

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.


Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.

The American Civil Liberties Union, Texas Civil Rights Project, Center for Gender & Refugee Studies, and Oxfam have filed a legal challenge to the Trump administration's order restricting immigration at the border based on an unprecedented and unlawful invocation of the Public Health Service Act, located in Title 42 of the U.S. Code.
The American Civil Liberties Union, Texas Civil Rights Project, Center for Gender & Refugee Studies, and Oxfam have filed a legal challenge to the Trump administration's order restricting immigration at the border based on an unprecedented and unlawful invocation of the Public Health Service Act, located in Title 42 of the U.S. Code.
The order authorizes the summary removal of unaccompanied children without any due process -- even if the child is fleeing danger and seeking protection in the United States and shows no signs of having COVID-19. It also authorizes the summary removal of adults seeking protection in the United States.
The plaintiff, G.Y.J.P., is a 13-year-old girl from El Salvador. Her mother, a former police officer, was targeted by the notorious Salvadoran gangs after she refused to cooperate with them. Forced to quickly flee for her life, G.Y.J.P.'s mother was granted legal protection by the United States and now lives here lawfully. The girl sought to join her mother when the gangs began threatening her life.
When G.Y.J.P. arrived in the United States, she let officials know she was fleeing danger, that her mother lives here, and that she had her mother's phone number. The officials did not contact her mother and simply removed the girl to El Salvador without a hearing, where she has gone into hiding.
Under longstanding immigration statutes protecting children and those seeking protection, G.Y.J.P. should have been given shelter in a children's facility until she could be released to her mother, and she should have had a full and fair proceeding to determine her right to protection in the United States -- which would have allowed her to reunite permanently with her mother.
"The Trump administration is hiding behind COVID-19 as a way to send children back to grave danger," said ACLU attorney Lee Gelernt. "Like Trump's horrendous family separation policy, the courts should conclude this latest attack on children is illegal."
The groups are asking the court to declare the use of the order against G.Y.J.P. to be unlawful and allow her to return to have her asylum request heard.
"This isn't some ivory tower legal battle," said Karla M. Vargas, senior attorney with the Texas Civil Rights Project. "In our name, the government used a dog to chase a girl into the river and never even bothered to check if she had a mother. Then sent her back to a country where she fears being killed. The administration's racist agenda to end asylum for refugees means dismantling basic protections for the most vulnerable children in the world."
The lawsuit argues that the administration is not authorized to issue the expulsion order under public health provisions in Title 42 of the U.S. Code -- provisions that have rarely been used and never in this way. Title 42 does not permit expulsions of non-citizens who are in the United States, nor does it legally allow the removal of children. Besides violating U.S. immigration law, G.Y.J.P.'s expulsion also violates the nation's international obligations to protect people fleeing persecution and torture.
"G.Y.J.P. arrived at our border fleeing unthinkable violence, desperate to reunite with her mother," said Jamie Crook, CGRS director of litigation. "Under the illegal order, our government sent her right back into harm's way. The pandemic does not absolve the Trump administration of its legal obligations to children like G.Y.J.P. Numerous countries have shown us that it is possible to protect public health while continuing to uphold the rights of refugees."
The case also cites violations of the Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act, the Administrative Procedure Act, the Immigration and Nationality Act, and the Convention Against Torture.
"From our decades of work in Central America, Oxfam knows firsthand the severity of conditions, including persecution and torture, that people are fleeing," said Noah Gottschalk, Oxfam America humanitarian policy lead. "As a global organization working to end the injustice of poverty, defend human rights, and advocate for and with the world's most vulnerable people, we are proud to stand alongside our partners to challenge the Trump administration's continued assault on this country's legacy as a refuge for people fleeing persecution. This lawsuit is a critical step to begin repairing the damage being done by these harmful attacks against our common humanity."
The lawsuit, G.Y.J.P. v. Wolf, was filed in federal court in Washington, D.C. The ACLU of Texas and ACLU of D.C. are co-counsel.
Complaint: https://www.aclu.org/legal-document/gyjp-v-wolf-complaint
Case details: https://www.aclu.org/cases/gyjp-v-wolf
The American Civil Liberties Union was founded in 1920 and is our nation's guardian of liberty. The ACLU works in the courts, legislatures and communities to defend and preserve the individual rights and liberties guaranteed to all people in this country by the Constitution and laws of the United States.
(212) 549-2666"Trump knows Americans are angry that he's made everything more expensive," said Sen. Elizabeth Warren.
US Sen. Elizabeth Warren on Tuesday accused President Donald Trump of trying to sabotage the 2026 midterm elections as his illegal war on Iran jacks up gas prices and threatens higher inflation throughout the economy, angering voters across the political spectrum.
The Massachusetts Democrat's warning came shortly after Trump signed an executive order aimed at restricting mail-in voting, a move that was widely seen as unconstitutional. Warren wrote on social media: "Trump knows his war with Iran is unpopular. Trump knows Americans are angry that he's made everything more expensive. Instead of reversing course, Trump is trying to rig the next election. It's illegal—and we will fight back."
Ben Raderstorf, a policy advocate at the nonprofit group Protect Democracy, said that "just like the war in Iran, the war against the midterms is extremely dangerous and will do so much damage to our elections and our democracy."
A Reuters/Ipsos poll released Tuesday evening found that 66% of US voters—including 40% of Republicans—want a quick end to Trump's war on Iran, even if his administration doesn't achieve its vague and constantly shifting objectives, which have ranged from thwarting an imminent threat that analysts say was not present, to full-scale regime change, to destroying a nuclear weapons program that US intelligence has repeatedly found does not exist.
Reuters reported that two in three respondents to the new survey "said they expected gas prices to worsen over the next year, including 40% of Republicans."
While oil prices fell sharply on Tuesday after Trump declared that US forces would end their assault on Iran in "two weeks or maybe a few days longer," the Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy (ITEP) estimated last week that the gas price surge stemming from the war was on pace to cost American drivers an additional $9.4 billion per month.
"Alabama is the most affected state in the nation, with residents spending an extra $52 per person, per month," ITEP found. "Other heavily impacted states include Mississippi ($51), Wyoming ($49), Kentucky ($47), and New Mexico ($44)."
Trump is expected to address the nation on the Iran war at 9 pm ET on Wednesday, more than a month into a military campaign that was not authorized by lawmakers and that has sparked a regional conflict, killing thousands and displacing millions.
The president told reporters on Tuesday that Iran "doesn't have to make a deal" to end the war, and Trump has privately told aides that he's willing to end the assault without securing the reopening of the Strait of Hormuz.
“We leave because there’s no reason for us to do this,” Trump said.
“The Trump administration knowingly and unlawfully locked up an innocent person for four months in a concentration camp-like prison," said one attorney for the plaintiff.
A Utah law firm said Tuesday that it plans to sue the US government for its allegedly unlawful detention and deportation of a Venezuelan immigrant who was sent to a maximum security prison in El Salvador known for its torture and abuse of inmates.
“Our client is a young Venezuelan man who came into the US legally to escape threats of violence by the Venezuelan government against his family for their opposition to the Maduro regime," said Brent Ward, an attorney at Parker & McConkie, referring to Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro, who was kidnapped by US forces during a January invasion of his country.
Ward said that the client—identified by the pseudonym "Johnny Hernandez"—is seeking $56 million in damages and "has no criminal record either in the US or in Venezuela."
A man entered the U.S. legally, had no criminal record, and was still sent to one of the world's most dangerous prisons for four months. Parker & McConkie is pursuing $56 million in justice on his behalf.www.parkerandmcconkie.com/blog/parker-...#CivilRights #JusticeForJohnny #Immigration #CECOT
[image or embed]
— Parker & McConkie | Personal Injury Law (@parkermcconkie.bsky.social) March 31, 2026 at 2:40 PM
Hernandez was arrested by Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) officers and subsequently deported to the Terrorism Confinement Center (CECOT) in Tecoluca, central El Salvador, where he allegedly suffered torture and other abuse.
“The Trump administration knowingly and unlawfully locked up an innocent person for four months in a concentration camp-like prison where he suffered torture, shooting, beatings, and solitary confinement," Ward stated. "When the US government knowingly and purposefully violates the law by detaining and deporting innocent individuals on false charges and is not held responsible, the individual rights of not just legal immigrants but all Americans are placed in jeopardy."
"Our client suffered catastrophic injuries in CECOT from which he will never fully recover," the lawyer said. "Failing to demand accountability now places all Americans in jeopardy in the future.”
The impending lawsuit comes as ICE proposes to literally warehouse up to 10,000 arrested immigrants in a "megacenter" in Salt Lake City, Utah. Opponents have compared the 833,000-square foot facility to a concentration camp akin to the Topaz War Relocation Center, a harsh, desolate desert prison where Japanese Americans and Japanese people living in the Western US were forcibly interned during World War II.
The case also follows last week's filing of a lawsuit by Neiyerver Adrián León Rengel, one of the Venezuelans sent to CECOT. Like Hernandez, León Rengel—who is seeking $1.3 million in damages—was in the US legally when he was arrested by federal immigration authorities.
Human Rights Watch (HRW) recently said on the one-year anniversary of President Donald Trump’s mass deportation of Salvadorans, Venezuelans, and others that, of the 9,000 Salvadorans expelled from the US since the beginning of last year, “only 10.5% had a conviction in the United States for a violent or potentially violent crime.”
The Salvadoran investigative journalism outlet El Faro—which, along with its staff, has been the target of sweeping government persecution—last year published a report on CECOT, citing one former prisoner who said that inmates are “committing suicide out of desperation.”
At least one deported Salvadoran—longtime Maryland resident Kilmar Ábrego García—was wrongfully expelled due to what the Trump administration called an “administrative error.”
The Trump administration deported hundreds of Venezuelans to CECOT under a multimillion-dollar agreement between the Trump administration and the government of Salvadoran President Nayib Bukele.
While Trump claimed—often without evidence—that the Venezuelan deportees were members of the Tren de Aragua gang, only about 3% of them had violent criminal convictions in the United States, and Department of Homeland Security records show that the Trump administration knew it.
In July 2025, El Salvador released 252 Venezuelans imprisoned at CECOT and sent them to Venezuela in a prisoner swap that saw Maduro's government free 10 US citizens and permanent residents whom it jailed. Many of the repatriated Venezuelans said they suffered torture, sexual assault, severe beatings, and other abuse at CECOT.
Last December, Judge James Boasberg of the US District Court for the District of Columbia ruled that the Trump administration broke the law by deporting the Venezuelans without due process.
"This executive order is a blatant, unconstitutional abuse of power," said Sen. Alex Padilla. "Make no mistake: Trump's attacks on our elections are a clear and present threat to our democracy."
Just days after the GOP-controlled Senate skipped town once they failed to send a voter suppression bill to President Donald Trump's desk, the Republican on Tuesday signed an executive order to create a nationwide list of US voters and crack down on voting by mail—which is how he voted in Florida's most recent election.
The order, Ensuring Citizenship Verification and Integrity in Federal Elections, was first reported by the Daily Caller, a right-wing outlet. It requires the secretary of Homeland Security to establish a "citizenship list" of verified eligible voters in each state, using Social Security Administration records and other federal databases.
Trump—who has repeatedly spread lies about election fraud, including his unfounded claim that Democrats stole the 2020 election from him, which led to his supporters storming the Capitol on January 6, 2021—also directed the postmaster general to craft rules for absentee ballots sent through the US Postal Service.
Legal experts expect the order will be swiftly challenged in court as unconstitutional. David Becker, a former US Department of Justice lawyer who now leads the Center for Election Innovation and Research, told Democracy Docket that "it's obvious the president didn't learn anything from his first failed executive order."
"This is unconstitutional on its face. The Constitution clearly gives the president no power over elections," he said. "I expect that this will be blocked by multiple federal courts in a very short period of time and have no legal effect whatsoever."
Becker also noted that "after the Department of Justice has been telling courts they're not creating a national voter list, this appears to confirm exactly what courts were concerned about."
Marc Elias, founder of Democracy Docket and a longtime election lawyer for Democrats, similarly said that "this is a massive and unconstitutional voter suppression effort aimed at giving Trump the power to create a list of who is allowed to vote by mail."
"We know where this will go—the targeting of Democrats for mass disenfranchisement," he added. "We will sue and we will win."
US Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) shared a message for the administration on social media: "See you in court. You will lose."
Sen. Alex Padilla (D-Calif.), ranking member of the Senate Committee on Rules and Administration and California's former secretary of state, said in a statement that "instead of focusing on lowering the cost of energy, groceries, and healthcare, Donald Trump is desperately attempting to take over and rig our elections and avoid accountability in November."
The order was issued just over seven months away from the midterm elections that could hand control of Congress back to the Democrats—which could, in term, lead to a historic third impeachment for Trump.
"This executive order is a blatant, unconstitutional abuse of power," Padilla declared. "The president and the Department of Homeland Security have no authority to commandeer federal elections or direct the independent Postal Service to undermine mail and absentee voting that nearly 50 million Americans relied on in 2024. A decade of lies about election fraud does not change the Constitution."
"Make no mistake: Trump's attacks on our elections are a clear and present threat to our democracy. In the middle of an unauthorized war abroad and an escalating authoritarian crackdown by ICE here at home, Trump is attempting another illegal power grab," he added, referring to Immigration and Customs Enforcement. "I will use every tool I can to stop him, and I expect immediate legal challenges in order to protect our free and fair elections."
After signing the order, Trump signaled that he, too, expects a court battle. While holding up the order, he said that "I don't know how it can be challenged," but critics will "probably challenge it" and "find a rogue judge."
There are "a lot of rogue judges. Very bad, bad people. Very bad judges," he added. "But that's the only way that can be changed, and hopefully we'll win on appeal if it is. But I don't see how anybody can challenge it."
Trump signed the order after unsuccessfully trying to convince the GOP-controlled Senate to pass the SAVE America Act—already approved by Republicans in the House of Representatives—before the current recess.
The bill would require US voters to provide proof of citizenship when registering to vote and to show photo identification to participate in federal elections. Trump has been pushing for amendments to restrict mail-in voting as well as more attacks on transgender Americans.
While Trump and other supporters of the bill have claimed it is needed to stop noncitizens from voting, that is already illegal and, according to research, incredibly rare. Critics warn that the SAVE America Act would disenfranchise eligible voters who don't have access to citizenship documents, including people who have lost paperwork, can't afford replacements, or have changed their names.