and others from a list of countries whose conditions the U.S. government has concluded “temporarily prevent the country’s nationals from returning safely,” to quote the official website. In Venezuela’s case, those conditions include a humanitarian crisis and a dictatorial regime under investigation for crimes against humanity. Trump was actually the one who’d designated Venezuela “unsafe” and given Venezuelans access to TPS in the first place, starting in 2020.

TPS is usually good for 18 months, but the status can be renewed indefinitely if the country’s situation doesn’t improve. Trump dislikes this feature. In 2018, his first administration sought to strip the status from Salvadorans, on the grounds that the earthquake that had prompted the U.S. to grant it back in 2001 was long past, even if other crises had since occurred. The courts blocked this termination before it took effect.

The Biden administration anticipated that Trump would go after TPS again, and perhaps for this reason, it extended TPS for Venezuela just before Inauguration Day. Noem vacated that order, telling Fox that Venezuelan TPS holders “were going to be able to stay here and violate our laws for another 18 months. We stopped that.” No one in the administration has tried to argue that conditions in Venezuela have improved, which, the law stipulates, would be the only justification for terminating TPS.

Legal challenges are probably coming, because no precedent has established the legality of terminating a preceding administration’s TPS extension. Further terminations could be coming too. I spoke with Yusuf Ahmad, an immigration attorney in Washington, D.C., who has been receiving lots of nervous calls from his TPS clients asking whether the status will end for good, and not only for Venezuelans. Since 2018, Emi MacLean of the ACLU told me, “Trump has made no secret of his desire to undermine the TPS program as a whole.”

So far, however, the status has been withdrawn only from Venezuelans. The last-minute nature of the extension doesn’t quite explain this, because on the same day, the Biden administration also extended TPS for El Salvador, Ukraine, and Sudan. Of these, however, Venezuela has by far the most recipients. When asked where Venezuelans will be deported to, given that Caracas has made noises about refusing them unless the U.S. accedes to certain demands, Noem suggested El Salvador, or maybe Guantánamo Bay. Daniel Di Martino, a vocal Trump supporter from Venezuela who researches immigration at the Manhattan Institute, wondered at the expense of it all. Deportation costs $50,000 per head, Di Martino told me, and deporting a TPS holder means losing a taxpayer.

One of the stranger aspects of this termination is that Trump has long had admirers among Venezuelan Americans, particularly in South Florida. Esteban Hernández, the editor in chief of Contra Poder News, a right-wing publication serving Venezuelan Floridians, told me that many in his circle felt betrayed; Trump had once courted Venezuelans. Still, Hernández couldn’t fathom that TPS really would be revoked for everyone. It would just be “bad guys,” he suggested to me.

Erick Suarez, who lived off his savings for six months as he waited for his TPS status so that he could work, told me that stripping TPS from everyone just wouldn’t make sense: “Why would they go after people who did everything the right way?”

Article originally published at The Atlantic