What Happened: Federal charges have been brought against two Ukrainians for allegedly voting illegally in the 2024 U.S. presidential election as noncitizens.
Who’s Involved: The individuals are Svitlana Demydenko, 53, and her daughter, Yelyzaveta Demydenko, 22, both Ukrainian nationals. The prosecution involves the U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of Florida, Homeland Security Investigations, and the Florida Department of Law Enforcement.
Where & When: The charges were filed in federal court in Palm Beach, Florida. The women appeared before a federal judge in West Palm Beach on April 29, 2024. The voting in question occurred on October 31, 2024.
Key Quote: The Department of Justice stated that the women “voted from Palm Beach in the federal 2024 General Election, which included election of a United States President.”
Impact: This case highlights the Trump administration’s focus on election integrity, particularly its push to ensure only citizens participate in voting following concerns about noncitizen voter registration.
IN FULL:
Federal prosecutors are charging two Ukrainian nationals with unlawfully casting ballots in the 2024 U.S. presidential election. According to the Department of Justice (DOJ), Svitlana Demydenko, 53, and her daughter Yelyzaveta, 22, were brought before a federal court on April 29 to face charges related to voting as noncitizens.
The Demydenkos, who entered the United States on nonimmigrant visas in April 2021, successfully registered to vote in August 2024. This registration was conducted through a system requiring prospective voters to affirm their U.S. citizenship. Despite this requirement, they allegedly cast ballots during early voting on October 31, in Palm Beach, within the federal general elections, which included the presidential race.
U.S. Attorney Hayden P. O’Byrne for the Southern District of Florida, Acting Special Agent in Charge Jose R. Figueroa of Homeland Security Investigations in Miami, and Florida Department of Law Enforcement Commissioner Mark Glass announced the charges. Additionally, the DOJ says the investigation was supported by various entities, including the Florida Department of State’s Office of Election Crimes and Security, Palm Beach County Supervisor of Elections, the U.S. Diplomatic Security Service, and the U.S. Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE).
Meanwhile, Assistant U.S. Attorney John McMillan is spearheading the ongoing prosecution. Notably, the incident arrives amidst efforts, particularly championed by Republican lawmakers, to ensure only citizens engage in federal voting following historical concerns regarding voter registration by noncitizens during former President Joe Biden’s term in office.
What Happened: Failed Democratic presidential candidate Kamala Harris addressed a gathering of fellow Democrats, expressing her disapproval of changes in America under Donald J. Trump’s presidency.
Who’s Involved: Former Vice President Kamala Harris; Democratic donors, candidates, and elected officials, including California’s lieutenant governor, Eleni Kounalakis.
Where & When: Palace Hotel in San Francisco, during a 15-minute speech on April 30.
Key Quote: Harris criticized the swift implementation of the America First agenda, calling it, “A narrow, self-serving vision of America where they punish truth-tellers, favor loyalists, cash in on their power, and leave everyone to fend for themselves.”
Impact: Her speech highlighted ongoing distress within Democratic ranks over Trump’s energetic presidency.
IN FULL:
Former Vice President Kamala Harris has bemoaned President Donald J. Trump’s whirlwind implementation of his agenda in his first 100 days. Speaking at an exclusive event at the Palace Hotel in San Francisco, California, she delivered her first major public address post-election.
“What we are, in fact, witnessing is a high velocity event, where a vessel is being used for the swift implementation of an agenda that has been decades in the making,” Harris said, complaining that, among other things, President Trump is looking to downsize the government.
Her remarks were made in front of an audience that included prominent Democratic figures such as California’s lieutenant governor, Eleni Kounalakis. Like Harris, Kounalakis is a potential gubernatorial candidate, and part of a broader group within the Democratic Party reassessing why Harris faced widespread rejection at the polls.
Harris remarked on what she viewed as a “narrow, self-serving vision of America” under President Trump, which she claimed penalizes those speaking against it.
Speculation that Harris may consider a bid for California’s governorship in 2026 comes alongside speculation she may have hopes for another presidential run in 2028. Polls suggest that while Harris leads other potential gubernatorial candidates in polls, many voters are actually split on whether she should run at all. Just 50 percent of California voters think Harris should enter the race for state governor.
What Happened: A former judge from New Mexico and his spouse were released on bond after being arrested for allegedly sheltering a Venezuelan gang member and tampering with evidence.
Who’s Involved: Former Doña Ana County Magistrate Judge Joel Cano, his wife Nancy Cano, and Cristhian Ortega-Lopez, an alleged member of the Tren de Aragua gang.
Where & When: Las Cruces, New Mexico; arrested in April and released on bond this past Tuesday.
Key Quote: “Jose Cano stated that he destroyed [a] cellphone and further admitted that he believed the cellphone contained photos or videos that would reflect negatively on Ortega,” a federal criminal complaint states.
Impact: Joel and Nancy Cano face potential prison sentences of up to 15 years if convicted; Joel Cano has resigned from his judicial position and is permanently barred from holding any judicial office in New Mexico.
IN FULL:
A former judge from New Mexico, Joel Cano, along with his wife, Nancy Cano, has been released on $10,000 bonds after facing charges of tampering with evidence and allegedly harboring a Venezuelan gang member, following a federal raid on their residence. The couple was apprehended in Las Cruces, New Mexico, after Homeland Security Investigations got a tip-off in January 2025 concerning Cristhian Ortega-Lopez. Ortega-Lopez is an alleged member of Tren de Aragua, a Venezuelan gang designated as a foreign terrorist organization (FTO).
Court records detail that Nancy Cano initially hired Ortega for projects around the house, later offering him accommodation in a guesthouse. Ortega reportedly entered the United States in 2023, climbing over a barbed wire fence. He now faces charges related to illegal firearm possession.
Federal agents searched the Canos’ home on April 24, aiming to locate a missing cellphone belonging to Ortega. During an inquiry, Joel Cano admitted to destroying the device with a hammer and disposing of it. “Specifically, Jose Cano stated that he destroyed the cellphone and further admitted that he believed the cellphone contained photos or videos that would reflect negatively on Ortega,” a federal criminal complaint states. “Through further questioning, agents ascertained that Jose Cano destroyed the cellphone, believing that it contained photographs of Ortega holding firearms that Ortega had uploaded onto social media platforms which would be additional incriminating evidence against him.”
Other devices retrieved from Ortega allegedly suggest affiliations with Tren de Aragua and depict him with weaponry.
Joel Cano resigned from his role as a magistrate judge in March. Subsequently, the New Mexico Supreme Court barred him from holding any judicial office within the state. The charges against the Canos could result in 15-year prison sentences if they are found guilty.
What Happened: SiriusXM reported a decrease in first-quarter revenue and subscribers. Despite this, CFO Tom Barry indicated that the company is not significantly impacted by tariff-related pressures on car sales. Notably, in 2024, an estimated 92.7 percent of SiriusXM’s revenue came from subscriptions to its satellite radio service, a large portion of which is tied to installation deals with much of the American automobile industry.
Who’s Involved: SiriusXM, CFO Tom Barry, CEO Jennifer Wirtz, and the Trump White House.
Where & When: The quarterly revenue numbers and comments regarding tariff impacts were revealed on May 1 during SiriusXM’s earnings call.
Key Quote: “Big picture, we sleep well at night,” Barry said, noting the company had not seen a significant negative impact on auto sales stemming from President Donald J. Trump’s imposition of tariffs on foreign imports earlier this year.
Impact: SiriusXM’s unique business model, heavily reliant on new car sales and installment contracts with automobile manufacturers, makes the company especially vulnerable to disruptions impacting the auto industry. The comments from company executives indicating that they see tariffs having only a minimal impact on revenue suggest negative economic forecasts pushed by Wall Street may be overblown.
IN FULL:
Executives with SiriusXM, the satellite radio provider, stated during a quarterly earnings call on Thursday that they do not believe the foreign import tariffs imposed by President Donald J. Trump will significantly impact the company’s revenue. The comments are notable as SiriusXM is heavily reliant on revenue derived from subscribers to its satellite radio service, which is pre-installed in many American automobiles.
During the Thursday morning earnings call, SiriusXM CFO Tom Barry stated that the company does not anticipate “that tariff-related pressure on new car sales will have a material impact on our subscriber or financial performance this year.” While Barry cautioned that “like every business, we’ll continue to closely monitor ongoing developments and broader consumer health,” he emphasized to investors, “Big picture, we sleep well at night.”
While SiriusXM did state that its revenue decreased in the first quarter of 2025 by four percent, to slightly over $2 billion, Barry and the company’s CEO, Jennifer Wirtz, stressed that lower-than-expected advertising profits drove the decline. The satellite radio provider’s business model is heavily reliant on new car sales and installment contracts with automakers to grow its subscriber base. In 2024, an estimated 92.7 percent of SiriusXM’s revenue came from subscriptions to its satellite radio service, a large portion of which is tied to the installation deals with much of the American automobile industry.
The confidence expressed by the SiriusXM executives that the Trump administration tariffs will have minimal impact on their future earnings contrasts with the narrative being pushed by economic analysis on Wall Street, which continues to forecast a high likelihood of a recession later this year. Notably, the outlook presented by Barry mirrors consumer data that suggests the U.S. economy remains steady despite a 0.3 percent contraction in GDP in the first quarter announced on Wednesday.
What Happened: Mexican President Claudia Sheinbaum has pledged to “improve” its trade balance with the U.S., currently skewed in Mexico’s favor, in response to President Donald J. Trump’s imposition of tariffs to correct such imbalances.
Who’s Involved: Mexican President Claudia Sheinbaum and U.S. President Donald Trump.
Where & When: The conversation was acknowledged on Thursday, details shared in Mexico.
Key Quote: “We agreed that the secretaries of the Treasury, finance, economy and commerce will continue working in the coming days on options to improve our trade balance and advance outstanding issues for the benefit of both countries,” Sheinbaum wrote on X.
Impact: U.S. tariffs remain in place for certain Mexican exports. Mexico aims to decrease its trade imbalance with the U.S. so the Trump administration feels less inclined to correct it through tariffs.
IN FULL:
Mexican President Claudia Sheinbaum announced Thursday that she has held conversations with U.S. President Donald J. Trump on trade, revealing, “We agreed that the secretaries of the Treasury, finance, economy and commerce will continue working in the coming days on options to improve our trade balance and advance outstanding issues for the benefit of both countries.”
So far, no definitive plan has been reached to eliminate tariffs affecting certain Mexican exports. These were imposed by President Trump to address the trade imbalance between the two countries, with manufacturing jobs flowing to America’s comparatively low-wage neighbor at the expense of American businesses and workers.
While Mexico has avoided being hit with high reciprocal tariffs, trade duties imposed on specific sectors such as automobiles and steel pose ongoing challenges to the Mexican economy. The U.S. absorbs a significant portion of Mexican exports, with Mexico overtaking China as America’s biggest source of imports in 2023.
President Trump said in late April that he believes he will have secured 200 trade deals, increasing advantages for American producers and exporters, by roughly the end of May, possibly paving the way for a reduction in some tariffs.
What Happened: A federal judge ruled that the Trump administration cannot use the Alien Enemies Act (AEA) to detain or deport a group of Venezuelan illegal immigrants from a Texas facility.
Who’s Involved: U.S. District Court Judge Fernando Rodriguez, the Trump administration, Venezuelan illegal immigrants alleged to be part of the Tren de Aragua (TdA) gang.
Where & When: Southern Texas, with the ruling issued on Thursday, May 1.
Key Quote: Judge Rodriguez claims the president’s invocation of the AEA through proclamation “exceeds the scope of the statute and is contrary to the plain, ordinary meaning of the statute’s terms.”
Impact: The administration is barred from using the AEA and Trump’s proclamation to detain or remove the migrants, but removal proceedings can still proceed under the Immigration and Nationality Act.
IN FULL:
A federal judge has ruled that President Donald J. Trump‘s March 15 proclamation invoking the Alien Enemies Act (AEA) to expedite the deportation of illegal immigrants residing in the United States exceeds the statutory authority laid out in the law. U.S. District Court Judge Fernando Rodriguez—appointed to the bench in 2018 during Trump’s first term in office—issued the decision on Thursday, determining that the America First leader cannot use the AEA as a legal justification for holding or deporting illegal immigrants either residing or detained in the jurisdiction of the Southern District of Texas.
“The Proclamation makes no reference to and in no manner suggests that a threat exists of an organized, armed group of individuals entering the United States at the direction of Venezuela to conquer the country or assume control over a portion of the nation,” Rodriguez wrote in his ruling. He continued: “Thus, the Proclamation’s language cannot be read as describing conduct that falls within the meaning of ‘invasion’ for purposes of the AEA.”
“Neither the Court nor the parties question that the Executive Branch can direct the detention and removal of aliens who engage in criminal activity in the United States… The question that this lawsuit presents is whether the president can utilize a specific statute, the AEA, to detain and remove Venezuelan aliens who are members of TdA,” the judge continued, concluding: “As to that question, the historical record renders clear that the president’s invocation of the AEA through the proclamation exceeds the scope of the statute and is contrary to the plain, ordinary meaning of the statute’s terms.”
Notably, Tren de Aragua has been officially designated as a foreign terrorist organization, and the FBI reportedly has evidence that the Venezuelan government is aiding its infiltration of the U.S.
The lawsuit, initially filed by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), and the subsequent ruling come as a blow to the Trump White House’s push to swiftly deport dangerous, criminal illegal immigrants. Should the administration appeal Judge Rodriguez’s decision, the conservative-dominated 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, based in New Orleans, would hear the case. However, the 5th Circuit has shown a penchant in the past to rule against actions it sees as constitutional overreach by the Executive Branch, especially on the issue of immigration. Previously, the appellate court ruled against measures enacted by former Presidents Joe Biden and Barack Obama aimed at allowing illegal immigrants to remain in the country.
Notably, Judge Rodriguez took over the case from James Boasberg, who serves as the chief judge for the United States District Court for the District of Columbia. The change in venue and judge occurred after the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that legal challenges to President Trump’s deportations can only be filed in the court district where the deported person resides or is detained. In addition, the Supreme Court determined that lower court rulings on the matter only apply to the judge’s respective judicial district.
While still presiding over the case earlier this year, Judge Boasberg issued a temporary halt to the deportation of illegal Venezuelan immigrants under the AEA in a bizarre order that demanded the Trump administration recall two planes that were over international waters carrying deportees to El Salvador.
President Donald J. Trump has once again thrown down the gauntlet against the corporate media—this time by taking CBS to court. His bold litigation has exposed what millions of Americans already know: the mainstream media is not a neutral institution but a political weapon used to silence, smear, and control. But we must go beyond the courtroom to move from outrage to reform. It’s time to hit fake news where it hurts most: financially.
The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) should cap reverse retransmission fees (revenue that local TV stations pay back to their affiliated broadcast networks) at 30 percent to protect local broadcasters, lower consumer costs, and strike a decisive blow against the corrupt media cartel.
Excessive reverse retransmission fees are among the least understood but most abused levers in the modern media economy. Reforming them concretely realigns our communications infrastructure with the public interest and President Trump’s America First agenda.
HOW THEY WORK.
These fees (and ad sales) generate revenue for broadcasters that they use to run their operations and produce local journalism. However, media conglomerates like Paramount Global, the parent company of CBS, have begun charging what’s known as “reverse” retransmission fees to broadcasters. The networks demand a share of broadcasters’ revenue for the right to use their content. This practice was once unheard of, but some networks now regularly require more than one hundred percent of broadcasters’ retransmission fees as “reverse” fees, leaving broadcasters to sustain themselves solely on whatever ad sales they can make with their limited inventory (also capped by the networks, and often amounts to only a few minutes of airtime per hour).
This funnels more and more money out of local markets and local journalism and into the hands of mega media corporations, who threaten broadcasters with content blackouts if they don’t get sky-high payouts.
This problem gets even worse with providers like YouTube TV and Hulu Live. Under their affiliate agreements with the networks, local affiliates can’t even negotiate for online providers to carry the content. The networks do it for them and pay the affiliates whatever they deem reasonable (sometimes, nothing). This gives the networks total control over streaming distribution while robbing local stations of revenue and autonomy in the rapidly growing online video space.
What was once a mechanism to support hometown news is now a corporate racket. Instead of investing in local reporters, meteorologists, and producers, local broadcasters’ funds are siphoned to bloated national newsrooms that churn out anti-Trump propaganda and woke talking points. Meanwhile, higher cable bills pass the cost to everyday Americans.
HIT ‘EM WHERE IT HURTS.
President Trump’s lawsuit against CBS underscores the ideological warfare these media giants are waging. They’ve abandoned any pretense of objectivity, acting instead as political operatives with studios. Capping reverse retransmission fees at 30 percent is not just a technical tweak; it’s a strategic strike on these bad actors’ financial foundations.
We must return power to the communities and stations serving the people. Local broadcasters provide vital coverage—emergency alerts, school board meetings, small business spotlights—that you’ll never find on CNN or MSNBC. They reflect the values of the towns and cities they serve. However, the incentives shift when a national corporation owns the local affiliate. Content becomes homogenized. Narratives are imported. Local journalists lose editorial independence, and viewers get New York news with a local logo slapped on top.
We limit these national behemoths’ ability to weaponize local stations as bargaining chips and ideological delivery systems by capping reverse retransmission fees. We restore breathing room for independent broadcasters and stop the endless consolidation cycle that has gutted journalism in rural and working-class communities.
The FCC can solve both of these issues.
It has the authority to cap reverse retransmission fees and rein in Big Tech and network dominance by eliminating their unfair advantage over local broadcasters. Whether through traditional cable or streaming platforms, the Commission must act decisively to level the playing field.
This reform is in the same spirit as President Trump’s efforts to break up Big Tech, bring back American manufacturing, and take on the pharmaceutical lobby. It’s a populist solution to a top-down problem. It reduces costs, decentralizes power, and reorients the system to serve the needs of regular Americans, not just media executives and political elites.
THE PUBLIC FIGHT.
Critics will claim this is “government interference.” That’s nonsense. The airwaves are public property to which the government grants broadcast licenses to companies that serve the public interest. When national corporations abuse that privilege by hoarding retransmission profits, forcing the slashing of local news staff, and pumping out politicized content, it is not only appropriate for the FCC to step in; it is necessary.
Just as President Trump stood up to China on trade, he now stands up to CBS on the truth. His lawsuit has opened a vital lane for real reform. Capping reverse retransmission fees gives that legal challenge policy teeth. It weakens the media’s monopoly, strengthens local stations, and ensures that taxpayer-owned airwaves serve the public, not the D.C. cocktail circuit.
Make no mistake: this is a fight for the soul of the American media. National networks have shown they cannot be trusted. They’ve censored stories, smeared dissenters, and openly campaigned against conservative candidates. The only remaining check on their power is at the local level, and even that is slipping away under the weight of retransmission extortion.
If we want a media that informs instead of indoctrinates and represents communities instead of manipulating them, we must go upstream to the funding model. Capping reverse retransmission fees is the cornerstone of that effort. And if the networks try to make an end-run by demanding an unfair cut in ad sales, restricting available airtime for local news and weather, or prohibiting broadcasters from trying to reach new audiences through alternative distribution channels, then the FCC should be prepared to step in and stop it.
President Trump was elected with a mandate to put the American people back in charge. Capping reverse retransmission fees does just that. It ensures your local news stays local, your cable bill stays lower, and your country remains free from corporate media control.
Let’s follow President Trump’s lead, end the fake news grift, and get to work capping reverse retransmission fees for the good of our country, our communities, and our future.
Nathan A. Simington is a Commissioner of the Federal Communications Commission. Gavin M. Wax is Chief of Staff and Senior Advisor to Commissioner Simington and the co-author of ‘The Emerging Populist Majority’.
show less
President Donald J. Trump has once again thrown down the gauntlet against the corporate media—this time by taking CBS to court. His bold litigation has exposed what millions of Americans already know: the mainstream media is not a neutral institution but a political weapon used to silence, smear, and control. But we must go beyond the courtroom to move from outrage to reform. It’s time to hit fake news where it hurts most: financially.
What Happened: President Donald J. Trump announced that National Security Advisor Mike Waltz will be nominated as U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations, with Secretary of State Marco Rubio taking over as National Security Advisor temporarily.
Who’s Involved: President Trump, Mike Waltz, Secretary of State Marco Rubio.
Where & When: Announced on Truth Social on May 1, 2025.
Key Quote: “From his time in uniform on the battlefield, in Congress and, as my National Security Advisor, Mike Waltz has worked hard to put our Nation’s Interests first. I know he will do the same in his new role,” Trump stated.
Impact: Waltz’s reassignment reflects Trump’s strategic reshuffling to optimize his administration’s efficiency, ensuring America First policies are advanced at the UN while national security gets a reset following ‘Signalgate.’
IN FULL:
President Donald J. Trump has announced that National Security Advisor Mike Waltz will be nominated for the position of United States Ambassador to the United Nations (UN). Secretary of State Marco Rubio will take over his national security role on an interim basis.
“I am pleased to announce that I will be nominating Mike Waltz to be the next United States Ambassador to the United Nations,” Trump wrote on his Truth Social platform. “From his time in uniform on the battlefield, in Congress and, as my National Security Advisor, Mike Waltz has worked hard to put our Nation’s Interests first,” he continued.
“I know he will do the same in his new role. In the interim, Secretary of State Marco Rubio will serve as National Security Advisor, while continuing his strong leadership at the State Department,” the America First leader added, concluding: “Together, we will continue to fight tirelessly to Make America, and the World, SAFE AGAIN.”
Rubio was previously named Acting Administrator of the United States Agency for International Development (USAID), following its gutting by the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), and Acting Archivist of the United States.
The National Pulse previously reported on sources saying Waltz’s removal as National Security Advisor was imminent, supposedly driven by a sense that the National Security Council was “not being run efficiently in an organized way,” rather than the so-called ‘Signalgate’ scandal, which saw Waltz accidentally add a hostile journalist to a group chat about strikes on the Houthis in Yemen.
Waltz’s nomination as UN ambassador suggests President Trump still values Waltz, but feels his talents could be better utilized elsewhere.
What Happened: The Football Association (FA) in England has issued a decision to prohibit transgenders from participating in women’s soccer teams.
Who’s Involved: The Football Association, the governing body of soccer in England, and male players who claim to be women.
Where & When: England; effective from June 1.
Key Quote: “Transgender women will no longer be able to play in women’s football in England.” — Football Association.
Impact: The ruling affects participation in both grassroots and professional women’s soccer, requiring adaptation to a recent Supreme Court ruling that women should be defined in terms of their biology for legal purposes.
IN FULL:
The English Football Association (FA) has announced that transgenders will be barred from competing on women’s soccer teams. This decision, effective from June, follows a recent ruling by the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom. The ruling clarified that Britain’s equality laws are founded on “biological sex,” and that female-identifying males do not meet the legal definition of women.
The FA’s policy shift is part of a broader movement among various organizations to comply with the Supreme Court’s judgment, directing all public and private bodies in Britain to comply regarding the access they provide to single-sex services and spaces.
This new ban affects grassroots soccer, regional leagues governed by the FA, and professional-level competition. The ruling has also prompted changes in other sports organizations. The Scottish Football Association (SFA) has announced that competitive girls’ and women’s football will be restricted to biological females beginning in the 2025-26 season.
The move comes after the London Marathon refused to ban biological men from competing as women in its mass participation category. Transgender athletes were prohibited from elite-level competition, but still able to record their race times as women in the mass participation race.
What Happened: A Joe Biden-appointed federal judge in Idaho has temporarily blocked a state immigration law that let local police arrest migrants suspected of unlawful entry if involved in other crimes.
Who’s Involved: Federal Judge Amanda Brailsford, former President Joe Biden, Gov. Brad Little, and the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) of Idaho.
Where & When: Idaho, with the law signed in March, and the preliminary injunction issued recently.
Key Quote: “We are pleased the court recognized that enforcement of this law is harmful and unconstitutional,” gloated Emily Croston, ACLU of Idaho Staff Attorney.
Impact: The enforcement of the law is halted, pending a review, as state attorneys consider their next steps.
IN FULL:
A federal judge has put a temporary hold on a controversial Idaho immigration bill, pausing local law enforcement’s ability to arrest migrants suspected of illegal entry if involved in other offenses. Federal Judge Amanda Brailsford, appointed by former President Joe Biden, issued a preliminary injunction on parts of House Bill 83, known as the Immigration Cooperation and Enforcement Act. The law, passed by Idaho’s legislature in March and immediately signed by Gov. Brad Little, criminalizes entry and reentry to the state.
The move follows a lawsuit from the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) of Idaho. The organization contends that the bill unlawfully attempts to override federal immigration enforcement, effectively turning local police into immigration agents. Judge Brailsford claimed the ACLU showcased a likelihood of success on several claims, including potential violations of the U.S. Constitution’s due process clause and federal immigration preemption.
The court’s decision halts the state’s ability to enforce misdemeanor penalties on individuals entering Idaho unlawfully, which could escalate to felony charges if associated with further criminal activities. Such offenses could lead to federal deportation processes. The ACLU of Idaho has praised the injunction, claiming, “the court recognized that enforcement of this law is harmful and unconstitutional.”
The blockage of the Immigration Cooperation and Enforcement Act mirrors challenges faced by a similar Texas law, actively opposed by the federal government under Biden, highlighting ongoing guerrilla lawfare against border control policies by partisan organizations. Idaho’s Attorney General is currently evaluating the ruling to consider the state’s next steps.
show less
PULSE POINTS:
show more
Share Story
FacebookTwitterWhatsappTruthTelegramGettrCopy Link
Real News Fan? Show It!
Many people are shocked to learn that because of active censorship, we currently have to spend more time making sure you can even see The National Pulse, than on producing the news itself. Which sucks. Because we do this for the truth, and for you.
But the regime doesn’t want you being informed. That’s why they want us to go away. And that will happen if more people don’t sign up to support our work. It’s basic supply and demand. So demand you get to read The National Pulse, unrestricted. Sign up, today.
We don’t sell ads, and refuse corporate or political cash. It all comes down to you, the reader. I hope you can help.
What Happened: Federal charges have been brought against two Ukrainians for allegedly voting illegally in the 2024 U.S. presidential election as noncitizens.
Who’s Involved: The individuals are Svitlana Demydenko, 53, and her daughter, Yelyzaveta Demydenko, 22, both Ukrainian nationals. The prosecution involves the U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of Florida, Homeland Security Investigations, and the Florida Department of Law Enforcement.
Where & When: The charges were filed in federal court in Palm Beach, Florida. The women appeared before a federal judge in West Palm Beach on April 29, 2024. The voting in question occurred on October 31, 2024.
Key Quote: The Department of Justice stated that the women “voted from Palm Beach in the federal 2024 General Election, which included election of a United States President.”
Impact: This case highlights the Trump administration’s focus on election integrity, particularly its push to ensure only citizens participate in voting following concerns about noncitizen voter registration.
