By MEGAN JANETSKY

MEXICO CITY (AP) — Historians and observers accused the Trump administration of trying to rewrite American history to justify its own foreign policy decisions toward Latin America by posting a “historically inaccurate” version of the Mexican-American war.

Related Articles

Federal agents must limit tear gas for now at protests outside Portland ICE building, judge says

House lawmaker raises new concerns over FDA’s ultra-fast drug review program

Judge seems skeptical of legal justification for Pentagon’s punishment of Sen. Mark Kelly

Minnesota athletes head into the Winter Olympics with concerns about turmoil back home

Clintons finalize agreement to testify in House Epstein probe, bowing to threat of contempt vote

The Monday statement from the White House commemorating the anniversary of the war described the conflict as a “legendary victory that secured the American Southwest, reasserted American sovereignty, and expanded the promise of American independence across our majestic continent.” The statement drew parallels between the period in U.S. history and its own increasingly aggressive policies toward Latin America, which it said would “ensure the Hemisphere remains safe.”

“Guided by our victory on the fields of Mexico 178 years ago, I have spared no effort in defending our southern border against invasion, upholding the rule of law, and protecting our homeland from forces of evil, violence, and destruction,” the statement said, though it was unsigned.

In the post, the White House makes no mention of the key role slavery played in the war and glorifies the wider “Manifest Destiny” period, which resulted in the displacement of hundreds of thousands of Native Americans from their land.

Sparking criticism

Alexander Aviña, Latin American history professor at Arizona State University, said the White House statement “underplays the massive amounts of violence that it took to expand” the U.S. to the Pacific shore at a time when the Trump administration has stuck its hand in Latin American affairs in a way not seen in decades, deposing Venezuela’s president, meddling in elections and threatening military action in Mexico and other countries.

“U.S. political leaders since then have seen this as an ugly aspect of U.S. history, this is a pretty clear instance of U.S. imperialism against its southern neighbor,” Aviña said. “The Trump administration is actually embracing this as a positive in U.S. history and framing it – inaccurately historically – as some sort of defensive measure to prevent the Mexico from invading them.”

On Tuesday, criticisms of the White House statement quickly rippled across social media.

Asked about the statement in her morning news briefing, Mexican President Claudia Sheinbaum guffawed, quipping and noting “we have to defend sovereignty.” Sheinbaum, who has walked a tight rope with the Trump administration, has responded to Trump with a balanced tone and occasionally with sarcasm, like when Trump changed the name of the Gulf of Mexico to the Gulf of America.

Historical sticking point

The Mexican-American war (1846–1848) was triggered by long-running border disputes between the U.S. and Mexico and the United States’ annexation of Texas in 1845. For years leading up to the war, Americans had gradually moved into the then-Mexican territory. Mexico had banned slavery and U.S. abolitionists feared the U.S. land grab was in part an attempt to add slave states.

After fighting broke out and successive U.S. victories, Mexico ceded more than 525,000 square miles of territory — including what now comprises Arizona, California, western Colorado, Nevada, New Mexico, Texas and Utah — to the U.S.

The moment turned Texas into a key chess piece during the U.S. Civil War and led former President Ulysses S. Grant to write later that the conflict with Mexico was “one of the most unjust ever waged by a stronger against a weaker nation.”

The Associated Press was formed when five New York City newspapers funded a pony express route through Alabama to bring news of the Mexican War — as it is sometimes known in the U.S. — north faster than the U.S. Post Office could deliver it.

The war continues to be a historical sticking point between the two countries, particularly as Sheinbaum repeatedly reminds Trump that her country is a sovereign nation whenever Trump openly weighs taking military action against Mexican cartels and pressures Mexico to bend to its will.

Rewriting history

The White House statement falls in line with wider actions taken by the Trump administration to mold the federal government’s language around its own creed, said Albert Camarillo, history professor at Stanford University, who described the statement as a “distorted, ahistorical, imperialist version” of the war.

Aviña said the statement serves “to assert rhetorically that the U.S. is justified in establishing its so-called ‘America First’ policy throughout the Americas,” regardless of the historical accuracy.

The Trump administration has ordered the rewriting of history on display at the Smithsonian Institution, saying it was “restoring truth and sanity to American history.”

The administration has scrubbed government websites of history, legal records and data it finds disagreeable. Trump also ordered the government to remove any signs that “inappropriately disparage Americans past or living,” including those making reference to slavery, destruction of Native American cultures and climate change.

“This statement is consistent with so many others that attempt to whitewash and reframe U.S. history and erase generations of historical scholarship,” Camarillo said.

By HEATHER HOLLINGSWORTH, DAVID A. LIEB and MORGAN LEE

Federal immigration officials are scouting warehouses and beginning to purchase some of them to transform into detention and processing facilities.

Related Articles

Federal agents must limit tear gas for now at protests outside Portland ICE building, judge says

House lawmaker raises new concerns over FDA’s ultra-fast drug review program

Judge seems skeptical of legal justification for Pentagon’s punishment of Sen. Mark Kelly

Minnesota athletes head into the Winter Olympics with concerns about turmoil back home

Clintons finalize agreement to testify in House Epstein probe, bowing to threat of contempt vote

Some warehouse owners have decided not to sell to Immigration and Customs Enforcement under pressure from elected officials and advocates. Some cities are issuing statements urging ICE to look elsewhere, and Kansas City has passed a moratorium on non-city-run detention facilities.

ICE has offered few specifics, even to the cities, but said in a statement that the sites wouldn’t be warehouses but “well structured detention facilities” and said it should come as no surprise that the agency is working to expand detention space.

Here is a look at what’s happening:

Arizona

ICE paid $70 million last month for a vast warehouse facility on the northwestern outskirts of Phoenix, according to a deed filed with Maricopa County.

The city of Surprise said in a statement released Friday that it was not aware that there were efforts underway to purchase the building, was not notified of the transaction by any of the parties involved and has not been contacted by the Department of Homeland Security or any federal agency about the intended use of the building.

The statement said federal projects are not subject to local regulations, such as zoning.

Florida

In Orlando, Mayor Buddy Dyer said in a statement last month that the city was advised that it has no legal options to halt a possible ICE facility from opening.

The statement said the city has not been informed by the federal government of potential plans, but a TV reporter spotted a group of private contractors and federal officials touring a 439,945-square-foot industrial warehouse last month. ICE senior advisor David Venturella told a reporter with WFTV at the time that the tour was “exploratory” and that nothing had been decided yet.

City attorney Mayanne Downs said in a letter that “ICE is immune from any local regulation that interferes in any way with its federal mandate.”

Indiana

The town council in Merrillville passed a resolution last week in opposition of ICE converting a warehouse into a processing or detention facility.

The city said it was aware of a tour of the newly constructed, 275,000-square-foot warehouse. But it said it had received no notice or communication from ICE, the Department of Homeland Security or any federal agency about any possible plans.

An earlier statement said that the town was reviewing zoning, land use and occupancy requirements.

Maryland

ICE purchased a warehouse in a county about 60 miles northwest of Baltimore for $102.4 million, a deed signed last month shows. The deed was unearthed by Project Salt Box, a Maryland ICE watchdog.

Officials in Washington County said in a Facebook post that the Department of Homeland Security sent a letter beforehand that it was considering purchasing the warehouse for use as a “new ICE Baltimore Processing Facility.” Cafeterias, bathrooms, health care spaces, tents and guard shacks could be part of the project, according to the letter that was addressed to historic and planning officials in the county.

The county said there wasn’t much they could do because the federal government generally does not need to respect local zoning regulations that conflict with federal mandates.

“Washington County is not able to legally restrict the federal government’s ability to proceed,” the post said.

Minnesota

In the suburbs of Minneapolis, the owners of two warehouses have pulled out of possible ICE deals amid a public outcry.

In Woodbury, Mayor Anne Burt said in a Facebook post last month that city staff had confirmed that a warehouse in the city isn’t being sold or leased to the federal government. She also confirmed at a council meeting that ICE had been interested in the property.

Owners of another warehouse in Shakopee also decided not to move forward, state Rep. Brad Tabke announced last month in a Facebook post.

“They heard you, they listened,” Tabke said.

Mississippi

Federal officials were spotted last month scouting a building in Marshall County, the county’s board vice president, Neil Bennett, told The Commercial Appeal.

Bennett said he was not aware of the visit beforehand because it is a privately owned building, but he heard about it “later on.” The building is listed as available for sale and lease on the website of JLL Properties, a purveyor of commercial real estate.

Bennett told The Associated Press that he didn’t have time to discuss the situation when contacted Tuesday because he was dealing with ongoing power outages in the area. A woman who answered the phone at the county government building said the county isn’t commenting at this time.

Missouri

In Kansas City, the city council passed a five-year moratorium on non-city-run detention facilities on the very day that ICE officials were spotted touring a warehouse.

Manny Abarca, a Jackson County lawmaker, was initially threatened with trespassing when he showed up Jan. 15 at the nearly 1-million-square-foot (92,903 square meters) building on the outskirts of Kansas City.

He said he was eventually allowed inside where Shawn Byers, the deputy field office director for ICE in Chicago, told him that they were scouting for a 7,500-bed site.

Abarca announced last week he was introducing a similar detention moratorium at the county level.

“When federal power is putting communities on edge, local government has a responsibility to act where we have authority,” he said in a statement.

New Hampshire

The town council in Merrimack — population 30,000 — expressed its opposition to an ICE immigration detention and processing center in a January letter to Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem, without receiving a direct response.

Council members fear federal acquisition of a commercial warehouse in Merrimack, 45 miles northwest of Boston, would undermine the city’s property tax base by more than $500,000 a year, shifting costs to other property owners.

The Department of Homeland Security told New Hampshire’s congressional delegation that ICE is “reviewing its detention structure and acquisition strategy to address a historic operational tempo and increasing arrests” and had no new detention centers to announce. The ACLU of New Hampshire said Tuesday that public records show ICE has consulted with state historic preservation officials about development of a 43-acre site at Merrimack.

Democratic state Rep. Rosemarie Rung of Merrimack said her constituents worry about the strain of an immigration detention center on local emergency services and public infrastructure.

“I really suspect that the silent treatment is deliberate so that they can avoid any protests regarding this facility,” Rung said. “It makes us all very suspect.”

New Jersey

In Roxbury, council members passed a resolution saying that they aren’t in support of an ICE facility after township manager J.J. Murphy spotted ICE officials touring a warehouse there last month. The council also pointed out that the township’s zoning regulations prohibit using the warehouse as a detention facility.

ICE’s plans for the site are unclear. Murphy said in an interview with The Associated Press Monday that the township has received no information from federal officials about their plans for the site despite repeated emails.

That hasn’t stopped the township from sharing an internal memo from the city’s engineer about water and sewar issues at the site with the owner of the warehouse. New Jersey Sen. Cory Booker also has toured the site.

New York

Elected officials are pushing back after the Department of Homeland Security posted a notice announcing a proposal to purchase a vacant warehouse in Chester, a town more than an hour north of New York City, for “ICE operations.” ICE said the proposed improvements would include a small guard building and outdoor recreation area.

The notice was needed because the former distribution center for the aftermarket automotive chain PepBoys is in a 100-year flood plain.

New York state Sen. Michelle Hinchey, a Democrat, said in a statement that she would support the town and village boards as they use “every legal, zoning, and environmental tool available” to block the facility.

Oklahoma

In Oklahoma City, Mayor David Holt announced Thursday that he has been informed that the Department of Homeland Security is no longer in talks to acquire a warehouse after the city council urged federal officials to take part in the city’s permitting process.

The department had told the city in a letter last month that it intended to purchase a nearly 27-acre warehouse in the city for ICE operations.

But as crowds opposed to the facility packed a city council meeting this week, the council said the city was exploring legal options. Holt said the property owners then informed him that they are no longer engaged with Homeland Security about a potential acquisition or lease of this property.

“I commend the owners for their decision and thank them on behalf of the people of Oklahoma City,” Holt said. “As Mayor, I ask that every single property owner in Oklahoma City exhibit the same concern for our community in the days ahead.”

Pennsylvania

ICE paid $87.4 million for a nearly 520,000-square-foot warehouse, according to a deed that was recorded Monday in Berks County.

Real estate developers promoted it as a “state-of-the art logistics center” located 45 minutes from Allentown, an hour and a half from Philadelphia and two hours from New York City.

The county spokesman, Jonathan Heintzman, said in an email that the county was informed Monday by the recorder of deeds of the purchase. Heintzman said the county had no prior knowledge of the sale and had no information on future plans for the property.

Texas

In El Paso County, commissioners on Monday formally expressed opposition to the construction of detention facilities amid reports that ICE is eying a warehouse in the county. Commissioners also said they working with other officials to try to get more details.

Other cities in Texas also have been named in unconfirmed reports, but officials haven’t heard any information from federal officials.

Utah

In Salt Lake City, Mayor Erin Mendenhall expressed gratitude last week in her State of the City address that the owners of a warehouse that ICE was eying as a detention facility had announced plans not to sell or lease the property to the federal government.

The announcement from the Ritchie Group, a Utah real estate developer, came after Mendenhall sent a letter saying that the building would need to address a host of requirements before obtaining an occupancy permit.

“But let me be clear: this isn’t just about zoning restrictions,” Mendenhall said. “Such a facility has no place in our city. Whether at that site or anywhere else.”

Virginia

In the suburbs of Richmond, Virginia, officials in Hanover County are asking their attorney to evaluate legal options after the Department of Homeland Security sent a letter confirming its intent to purchase and operate an ICE processing facility in an area that includes retail, hotels and restaurants.

Sean Davis, the county’s board of supervisors chair, said the facility would cut into tax revenue but acknowledged at a packed meeting last week that there was only so much it could do to oppose it.

“The federal government is generally exempt from our zoning regulations,” he said.

Dozens of speakers turned out — some in support of the facility and others opposed.

“You want what’s happening in Minnesota to go down in our own backyard, build that detention center here and that’s exactly what will happen,” Kimberly Matthews of Mechanicsville told supervisors.

By MICHAEL R. SISAK and LARRY NEUMEISTER

NEW YORK (AP) — A deal was reached between lawyers for victims of Jeffrey Epstein and the Justice Department to protect the identities of nearly 100 women whose lives were allegedly harmed after the government began releasing millions of documents last week, a lawyer told a federal judge on Tuesday.

Related Articles

Federal agents must limit tear gas for now at protests outside Portland ICE building, judge says

House lawmaker raises new concerns over FDA’s ultra-fast drug review program

Judge seems skeptical of legal justification for Pentagon’s punishment of Sen. Mark Kelly

Minnesota athletes head into the Winter Olympics with concerns about turmoil back home

Clintons finalize agreement to testify in House Epstein probe, bowing to threat of contempt vote

Judge Richard M. Berman in Manhattan cancelled a hearing scheduled for Wednesday after he was notified by Florida attorney Brittany Henderson that “extensive and constructive discussions” with the government had resulted in an agreement.

Henderson and attorney Brad Edwards had complained to Berman in a letter Sunday that “immediate judicial intervention” was needed after there were thousands of instances when the government had failed to redact names and other personally identifying information of women sexually abused by Epstein.

Among eight women whose comments were included in the lawyers’ Sunday letter, one said the records’ release was “life threatening” while another said she’d gotten death threats and she was forced to shut down her credit cards and banking accounts after their security was jeopardized.

The lawyers had requested that the Justice Department website be temporarily shut down and that an independent monitor be appointed to ensure no further errors occurred.

Henderson did not say what government lawyers said to ensure identities would be protected going forward or what the agreement consisted of.

“We trust that the deficiencies will be corrected expeditiously and in a manner that protects victims from further harm,” she wrote to the judge.

The Justice Department did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

The judge wrote in an order cancelling the Wednesday public hearing that he was “pleased but not surprised that the parties were able to resolve the privacy issues.”

On Monday, U.S. Attorney Jay Clayton in Manhattan wrote in a letter filed in Manhattan federal court that errors blamed on “technical or human error” occurred on redactions during the document release.

He said the Justice Department had improved its protocols to protect victims and had taken down nearly all materials identified by victims or their lawyers, along with many more that the government had found on its own.

Mistakes in the largest release of Epstein documents yet included nude photos showing the faces of potential victims as well as names, email addresses and other identifying information that was either unredacted or not fully obscured.

Most of the materials that were released stemmed from sex trafficking probes of Epstein and his former girlfriend, British socialite Ghislaine Maxwell, who is serving a 20-year prison sentence after she was convicted in December 2021 at a New York trial.

Epstein took his life in a federal jail in New York in August 2019 while awaiting trial on sex trafficking charges.

A 67-year-old former executive director of a St. Paul faith-based nonprofit who had child sexual abuse material at his Roseville home has been spared prison time.

Drew Michael Brooks (Courtesy of the Ramsey County Sheriff’s Office)

At Faith Partners, Drew Michael Brooks provided “leadership, administration and training” to “people of faith to serve with an informed, compassionate response to the risk and prevalence of addiction,” according to a now-deleted webpage.

In May, Brooks was charged in Ramsey County District Court with 12 counts of possession of child pornography after investigators — following tips to the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children — executed a search warrant at his home in 2024 and found 36 printed images of child sexual abuse material and more on his computer.

Brooks told police he is “not necessarily” sexually attracted to children and “described an attraction/repulsion dynamic along with novelty (that) makes him seek the material out,” the criminal complaint read.

Brooks pleaded guilty to three of the dozen counts after reaching a plea deal with the prosecution, which agreed to a downward departure to five years of probation and no additional jail time beyond the day he had served after his arrest and before posting bond.

Judge Thomas Gilligan Jr. followed the plea deal and gave Brooks a five-year stayed prison sentence on Jan. 27, while citing his amenability to probation and sex offender treatment, and his remorse.

Related Articles

St. Paul man gets 7-year prison term for daytime carjacking and armed robbery

Hennepin County Attorney’s Office demands evidence in Renee Good investigation

Resignations in U.S. Attorney’s Office could slow MN fraud cases

Judge says she won’t halt the immigration enforcement surge in Minnesota as a lawsuit proceeds

Journalists Georgia Fort, Don Lemon among 4 more arrested in St. Paul church protest