I was going to write a post about why, in this election, the right thing for libertarians to do is vote for Democrats for all federal offices, unless either 1) the Dem candidate is DSA, or 2) the GOP candidate is one of those very rare Republicans who oppose all or most of Trump's awful policies. But libertarian political philosopher Dan Shapiro beat me to it, in an excellent post at the Bleeding Heart Libertarian substack. I agree with the vast bulk of what he says. But I have a few additions and caveats that I will append after quoting a few key passages from Dan's post. Before getting into detail, I will note that I generally believe in voting for the lesser evil among those candidates with a realistic chance to win. Thus, unlike Dan, I don't usually vote for third party candidates, even in more normal times. If you're opposed to "lesser evil" voting on principle, we have a disagreement that goes  far beyond the present election. But I would urge you to check out my defense of that practice, where I explain why you should even vote for the evil Queen Cersei over the even more evil Sauron, if those are the only available choices.

I don't expect this post or Dan's will change the outcome of the election. They almost certainly won't. But they might still be helpful in thinking through big issues we face in the current political moment.

Here's an excerpt from Dan's post:

Most of my voting life I voted for the Libertarian Party when they advocated classical liberal/libertarian policies. Now those who care about and prioritize liberty and a free society—however they label themselves—should vote Democratic unless the candidate is a Democratic Socialist….

There's been so much criminality and misdeeds in the Trump administration that it's exhausting to cover it all, but keeping "the land of the free and the home of the brave" means remembering the essentials. I provide links when the points I make are not common knowledge and/or might be controversial.

Violating the norm of peaceful transfer of political power

January 6: Trump is the only presidential candidate in the US who refused to concede that he lost. He told a crowd to "fight like hell," and the mob then stormed the Capitol to try to overturn the results. The House impeached him for "incitement of insurrection," and 57 senators, including seven Republicans, voted to convict—short of the two-thirds required. After his campaign of lies and deception and pressuring election officials to falsify the results failed to overturn the election, he later pardoned all the perpetrators of the violence.

Violating the rule of law, shredding due process, torture

ICE: masked secret police who kidnap people and send them to hellholes in El Salvador, where they were subject to constant beatings, sexual abuse, and torture; to the Central African Republic, in the midst of a brutal civil war with severe human rights abuses; to Florida's "Alligator Alcatraz," where large numbers of detainees were held in cages the size of phone booths; and to Fort Bliss, Texas, where guards grabbed detainees' testicles while beating them. There've been zero consequences for this; indeed, Trump says they are "immune."

Not only were the deportations done without any notification to families or lawyers, but ICE has disappeared from databases those they seized so lawyers and families can't find them.

ICE and CBP have rammed people in their cars, dragged the occupants out, and rammed into houses without warrants. They have murdered, wounded, and assaulted protestors and ICE monitors—Alex Pretti and Renee Good, during the ICE occupation of Minneapolis, being the most publicized—but there have been many others.

There is now "expedited removal" for anyone undocumented, which means no hearing before a judge. (And this is even though immigration judges are—wrongly—a part of, and not independent of, the executive branch.) Indeed, Trump fired any immigration judge who disagreed with him or whom he perceived as not being deportation-friendly enough, and replaced the Board of Immigration Appeals, which has denied appeals for almost all deportation orders.

The administration removed TPS (temporary protected status) for immigrants fleeing violence and is deporting them to the very countries the State Department has declared unsafe—e.g., Haiti.

ICE apprehended immigrant parents after they dropped their kids off at school (see here, here, and here), as well as apprehending children and toddlers and using them as bait (the Liam Conejo Ramos incident)….

Violating the ban on using the military for policing

 

Trump sent Marines to LA, and National Guard troops to Chicago and DC. This violates a basic norm since the Founding and violates Posse Comitatus, a statute banning the military from policing.

Assaults on free speech and free assembly

Trump and FCC chairman Carr threatened talk shows and networks for dissenting political opinions.

As mentioned, ICE murdered, assaulted, and wounded protestors and ICE monitors.

The administration targeted people for their political views and for writing op-eds. Rochester resident David Streever sent a critical email to the director of ICE, and five months later, federal officers tracked his movements and staked out his New York City hotel as he returned from an overseas trip….

There is much more, including explanations of why the Democrats (with the notable exception of DSA types) are far less bad than this, despite their considerable flaws. I myself have written about the evils of the DSA here, explaining why they are comparable to MAGA nationalist Republicans.  In addition to the harm individual DSA members might cause if elected to office, it is important to reduce their numbers as much as possible, so as to minimize the chances that socialists could take over the Democratic Party, as MAGA nationalists have done with the GOP.

I have a few additions to Dan's arguments.

First, it is essential to consider the enormous scale of Trump's harmful and unjust immigration and trade policies. When it comes to setting issue priorities, scale matters a great deal. Even under normal administrations, immigration restrictions threaten the economic and civil liberties of American citizens (to say nothing of those of immigrants themselves) more than any other federal policy. Trump's vast expansion of exclusion and mass deportation has made things a lot worse. The liberty and well-being of millions of people are at stake.

Trump's trade policies seek to impose the highest tariff levels since those that gravely exacerbated the Great Depression, and also are a grave menace to the rule of law. Here too, we're talking about massive effects on the liberty and welfare of millions. Judicial review can and has helped curb these abuses (more on the tariff front than immigration). But there is much Congress can do to help, including curbing funding to ICE and other agencies complicit in wrongdoing. Congressional Democrats also plan to cut back executive tariff authority. That may not succeed while Trump remains in office, but can help set the stage for later progress.

Dan raises the issue of whether non-DSA Democrats might be worse than the Trump-era GOP on economic liberty issues. This becomes an easy issue if you recognize that immigration restrictions and tariffs are also violations of economic liberty. Due to their massive scale, Trump's actions in this area easily outweigh the very real economic policy flaws of non-DSA Dems. And then we have such things as his acquisition of federal government stakes in numerous private firms, something that even the most left-wing recent Democratic presidents didn't attempt. It's a dramatic example of how MAGA nationalists have dangerous economic policies similar to those of socialists.

It is also important to remember that a Democratic Senate could block Trump's horrible executive and judicial nominees. I don't want to see any more Pete Hegseths and RFK, Jrs. In Trump's first term, he had some good judicial nominees. In the second, he has mostly  bad ones (Emil Bove is a particularly egregious example). From a libertarian perspective, I'd rather have a standard liberal nominee fill the next Supreme Court vacancy (despite all the flaws such jurists have) than the type of right-winger Trump II is all too likely to nominate. Such a person would probably be selected for his willingness to turn a blind eye to executive abuses of power, trample civil liberties, and bulldoze constitutional obstacles to MAGA nationalist policies, such as federalism and separation of powers. There may well not be any Supreme Court vacancies, of course. But lower court nominations will arise, and they matter too.

Finally, I'm more hawkish than the average libertarian, and I think it's important to counter Trump's policies of undermining the Western alliance, and coddling mass-murdering dictators like Vladimir Putin and (to a lesser extent) Xi Jinping. We should care about defending liberty worldwide, not just in one country, especially since the two are interconnected. The Democrats (except for a few far-leftists) oppose this awfulness and could use control of Congress to help curb it.

In these and other areas, a Democratic-controlled Congress could not fully stop Trump's abuses. The executive has accumulated too much power for that, often in constitutionally dubious ways. But congressional control of nominations and purse strings can do much to constrain the executive at the margin. And electoral repudiation of Trump's abuses can reduce the risk that future presidents will imitate them.

I do have a few caveats to attach to Dan's otherwise compelling points:

First, Dan doesn't differentiate between elections for federal offices and those for state and local ones. I do. Beating the GOP in federal races is vital for countering Trump's awful agenda. At the state and local level, other issues are dominant, and Republicans are often better than Dems on the crucial issues of housing, state-level taxation, and state and local economic regulation. Which party is better on these and other state and local issues will vary from state to state. For example, red state Republicans are much better on the crucial issue of housing deregulation than blue state ones (who often back exclusionary zoning against Democratic reform efforts). Thus, it might make sense to vote for Republican candidates in some state and local races, but not others, depending on the issues involved.

Second, when it comes to the DSA problem, there can be difficult questions about what to do with Dem candidates who are not actual DSA members, but seem closely adjacent to them. Michigan Senate candidate Abdul El-Sayed is a notable example. He says he's not a socialist, but also is closely aligned with socialists like Bernie Sanders, and "influencer" Hasan Piker, the guy who - among other things - praises communist mass murderers like Mao Zedong.

In this post, I'm not going to try to adjudicate each individual candidate and race. I will merely say that if you're trying to figure out whether a non-DSA member is actually a socialist, two noteworthy indicators are 1) whether he or she supports government control of all or most of the economy and 2) whether they praise socialist despots abroad, such as Mao, Fidel Castro, and others. If the answers to one or both questions are "yes," that's a strong indication they might be socialists, and therefore not worth voting for, except perhaps against the very worst Republicans.

There is a similar calculation in identifying the few Republicans who have opposed Trump's worst policies. Here, key indicators are whether they have opposed his tariffs, his mass deportations, his kowtowing to Vladimir Putin, and his attacks on civil liberties. Sadly, Republican candidates with consistent strong records on all or most of these issues, are few and far between, though Republican criticism of the tariffs and policies towards Russia have picked up in recent weeks.

Finally, as Dan would agree, voting for Democratic candidates does not imply supporting everything the Democratic Party does, or abstaining from criticizing Democrats on the many occasions when they do bad things.

Elsewhere, I have argued that libertarians, in the current political moment, should seek an alliance with "abundance liberals." But alliance is not the same thing as total agreement. And the Democratic Party obviously includes various factions who are much worse than the abundance types. We should keep that in mind, even as we recognize that right now the Republicans are much worse.

The post A Libertarian Perspective on the 2026 Election appeared first on Reason Magazine.

Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) has deported an illegal alien accused of raping a child in Mexico to whom former President Joe Biden's administration had given a two-year green card, Breitbart News has learned.

The post Exclusive – ICE Deports Accused Child Rapist Biden Administration Gave Green Card appeared first on Breitbart.

James Ho, whom President Donald Trump appointed to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit in 2017 and considered as a potential Supreme Court nominee, recently criticized Trump v. Barbara, the June 2026 decision rejecting Trump's attempted restrictions on birthright citizenship. Ho's remarks, part of a speech he delivered on October 5 to a gathering of Christian activists at the Museum of the Bible in Washington, D.C., are striking because they seem to contradict his longstanding position that the children of unauthorized immigrants qualify as citizens under the 14th Amendment when they are born in the United States.

The New York Times presents Ho's speech as evidence that he hopes Trump will nominate him to the Supreme Court, assuming that opportunity arises during the next two years. But whatever you make of that theory, Ho's position on Trump v. Barbara is hard to reconcile with what he has repeatedly said about the meaning of the 14th Amendment's Citizenship Clause.

"Birthright citizenship is guaranteed by the Fourteenth Amendment," Ho wrote in a 2006 law journal article. "That birthright is protected no less for children of undocumented persons than for descendants of Mayflower passengers."

Ho reiterated that position in a 2011 Wall Street Journal essay. "Opponents of illegal immigration cannot claim to champion the rule of law and then, in the same breath, propose policies that violate our Constitution," he wrote.

The first sentence of the 14th Amendment, Ho noted, says "all persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States." The "plain meaning" of that language "is clear," Ho said. "A foreign national living in the United States is 'subject to the jurisdiction thereof' because he is legally required to obey U.S. law." The historical evidence, he added, shows that "both proponents and opponents of the citizenship clause agreed" that "it would extend birthright citizenship to the U.S.-born children of Chinese laborers and other noncitizens."

So why does Ho think the Supreme Court reached the wrong result in Trump v. Barbara? "Foreign governments weaponize illegal immigration in order to hurt other countries," he said at the Museum of the Bible conference, which was convened by the Judicial Action Group. "For decades, administrations of both parties have warned the people about the use of illegal immigration as a weapon of war, and judges are supposed to defer to presidential proclamations about a state of invasion. So the Supreme Court should have upheld the president's birthright citizenship order in full based on his invasion proclamation."

Ho hinted at this position in a November 2024 interview with South Texas College of Law professor Josh Blackman, who agrees with Ho that the Citizenship Clause covers the U.S.-born children of unauthorized residents. The previous July in United States v. Abbott, Blackman noted, Ho had written a dissenting opinion arguing that illegal immigration could qualify as an "invasion" under Article I, Section 10, Clause 3 of the Constitution, which says no state may "engage in war, unless actually invaded, or in such imminent danger as will not admit of delay."

Blackman asked Ho to address criticism of that opinion. "Anyone who reads my prior writings on these topics should see a direct connection between birthright citizenship and invasion," Ho replied. "Birthright citizenship is supported by various Supreme Court opinions, both unanimous and separate opinions involving Justices Scalia, Thomas, Alito, and others. But birthright citizenship obviously doesn't apply in case of war or invasion. No one to my knowledge has ever argued that the children of invading aliens are entitled to birthright citizenship. And I can't imagine what the legal argument for that would be."

The problem with Ho's qualification is that it empowers the president to override birthright citizenship, which Ho has said is guaranteed by the 14th Amendment, simply by declaring that illegal immigration amounts to an "invasion." It is not hard to see why that position would appeal to Trump, since it means he can unilaterally redefine citizenship.

Does that mean Ho is kissing up to Trump because he wants to replace any justice who might retire before the end of Trump's term? That is what Times reporter Mattathias Schwartz suggests. Schwartz concedes that Ho, like most of the potential Supreme Court nominees that Trump listed during his first term, falls into the category of "traditional conservatives with strong ties to the Federalist Society." But Schwartz says "some experts perceive Judge Ho's remarks" as "an attempt to show his alignment with Mr. Trump's worldview."

How so? Ho's speech "channeled frustrations shared by Mr. Trump and his base that the Supreme Court's six-judge conservative supermajority—three of whom are Mr. Trump's appointees—have failed to uniformly back his agenda," Schwartz writes. "Despite a string of conservative wins on abortion, gun rights, and gerrymandering, there is a sense on the Trump-aligned right that Justices Brett M. Kavanaugh, Amy Coney Barrett and Neil M. Gorsuch are becoming unreliably centrist swing votes—'squishes' in the online parlance—in the mold of Justices Anthony M. Kennedy and David H. Souter."

That framing implies that backing Trump's agenda is a matter of conservative principle. But Trump himself has no coherent ideology, and his authoritarian impulses often run headlong into conservative principles such as originalism, the rule of law, and the separation of powers. It makes sense to describe justices who occasionally disagree with Trump as "centrist" only if you accept the idea that his views are the standard by which judicial performance should be judged.

In any event, Schwartz suggests that Ho is presenting himself as a Trump-friendly judge who, unlike Kavanaugh, Barrett, and Gorsuch, could be relied upon to take the president's side. But the evidence that Schwartz cites to support that take is thin.

As Schwartz acknowledges, it is not even clear that Ho wants the job for which he supposedly is auditioning. His wife, Allyson N. Ho, works for a law firm that frequently litigates Supreme Court cases, and Judge Ho has suggested that her career would be ruined if he joined Court. "I can't imagine that Allyson's firm would want to be categorically recused from the highest court in the land," Ho said in a recent interview. "To have to tell every client that, if you hire them, they can only seek cert from an eight-member Court? That would effectively end her career and her practice—one she's worked so hard, for decades, to build."

Undeterred by that wrinkle, Schwartz cites parts of Ho's speech that he thinks suggest a desire to please the president. "Judge Ho lamented the values of 'this fallen world,'" Schwartz writes. "He called on the judiciary to stand up to 'cultural elites who control the national discourse.' He also bluntly rebuked the Supreme Court for legalizing same-sex marriage. He said the court's majority was wrong not to block the distribution of an abortion drug. And he said it was wrong again when it rejected Mr. Trump's attempt to limit birthright citizenship."

Those comments presumably appealed to the Christian conservatives in the audience. But with the exception of Ho's position on Trump v. Barbara, none of this seems tailored to ingratiate Ho with Trump, who is not particularly religious and seems to have no real interest in revisiting same-sex marriage or overriding state abortion policies.

While opposition to "cultural elites" sounds consistent with Trump's populism, the context of that phrase makes it clear that Ho was defending originalism against result-oriented jurisprudence. "We know that originalism may be permitted in polite company," Ho said, "but only until it leads to outcomes that are detested by the cultural elites who control the national discourse and who dispense the prestige and the respect and the stature craved by so many judges."

Although Ho's speech was peppered with Christian rhetoric, some of which the Times quotes, he emphasized that originalism does not entail interpreting the law according to religious principles. "Being an originalist means following the text and original understanding of the law no matter the outcome, no matter the effect on the judge's standing or reputation in the community," he said. "And if that's truly what you're doing, there actually should not be a Christian interpretation of the text or an atheist interpretation of the text. There would just be a dutiful, faithful interpretation of the text."

If you think Trump honestly cares about judicial methodology, "faithful interpretation of the text," or adherence to the original understanding of the Constitution, you have not been paying attention to his criticism of judges and justices, which is always based on their failure to agree with him. Michael Fragoso, former chief counsel to Sen. Mitch McConnell (R–Ky.), who was the Senate majority leader when Trump nominated Kavanaugh, Gorsuch, and Barrett, made exactly that point in an interview with Schwartz.

"One thing the activist class hasn't figured out is that the president doesn't really care about any of those substantive questions," Fragoso said. "He sees this as a loyalty issue."

Given that reality, you might expect that a judge trying to signal "his alignment" with Trump would say something about tariffs, his signature policy. But Ho's criticism of recent Supreme Court rulings did not extend to its decision last February in Learning Resources v. Trump, which rejected Trump's claim to sweeping tariff powers under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act.

Of all his judicial setbacks during his current term, Trump was probably angriest about that one—in particular, the role that Gorsuch and Barrett played by joining the majority. Yet Ho, who supposedly was channeling Trump's frustration with such traitors, did not mention that case. Nor did he say anything about the Supreme Court's ruling against Trump's National Guard deployments or its decision constraining his use of the Alien Enemies Act, which were both big losses for him.

Those omissions are puzzling if Ho was mainly interested in boosting his chances at a Supreme Court nomination. Less so if he was simply expressing his honest opinions.

The post 5th Circuit Judge James Ho Says a Presidentially Declared 'Invasion' Overrides Birthright Citizenship appeared first on Reason Magazine.

The recent charges against nearly 20 individuals for illegal voting in North Carolina is yet another example of the failure of Democrat Roy Cooper's tenure as the state's governor.

The post North Carolina Democrat Roy Cooper’s Election Board Oversaw Fraudulent Voting appeared first on Breitbart.

A liberal-majority appeals court in California handed the Trump administration a victory by blocking a lower court's ruling that ordered the State Department to open its application pool for the 2027 Diversity Visa lottery, which admits roughly 55,000 immigrants from low-immigration countries each year.

In a 2-1 ruling, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals blocked a preliminary injunction issued by U.S. District Judge Jinsook Ohta requiring the lottery pool to be opened after Secretary of State Marco Rubio issued a notice in November delaying the program's acceptance of new applications in order to "implement certain changes," but the application period never opened.

A month later, the State Department ordered an indefinite pause on issuing diversity visas after a Portuguese national who was issued a lottery visa in 2017 committed a mass shooting at Brown University, killing two people and injuring nine others. The shooter, Claudio Manuel Neves Valente, was also tied to the murder of a Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) professor two days after the Brown University shooting.

FBI REVEALS BROWN UNIVERSITY MASS SHOOTER BEGAN PLOTTING MASSACRE AS EARLY AS 2022, BLAMED VICTIMS

The Ninth Circuit has been a perennial thorn in the side of President Donald Trump, having ruled against key portions of Trump's 2017 executive order restricting travel from predominantly Muslim countries and blocked a policy barring immigrants from being eligible for asylum if they crossed the southern border between ports of entry.

However, the appeals court ruled that the lower court's preliminary injunction could not be enforced, finding that the immigration law firm Red Eagle, which represents individuals going through the visa lottery process, did not have standing to sue the federal government. The appeals court ruled that the program was intended to "encourage immigration, not generate revenue for law firms."

LIBERAL COURT STUNS WITH RULING THAT HANDS TRUMP MAJOR IMMIGRATION WIN

The court wrote, "If Red Eagle Law were allowed to allege standing based upon its hypothetical or conjectural collateral injury, we would be opening the floodgates, allowing all lawyers to ‘roam the country in search of governmental wrongdoing.’"

However, the court made clear that its ruling was based on procedural grounds and did not weigh whether the State Department failed to follow the law.

"We do not endorse the Department’s failure to open the lottery registration period," the court wrote.

Abhishek Kambli, a former federal prosecutor and partner at Holtzman Vogel, said the decision by the liberal court was a "very easy call" in a post on X.

"Here, the plaintiff was a law firm not bringing a claim on behalf of someone in the diversity visa lottery but on behalf of the firm itself," Kambli wrote. "The district court should have never gone beyond standing but CA9 corrected this one."

TRUMP ADMIN ANNOUNCES EXPANSION OF VISA RESTRICTION POLICY IN WESTERN HEMISPHERE

President Donald Trump has been vocal about his opposition to the Visa Lottery Program for years. During his January 2018 State of the Union address, he called for ending the program, arguing that visas should be issued based on merit.

Earlier that same month, Trump said during a bipartisan meeting with lawmakers at the White House that lottery visas allow the "worst of the worst" to come into the country.

SIGN UP TO GET THE POLITICS NEWSLETTER

"They call it ‘visa lottery,’ I just call it ‘lottery.’ But countries come in and they put names in a hopper," Trump said. "They’re not giving you their best names; common sense means they’re not giving you their best names."

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

Countries eligible for the 2026 lottery included Afghanistan, New Zealand, Ecuador, Iran, Uganda, Somalia and Russia. The program was designed to create an additional pathway for people seeking visas who may not qualify through traditional channels, such as employment- or family-based immigration.

Elon Musk warned if Democrats get a trifecta in 2028, they'll make Washington, DC, and Puerto Rico states and expand the Supreme Court.

The post Musk Warns Democrats Will Make D.C., Puerto Rico States, Court-Pack, and Open Borders If They Get Trifecta in 2028 appeared first on Breitbart.

The officer, Mario Alberto Morales, was driving an unmarked SUV on Oct. 10 when he struck and ran over Miguel Parra Hernandez, 48, who was running away during a pursuit through a parking lot, the Harris County District Attorney's Office said.

The Trump administration plans to fly the Afghan immigrants from Louisiana to Pakistan, where they are expected to be expelled over the border to Afghanistan.

© Tomas Munita for The New York Times

Two Border Patrol unions endorsed Republican Anthony Constantino in the race for New York’s 21st Congressional District, citing his commitment to border security.

The post EXCLUSIVE: Border Patrol Unions Back Anthony Constantino for Elise Stefanik’s House Seat appeared first on Breitbart.

A 21-year-old college hockey captain who dreamed of becoming a police officer was killed in a wrong-way crash involving a Mexican national who repeatedly entered the United States illegally after previously being removed, the Department of Homeland Security confirmed to Fox News Digital.

Ryan O'Shea, a senior at the University of New Haven, was driving south on Interstate 91 in North Haven late Oct. 16 when a Chevrolet Silverado traveling the wrong way slammed head-on into his Honda Accord, Connecticut State Police said.

According to the State Police accident summary, 31-year-old Guillermo Carmona-Lopez of Bridgeport was driving the Silverado.

ICE LODGES DETAINER FOR ILLEGAL IMMIGRANT CHARGED IN WRONG-WAY MARYLAND CRASH THAT KILLED MOM, DAUGHTER

The crash sent O'Shea's car into another lane, where it was struck by a Jeep before moving onto the right shoulder and being hit by a third vehicle.

O'Shea suffered fatal injuries and was pronounced dead at the scene. Carmona-Lopez was taken to Yale New Haven Hospital with serious, life-threatening injuries, while three other people suffered minor injuries.

ILLEGAL ALIEN ORDERED REMOVED YEARS AGO CHARGED IN CRASH THAT KILLED NEWLY ENGAGED 23-YEAR-OLD TEACHER

DHS told Fox News Digital that Carmona-Lopez entered the U.S. illegally multiple times despite previously being removed and receiving a final order of removal.

"In May 2013, Border Patrol arrested Guillermo Carmona-Lopez, a criminal illegal alien from Mexico, after he illegally entered the country," a DHS spokesperson said. "Carmona-Lopez was issued an expedited removal and was removed from the country."

FATHER OF SLAIN MARINE SPEAKS OUT AFTER ILLEGAL IMMIGRANT WHO KILLED SON FACES THIRD DEPORTATION

Carmona-Lopez then illegally reentered the country near the Rio Grande Valley and was arrested again by Border Patrol that same month, DHS said.

"Carmona-Lopez was issued a final order of removal on May 30, 2013," the spokesperson said. "He then reentered the country at an unknown time and place."

IMMIGRANT TRUCK DRIVER ADMITTED TO US UNDER BIDEN ALLEGEDLY KILLS UMASS SOCCER STAR, SPOKE NO ENGLISH

FOLLOW THE FOX TRUE CRIME TEAM ON X

O'Shea, of Stony Point, New York, was studying criminal justice with a concentration in police science at the University of New Haven and served as senior captain of the men's club hockey team.

SIGN UP TO GET THE LATEST TRUE CRIME NEWS

He interned with the New York City Police Department over the summer and hoped to join the NYPD after graduation before eventually pursuing a career with the Drug Enforcement Administration, the university said.

CLICK HERE FOR MORE FROM THE FOX TRUE CRIME HUB

"Ryan wanted to go into public service in order to help others," his academic advisor, Lorenzo Boyd, said in a university tribute. "He was engaging in the classroom and will be missed greatly."

SEND US A TIP

Devin Bertrand, general manager of the men's ice hockey club, remembered O'Shea as someone whose "infectious personality lit up our locker room the moment he walked in."

GOT A TIP?

O'Shea also served as president of his Kappa Sigma fraternity chapter, which said he was returning from a hockey game when the crash occurred.

LISTEN TO THE NEW 'CRIME & JUSTICE WITH DONNA ROTUNNO' PODCAST

"Ryan was not only a great leader, but he was a caring friend to anyone around him," the fraternity said in a social media tribute. "He always knew how to light up a room and make people laugh, no matter the time."

GET BREAKING NEWS BY EMAIL

The State Police Collision Analysis and Reconstruction Squad responded to the scene and is assisting with the investigation, which remains ongoing.

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

"Under President Trump and Secretary Mullin, if you break the law, you will face the consequences," the DHS spokesperson said. "Criminal illegal aliens are not welcome in the U.S."

The Department of Justice (DOJ) has announced the arrests several foreign actors in connection with a "ghost student" scheme to defraud student aid programs of hundreds of thousands of dollars.

The post DOJ Targets ‘Ghost Students’ Receiving Millions in Federal Tuition Loans appeared first on Breitbart.

The man Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-MN) wed in 2009 — who also appears to be her own brother — identifies as gay.

The post Nolte: Ilhan’s Omar’s Alleged Brother-Husband Identifies as Gay appeared first on Breitbart.

The latest migrant caravan, “Fe y Esperanza #2” is making very little progress in its trek to reach the United States-Mexico border. At least four members of the caravan have been injured in fights that broken out within the group. Although no serious injuries have been reported, the incidents required the intervention of police and emergency personnel.

The post Fights Erupt Within U.S.-Bound Migrant Caravan as Northward Trek Moves Slowly Through Mexico appeared first on Breitbart.

A little-known agency within the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) has ended a myriad legal giveaways to 2.2 million migrants welcomed by President Joe Biden.

The post DHS Citizenship Agency Reverses Biden Giveaways to 2.2 Million Migrants appeared first on Breitbart.

Immigrants at Texas detention facility, protesting against harsh conditions, say they face threats of force-feeding

Members of Congress sent a scathing letter to federal immigration officials this week demanding answers about conditions inside a Texas immigration jail, as detained immigrants on a prolonged hunger strike claim officials are retaliating against them and threatening them with force-feeding.

A group of seven congressional Democrats sent the letter earlier this week to Markwayne Mullin, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) secretary, and David Venturella, the Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) acting director, protesting about the treatment of hunger strikers.

Continue reading...

© Photograph: Elizabeth Frantz/Reuters

© Photograph: Elizabeth Frantz/Reuters

© Photograph: Elizabeth Frantz/Reuters

A federal judge refused to force California to set aside mailed ballots from more than 20,000 people the Justice Department says are noncitizens.

The post Federal Judge Blocks DOJ Effort to Sequester 20,000 California Ballots appeared first on Breitbart.

Migration helps grow New York's Democrat government, Governor Kathy Hochul told Politico.com.

The post Governor Hochul: Migration Grows New York’s State Government appeared first on Breitbart.

Thursday on MS NOW’s “Morning Joe,” Rep. Ro Khanna (D-CA) said the Trump Administration is attempting to suppress the Latino vote. Co-host Jonathan Lemire said, “California is a place where we have seen ICE agent activity. We have seen the

The post Khanna: Trump Administration Attempting ‘Latino’ Vote Suppression appeared first on Breitbart.

The Department of Justice (DOJ) has charged an additional 18 foreign nationals with illegally voting in North Carolina, a swing state. 

The post Justice Department Charges 18 More Foreign Nationals with Illegally Voting in 2024 Election appeared first on Breitbart.

New York City's socialist Muslim Mayor Zohran Mamdani is taking heat for posting then deleting a message about the "halalflation" of the city's street vendors, with his announcement he is approving 10,500 new street vendor licenses.

The post NY Mayor Mamdani Celebrates — then Deletes — Post about ‘Halalflation’ of City Street Vendors appeared first on Breitbart.