GET THE APP
Saturday, April 11, 2026

Category: Immigration
March 10, 2026
Bonkers Britain
Immigration
Religion

Britain to Install ‘Anti-Muslim Hostility’ Czar.

PULSE POINTS

âť“WHAT HAPPENED: Britain’s left-wing Labour Party government announced a new definition of “anti-Muslim hostility” and appointed the first “anti-Muslim hostility” czar.

👤WHO WAS INVOLVED: Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer, the Labour Party, and Muslims in Britain.

đź“ŤWHEN & WHERE: Announced on March 10, 2026, in the United Kingdom.

đź’¬KEY QUOTE: “This definition is yet another assault on free speech from a Labour Party that seeks to appease a sectarian voting bloc at the expense of British values.” – Sarah Pochin, Member of Parliament (MP) for Nigel Farage’s Reform Party

🎯IMPACT: The move raises concerns over Britain’s already depleted free speech rights, with criticism of Muslims and the Islamic faith reclassified as “hate” or “hostility.”

IN FULL

Britain‘s leftist Labour Party government has introduced a new definition of “anti-Muslim hostility” as part of a ~$5 million initiative to increase the measurement of and response to incidents supposedly targeting Muslims. The plan also includes appointing the country’s first “anti-Muslim hostility” czar and encouraging helplines and community groups to record complaints related to alleged abuse.

The Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government said the definition is meant to help identify discrimination against Muslims. Officials claim that the guidance does not restrict lawful speech, and that people retain the right to criticize or ridicule religions, including Islam, but in practice, many people who do so have already found themselves targeted by law enforcement and the courts.

Sarah Pochin, a Member of Parliament (MP) for Nigel Farage’s Reform Party, criticized the proposal, saying, “This definition is yet another assault on free speech from a Labour Party that seeks to appease a sectarian voting bloc at the expense of British values. No religion or idea should be beyond scrutiny or ridicule in a free and democratic society.”

Several recent controversies have intensified arguments about Islam and free speech in Britain. In one case, a man was convicted of burning a Quran during a protest. In a separate incident, a teacher was suspended after telling a Muslim student that Britain is a Christian country—which is a constitutional fact.

Image by Simon Dawson/No 10 Downing Street.

Join Pulse+ to comment below, and receive exclusive e-mail analyses.

show less
show more
March 10, 2026
Jack Montgomery
Election Integrity
Immigration

Illegal Alien Accused of Voting in SEVEN Elections.

PULSE POINTS

âť“WHAT HAPPENED: The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) announced the arrest of an illegal migrant accused of voting in seven federal elections since 2008.

👤WHO WAS INVOLVED: Mahady Sacko, an illegal migrant from Mauritania, and federal authorities, including U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI).

đź“ŤWHEN & WHERE: Sacko was arrested in Philadelphia; his alleged voting dates back to 2008.

💬KEY QUOTE: “Illegal aliens should NOT be electing American leaders. Our elections belong to American citizens, not foreign citizens,” said Deputy Assistant DHS Secretary Lauren Bis.

🎯IMPACT: The case highlights concerns over election integrity and calls for legislative action like the SAVE America Act.

IN FULL

The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) has reported that Mahady Sacko, an illegal migrant from Mauritania accused of voter fraud, is now accused of voting in seven federal elections since 2008. Sacko, who was taken into custody in Philadelphia by officers from U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), was previously believed to have voted in five elections.

DHS says the migrant has been charged with voter fraud. According to the department, Sacko originally entered the United States near Miami, Florida, and was deported in 2002 after all appeals of his removal order were exhausted. Authorities have not determined when he returned to the country.

“This criminal illegal alien committed a felony by voting in federal elections dating back to 2008. Illegal aliens should NOT be electing American leaders,” Deputy Assistant DHS Secretary Lauren Bis said in a statement. She added, “Our elections belong to American citizens, not foreign citizens. Congress must pass the SAVE America Act immediately to secure our elections.”

Notably, President Donald J. Trump suggested this week that he would not sign any bills until the SAVE America Act, which mandated voter ID and other election integrity measures, is passed. Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton has even offered to drop out of a Senate primary race, where he is challenging Republican-in-name-only (RINO) incumbent John Cornyn, if the Senate passes the bill. However, Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-SD) is resisting these overtures.

Sacko’s arrest follows a similar case earlier this year in New Jersey, where two Pakistani illegal migrants were charged with voter fraud after allegedly voting in the 2020 presidential election and making false statements while applying for U.S. citizenship.

Join Pulse+ to comment below, and receive exclusive e-mail analyses.

show less
show more
March 9, 2026
Immigration
Lawfare

Court Overturns Obama Judge’s ‘Constitutionally Suspect’ Injunction Against ICE Operations.

PULSE POINTS

âť“WHAT HAPPENED: A federal appeals court overturned a preliminary injunction issued by a Barack Obama-appointed district court judge, ruling the lower court overstepped its authority in restricting immigration enforcement in Chicago.

👤WHO WAS INVOLVED: U.S. District Court Judge Sara Ellis, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 7th Circuit, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), the Department of Justice (DOJ), and plaintiffs—including anti-ICE agitators and journalists.

đź“ŤWHEN & WHERE: The decision was issued by the 7th Circuit Court late last week following a series of legal battles over immigration enforcement in Chicago, Illinois.

đź’¬KEY QUOTE: “This case involved extraordinary circumstances. Working on a highly compressed timeline, the district court granted an overbroad, constitutionally suspect injunction.” — Seventh Circuit panel

🎯IMPACT: The ruling emphasized the separation of powers and prevented further judicial oversight of federal executive actions.

IN FULL

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 7th Circuit vacated a wide-ranging preliminary injunction against U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and other Department of Homeland Security (DHS) agents in Chicago, Illinois, issued by U.S. District Court Judge Sara Ellis—a Barack Obama appointee. The three-judge appellate panel, including two Trump appointees and a Reagan appointee, criticized the decision as “overbroad” and “constitutionally suspect.”

“This case involved extraordinary circumstances. Working on a highly compressed timeline, the district court granted an overbroad, constitutionally suspect injunction,” the majority wrote, continuing, “This decision was supported with hundreds of pages of factfinding, covering incidents from over a dozen locations around the Northern District of Illinois. That decision treated the claims of lead plaintiffs, class members, and non-class members as essentially interchangeable—both for Article III standing and for the merits.”

“Yet when this court stayed the district court’s order, the plaintiffs quickly and voluntarily withdrew their case. Vacatur is therefore proper to ensure the district court’s injunction order does not affect future litigation, which would present its own facts and legal issues,” the appellate panel added.

The National Pulse reported in November last year that Judge Ellis issued a preliminary injunction that prohibited immigration officials from using tear gas or other riot control tools at protests in Chicago, Illinois. Under Ellis’s order, such weapons were banned unless agents delivered two clear warnings and faced an immediate danger to safety. Additionally, federal agents were also required to activate body cameras going forward.

Importantly, the 7th Circuit’s decision noted that Ellis’s order demanded federal agencies submit all internal policies for judicial review, which it deemed an improper intrusion on the separation of powers. The panel concluded that the district court “likely abused its discretion” by issuing such a sweeping injunction.

Join Pulse+ to comment below, and receive exclusive e-mail analyses.

show less
show more
March 9, 2026
Bonkers Britain
Immigration

British Flags Branded ‘Tools of Hate’ in Government Report.

PULSE POINTS

âť“WHAT HAPPENED: A leaked draft of the British government’s social cohesion policy suggests the British, English, and Scottish flags can be “tools of hate.”

👤WHO WAS INVOLVED: The British government, led by Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer and the Labour Party, British patriots, and ethnic minorities offended by Britain’s national flags.

đź“ŤWHEN & WHERE: Leaked draft reported March 2026, in the United Kingdom.

đź’¬KEY QUOTE: “Absurdly, this says our national flag is a tool of hate used to intimidate. The whole paper is a divisive nonsense that should be consigned to the bin.” – Richard Tice MP, Deputy Leader of Nigel Farage’s Reform Party

🎯IMPACT: Proposals could inflame debates over free speech, identity politics, and national pride.

IN FULL

A leaked draft of the British government’s upcoming social cohesion strategy suggests that the country’s national flags, including the British, English, and Scottish flags, can be “tools of hate.” The 47-page document, titled Protecting What Matters, claims that during protests against migrant crime last summer, some national symbols were used to “exclude or intimidate,” adding that the “extreme right has tried to turn symbols of pride into tools of hate.”

Recent grassroots campaigns against mass migration and migrant crime have encouraged public displays of British flags. One initiative, Operation Raise the Colours, organized supporters online to hang British Union flags and English St. George’s Cross flags across the country as an expression of patriotism. In some areas, however, local authorities removed the flags, supposedly because they had been attached to public infrastructure without permission. Officials in the London borough of Tower Hamlets, for instance, took down English flags installed as part of the campaign, despite having previously left Palestinian flags in place.

Separately, as former Premier League soccer player Joey Barton was convicted over allegedly offensive social media posts directed at BBC presenters, a judge criticized him for wearing a scarf featuring the British flag, describing it as an attempt to make a political point.

Richard Tice MP, Deputy Leader of Nigel Farage’s Reform Party, strongly criticized the government’s draft strategy, saying: “Absurdly, this says our national flag is a tool of hate used to intimidate. The whole paper is a divisive nonsense that should be consigned to the bin.”

The draft strategy also proposes appointing a “special representative” to address “hostility” toward Muslims and introducing a new definition of Islamophobia. Critics warn such measures could act as a de facto “blasphemy” law that further restricts free speech.

Image by Simon Dawson / No 10 Downing Street.

Join Pulse+ to comment below, and receive exclusive e-mail analyses.

show less
show more
March 6, 2026
Election Integrity
Immigration

Illegal Immigrant Faces Charges for Voting in FIVE U.S. Presidential Elections.

PULSE POINTS

âť“WHAT HAPPENED: An illegal immigrant from Mauritania was charged with fraudulent voting after allegedly casting ballots in five presidential elections in Pennsylvania.

👤WHO WAS INVOLVED: Mahady Sacko, a 50-year-old illegal immigrant, and the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania.

đź“ŤWHEN & WHERE: Sacko allegedly voted in elections from 2008 to 2024 in Pennsylvania, despite a deportation order issued in 2000.

🎯IMPACT: If convicted, Sacko faces a maximum sentence of five years in prison.

IN FULL

Mahady Sacko, an illegal immigrant from Mauritania living in Philadelphia, has been charged with fraudulent voting after allegedly participating in five presidential elections in Pennsylvania despite being under a deportation order since 2000. The U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania announced the charges, which include falsely representing U.S. citizenship to vote and register to vote.

According to the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), Pennsylvania state voting records show Sacko voted in multiple federal elections, including the 2008, 2012, 2016, 2020, and 2024 general elections, as well as the 2016 and 2020 primary elections. The complaint stated that Sacko voted in person for most of these elections, except for the 2020 primary, which he voted by mail. On each occasion, he allegedly misrepresented his citizenship status.

The complaint also detailed Sacko’s immigration history. He entered the U.S. in 1998 and was ordered deported by an immigration judge in 2000. Sacko appealed the decision, but the Board of Immigration Appeals dismissed his appeal in 2002. Despite this, Sacko remained in the U.S., and U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) was unable to enforce the deportation order due to a lack of a valid Mauritanian passport.

Sacko was arrested in 2007, but was placed under ICE supervision due to the inability to secure travel documents. While under supervision, he reportedly registered to vote multiple times, starting in January 2005. The Philadelphia Inquirer reported that voting records show Sacko registered as a Democrat.

If convicted, Sacko could face up to five years in prison.

Join Pulse+ to comment below, and receive exclusive e-mail analyses.

show less
show more
March 6, 2026
Immigration
Politics

Dem Congressman’s Illegal Alien SOTU Guest Linked to Sexual Assaults Involving Juveniles.

PULSE POINTS

âť“WHAT HAPPENED: Marcelo Gomes da Silva, an illegal immigrant and guest of Congressman Seth Moulton (D-MA) at President Donald J. Trump’s State of the Union address, is referenced in police reports involving sexual assault and juveniles.

👤WHO WAS INVOLVED: Congressman Seth Moulton, Marcelo Gomes da Silva, the Milford Police Department, and the Department of Homeland Security (DHS).

đź“ŤWHEN & WHERE: The reports date back to June and September of 2021, with recent developments occurring around the State of the Union on February 24, 2026.

đź’¬KEY QUOTE: “Gomes DaSilva is an illegal alien who has no right to be in our nation.” – Department of Homeland Security

🎯IMPACT: The Boston Herald, through public records requests, sought details from the Milford Police Department about incidents involving Gomes da Silva in 2021. However, these requests were denied, citing the involvement of juveniles in the reports.

IN FULL

Anti-ICE activist Marcelo Gomes da Silva, who was invited by Congressman Seth Moulton (D-MA) to the State of the Union, is referenced in police reports related to sexual assault and juveniles, raising concerns about the vetting of such high-profile guests. The Boston Herald, through public records requests, sought details from the Milford Police Department about incidents involving Gomes da Silva in 2021. However, these requests were denied, citing the involvement of juveniles in the reports.

“The records you are requesting are not public records in accordance with M.G.L. c. 4 s. 7 cl. 26 (A). Report 21-23101-OF involves a sexual assault and juveniles. Report 21-16254-OF involves juveniles,” Milford Deputy Chief John Sanchioni wrote when denying the record inquiries.

The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) criticized Moulton’s stunt just before President Donald J. Trump’s February address to Congress, posting on X (formerly Twitter): “[Rep. Moulton] plans to bring illegal alien Marcelo Gomes DaSilva. Gomes DaSilva is an illegal alien who has no right to be in our nation. We are committed to enforcing the law and fighting for the arrest, detention, and removal of aliens like him.”

Notably, Moulton had his staff escort Gomes da Silva out of the House gallery early on during President Trump‘s State of the Union address, hiding the illegal immigrant and alleged sexual predator in office “out of an abundance of caution,” alleging DHS was “targeting and harassing Marcelo.” The Massachusetts Democrat went on to defend Gomes da Silva, describing him as a “great American” and a “patriot” during subsequent media appearances. Addressing the criminal allegations directly, a spokesman for Moulton said, “According to our review, Marcelo has never been charged with a crime.”

Join Pulse+ to comment below, and receive exclusive e-mail analyses.

show less
show more
March 5, 2026
Crime
Immigration

‘Abdulkarim Farah’ Jailed for Trying to Bribe Juror in Minnesota Fraud Case.

PULSE POINTS

âť“WHAT HAPPENED: Abdulkarim Farah of Minneapolis was sentenced to 57 months in prison for attempting to bribe a juror in a high-profile fraud case.

👤WHO WAS INVOLVED: Abdulkarim Farah, his brothers, co-defendant Ladan Ali, and “Juror 52” were key figures in the case.

đź“ŤWHEN & WHERE: The bribery attempt occurred during a trial beginning April 22, 2024, in Minnesota.

🎯IMPACT: The case highlights the importance of safeguarding the integrity of the justice system and the role of impartial juries.

IN FULL

Abdulkarim Farah of Minneapolis, Minnesota, has been sentenced to 57 months in federal prison followed by one year of supervised release after attempting to bribe a juror during the first trial connected to the massive Feeding Our Future fraud case. The largely Somali-led nonprofit sat at the center of a pandemic-era scheme that prosecutors say stole more than $250 million in taxpayer funds intended to provide meals to children during the COVID-19 pandemic.

According to federal prosecutors, Farah worked with his brothers and other associates to influence the trial’s outcome by offering money to “Juror 52” in exchange for a not-guilty verdict. The bribery attempt occurred during a trial that began April 22, 2024, involving seven defendants, including two of Farah’s brothers, before U.S. District Judge Nancy E. Brasel.

Court filings state that Farah monitored Juror 52 and the juror’s home, shared logistical information with co-conspirators, and coordinated the delivery of the bribe with co-defendant Ladan Ali. On June 2, 2024, Farah drove Ali to the juror’s residence, where she delivered a gift bag containing cash to a relative of the juror and promised additional payments if the juror voted to acquit. Investigators later found that Farah deleted the Signal messaging app from his phone in an effort to destroy evidence.

U.S. District Judge Eric C. Tostrud sentenced Farah to the high end of the federal guidelines. During sentencing, the judge emphasized the importance of juries to the justice system, describing “properly functioning juries” as a cornerstone of criminal courts, and commended Juror 52 for refusing the large cash bribe.

The Feeding Our Future case has become one of the largest fraud scandals in the United States. Payments to the nonprofit surged during the pandemic as it claimed to be distributing millions of meals through dozens of affiliated sites across Minnesota.

Federal investigators have charged 98 people in connection with the scheme. According to congressional oversight findings cited in early 2026, 85 of those defendants are Somali.

The case has also prompted broader scrutiny of organized fraud networks tied to pandemic relief programs in Minnesota. Investigators and lawmakers have raised concerns about underground financial networks moving large sums of money through U.S. airports and allegations that proceeds from fraud operations have been connected to activist movements in Minneapolis.

Join Pulse+ to comment below, and receive exclusive e-mail analyses.

show less
show more
March 5, 2026
Bonkers Britain
Immigration
War

Vigil for Ayatollah Khamenei in ENGLAND Sees Fighting Between Pro- and Anti-Regime Demonstrators.

PULSE POINTS

âť“WHAT HAPPENED: Protesters held a vigil in Manchester, England, to mourn Iran’s slain Supreme Leader, Grand Ayatollah Khamenei, and fought with anti-regime counter-protesters.

👤WHO WAS INVOLVED: Up to 100 demonstrators, including students from Manchester University’s Ahlul-Bayt Islamic societies, and 300 to 400 counter-protesters.

đź“ŤWHEN & WHERE: The vigil took place on Wednesday night in Manchester.

đź’¬KEY QUOTE: “You can kill a man, but you can’t kill an ideology,” the Ayatollah’s supporters.

🎯IMPACT: The vigil clash highlights the influence of Islamism on British campuses and the country’s increasing social fractures as it becomes more diverse.

IN FULL

Protesters gathered in Manchester, England, to mourn Iran’s slain Supreme Leader, Grand Ayatollah Khamenei, on Wednesday night, and clashed with counter-protesters. The event, organized by students from Manchester University’s Ahlul-Bayt Islamic societies, included demonstrators burning images of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. Counter-protesters celebrated Khamenei’s death in the ongoing U.S.-Israeli “Epic Fury” operation and displayed pictures of U.S. President Donald J. Trump.

Signs at the vigil expressed sentiments like “You can kill a man, but you can’t kill an ideology.” Another sign read: “My enemies have the support of each other to kill me, O Heart warming love … I have only your support, loyal to Ayatollah Khamenei.”

The incident raises concerns about the spread of Islamism on British university campuses and the increasing ethno-religious fractures in British society, especially following the October 7 attacks on Israel by Hamas. Research by the Community Security Trust (CST) suggests attacks on Jews in Britain have increased exponentially since October 7, with hundreds of abusive incidents recorded.

The University of Manchester’s AbSoc plans further commemorative events for Khamenei and his regime, with one set for Friday intended to “remember the martyrs of the recent strikes”.

Join Pulse+ to comment below, and receive exclusive e-mail analyses.

show less
show more
March 4, 2026
Immigration
SCOTUS

Supreme Court UNANIMOUSLY Backs Trump Admin on Asylum.

PULSE POINTS

âť“WHAT HAPPENED: The U.S. Supreme Court unanimously sided with the Trump administration in a case concerning the standard for reviewing asylum claims by illegal immigrants.

👤WHO WAS INVOLVED: The case involved Salvadoran illegal immigrant Humberto Urias-Orellana and the Trump administration.

đź“ŤWHEN & WHERE: The ruling was issued on March 4, 2026, by the U.S. Supreme Court.

đź’¬KEY QUOTE: “We conclude that the statute requires application of the substantial-evidence standard to the agency’s conclusion that a given set of undisputed facts does not constitute persecution.” – Ketanji Brown Jackson

🎯IMPACT: The decision reinforces the substantial evidence standard for reviewing asylum claims, supporting the executive branch’s determinations.

IN FULL

In a firm and unanimous ruling, the United States Supreme Court handed the Trump administration a victory regarding its power to review asylum claims made by illegal immigrants. The high court in Urias-Orellana v. Bondi found that federal courts must defer to immigration agencies when deciding whether facts qualify as “persecution” in asylum cases. Importantly, this entails the application of the substantial-evidence standard, rather than the interpretation of individual jurists.

The case involves Humberto Urias-Orellana, an illegal immigrant from El Salvador who unlawfully entered the United States in 2021 and filed for asylum. Urias-Orellana claimed that he faced persecution in El Salvador, but both an immigration judge and the Board of Immigration Appeals rejected his claims, determining the alleged violence he faced did not constitute persecution. The First Circuit Court of Appeals upheld this decision.

Associate Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, writing for the court, stated that the statute requires the application of the substantial-evidence standard to the agency’s conclusion that the facts do not amount to persecution. “We conclude that the statute requires application of the substantial-evidence standard to the agency’s conclusion that a given set of undisputed facts does not constitute persecution. Accordingly, we affirm,” Justice Jackson wrote.

Notably, the case reinforces the deference given to the executive branch’s factual determinations in immigration cases. The substantial evidence standard is a highly deferential appellate review standard requiring that factual findings be upheld if they are supported by “such relevant evidence as a reasonable mind might accept as adequate to support a conclusion”. It requires more than a mere scintilla of evidence but less than a preponderance.

Image by Joe Ravi.

Join Pulse+ to comment below, and receive exclusive e-mail analyses.

show less
show more
March 3, 2026
Crime
Immigration

What We Know About Austin Mass Shooter Ndiaga Diagne.

PULSE POINTS

❓WHAT HAPPENED: Authorities are investigating a mass shooting at Buford’s Backyard Beer Garden in Austin, Texas, which left three people dead and more than a dozen injured.

👤WHO WAS INVOLVED: The gunman, identified as 53-year-old Ndiaga Diagne, was shot and killed by police. Victims include Savitha Shan, Ryder Harrington, and Jorge Pedersen.

📍WHEN & WHERE: The shooting occurred early Sunday at a crowded bar in Austin’s busy nightlife district.

💬KEY QUOTE: “Any declarations on what led to that motive would be premature, right? We want to make sure we have our facts 100 percent correct.” – Alex Doran, FBI Special Agent

🎯IMPACT: Investigators are treating the incident as a potential act of terrorism.

IN FULL

Law enforcement has released new information about the perpetrator of Sunday’s mass shooting at Buford’s Backyard Beer Garden in Austin, Texas. Ndiaga Diagne, a 53-year-old naturalized immigrant originally from Senegal, has been officially confirmed as the gunman. Notably, while law enforcement still has not stated that the shooting was an act of terrorism, photos of Diagne’s corpse that have circulated on social media reveal he was wearing a “Property of Allah” hooded sweatshirt and an Iranian flag t-shirt underneath.

The attack left three people dead—Savitha Shan, 21, Ryder Harrington, 19, and Jorge Pedersen, 30—and injured over a dozen others. Meanwhile, Austin Police Chief Lisa Davis confirmed that Diagne legally acquired the firearms used in the attack in San Antonio several years ago.

Authorities also acknowledged they are now investigating the shooting as a possible act of terrorism, but Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) Special Agent Alex Doran claims that it is too early to determine a motive. “Any declarations on what led to that motive would be premature, right? We want to make sure we have our facts 100 percent correct,” he stated.

After Diagne opened fire early Sunday morning, officers responded to reports of the shooting in just 57 seconds, confronting the gunman, who was armed with both a handgun and a rifle. Law enforcement engaged and killed Diagne at the scene.

The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) has confirmed that Diagne entered the United States on March 13, 2002, on a B-2 tourist visa. He became a lawful permanent resident in 2006 after marrying an American citizen and was naturalized in April of 2013.

Join Pulse+ to comment below, and receive exclusive e-mail analyses.

show less
show more