NORTON META TAG

Showing posts with label citizenship. Show all posts
Showing posts with label citizenship. Show all posts

20 July 2025

POLITIFACT THIS WEEK: Trump officials say ICE has higher detention standards than prisons, jails. Is that true?, Catch wind of this, DeSantis brushes off natural impact, The new size of ICE., You asked about Trump’s megabill. We answered., The MAGA-Meter: How Trump’s campaign promises fare at 6 months, Why does Grok post false, offensive things on X?, On Facebook, posts about celebrity donations for Texas relief efforts went viral. They were baseless., Do you smell smoke? Here's your Pants on Fire fact-check of the week: There’s no evidence ICE deportation flights are dropping people in the ocean. An immigration activist who has tracked ICE flights for over five years said the claim is baseless.17JUL25

 


 This week:  Answering reader questions about Trump’s megabill … Trump’s Pants on Fire underestimation of Chinese wind energy … How new law boosts ICE staffing … Grok keeps giving offensive responses. Why? … A look at Trump’s campaign promises, almost 6 months in office … The government can’t take citizenship from US-born citizens 



(AP)

Trump officials say ICE has higher detention standards than prisons, jails. Is that true?

Democratic members of Congress who saw Florida's Alligator Alcatraz immigration detention center said they witnessed dozens of people in metal enclosures, bugs and mosquitos in bunk areas, indoor temperatures above 80 degrees and people screaming for help.

Republicans who also toured the facility tell a different story, describing the space as safe, clean and well-run. The federal Homeland Security Department, which oversees immigration detention, has called characterizations of inadequate conditions at the state-run Alligator Alcatraz "false."

Homeland Secretary Kristi Noem was asked about Democrats’ accounts during a July 13 interview on NBC’s "Meet the Press." She said the Florida-run facility is "held to the highest levels of what the federal government requires for detention facilities."

"Our detention centers at the federal level are held to a higher standard than most local or state centers and even federal prisons," Noem said. "The standards are extremely high."

White House border czar Tom Homan also touted the nation’s immigration detention standards as being a cut above those for prisons and jails. When a reporter asked Homan about a 75-year-old Cuban man who had been living in the U.S. for 60 years before he died in detention in Miami in June, Homan defended federal facilities. 

"People die in ICE custody," he said, before saying ICE has "the highest detention standards in the industry. I’ll compare an ICE detention facility against any state prison against any federal facility. I’ll go head-to-head with any of them. … People say, ‘The detention centers are horrendous.’ Go look for yourself then come back and talk to me."

Isidro Perez was the 11th person to die in ICE custody almost six months into President Donald Trump’s second term. Twelve people died during former President Joe Biden’s last fiscal year in office. 

ICE detention centers have standards akin to prisons. But it’s difficult to assess blanket statements about the standards of immigration detention compared with state, local or other federal facilities for a few reasons:

  • ICE detention standards aren’t codified into law, so it’s difficult to enforce them.

  • Different ICE detention centers are upheld to different standards based on the terms of their individual contracts.

  • There isn’t one set of standards for local, state and federal prisons and jails. Some standards are mandatory or codified into law, others aren’t.

Several government watchdog agencies, advocacy organizations and news reports have long documented inadequate conditions at immigration detention centers. 

In May, human rights group Amnesty International reported "physical abuse by guards, use of solitary confinement, unsanitary and overcrowded living spaces including dysfunctional toilets, inadequate medical care and poor-quality, expired food," at an El Paso detention center.

Lauren Brinkley-Rubinstein, a Duke University associate professor who studies the health impacts of the criminal legal system, called Homan’s statement "very misleading."

"In most respects, ICE facilities operate with less consistent oversight and legal accountability than state or federal prisons or local jails," Brinkley-Rubinstein said. "ICE detention facilities and people that run them tend to be much less transparent about their operations."

Here’s the full story.

— Maria Ramirez Uribe

ShareShare
TweetTweet
ForwardForward

Fact-checks of the week

  • The new size of ICE. Former Obama speechwriter and “Pod Save America” cohost Jon Favreau said under Trump’s megabill, “ICE will now become the country’s largest federal federal law enforcement agency, bigger than the FBI, bigger than the DEA.” Favreau referenced the new law’s budgetary allocations to hire 10,000 ICE employees and build immigration detention beds. He’s right about the DEA comparison, but things are trickier with the FBI. Trump’s law makes ICE the highest-funded federal law enforcement agency compared with the FBI’s existing budget. However, base budgets for all three agencies could change. In terms of staffing, the FBI now is larger than ICE, but with 10,000 potential hirings, ICE could eclipse the FBI for staffers with arrest authority. The statement is accurate but needs additional information, so we rated the claim Mostly True.

  • DeSantis brushes off natural impact. Gov. Ron DeSantis, R-Fla., said Alligator Alcatraz has “zero impact” on the surrounding Everglades at a press conference. The migration detention center was built atop a pre-existing 10,500-foot runway from an abandoned airport project. Environmental experts pointed to increased human activity, habitat degradation for endangered species, waste management concerns, noise pollution and light pollution among reasons to doubt Alligator Alcatraz having “zero” environmental impact. DeSantis’ office did not conduct an environmental review prior to construction. We rated the governor's implausible claim False.

  • Catch wind of this. Trump said China has “very, very few” wind farms following the July 4 signing of his major tax and spending bill. Among other things, the megabill reduced policies intended to increase U.S. renewable energy, including wind power. Except, China accounts for more than 44% of the world’s wind energy capacity, which is more than any other nation and nearly triple the U.S. capacity. China also ranks first for its number of wind farms in the works. We rated the statement Pants on Fire!
You're a current PolitiFact donor. Thank you so much for supporting our work! 
Here’s the secret to great writing: There isn’t one. It’s teachable, says longtime Poynter writing coach Roy Peter Clark. Watch him on The Poynter Report Podcast.

You asked about Trump’s megabill. We answered.

Since Trump signed the Big Beautiful Bill on July 4, some PolitiFact readers have asked us what the new law will or won’t do. 

Reader: "I’ve heard that although overtime received will not be taxed on people’s wage checks, it will appear on their annual W-2s and incur taxes at that point. Is that true?"

Tax experts say not to worry: The deduction of overtime pay from a taxpayer’s income tax is real.

The new law allows workers to deduct up to $12,500 in overtime compensation (for single filers) or $25,000 (for joint filers). This deduction phases out for income levels between $150,000 and $275,000 (for single filers) and $300,000 and $550,000 (for joint filers).

It doesn’t make all overtime compensation free, but rather the portion above the worker’s regular pay.

"The deduction is certainty included during tax time," said Garrett Watson, director of policy analysis for the Tax Foundation, a center-right think tank. "It’s a real deduction."

The confusion may stem from the fact that all kinds of untaxed income are listed on a taxpayer’s W-2 — the year-end form that employers give their employees to summarize the year’s compensation. For instance, there’s a box on the W-2 that lists 401(k) contributions made by the employee, but being listed on the form doesn’t mean those contributions are subject to income tax.

Reader: "I am 65 but I do not collect Social Security yet. My husband is 71 and does collect Social Security. Will we get the $6,000 deduction or the $12,000 because we file a joint return? And how long will this provision be in place?"

The new law includes a tax break for older Americans. The law gives an additional $6,000 tax deduction to people aged 65 and older. These deductions come on top of existing tax deductions for Americans over 65 years old — $2,000 if married or $1,600 if unmarried and not a surviving spouse. The new deductions are temporary, lasting through 2028.

This reader and her spouse should get the higher rate, Watson said, because they are both 65 or over, regardless of who receives Social Security benefits. So this couple should get the $12,000 deduction, although the tax break would diminish if their income exceeds the limitation set in the law — $175,000 for single filers and $250,000 for joint filers.

Chief Correspondent Louis Jacobson answered two additional questions about tariffs and Social Security in this story.

Readers can submit questions and suggestions for fact-checks to truthometer@politifact.com

The MAGA-Meter: How Trump’s campaign promises fare at 6 months

The six-month anniversary of Trump’s inauguration is approaching July 20, so our journalists have been busy updating the status of his campaign promises on PolitiFact’s MAGA-Meter. We launched Trump’s second-term promise tracker to keep an eye on 75 of the administration’s campaign promises. We issue ratings on verifiable outcomes or measurable actions — not intentions.

You can see all 75 of Trump’s promises here. For now, here are six MAGA-Meter ratings we’ve updated ahead of the six month-iversary. 

We tracked the promises of past presidents Barack ObamaTrump during his first term and Joe Biden

— Gabrielle Lazor

Why does Grok post false, offensive things on X? 

What do you get when you combine artificial intelligence trained partly on X posts with a CEO’s desire to avoid anything "woke"? A chatbot that sometimes praises Adolf Hitler, it seems. 

X and xAI owner Elon Musk envisions the AI-powered chatbot Grok as an alternative to other chatbots he views as left-leaning. But as programmers under Musk’s direction work to eliminate "woke ideology" and "cancel culture" from Grok’s replies, xAI, X’s artificial intelligence-focused parent company, has been forced to address a series of offensive blunders. 

X users can ask Grok questions by writing queries like "is this accurate?" or "is this real?" and tagging @grok. The bot often responds in an X post under 450 characters. 

Last week, Grok’s responses praised Hitler and espoused antisemetic views, prompting xAI to temporarily take it offline. Two months ago, Grok offered unprompted mentions of "white genocide" in South Africa and Holocaust denialism. In February, X users discovered that Grok’s responses about purveyors of misinformation had been manipulated so the chatbot wouldn’t name Musk.

Why does this keep happening? It has to do with Grok’s training material and instructions.

— Madison Czopek

On Facebook, posts about celebrity donations for Texas relief efforts went viral. They were baseless.

As communities in Texas continued their search for the missing after a flood, dozens of Facebook posts trumpeted news that sports and music icons were on their side.

Some of the posts showed celebrities alongside photos of mourners and flood damage. Rapper Eminem. Football stars Tom Brady and Patrick Mahomes. According to these posts, they each "broke down" or "couldn’t hold back his tears" after hearing about the tragedy and pledged their help.

By the captions’ telling, these well-known figures already raised tens of millions of dollars for relief efforts. The posts gained thousands of shares.

But many of them aren’t true. When PolitiFact looked for evidence, we found no public announcements and no news reports supporting these individual stories of celebrity outpouring

Although deceptive posts like these are often created to drive viewers to click on links that take people to ad-filled websites, they can also have an impact on peoples’ attitudes about disaster relief response, said Yotam Ophir, University at Buffalo associate professor of communication who studies misinformation.

"If people are convinced that celebrities have already poured millions of dollars into aid, then one can dismiss the need for federal funding of crisis solutions," Ophir said. "The long run impact could be less trust in the government, as it may seem as if officials are not doing enough, and that the safety of citizens depends on the good intentions of celebs and rich people."

Here’s the story.

— Loreben Tuquero

Quick links to more fact-checks & reports 

Do you smell smoke? 

Here's your Pants on Fire fact-check of the week: 
There’s no evidence ICE deportation flights are dropping people in the ocean. An immigration activist who has tracked ICE flights for over five years said the claim is baseless.

See what else we've rated Pants on Fire this week. 
Have questions or ideas for our coverage? Send me an email.

Thanks to Gabrielle Lazor for helping compile this week's newsletter, and thank you for reading!

Katie Sanders
PolitiFact Editor-in-Chief
Send this link to your friends so they can sign up for this email!Send this link to your friends so they can sign up for this email!
Copyright © 2025 PolitiFact, All rights reserved.
You are receiving this email because you opted in at our website, attended one of our events, or communicated with us.

Our mailing address is:
PolitiFact
801 3rd St S 33701
St. Petersburg, FL 33701

Add us to your address book

13 June 2021

Biden Must Honor Pledge to Immigrant Troops: Rescind Trump Policy Blocking Path to Citizenship 27MAI21



 IT takes more than saying to members of the military and vets thank you for your service. We need to support them during and after their service to make sure the government takes care of their needs. Email Pres Biden and Vice-Pres Harris and tell them to end the federal government's appeal of the U.S. District Court's ruling against the drumpf/trump  anti-immigrant policy for U.S. military members and to honor their campaign pledge  to " Protect and expand opportunities for people who risked their lives in military service. Biden will not target the men and women who served in uniform, or their families, for deportation. He will also direct the Secretary of Homeland Security to create a parole process for veterans deported by the Trump Administration, to reunite them with their families and military colleagues in the U.S.  " I e mailed them, you should to. This from the ACLU.....

Biden Must Honor Pledge to Immigrant Troops: Rescind Trump Policy Blocking Path to Citizenship


Scarlet Kim Staff Attorney
May 27, 2021
This piece first appeared in Just Security.

Thousands of service members are in a state of purgatory because of President Biden's failure to end Trump's harmful policy. Ending this policy is an easy step to honor the president’s pledge to immigrant service members.

  • Over 100 days into his administration, President Joe Biden has yet to act on a Trump administration policy denying thousands of immigrants serving in the U.S. military the path to citizenship promised to them by Congress. Rescinding this policy—which runs contrary to U.S. history, values, and laws—is a no-brainer. It is also consistent with Biden’s own campaign pledge to “protect and expand opportunities” for immigrants “who risked their lives in military service.” The Biden administration should seize the opportunity to honor this pledge by immediately withdrawing the Trump policy and abandoning the Trump administration’s defense of it in federal court.

    As has been the case for over 70 years, before service members can apply for citizenship, the Defense Department must first certify their honorable service. This certification is a purely administrative task, consisting of looking up an individual’s service record and verifying honorable service to date. DoD’s longstanding practice was to issue certifications almost immediately after immigrants began their service so that they could become U.S. citizens prior to deployment. However, an October 2017 Trump administration policy required DoD to withhold certification until service members satisfied new preconditions, including a minimum service duration requirement. As a result, DoD denied thousands of immigrants in uniform the path to citizenship promised to them under federal law.

    In April 2020, the ACLU filed a class action lawsuit on behalf of thousands of immigrants whose service in the U.S. military during a period of armed conflict entitles them to naturalize expeditiously but who were blocked from doing so by the Trump administration. Four months later, the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia struck down portions of the Trump policy, ruling that the Immigration and Nationality Act “contains no minimum service requirement.” The court also held that those portions of the policy were unlawful because they were “arbitrary and capricious” under the Administrative Procedure Act. In October 2020, the Trump administration appealed this decision to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit.

    The government’s opening brief to the D.C. circuit was due in early February, giving the Biden administration an easy opportunity to comply with federal law, the district court’s decision, and Biden’s campaign promise by simply withdrawing the appeal. However, the Justice Department has now sought four extensions, and the brief is currently due on June 2, in just under two weeks.

    We don’t know what is holding up the Biden administration, but by continually punting the decision to withdraw the appeal and disavow the Trump policy, it has left thousands of service members in a state of purgatory. The prospect of an adverse decision, which would effectively upend the expedited naturalization process for immigrant service members, continues to loom over thousands of class members in this case.

    The Biden administration’s failure to act is inexplicable. The Trump policy was a component of that administration’s punishing anti-immigrant agenda, targeted specifically at immigrants serving in the U.S. military. It forced these service members to deploy and wait prolonged periods before they could obtain citizenship. In doing so, it prevented service members from enjoying the privileges of citizenship, such as voting while serving to protect the United States, or traveling with a U.S. passport while serving overseas. Because of the Trump policy, service members who fell out of lawful immigration status while awaiting citizenship became vulnerable to placement in removal proceedings and deportation, notwithstanding their ongoing military service. On top of it all, the policy prevented many immigrants from advancing their military careers since many specialized roles for which they are best suited, such as in linguistics or information-technology, require U.S. citizenship.

    The Trump policy also eviscerated naturalization through military service, the path to citizenship over 100,000 immigrants have taken since 9/11. In the year following the policy’s implementation, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services reported a 72-percent drop in military naturalization applications from pre-policy levels. In fact, many service members waited so long to naturalize that they could have obtained citizenship faster through the civilian process, defeating the very purpose of the expedited naturalization Congress intended for non-citizens serving in the U.S. military.

    The Trump policy broke the promise of expedited citizenship Congress has made to immigrant service members for over 200 years. From the War of 1812 to the present, federal laws have reflected Congress’ intent that immigrants serving during wartime naturalize almost immediately upon entering service and prior to deployment. Since 1952, that promise has been codified in a provision of the Immigration and Nationality Act. As the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia found in this case, the legislative history of that provision “is ripe with evidence that Congress intended that there be no minimum time-in-service required of a noncitizen enlistee in order to benefit from” the expedited path to citizenship. The legislative history also makes the reason for this intent clear: “if they are invited to fight and die for the United States, . . . they are good enough to come into citizenship.” Years later, when Congress expanded eligibility for expedited naturalization from those serving in World War II to those serving in future periods of conflict, it also explained that a service member should be “afforded an opportunity to acquire citizenship before he is assigned to active combat,” otherwise “the serviceman killed in action could never avail himself of the special benefits provided by his adopted country.”

    The Biden administration’s failure to act on the Trump policy—either by withdrawing the appeal or rescinding the policy itself—is especially puzzling because the Trump policy so obviously conflicts with the administration’s promises on immigration reform. As part of the immigration plank of his campaign platform, Biden vowed to address the harms experienced by immigrant service members. He explicitly pledged in his first 100 days to “[p]rotect and expand opportunities” for immigrants “who risked their lives in military service” and to “restore faith in the citizenship process by removing roadblocks to naturalization.” And in a Feb. 2 executive order, he specifically ordered the secretary of state, attorney general, and secretary of homeland security to “develop a plan” within 60 days to “facilitate naturalization for . . . members of the military, in consultation with the Department of Defense.”

    This failure to act is also disappointing because, as Senator Tammy Duckworth (D-IL) outlined in a January letter to then-President-elect Biden, immigrant service members face a legion of hurdles to citizenship that go beyond this specific Trump policy. The letter outlined a series of executive and agency actions the Biden administration could take in order to build on Biden’s stated “commitment to protect and expand citizenship opportunities for the brave men and women who have fought to defend our Nation.” A Biden administration serious about this commitment would not only address the Trump policy, but also begin to put this blueprint in action.

    By rescinding the Trump policy, the Biden administration would be taking an easy step to honor the president’s pledge to immigrant service members. Thousands of service members are currently relying on that pledge and the restoration of the citizenship promise Congress made to them.

    Update: On May 25, the D.C. Circuit granted the Justice Department’s fifth request for an extension on its opening brief, which is now due July 2.

12 June 2018

NPR DAILY HEADLINES:The Singapore Summit; Interpreting Diplomacy; When Privilege Backfires 11JUN18


NPR

Daily Headlines

Monday, June 11, 2018

FIRST UP: What you need to know now


Trump said, Canada said: Fallout from the G-7 this weekend

In a series of angry tweets from Air Force One after the Group of Seven meeting, President Trump instructed U.S. representatives to not endorse the G-7’s joint communique for “free, fair, and mutually beneficial trade” and called Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau — who said he planned to retaliate against recently announced U.S. tariffs — “very dishonest and weak.” Canadian leaders offered a measured and polite statement in response. Read more.

All Things North Korea

Ready or not, here we go: After months of negotiation, President Trump and Kim Jong Un arrived in Singapore on Sunday to meet face to face. On the table are talks of North Korea’s denuclearization and a potential peace treaty to officially end the Korean War. Both Trump and Kim — with their flair for “the drama and the dramatic,” as one expert said — are highly invested in the optics of the historic meeting, to take place Monday evening. Read more.

Why was the citizenship question added to the 2020 census?

Critics are concerned that the citizenship question was added because of political pressure from the Trump administration. Though Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross says the question addresses the need for more accurate citizenship data, the Justice Department released internal documents that show Ross overruled Census Bureau concerns — including about high costs and the quality of the data. See the documents.

IN THE NEWS: Digging deeper

When every word truly matters: The pressures of being a high-stakes interpreter

When former President George H.W. Bush negotiated an arms control treaty with Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev in 1990, interpreter Igor Korchilov said the word “verifying” in English instead of “verified” before quickly being corrected. The seemingly small word tense could’ve potentially changed the direction of the superpowers' conversation, and points to the high-stakes pressure of being an interpreter in global diplomacy.

The best interpreters serve as both linguists and diplomats and intimately understand the politics behind the words. For example, for a 2000 meeting between then-Secretary of State Madeleine Albright and former North Korean leader Kim Jong Il, senior Korean language interpreter Tong Kim had to learn the jargon of arms control and perfected a North Korean accent.

Ahead of Monday night’s unprecedented meeting between the U.S. and North Korea, President Trump presents his own challenges for interpreters, since he’s known to go off-script.
Facebook
Twitter

BEFORE YOU GO

Francesco Zorzi for NPR