Immigration

On February 19, 1923, the United States Supreme Court issued a unanimous ruling in United States v. Bhagat Singh Thind that declared South Asians ineligible for U.S. citizenship. Nine unelected judges, in a single decision, stripped the legal standing of an entire people from the fabric of American law — and their ruling set off a cascade of consequences that ruined businesses, seized property, and drove at least one man to his death. Today is the 103rd anniversary of that decision. It deserves to be remembered — not just as a historical injustice, but as a precise illustration of why unchecked judicial power is dangerous, why the Court’s institutional consensus is no guarantee of moral correctness, and why structural reform is not optional. ...

Federal Agency or White Nationalist Content Mill? The Department of Homeland Security—the federal agency responsible for protecting Americans from terrorism and extremism—has turned its official social media accounts into a distribution network for racist memes, white nationalist imagery, and content celebrated by neo-Nazis. This isn’t hyperbole. The Southern Poverty Law Center’s Hatewatch documented how “the agency and top Trump administration officials have ramped up their promotion of white nationalist or anti-immigrant social media posts” throughout 2024 and 2025. ...

The Winning Streak Breaks On December 20, 2025, the Supreme Court delivered something extraordinary: a loss for the Trump administration. The Court rejected the administration’s emergency request to block a lawsuit challenging its “gag rule” on immigration judges—a policy that categorically forbids judges from speaking publicly about immigration or the agency that employs them, even in their personal capacity. ...

A Million-Dollar Fast Track to Bypass Congress President Trump launched his “Gold Card” visa program this week, offering foreign nationals expedited permanent residency for a $1 million “gift” to the Department of Commerce—or $2 million if sponsored by a corporation. The program raises a fundamental constitutional question: Can a president simply bypass Congress to rewrite immigration law if you have enough money to pay? ...

On February 19, 2026, a federal judge in West Virginia released a 21-year-old Salvadoran man from immigration detention and, in doing so, produced one of the most searingly direct opinions in recent American legal history. Anderson Jesus Urquilla-Ramos had come to the United States fleeing violence in El Salvador. He had a pending asylum case. He had valid work authorization. He had a valid driver’s license. On a West Virginia highway, a traffic stop — pretextual, for a license plate cover — became the occasion for his arrest by federal agents who wore masks, carried military-style weapons, drove unmarked vehicles, and presented no warrant of any kind. ...

The Surveillance Grid You Never Voted For: Flock Cameras, ICE, and the Courts’ Failure to Catch Up Sometime in the past few years, a camera appeared on a pole near your home. You probably did not vote on it. Your city council may have approved a contract you never heard about. The company that makes the camera — a Georgia-based firm called Flock Safety — now operates an estimated 80,000 license plate readers across more than 5,000 communities in 49 states. And the data those cameras collect, recording every vehicle that passes with a timestamp and location, is being shared with Immigration and Customs Enforcement. ...

Justice Brett Kavanaugh assured Americans that immigration enforcement stops targeting individuals based on their appearance would be brief and harmless—citizens would “promptly” be released after proving their status. A new ProPublica investigation reveals the disturbing reality: more than 170 American citizens have been detained, dragged, beaten, and held for days without access to lawyers or even phone calls during the first nine months of President Trump’s second administration. ...

The Supreme Court’s recent decision permitting Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) to detain individuals based solely on race, language, occupation, or geographic location represents a troubling erosion of constitutional protections. What makes this decision particularly concerning is Justice Brett Kavanaugh’s concurring opinion, which provides additional justification for what amounts to institutionalized racial profiling. ...