Daily Caller
Mass Deportations, Cracking Down On Sanctuary Cities And More: Here’s What Trump Has In Store For Immigration
From the Daily Caller News Foundation
President-elect Donald Trump will immediately crack down on border security and interior immigration enforcement upon his return to office, immigration experts and other allies of the upcoming administration say.
Trump decisively won re-election to the White House, having secured 295 electoral votes and drawing more than 73 million supporters to the voting booth on Election Day, per the latest results as of Friday. The victory brings into sharper focus his campaign platform, which includes incredibly hawkish border security proposals.
The president-elect, who already established himself as a stalwart on border enforcement during his first term in office, made a slate of campaign promises on border security over the past year, such as completing the U.S.-Mexico border wall, reviving the Remain in Mexico program, bringing back the travel ban and hiring more Border Patrol agents.
Trump also introduced a number of more novel pledges while on the campaign trail, such as a vow to conduct the “largest deportation program in American history” and a plan to end birthright citizenship for those born on American soil by illegal migrant parents.
Trump’s rhetoric and past reputation may have already helped mitigate the immigration crisis at the U.S.-Mexico border. Upon hearing that he was elected to a second term, numerous migrants in southern Mexico expressed hopelessness and opted to leave a U.S.-bound caravan they were traveling in, with a Mexican official noting that the incoming caravan of roughly 3,000 migrants shrunk by roughly half its size after Trump declared victory.
Immigration experts who spoke with the Daily Caller News Foundation, while cautioning that anti-borders groups will fight the upcoming administration tooth and nail, said the American people can certainly expect a return to the tough immigration measures that were seen in Trump’s first term.
“America can expect the new Trump administration to do what the prior Trump Administration did: To apply the Immigration and Nationality Act, as written by Congress. And to restore the rule of law, both to the Southern border and to the legal immigration system,” said Matt O’Brien, investigations director at the Immigration Reform Law Institute (IRLI), a conservative legal group in Washington, D.C., that pushes for stricter immigration policies.
“The overall goal will be protecting the public safety and national security of the United States; as well as protecting migrants — especially vulnerable women and children — from exploitation by smugglers and traffickers,” O’Brien continued. “The only thing that needs to be done to ‘fix’ the immigration system is to use the laws on the books as Congress intended. And President Trump will do that.”
As for laws set by Congress, several lawmakers in the House and Senate told the DCNF that they are ready and waiting with their own legislation once Trump re-enters the Oval Office.
Texas GOP Sen. Ted Cruz, for example, said he looks forward to passing his Justice for Jocelyn Act in the next Congress, an homage to a 12-year-old Houston girl who was allegedly sexually assaulted and murdered in June by two illegal migrants. The bill would mandate the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) to “exhaust all reasonable efforts” to keep an illegal migrant in custody before releasing them into the interior of the country, according to the legislation.
Should an illegal migrant be released, however, the legislation would call for continuous GPS monitoring until their removal from the U.S. or the completion of their immigration proceedings. Texas GOP Rep. Troy Nehls has sponsored the same legislation on the House side.
“In a second Trump administration, the House Committee on Homeland Security will do everything possible to help the United States return to an era of secure borders and robust interior enforcement,” GOP Rep. Mark Green, who serves as chairman of the House Homeland Security Committee, stated to the DCNF. “Ending the Biden-Harris border crisis will require two things — policy changes to end the flow of inadmissible aliens into our country, and more funding for interior enforcement to demonstrate that there are consequences to entering illegally.”
The election results so far show Congress will likely be in a position to support the upcoming Trump administration’s immigration agenda. The GOP secured control of the Senate after flipping four different Senate seats, and while there is no definitive winner of the House majority yet, Republicans appear to have a slight edge as votes continue to trickle in.idential nominee U.S. Sen. JD Vance (R-OH) tours the U.S. Border Wall on August 01, 2024 in Montezuma Pass, Arizona. (Photo by Anna Moneymaker/Getty Images)
While it’ up for debate on exactly what bills Trump ultimately signs into law or executive orders he takes, it’s certain that the incoming president will face courtroom fights over whatever he decides to do.
“Any action that President Trump would take, someone is going to sue,” Eric Ruark, research director for NumbersUSA, stated to the DCNF about the expected barrage of court challenges the Trump administration will receive once it embarks on its immigration agenda. “It depends on whether you find a judge that will rule against him, and it may take a long time for these things to play out.”
The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) filed more than 400 legal actions against Trump and his administration since 2016, according to their count, and these lawsuits targeted a vast number of his first term’s immigration priorities. The massive liberal organization, and others like it, say they’re ready to battle the Republican again now that he will be returning to office.
Even President Joe Biden, who entered office on a pledge to undo Trump’s hawkish border policies, was sued by immigrant rights groups when he finally attempted to end the illegal immigration crisis by issuing an executive order in June that largely shut down crossings at the southern border.
The Biden-Harris administration oversaw record-levels of border encounters during its time in office, with illegal border crossings in fiscal year 2023 and fiscal year 2024 being the worst in history, according to CBP data. The border crisis began after the administration in its first year took nearly 90 executive actions that specifically targeted Trump’s first-term immigration policies.
While some of Trump’s more ambitious goals will take time and likely endure legal challenges, there are swift administrative actions that the president-elect will likely take on day one of his administration, Ruark noted.
“Ending the parole abuse,” he said, referring to the CHNV program and others like it that have paroled into the U.S. more than half a million foreign nationals during the Biden administration. Around 530,000 Cubans, Haitians, Nicaraguans and Venezuelans have been flown into the country under the CHNV initiative.
“On day one I think he would end those parole programs,” Ruark said. “And people who come in under parole were being allowed — and I guess they still are — to sponsor other people to come in, which is a complete violation of the law. So that is something Trump can end on day one.”
He also listed the termination of the CBP One app — which has allowed roughly one million foreign nationals to schedule appointments at ports of entry since it was first rolled out — and the withholding of federal funds from sanctuary cities as other unilateral actions that Trump will likely embark on immediately.
A successful immigration agenda will also hinge in large part on cooperation from Mexico, which stands in between the U.S. southern border and the countless illegal migrants who wish to cross it every year. The former Mexican president, Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador, ramped up his government’s crackdown on U.S.-bound illegal migration, giving relief to Biden as he dealt with historic border encounters.
Claudia Sheinbaum, Lopez Obrador’s successor, took office in October, but questions remain on how the leftist Mexican leader will get along with Trump. Sheinbaum on Thursday confirmed that she had a “cordial” phone call with the president-elect following his victory, but did not go into further detail on what was discussed. A spokesperson for Trump’s campaign declined to comment on what was said during the phone call when reached by the DCNF.
Regardless of legal pushback by liberal organizations or a lack of cooperation from his Mexican counterparts, immigration experts do anticipate Trump to be even tougher on immigration than he was in his first term.
“I would be surprised and very disappointed if not,” Ruark said.
Daily Caller
Trump Moves To Reverse Biden’s Green New Deal Agenda — With A Special Focus On Wind
From the Daily Caller News Foundation
By David Blackmon
Shares of big Danish offshore wind developer Orsted dropped by 17% Monday, the same day President Donald Trump took the oath of office to become the 47th president of the United States. The two events are not merely coincidental with one another.
To be sure, Orsted’s loss of market cap was caused by several factors, including both the general slowing of the offshore wind business, and Orsted’s own announcement that it will incur a $1.69 billion impairment charge related to its Sunrise Wind project off the coast of New York. Company CEO Mads Nipper attributed the charge to delays and cost increases and said the project completion date is now delayed to the second half of 2027.
But there can be little doubt that the raft of energy-related executive orders signed by Trump also contributed to the drop in Orsted’s stock price. As part of a Day 1 agenda consisting of a reported 196 executive orders, the new president took dead aim at reversing the Biden Green New Deal agenda in general, with a special focus on wind power projects on federal lands and waters.
In addition to general orders declaring a national energy emergency and pulling the United States out of the Paris Climate Accords (for a second time), Trump signed a separate order titled, “Temporary Withdrawal of All Areas on the Outer Continental Shelf from Offshore Wind Leasing and Review of the Federal Government’s Leasing and Permitting Practices for Wind Projects.” That long-winded title (pardon the pun) is quite descriptive of what the order is designed to accomplish.
Section 1 of this order withdraws “from disposition for wind energy leasing all areas within the Offshore Continental Shelf (OCS) as defined in section 2 of the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act (OCSLA), 43 U.S.C. 1331.” Somewhat ironically, this is the same OCSLA cited in early January by former President Joe Biden when he set 625 million acres of federal offshore waters off limits to oil and gas leasing and drilling into perpetuity.
As with Biden’s LNG permitting pause, the fourth paragraph of Section 1 in Trump’s order states that “Nothing in this withdrawal affects rights under existing leases in the withdrawn areas.” However, the same paragraph goes on to subject those existing leases to review by the secretary of the Interior, who is charged with conducting “a comprehensive review of the ecological, economic, and environmental necessity of terminating or amending any existing wind energy leases, identifying any legal bases for such removal, and submit a report with recommendations to the President, through the Assistant to the President for Economic Policy.”
Observant readers will know that the parameters of this order as it relates to offshore wind are essentially the same as a proposal I suggested in a previous piece here on Jan. 1. So, obviously, it receives the Blackmon Seal of Approval.
But we should also note that Trump goes even further, extending this freeze to onshore wind projects as well. While the rationale for the freeze in offshore leasing and permitting cites factors unique to the offshore like harm to marine mammals, ocean currents and the marine fishing industry, the rationale supporting the onshore freeze cites “environmental impact and cost to surrounding communities of defunct and idle windmills and deliver a report to the President, through the Assistant to the President for Economic Policy, with their findings and recommended authorities to require the removal of such windmills.”
This gets at concerns long held by me and many others that neither the federal government nor any state government has seen fit to require the proper, complete tear down and safe disposal of these massive wind turbines, blades, towers and foundations once they outlive their useful lives. In most jurisdictions, wind operators are free to just abandon the projects and leave the equipment to dilapidate and rot.
The dirty secret of the wind industry, whether onshore or offshore, is that it is not sustainable without consistent new injections of more and more subsidies, along with the tacit refusal by governments to properly regulate its operations. Trump and his team understand this reality and should be applauded for taking real action to address it.
David Blackmon is an energy writer and consultant based in Texas. He spent 40 years in the oil and gas business, where he specialized in public policy and communications.
Daily Caller
Opinion: Trump Making ‘Sex’ Great Again On Day One Of Presidency
From the Daily Caller News Foundation
By Megan Brock
One day into his presidency, Trump has taken significant executive action to preserve the integrity of the sexes and root out gender ideology from the federal government.
Throughout his 2024 presidential campaign, Trump promised to affirm the unique distinctions of the two sexes, male and female, and reverse the spread of gender ideology that was pushed during the Biden administration. Trump kept that promise Monday by signing an executive order (EO) titled “Defending Women From Gender Ideology Extremism And Restoring Biological Truth To The Federal Government,” which defends the integrity of the sexes by mandating the federal government apply “clear and accurate language” that includes requiring the use of the term “sex” over “gender.”
“My Administration will defend women’s rights and protect freedom of conscience by using clear and accurate language and policies that recognize women are biologically female, and men are biologically male,” the EO states.
“When administering or enforcing sex-based distinctions, every agency and all Federal employees acting in an official capacity on behalf of their agency shall use the term ‘sex’ and not ‘gender’ in all applicable Federal policies and documents.”
Trump’s order defines male and female as “immutable biological” classifications, noting that “sex” is not synonymous with the term “gender identity.”
“‘Sex’ shall refer to an individual’s immutable biological classification as either male or female. ‘Sex’ is not a synonym for and does not include the concept of ‘gender identity’,” the EO states.
“Gender Identity” is a term used by transgender activists to describe an individual’s imagined sex. Transgender activists believe a person’s imagined sex is as real as their physical sex, and should hold equal weight in society and law.
For example, in April 2024 the Biden administration expanded Title IX regulations, which prohibit discrimination on the basis of sex, to include “gender identity,” giving men claiming to have a female “gender identity” full legal access to women’s sports and private spaces. A federal judge recently struck down the expanded Title IX regulations in a lawsuit filed against the Biden administration by six states, including Tennessee.
Transgender activists often use the terms “gender” and “gender identity” interchangeably.
The World Professional Association for Transgender Health (WPATH) described how these terms are used synonymously in their gender medical guidance, called the Standards of Care version 8 (SOC 8), which is routinely used by medical associations, governments, and insurance companies in the U.S. and abroad to create policy driven by gender ideology.
“Depending on the context, gender may reference gender identity, gender expression, and/or social gender role, including understandings and expectations culturally tied to people who were assigned male or female at birth,” the SOC 8 states.
“Gender identities other than those of men and women (who can be either cisgender or transgender) include transgender, nonbinary, genderqueer, gender neutral, agender, gender fluid, and “third” gender, among others; many other genders are recognized around the world.”
This muddying of language is found throughout medical institutions including The National Institutes of Health who define gender as “A multidimensional construct that encompasses gender identity and expression, as well as social and cultural expectations about status, characteristics, and behavior as they are associated with certain sex traits.”
The Trump administration acknowledged how the corruption of language by transgender activists has had an “corrosive impact” on American society, stating: “The erasure of sex in language and policy has a corrosive impact not just on women but on the validity of the entire American system,” in the EO. “Basing Federal policy on truth is critical to scientific inquiry, public safety, morale, and trust in government itself.”
The term “gender identity” was popularized in the 1960s by controversial sexologist John Money, whose most high-profile experiment involved advising parents of a boy whose penis was damaged in a botched circumcision to cut the rest of it off and raise him as a girl. At age 15, the boy — who was raised as “Brenda” — discovered the truth and rejected further hormone treatments. He eventually committed suicide at age 38.
Gender ideology believes a person’s sex can differ from their “gender identity,” rejecting the long-established scientific understanding of biology that there are only two sexes based on the fact there are only two types of reproductive cells — sperm and ova.
The very concept of “gender identity” creates the possibility of changing one’s sex — a biological impossibility — through medical interventions, therefore creating a demand for medical sex reassignment interventions.
WPATH defines “gender identity” in the SOC 8 as “a person’s deeply felt, internal, intrinsic sense of their own gender,” whereas the Trump administration defines it as “A fully internal and subjective sense of self, disconnected from biological reality.”
The EO further explains that because “gender identity” is wholly subjective to the individual, it cannot be used to replace the objective reality of sex.
“‘Gender identity’ reflects a fully internal and subjective sense of self, disconnected from biological reality and sex and existing on an infinite continuum, that does not provide a meaningful basis for identification and cannot be recognized as a replacement for sex,” Trump’s EO states.
-
Alberta2 days ago
Is There Any Canadian Province More Proud of their Premier Today…
-
Dan McTeague11 hours ago
Carney launches his crusade against the oilpatch
-
Brownstone Institute2 days ago
The Deplorable Ethics of a Preemptive Pardon for Fauci
-
Daily Caller22 hours ago
Pastor Lectures Trump and Vance On Trans People, Illegal Immigrants
-
Business2 days ago
Liberals to increase CBC funding to nearly $2 billion per year
-
Daily Caller12 hours ago
Opinion: Trump Making ‘Sex’ Great Again On Day One Of Presidency
-
Alberta1 day ago
Alberta Premier Danielle Smith Media Roundtable from Washington
-
Alberta2 days ago
Trump delays implementation 25% tariffs: Premier Smith response