ICE ‘Task Force’ Agreements Expand to Galveston, Beaumont

posted in: All news | 0

Nearly 1.5 million Texans now live in jurisdictions where sheriffs or police chiefs have agreed to train some of their officers to act as immigration agents in the streets of their communities. These agreements currently cover around 30 Texas law enforcement agencies including: the sheriff’s departments in the populous counties of Jefferson and Smith, home to Beaumont and Tyler; sheriffs in sparsely populated South Texas counties along much of the corridor from the Rio Grande Valley to San Antonio; and municipal police departments in the small towns of Nixon and Splendora.

Last week, the sheriff’s office in Galveston County, where more than 360,000 people live, also inked an agreement—making it the most populous local jurisdiction in Texas to sign one so far.

These arrangements are what are known as 287(g) “task force” model agreements, which essentially deputize local cops as federal Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents after they’ve received training. Officers gain the powers to “interrogate any alien or person believed to be an alien as to his right to be or remain in the United States”; arrest without a warrant anyone the officer believes “is in the United States in violation of law and is likely to escape before a warrant can be obtained”; execute warrants for immigration violations; and prepare immigration charging documents. When exercising this newfound authority, local officers must seek guidance from an ICE supervisor—but are allowed to do so “as soon as is practicable” after exercising the authority. ICE pays for the required training but does not reimburse local agencies for their time spent enforcing immigration law.

Two other forms of 287(g) agreements exist; both are limited to the county jail setting and have sparked far less controversy than the task force model, which was revived by President Donald Trump earlier this year more than a decade after it was terminated amid controversy over racial profiling. Since Trump’s inauguration, ICE has inked more than 700 new 287(g) agreements nationwide including more than 400 task forces. (The full list, which is updated frequently, is available on ICE’s website.)

“The administration is doing everything possible to arrest and deport as many immigrants as possible, including those who have pending applications or court processes to obtain protection,” said Adriel Orozco, senior policy counsel at the American Immigration Council. “Given the well-documented history of racial profiling, particularly related to the task force model but also the use of the partnership to funnel suspected immigrants into jails, this expansion will likely lead to an enduring distrust of these institutions.”

Orozco said the program may soon be supercharged by Congress’ recent tax cuts-and-spending bill, HR 1, which contains $75 billion for ICE detention and removal operations. The bill authorizes new spending on the 287(g) program, and an earlier House version of the legislation specified the amount as $650 million. Those funds are expected to go to salaries for supervising ICE agents and the costs to conduct 287(g) training, Orozco said, but not reimbursement of local law enforcement partners. ICE did not respond to questions or a request for comment.

In June, Governor Greg Abbott signed Senate Bill 8, which will require nearly all Texas sheriffs to request and sign 287(g) agreements with ICE by the end of next year. The law does not specify what type of 287(g) agreement they must seek.  

Two state agencies—the attorney general’s office and the National Guard—have also signed task force agreements, though neither agency answered Texas Observer questions about how they plan to work with ICE. The Guard is also subject to a separate agreement, per a different federal statute, that was signed by the governor early this year and allows soldiers to enforce immigration law in tandem with Border Patrol.

In Texas, the Observer has found that ICE has begun rolling out the required training for its task force partners. In Smith County, nestled in East Texas’ piney woods, Sheriff Larry Smith said that he and two dozen deputies have finalized their 40-hour online training. But the county’s top cop is still not sure what their next steps are. “We’re waiting to hear from ICE or the Department of Homeland Security to see what capacity that they might want to work with us in and then go from there,” he said. Despite the task force program’s checkered past of racial profiling, Smith said his deputies won’t start policing based on skin color. “We’re not going to … stop somebody tomorrow and if they look like they’re of Hispanic heritage, we’re not going to ask them, ‘Let me see your papers. Are you here legally? Are you not here legally?’ We’re going to ask to see their driver’s license if we’re stopping that vehicle, and, now, if they don’t have a driver’s license, then go with further steps that you try to determine who they are.”

Over in Brooks County, Sheriff Urbino “Benny” Martinez said most of his deputies hadn’t completed the training process yet. Matt Benacci, spokesperson for the Kinney County Sheriff’s Office, which has been subject to criticism in recent years for its cozy relationship with vigilante groups, said he was unsure if training had begun. Deputies in Jefferson County, home to 250,000 residents, have not yet completed training, a chief deputy said, and neither had those in Galveston County according to a sheriff’s sergeant. 

In one case, the Observer found that ICE had incorrectly listed an agency as having signed a 287(g) task enforcement agreement in its public-facing spreadsheet. In early July, the four-officer police department of Southside Place, a wealthy enclave city of 1,800 residents completely surrounded by Houston, was marked as having a task force deal.  

“They might be getting ahead of their skis,” said Southside Place Police Chief Don McCall when reached by phone on July 14. “This is something that has to be presented to city council, and we don’t even meet with city council till next month.” ICE later removed his department from its list of participating agencies. 

Then, on Tuesday, McCall told the Observer that because he’s planning to retire at the end of the year, he’d decided not to pursue the task force agreement with ICE anymore.

The post ICE ‘Task Force’ Agreements Expand to Galveston, Beaumont appeared first on The Texas Observer.

New whistleblower emerges against Trump lawyer ahead of confirmation vote

posted in: All news | 0

By MARY CLARE JALONICK and ERIC TUCKER, Associated Press

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Senate is set to vote as soon as Tuesday evening to confirm former Trump lawyer Emil Bove for a lifetime appointment as a federal appeals court judge despite vocal Democratic opposition and a new whistleblower complaint against him.

The whistleblower provided Congress with an audio recording of Bove that runs contrary to some of his testimony at his confirmation hearing last month, according to two people familiar with the recording. The audio is from a private video conference call at the Department of Justice in February in which Bove, a top official at the department, discussed his handling of the dismissed corruption case against New York City Mayor Eric Adams, according to transcribed quotes from the audio reviewed by The Associated Press.

The people spoke on the condition of anonymity because the whistleblower has not made the recording public. The whistleblower’s claims were first reported by the Washington Post.

Sen. Susan Collins, R-Maine, departs the chamber as the Senate holds a procedural vote on the nomination of Emil Bove, who served on President Donald Trump’s criminal defense team, to be a U.S. Circuit Court judge for the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, at the Capitol in Washington, Thursday, July 24, 2025. (AP Photo/J. Scott Applewhite)

Democrats attempt to block Bove

The new evidence comes as Democrats try to delay Bove’s confirmation and convince more Republicans to vote against him. A different whistleblower, a fired department lawyer, said earlier this month that Bove had suggested the Trump administration may need to ignore judicial commands — a claim that Bove denies.

None of that evidence has so far been enough to sway Senate Republicans — all but two of them voted last week to move forward on his nomination as Senate Republicans defer to Trump on virtually all of his picks.

A former federal prosecutor in the Southern District of New York, Bove was on Trump’s legal team during his New York hush money trial and defended Trump in the two federal criminal cases brought by the Justice Department. If confirmed by the Senate, he’ll serve on the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, which hears cases from Delaware, New Jersey and Pennsylvania.

Bove was at the forefront of the department’s decision to dismiss the case against Adams and also efforts to investigate department officials who were involved in the prosecutions of hundreds of Trump supporters who were involved in the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the Capitol. Bove has accused FBI officials of “insubordination” for refusing to hand over the names of agents who investigated the attack and ordered the firing of a group of prosecutors involved in those Jan. 6 criminal cases.

At his confirmation hearing earlier this month, Bove addressed criticism of his tenure head-on, telling lawmakers he understands some of his decisions “have generated controversy.” But Bove said he has been inaccurately portrayed as Trump’s “henchman” and “enforcer” at the department.

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., speaks with reporters as the Senate holds its first procedural vote on Emil Bove’s nomination for the 3rd Circuit Court of Appeals, at the Capitol in Washington, Tuesday, July 22, 2025. (AP Photo/J. Scott Applewhite)

A February call casts a shadow over his confirmation

Senators at the Judiciary Committee hearing asked Bove about the February 14 call with lawyers in the Justice Department’s Public Integrity Section, which had received significant public attention because of his unusual directive that the attorneys had an hour to decide among themselves who would agree to file on the department’s behalf the motion to dismiss the case against Adams.

The call was convened amid significant upheaval in the department as prosecutors in New York who’d handled the matter, as well as some in Washington, resigned rather than agree to dispense with the case.

According to the transcript of the February call, Bove remarked near the outset that interim Manhattan U.S. Attorney Danielle Sassoon “resigned about ten minutes before we were going to put her on leave pending an investigation.” But when asked at the hearing whether he had opened the meeting by emphasizing that Sassoon and another prosecutor had refused to follow orders and that Sassoon was going to be reassigned before she resigned, Bove answered with a simple, “No.”

At another moment, Bove said he did not recall saying words that the transcript of the call reflects him as having said — that whoever signed the motion to dismiss the Adams case would emerge as leaders of the section.

Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, right, greets Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., as the panel meets to advance President Donald Trump’s nominees for the federal bench, including Emil Bove, Trump’s former defense lawyer, at the Capitol in Washington, Thursday, July 17, 2025. (AP Photo/J. Scott Applewhite)

Republicans decry ‘eleventh-hour’ whistleblower claims

A spokeswoman for Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, said that Grassley’s staff has spoken to more than a dozen people who have reached out to the committee, but that the most recent “eleventh-hour” whistleblower allegations “reek of a bad faith attempt to sink a nominee who’s already received committee approval.”

At a separate committee meeting earlier this month, when Democrats walked out in protest, Grassley said that Bove “has a strong legal background and has served his country honorably.”

Since then, Democrats have tried to delay the confirmation, calling for additional votes as Republicans quickly moved his nomination to the floor. But there is little they can do to stop it. If all Democrats vote against Bove, Senate Republicans can lose three GOP votes and still confirm him if Vice President JD Vance breaks a 50-50 tie.

On Tuesday, Democratic Sens. Cory Booker of New Jersey and Adam Schiff of California called on the Justice Department’s inspector general to tell senators whether Bove was under investigation.

“It is imperative that senators exercise their constitutional duty of advice and consent with full knowledge of Mr. Bove’s actions,” Booker and Schiff wrote the inspector general.

Related Articles


22 Democratic-led states sue Trump administration over Planned Parenthood funding cuts


Trump administration wants Harvard to pay far more than Columbia as part of settlement


Lawyers for Epstein’s former girlfriend say she’s open to interview with Congress, if given immunity


Trump gave the USOPC cover on its transgender athlete policy change. It could end up in court anyway


Changes to federal student loans leave aspiring medical students scrambling to cover costs

It’s not the first whistleblower claim against Bove

The first whistleblower complaint against Bove came from a former Justice Department lawyer who was fired in April after conceding in court that Kilmar Abrego Garcia, a Salvadoran man who had been living in Maryland, was mistakenly deported to an El Salvador prison.

That lawyer, Erez Reuveni, described efforts by top Justice Department officials in the weeks before his firing to stonewall and mislead judges to carry out deportations championed by the White House.

Reuveni described a Justice Department meeting in March concerning Trump’s plans to invoke the Alien Enemies Act over what the president claimed was an invasion by the Venezuelan gang Tren de Aragua. Reuveni said Bove raised the possibility that a court might block the deportations before they could happen. Reuveni claims Bove used a profanity in saying the department would need to consider telling the courts what to do and “ignore any such order,” Reuveni’s lawyers said in the filing.

Bove said he has “no recollection of saying anything of that kind.”

Illinois Sen. Dick Durbin, the top Democrat on the Judiciary panel, said that Bove has used his position “to weaponize the Department of Justice against the president’s enemies.”

Republican Sens. Lisa Murkowski of Alaska and Susan Collins of Maine were the only Republicans to oppose moving forward with Bove’s nomination last week.

“We have to have judges who will adhere to the rule of law and the Constitution and do so regardless of what their personal views may be,” Collins said in a statement. “Mr. Bove’s political profile and some of the actions he has taken in his leadership roles at the Department of Justice cause me to conclude he would not serve as an impartial jurist.”

22 Democratic-led states sue Trump administration over Planned Parenthood funding cuts

posted in: All news | 0

By SOPHIE AUSTIN, Associated Press

SACRAMENTO, Calif. (AP) — More than 20 mostly Democratic-led states sued the Trump administration Tuesday over its efforts to cut Medicaid payments to the nation’s largest abortion provider — Planned Parenthood.

The move comes in response to the package of tax breaks and spending cuts Trump signed earlier this month. The new cuts are focused on services such as cancer screenings and tests, birth control and treatment for sexually transmitted infections — by ending Medicaid reimbursements for a year for major providers of family planning services.

The cuts apply to groups that received more than $800,000 from Medicaid in 2023. The goal was to target Planned Parenthood, but the legislation also affected a major medical provider in Maine.

California, New York, Washington, D.C., Connecticut and other states argue in a complaint filed in the U.S. District Court for Massachusetts that the provision’s language is unclear about which groups it applies to. They also say it retaliates against Planned Parenthood for advocating for abortion access, violating the free speech clause of the First Amendment.

The states are asking that the portion of the law be blocked and deemed unconstitutional.

The cuts threaten health care access for many low-income Americans, California Attorney General Rob Bonta said at a news conference.

“This attack isn’t just about abortion,” the Democrat said. “It’s about denying vulnerable communities access to care they rely on every day.”

But the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, named a defendant in the suit, defended the provision.

“States should not be forced to fund organizations that have chosen political advocacy over patient care,” spokesperson Andrew G. Nixon said in an email. “It is a shame that these democrat attorney generals seek to undermine state flexibility and disregard longstanding concerns about accountability.”

Related Articles


Trump administration wants Harvard to pay far more than Columbia as part of settlement


Lawyers for Epstein’s former girlfriend say she’s open to interview with Congress, if given immunity


Trump gave the USOPC cover on its transgender athlete policy change. It could end up in court anyway


Changes to federal student loans leave aspiring medical students scrambling to cover costs


With AI plan, Trump keeps chipping away at a foundational environmental law

Maine Family Planning, which operates 18 clinics offering a range of services across the state, and Planned Parenthood Federation of America filed separate lawsuits earlier this year challenging the cuts. Planned Parenthood said although it is not specifically named in the law, the provision was meant to affect its nearly 600 centers in 48 states. About a third of those clinics risk closure because of the legislation, which would strip care from more than 1 million patients, the group argues.

A federal judge on Monday ruled Planned Parenthood clinics nationwide must continue to receive Medicaid reimbursements.

Maine Family Planning said it had enough in its reserves to keep seeing patients covered by Medicaid without reimbursements only through October. About half of the group’s patients not seeking abortions are enrolled in Medicaid.

The states’ suit filed Tuesday argues that by pushing Planned Parenthood clinics to close or cut services, it could increase the states’ medical care costs in the long term. Otherwise the cuts will make states use their own funds to keep health centers open.

“Either we have to comply and violate Planned Parenthood’s constitutional rights and then push people to alternative providers that don’t exist, who don’t have the capacity to pick up the slack, or we have to spend upwards of $6 million or more to cover (those services),” said William Tong, Connecticut’s Democratic attorney general.

Federal law already bars taxpayer money from covering most abortions, but some conservatives argue abortion providers use Medicaid money for other health services to subsidize abortion.

Associated Press writer Susan Haigh in Hartford, Connecticut, contributed to this report.

Austin is a corps member for The Associated Press/Report for America Statehouse News Initiative. Report for America is a nonprofit national service program that places journalists in local newsrooms to report on undercovered issues. Follow Austin on X: @sophieadanna

Starbucks looks to protein drinks and other new products to turn around lagging US sales next year

posted in: All news | 0

By DEE-ANN DURBIN, Associated Press

Starbucks said Tuesday it’s confident that new products coming next year — including a cold foam protein drink, coconut water-based beverages and improved baked goods — will help turn around the company’s lagging U.S. sales.

In the meantime, slow U.S. demand continues to be a drag on the company’s results.

Related Articles


Everything we know about the victims of the New York City shooting


What to know about the brain-eating amoeba that killed a boy swimming in a lake


Lawyers for Epstein’s former girlfriend say she’s open to interview with Congress, if given immunity


What Americans think about Israel’s military action in Gaza, according to a new Gallup poll


A DACA recipient accidentally drove into Mexico. Now he’s being fast-tracked for deportation

Starbucks reported that its revenue rose 4% to $9.5 billion in its fiscal third quarter. That was better than the $9.3 billion Wall Street expected, according to analysts polled by FactSet.

But same-store sales, or sales at locations open at least a year, fell 2% in the April-June period. That was a bigger decline than Wall Street expected, and it was the sixth straight quarter that the Seattle-based company reported lower same-store sales.

Same-store sales were up in China, Starbucks’ second-largest market, but they fell 2% in the U.S.

Starbucks is spending heavily to turn that around. One big expense in the third quarter was a two-day meeting in Las Vegas, where the company hosted 14,000 store managers and regional leaders.

The company said its net income fell 47% to $558 million in the April-June period. Adjusted for one-time items, its earnings fell 46% to 50 cents per share for the quarter. That was lower than the 65 cents analysts had forecast.

Starbucks shares rose 1.8% in after-hours trading.