SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
women
Dem Congresswomen Demand ICE Agents Clearly Identify Themselves Amid Wave of Imposter Assaults
"Your current practices leave women vulnerable to life-altering violence," the lawmakers said. "It's past time to act."
Aug 11, 2025
Citing "horrifying" incidents in which masked men impersonating U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents kidnap and assault women, more than 30 Democratic congresswoman on Monday demanded that ICE officers clearly identify themselves while conducting enforcement activities.
"All our lives, we are taught to fear masked men in unmarked vehicles. We learn we should run from such men to avoid being kidnapped, sexually assaulted, or killed," 33 members of the Democratic Women's Caucus (DWC) wrote in a letter led by Reps. Judy Chu (D-Calif.), Sylvia Garcia (D-Texas), and Nydia Velásquez (D-N.Y.) to Trump administration officials including Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem, acting ICE Director Todd Lyons, and "border czar" Tom Homan.
"Yet, ICE is increasingly conducting raids and arrests in masks [and] plain clothes, without visible identification or badges, using unmarked vehicles—tactics that cause confusion, terror, and mistrust among the public," the letter continues. "These tactics invited perpetrators of violence against women to take advantage of the chaos by impersonating masked ICE agents in order to target and sexually assault women."
DWC Members sent a letter calling out recent cases of people impersonating ICE to abuse women. We demand DHS and ICE wear visible identification to stop enabling impersonators.Women deserve to be safe. We’ll keep fighting.
[image or embed]
— Democratic Women’s Caucus (@demwomencaucus.bsky.social) August 11, 2025 at 1:04 PM
Reports of masked men—and in one case, a woman—impersonating federal officers began emerging shortly after President Donald Trump returned to the White House and ordered a mass deportation campaign that senior adviser Stephen Miller said aims to arrest at least 3,000 people per day. Since then, there have been reports of impostors abducting and subsequently sexually assaulting, robbing, or extorting women in states including Maryland, New York, North Carolina, and Pennsylvania.
"This cannot continue and must be addressed immediately," the DWC letter insists. "The Democratic Women's Caucus is committed to defending the rights of all women and girls to live in safety. We call on the department to recognize this pervasive issue and to take immediate action."
"We demand that ICE agents visibly and clearly identify themselves when conducting immigration enforcement activities to stop enabling impersonators who leverage women's uncertainty and fear of immigration consequences to rape, harass, and abuse them," the congresswoman wrote.
"Your current practices leave women vulnerable to life-altering violence," the letter adds. "It's past time to act. Just like local police officers, ICE agents must be required to wear visible and clear identification to ensure their safety, better protect women, and deter impersonators. Finally, impersonators must be held accountable to the fullest extent of the law and this violence must be denounced by this administration."
In a bid to unmask federal agents, Velázquez in June introduced the No Masks for ICE Act, which would ban agents from wearing facial coverings during enforcement actions and require them to wear clothing displaying their name and agency affiliation.
House lawmakers led by Reps. Adriano Espaillat (D-N.Y.) and Dan Goldman (D-N.Y.) in June also introduced the No Secret Police Act, which would require all Department of Homeland Security and other federal law enforcement officers to show their faces and clearly display their badges and identification when detaining or arresting people.
Similar legislation—the Visible Identification Standards for Immigration-Based Law Enforcement (VISIBLE) Act of 2025—was introduced last month in the U.S. Senate by Sens. Patty Murray (D-Wash.), Alex Padilla (D-Calif.), and Cory Booker (D-N.J.).
Also in July, upper chamber lawmakers led by Sens. Mark Warner (D-Va.) and Tim Kain (D-Va.) proposed the similar Immigration Enforcement Identification Act.
States including California, Massachusetts, New York, Pennsylvania, and Tennessee have also introduced or plan to propose legislation banning masked agents and requiring clear identification.
"When agents of the federal government are operating like masked militias, we've crossed a dangerous line by turning immigration enforcement into a paramilitary secret police force that should shock the nation's collective conscience," New York state Sen. Patricia Fahy (D-46), who last month introduced the Mandating End of Lawless Tactics (MELT) Act, said at the time.
"This goes beyond immigration enforcement; it's intimidation and it echoes authoritarian regimes, not the United States of America," Fahy added.
Keep ReadingShow Less
'A Big Win': Federal Judge Blocks Trump Effort to Defund Planned Parenthood
A provision in the Republican budget law signed earlier this month "kneecaps the entire organization" and harms patients' ability to access care, said a judge.
Jul 28, 2025
Patients who use Medicaid to access health services at Planned Parenthood clinics will not be forced to find care elsewhere following a ruling Monday by a federal judge in Massachusetts.
Judge Indira Talwani in the state's federal District Court extended a temporary restraining order she had placed on the Trump administration earlier this month, barring it from imposing a one-year ban on states sending Medicaid payments to nonprofits that provide abortion care.
The ban, a provision in the domestic policy and budget bill President Donald Trump signed into law this month, applied only to groups that received more than $800,000 in Medicaid funding in 2023—suggesting Planned Parenthood, a longtime foe of right-wing policymakers, is the "target of the law," said Talwani.
Federal law already prohibits public funds from being used to pay for abortion care, and Talwani found that the Republican Party and the Trump administration aimed to force clinics to "disaffiliate with Planned Parenthood Federation and stop providing abortion to continue participating in Medicaid programs."
"Imposing that choice kneecaps the entire organization," said Talwani.
Ripping Medicaid funds away from clinics would also harm patients, said the judge. About 11% of female Medicaid beneficiaries used services at Planned Parenthood clinics in 2021, according to the KFF, and the provision in the budget law made patients "likely to suffer adverse health consequences where care is disrupted or unavailable."
"In particular, restricting members' ability to provide healthcare services threatens an increase in unintended pregnancies and attendant complications because of reduced access to effective contraceptives, and an increase in undiagnosed and untreated STIs," Talwani said.
Talwani had granted relief for certain Planned Parenthood member organizations last week with her temporary restraining order, but the injunction applies to all clinics. The Trump administration filed an appeal of the restraining order last week; Talwani's injunction will remain in effect barring action from the appeals court.
Dominique Lee, president and CEO of Planned Parenthood League of Massachusetts, said she was "encouraged" by Monday's ruling.
"At a time when reproductive healthcare access is under constant attack, this decision is a powerful reminder that patients, not politics, should guide healthcare," said Lee. "In Massachusetts and beyond, we will keep fighting to ensure everyone can turn to the provider they trust, no matter their insurance or ZIP code."
U.S. Rep. Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.) called the ruling "a big win."
"As this case continues, patients across the country can still go to their trusted Planned Parenthood provider for care using Medicaid," said Alexis McGill Johnson, president and CEO of Planned Parenthood Federation of America. "We will keep fighting this cruel law so that everyone can get birth control, STI testing and treatment, cancer screenings, and other critical healthcare, no matter their insurance."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Trump Order to Hospitals on Emergency Abortions 'Means Women Will Die,' Warn Advocates
"The Trump administration would rather women die in emergency rooms than receive lifesaving abortions," said one reproductive rights leader.
Jun 04, 2025
Ensuring unequivocally that hospitals must provide abortion care to patients whose pregnancies have placed them in life-threatening medical emergencies is not "the policy of this administration," said the nation's top health agency on Tuesday—making clear, said one Democratic senator, that Trump administration officials "don't care how many women die or are forced into health crises to advance their anti-abortion agenda."
The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) released a policy statement saying that guidance regarding emergency abortion care introduced in July 2022 by the Biden administration—just after the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that people in the U.S. don't have the constitutional right to abortion care—was being rescinded.
Former President Joe Biden made clear to hospitals in 2022 that under the Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act (EMTALA), they were obligated to provide abortion care if it was medically necessary, even in states that ban abortions. Medical emergencies that required abortion care included "ectopic pregnancy, complications of pregnancy loss, or emergent hypertensive disorders, such as preeclampsia with severe features," according to Biden's guidance.
The 1986 law requires hospitals that receive federal funding to treat or stabilize patients experiencing medical emergencies even if they lack health insurance or cannot pay for health services, or to transfer them to another facility for care. EMTALA has been interpreted to include abortion care by both Republican and Democratic administrations going back to former President George W. Bush, but the CMS statement suggested President Donald Trump will not require hospitals to protect women's health or lives by providing abortions.
While rescinding Biden's guidance, CMS said it would continue to enforce EMTALA, "including for identified emergency medical conditions that place the health of a pregnant woman or her unborn child in serious jeopardy."
"CMS will work to rectify any perceived legal confusion and instability created by the former administration's actions," the agency added—an apparent reference to a lawsuit filed by the Biden administration against Idaho, which claimed its near-total abortion ban superseded EMTALA.
That case went to the Supreme Court in 2024 and was dismissed, leaving in tact a federal court ruling that required Idaho hospitals to provide emergency abortion care.
Fatima Goss Graves, president and CEO of the National Women's Law Center, emphasized that the CMS action "doesn't change hospitals' legal obligations, but it does add to the fear, confusion, and dangerous delays patients and providers have faced since the fall of Roe v. Wade."
"Stripping away federal guidance affirming what the law requires will put lives at risk," said Goss Graves. "At the same time, this administration claims it is considering ways to support 'population growth,' but it is actively dismantling the systems that protect pregnant people's health and lives. The hypocrisy is staggering. No matter what political games the administration wants to play, we will continue to stand with the patients, doctors, and hospitals fighting every day to do what is right."
Mary Ziegler, a professor at University of California, Davis, told The New York Times that the CMS guidance creates "a lot of unanswered questions about what hospitals are supposed to do going forward. So more confusion means more risk."
"We've already seen since the overturn of Roe that uncertainty and confusion tends to mean physicians are unwilling to intervene, and the more unwilling physicians are to intervene, the more risk there is in pregnancy," said Ziegler.
The Center for Reproductive Rights said that "confusion is the point" of the new policy statement.
"The Trump administration would rather women die in emergency rooms than receive lifesaving abortions," said Nancy Northup, the group's president and CEO.
The deaths of at least five women as the result of abortion bans in Texas and Georgia have been reported since Roe v. Wade was overturned, with doctors avoiding providing abortion care even in cases of nonviable pregnancies, for fear of being prosecuted.
Mini Timmaraju, president and CEO of Reproductive Freedom for All, said in a statement that rescinding Biden's guidance "means women will die."
"The Trump administration is clearly refusing to protect pregnant people in crisis," said Timmaraju. "It's another calculated step in Trump's war on reproductive freedom—siding with extremists who want to punish doctors and abandon patients. No one should be denied emergency care, and we'll hold every official who enables this cruelty accountable."
Alexa Kolbi-Molinas, deputy director of the ACLU's Reproductive Freedom Project, said the organization "will use every lever we have to keep President Trump and his administration from endangering our health and lives."
"The Trump administration cannot simply erase four decades of law protecting patients' lives with the stroke of a pen," said Kolbi-Molinas. "Regardless of where they live, pregnant patients have a right to emergency abortion care that will save their health or lives. By rescinding this guidance, the Trump administration has sent a clear signal that it is siding not with the majority, but with its anti-abortion allies—and that will come at the expense of women's lives."
U.S. Sen. Patty Murray (D-Wash.) also sought to provide clarification.
"Once again, the Trump administration is sending a clear message that they do not care about women's lives," said Murray. "Make no mistake: EMTALA is still the law, and Trump rescinding this guidance does not change the fact that pregnant women who need emergency abortion care to save their life or health are still legally entitled to this care."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular