Texas Weekly Online

Abrego Garcia to appear at ICE office in Baltimore amid talk of Uganda deportation

Abrego Garcia to appear at ICE office in Baltimore amid talk of Uganda deportation

Kilmar Abrego Garcia, the Salvadorian migrant whose months-long court fight has emerged as a flashpoint of the Trump administration’s immigration crackdown, will report Monday to the ICE Field Office in Baltimore, where he is expected to be arrested and deported to Uganda, his attorneys told Fox News Digital. The news caps an extraordinary, six-month court battle over Abrego Garcia’s legal status that has spanned two continents, touched off dozens of lengthy court hearings, and involved three federal judges in Tennessee and Maryland. The Department of Justice has said Abrego Garcia is a member of the El Salvadoran gang MS-13, was caught in Tennessee allegedly driving a van full of illegal migrants, and has been accused by his wife of beating her. His supporters have painted him as a hard-working father who has been vilified by the Trump administration, and have pointed to a judge’s ruling that said the government failed to provide sufficient evidence that he is a member of MS-13. Now, Abrego Garcia is slated for deportation to a third country, after an immigration judge ruled he could not be sent back to his homeland because he faced danger there. The latest development in Abrego Garcia’s saga comes days after the Justice Department offered to send him to Costa Rica on Thursday, in exchange for a guilty plea to criminal charges of human smuggling, brought against him while he was still detained in Salvadorian custody earlier this year. Abrego Garcia declined the offer. ABREGO GARCIA RELEASED FROM JAIL, WILL RETURN TO MARYLAND TO AWAIT TRIAL His attorneys used the spurned offer to bolster their motion to dismiss the criminal case against him on the grounds of “vindictive” and selective prosecution by the Trump administration. They said the plea deal offer shows that the Trump administration had embarked on a pressure campaign against their client, and one in which several government agencies— the Justice Department, ICE, and DHS— were “using their collective powers to force” their client to choose between the plea and Costa Rica, or not accepting the offer, and what they termed the “rendition to Uganda.”  “In conjunction with that proposal, the government produced a letter to Mr. Abrego’s counsel confirming that he could live freely in that country, which would accept him as a refugee or grant him residency status, and promise not to refoul him to El Salvador,” his attorneys said in a court filing on Saturday.  It was not until after he rejected that offer, they said, that the government “informed Mr. Abrego that he has until first thing Monday morning — precisely when he must report to ICE’s Baltimore Field Office — to accept a plea in exchange for deportation to Costa Rica, or else that offer will be off the table forever.” JUDGE PRESSES TRUMP DOJ ON ABREGO GARCIA DEPORTATION; ANSWERS LEAVE COURTROOM IN STUNNED SILENCE The plans were detailed in several documents, including the official notice sent Friday to Abrego Garcia’s attorneys by ICE’s Office of the Principal Legal Adviser (OPLA), and in the Saturday court filing from his attorneys. Abrego Garcia entered the U.S. illegally when he was a teenager, and lived in Maryland with his wife and children, prior to his removal to El Salvador in March. His family sued, saying his deportation to El Salvador violated a 2019 court order blocking him from being sent back to his home country. After months of legal wrangling, the Trump administration in May returned Abrego Garcia to the U.S., where he was slapped with charges of human smuggling; an investigation that originated from a 2022 traffic stop in Tennessee and which began in April.  ABREGO GARCIA LAWYERS FILE MOTION TO DISMISS CRIMINAL CHARGES FROM TRUMP DOJ Should ICE immediately arrest Abrego Garcia, their actions would likely defy a court order handed down by U.S. District Judge Paula Xinis, an Obama appointee, which sought to preclude ICE from immediately arresting Abrego Garcia upon return. Fox News reported Friday that DHS and ICE officials, frustrated with Abrego Grcia’s release, had been consulting with the Justice Department and ICE’s lawyers about how to go about removing him from the U.S. Lawyers for the Justice Department vehemently opposed Abrego Garcia’s release from custody, arguing at an evidentiary hearing earlier this year that he was a danger to the community and describing him as a member of MS-13 — a claim that was rejected by a judge in a ruling earlier this year. Even so, DHS Secretary Kristi Noem blasted Abrego Garcia’s release from criminal custody on Friday, saying in a statement that the Trump administration “will not stop fighting till this Salvadoran man faces justice and is OUT of our country.”  “Kilmar is being made an example of, a martyr for having the courage to stand up to this administration’s illegal deportation practices,” Lydia Walther-Rodriguez, CASA’s Chief of Organizing and Leadership, said in a statement.

Chicago mayor calls Trump’s National Guard plan ‘most flagrant violation of our Constitution’

Chicago mayor calls Trump’s National Guard plan ‘most flagrant violation of our Constitution’

Chicago Mayor Brandon Johnson on Sunday called President Donald Trump’s plan to send the National Guard to Chicago a “flagrant violation of our Constitution.”  “What the President is proposing would be the most flagrant violation of our Constitution in the 21st Century,” Johnson wrote on X. “The City of Chicago does not need a military occupation.” Johnson also shared a clip from his appearance on MSNBC’s “The Weekend.” On the show, Johnson said Chicago has made clear what it needs instead of troops. GOV. PRITZKER SAYS TRUMP TRYING TO ‘MANUFACTURE A CRISIS’ AS ADMIN PLANS NATIONAL GUARD DEPLOYMENT TO CHICAGO “We need to invest in people to ensure that we can build safe and affordable communities. That’s what I’ve done as mayor since assuming office,” he said. “It’s unfortunate that this president is working overtime to divide in his attempt to conquer working families and to conquer cities across America. “But this is clearly a violation of the Constitution, and we’re going to remain firm and vigilant in our commitment to ensure that our democracy is protected, and our humanity is secured,” Johnson added. Trump said Friday that Chicago would be next for federal intervention after efforts in Washington, D.C., conclude. CHICAGO MAYOR CALLS TRUMP’S NATIONAL GUARD DEPLOYMENT PLAN ‘UNCOORDINATED, UNCALLED-FOR AND UNSOUND’ He vowed to send troops elsewhere afterward to “make it safe” as well. “We’re going to make our country very safe,” Trump said. “…Chicago’s a mess.” Soon after Trump’s announcement, Johnson said Chicago had received no formal notice of law enforcement or military deployments and expressed “grave concerns” about any unlawful action. He called the administration’s efforts “uncoordinated, uncalled-for and unsound,” pushing back after Trump labeled him “grossly incompetent” earlier in the day. He noted homicides are down 30%, robberies are down 35% and shootings are down nearly 40% in the past year, arguing federal action would erode trust. TRUMP HINTS AT FEDERAL CRACKDOWN IN CHICAGO AMID ANTI-CRIME PUSH IN DC Johnson released a statement on Sunday, saying he and his team are in communication with counterparts at the county and state levels as Chicago prepares for any possible military deployments to the city. “The Governor, the Cook County Board President, and I are in complete alignment: Chicago is not calling for a military occupation of our city. We are currently evaluating all of our legal options to protect the people of Chicago from unconstitutional federal overreach,” Johnson said. “No matter what happens, the City of Chicago will not waver. We are Chicago. We will not bend or cower, and we will never break.”  The White House suggested that leaders of blue cities like Chicago focus on their own issues rather than criticizing the president for trying to make America great. “If Democrats spent half as much time solving their own city’s crime problems as they did criticizing the President for wanting to Make America Safe Again, their constituents would be much better off,” White House spokesperson Abigail Jackson told Fox News Digital. Chicago, which struggles with poverty and gangs, has a crime rate above the national average. But 2023 data shows several Illinois cities—including Chicago Heights, Danville, Peoria, Rockford and Harvey—had much higher violent crime rates than Chicago. On Aug. 11, Trump federalized D.C.’s Metropolitan Police under the Home Rule Act, which lets the president control the force for 30 days. A week later, six red states pledged 2,000 Guardsmen to D.C., joining agents from the FBI, DEA and ATF. Fox News Digital’s Alexandra Koch contributed to this report.

Trump rips trial judge whose $500M penalty was erased on appeal

Trump rips trial judge whose 0M penalty was erased on appeal

Fresh off a major appellate win, President Donald Trump on Sunday tore into New York Judge Arthur Engoron, who oversaw his state civil fraud trial, calling him “incompetent,” “crooked” and nearly as “corrupt” as New York Attorney General Letitia James. Trump’s barbs followed an appellate ruling that erased a $500 million penalty in James’ high-profile civil fraud case, handing Trump one of his biggest legal wins yet.  “The Appellate Court removed incompetent Judge Engoron, but he refused to go, or even to acknowledge them,” Trump wrote on Truth Social. “He’s a highly overturned, CROOKED Judge, who is retiring into a life of lawsuits, along with his Chief Clerk, soon! He is almost as Corrupt as Leticia James, but not quite!” Engoron presided over the non-jury trial, and Trump allies accused him of bias against the president-elect, his family and his company. Trump was accused of inflating the value of his assets to get more favorable terms from a lender his real estate business worked with. JUDGE WHO FINED TRUMP $500 MILLION GETS THE BOOKS THROWN AT HIM The New York Appellate Division tossed the penalty, ruling the fine was excessive and violated the Eighth Amendment. The five-member panel upheld findings that Trump and his company were liable, affirming James acted within her authority and that injunctive relief against the Trump Organization was appropriate. The ruling left liability intact but wiped out the $364 million penalty plus interest, which totaled about $500 million. TURLEY HAILS TRUMP’S ‘TREMENDOUS VICTORY’ AFTER CIVIL FRAUD PENALTY TOSSED, BLASTS ‘GROTESQUE’ USE OF NY LAW Justice David Friedman dissented in part, arguing James’ true aim was political, and the case should be dismissed. He wrote her “ultimate goal was not market hygiene … but political hygiene, ending with the derailment of President Trump’s political career and the destruction of his real estate business.” Friedman blasted James’ use of Section 63(12) of New York’s Executive Law, which gives the attorney general broad civil fraud powers. He called the use unprecedented and political, giving James “essentially limitless power to prosecute her political enemies.” NY APPEALS COURT THROWS OUT $500M PENALTY AGAINST TRUMP IN LETITIA JAMES CIVIL CASE Friedman said Trump’s business deals involved sophisticated parties who profited without harming the public and concluded he would “reverse the judgment and dismiss the complaint.” With judges split on liability, the case is likely headed to New York’s highest court, the Court of Appeals. James said she will appeal. James, a Democrat elected in 2018, has long targeted Trump. On the campaign trail, she called him an “illegitimate president” and vowed to “use every area of the law” to investigate him and his businesses. Since Trump returned to office, the Justice Department has opened investigations tied to the case brought against Trump and also over allegations she committed mortgage fraud herself. James alleges Trump is using the federal government to target her politically. DOJ is also investigating her for alleged mortgage fraud, including misrepresenting her primary residence on loans in Virginia and New York. She denies the claims and calls the probe a “revenge tour” for the civil fraud suit. Fox News Digital’s Michael Dorgan and Maria Paronich contributed to this report.

Midterm elections are as unpredictable as ever, as 2026 looms

Midterm elections are as unpredictable as ever, as 2026 looms

“Everything changes everything” – Late Baltimore Orioles’ Hall of Fame Manager Earl Weaver Determining the political landscape for next year’s midterm elections may prove to be impossible. At least right now. Midterms have become increasingly challenging to decipher in recent cycles. A learned, Democratic Capitol Hill hand told me after the historic, 63-seat bloodletting by House Democrats in 2010 that the election was “un-modellable.” Midterms are usually a problem for the party of the president. NEW RNC CHAIR JOE GRUTERS VOWS TO ‘RIDE THE PRESIDENT ALL THE WAY TO VICTORY’ IN MIDTERMS That said, Democrats only lost a few House seats in 1962 – immediately following the Cuban Missile Crisis – which nearly brought the U.S. and Soviet Union to nuclear blows. Democrats lost a staggering 47 House seats in 1966 – the first and only midterm of late President Lyndon Johnson. But the electoral rapture barely dented the robust House majority. Democrats controlled 295 House seats before the 1966 midterms, 248 seats afterwards. Still a comfortable margin. Very few political observers expected Democrats to lose control of the House in the legendary 1994 midterms – mainly because the party held the House for 40 consecutive years. It was nearly unthinkable that Democrats could lose the House – simply because it had not happened in decades. Democrats and other political observers excoriated the brilliant Michael Barone when he was the lone commentator to forecast that a Republican flip of the House could be in the offing come the fall of 1994. Barone was right, as Republicans collected 54 seats. Republicans nearly lost control of the House in the 1998 midterms – after they impeached former President Clinton. Republicans then bested the historic norms in 2002 and held the House, boosted by pro-GOP sentiment following 9/11. Democrats managed to win back the House in 2018 – following a similar playbook they deployed in 2006 when they also captured control of the House. Democrats ran a number of moderate ex-military or “national security” Democrats – often in battleground districts. The relative unpopularity of President Donald Trump didn’t help Republicans, either. Former House Speaker Kevin McCarthy, R-Calif., and former House Speaker Newt Gingrich, R-Ga., boasted that Republicans may capture anywhere from 40-60 seats in the 2022 midterms. Republicans did win the House – but barely. CALIFORNIA REPUBLICANS SUE TO STOP NEWSOM, DEMOCRATS FROM PUSHING REDISTRICTING PLAN Which brings us to 2026. The party of the president historically loses around 25 seats in their first midterm. Since President Trump is only the second commander in chief to return to office after a hiatus (late President Grover Cleveland was the first), 2026 serves as a de facto “first midterm.” Trump and the Republicans lost 41 House seats in 2018 – his true first midterm. But calculating what to expect next year is nearly impossible. Republicans now hold a 219 to 212 majority in the House with four vacancies. Three of those seats are solidly Democratic – for now. So for the sake of argument, let’s say the breakdown is 220 to 215. Democrats must only flip a net of three seats to claim the majority. It’s not that easy. First off, we barely understand the 2026 playing field. In baseball, it’s 90 feet between the bases. 60 feet, 6 inches to the pitcher’s mound. Major League Baseball even standardized the size of the dirt infield a couple of years ago. As we head to the playoffs, we know the Milwaukee Brewers and Detroit Tigers are excellent. The New York Mets and New York Yankees should be really good., but they’ve stumbled. The Philadelphia Phillies are excellent – but just lost starting pitcher Zack Wheeler to a major injury. Who could surprise down the stretch? The Cincinnati Reds and Kansas City Royals are hardly out of it. Everyone understands the general variables of Major League Baseball as October nears. That is not the case with the 2026 midterms. Texas Republicans are now determined to redraw congressional districts to favor a GOP pickup of five seats. President Trump has endorsed similar efforts to tilt the field in favor of Republicans in GOP-strongholds like Missouri, Ohio and Indiana. California Gov. Gavin Newsom is threatening to upend the present maps in favor of Democrats in the Golden State. New York Democrats may try the same in the Empire State. So, we don’t even know the basics. How far from the plate to the mound in the 2026 midterms? How large is the strike zone? Five balls for a walk or the standard four? Twelve players in the field or nine? Redistricting could also hamper Republicans – forcing the party to suddenly defend a number of more competitive seats. Democrats could suddenly have more opportunities where none existed in 2024. But we aren’t sure. Maybe everything is status quo and Democrats only need to flip those three seats. We also don’t know how the relative unpopularity of President Trump may impact voters. He historically defies political gravity. Plus, the Democratic brand remains utterly toxic. Party registration is down for the Democrats – big time. POLITICAL ANALYST SAYS DEMOCRATS ARE ALREADY WORRIED ABOUT THE ‘BIG PROBLEM’ OF WINNING BACK VOTERS FOR 2028 That said, could Republicans reap the benefits of passing the hallmark of their legislative agenda – the One, Big, Beautiful Bill Act? Some conservatives doubt that the GOP has sufficiently sold the public on that legislation, especially during the August recess. Democrats are banking on the possibility that the legislation will backfire on the GOP in next year’s midterms. We also don’t know if President Trump not being on the ballot in 2026 is similar to the Republican midterm performance in 2018. It’s clear that not having Mr. Trump on the ballot in 2018 undercut the party at the polls. Republicans could also face a backlash from moderates and swing voters if they are dissatisfied with the performance of the president. We certainly saw that after voters tired of the polices of former Presidents George H.W. Bush in