HUD proposes rule that would force noncitizens from public housing

posted in: All news | 0

By MICHAEL CASEY

The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development on Thursday proposed a rule that would limit public housing mostly to citizens, which advocates fear could lead to tens of thousands of people being evicted.

Related Articles


Federal judge accuses Trump administration of ‘terror’ against immigrants in scathing ruling


Lawmaker says the US deported a baby with bronchitis, while authorities say the child was medically cleared


New Trump administration order could lead to the detention of thousands of legal refugees


Justice Dept. lawyer is found in contempt by federal judge in Minnesota


Minnesota Capitol rally calls for state aid following immigration crackdown

The rule, published in the Federal Register, calls for limiting funding for those in public housing and other HUD-related housing to citizens and eligible noncitizens. The rule would require every resident in HUD-funded housing to show proof of citizenship or eligible status, including those 62 years and older who previously only had to show proof of age.

The measure would effectively bar mixed status families —- where some household members are eligible for help — from housing and is part of the government’s immigration crackdown. A similar rule was proposed but never finalized during the first Trump administration and is mentioned as a policy priority in the conservative blueprint Project 2025,

“Under President Trump’s leadership, the days of illegal aliens, ineligibles, and fraudsters gaming the system and riding the coattails of American taxpayers are over,” HUD Secretary Scott Turner said in a statement.. “HUD’s proposed rule will guarantee that all residents in HUD-funded housing are eligible tenants. We have zero tolerance for pushing aside hardworking U.S. citizens while enabling others to exploit decades-old loopholes.”

The proposed rule will be made official when it’s published in the Federal Register on Friday. HUD did not answer how long it may take before the rule takes effect.

Housing advocates were quick to criticize the move.

“Our country can ensure that every one of us, no matter where we come from or what language we speak, has a safe home,” Shamus Roller, the executive director of the National Housing Law Project said in a statement. “Instead, Trump is trying to evict immigrant families, citizen and non-citizen, from HUD housing.

In December, the left-leaning Center on Budget and Policy Priorities estimated that up to 20,000 families or as many as 80,000 people could lose assistance due to changes in eligibility that would overturn a rule that has been in place for decades.

The impact of the rule could affect many more people who struggle to provide proper documentation. About 3.8 million adults with citizenship lack any form of documentation proving their citizenship, and another 17.5 million cannot easily get the documents.

“Everyone deserves an affordable home, including our neighbors, friends, and coworkers who are immigrants,” said Sonya Acosta, a senior policy analyst with the Center. “This rule would force 20,000 families with mixed immigration statuses to make the agonizing choice between losing the assistance that helps them pay rent every month or separating their family. People without a documented immigration status have never been eligible for rental assistance.”

Trump’s New Wall Will Destroy Irreplaceable Border Treasures—Unless Congress Acts

posted in: All news | 0

The procession of more than a thousand people walked from Our Lady of Guadalupe church in Mission to the grounds of La Lomita chapel, the historic riverside mission which gave the border town its name. It was August 2017, early in Donald Trump’s first term, and the marchers carrying signs that read “Salvar La Lomita” and “Save Our River” knew that the new president planned to turn a dirt levee, running about 100 feet north of the modest white house of worship, into a border wall—30 feet tall and consisting of a concrete slab surmounted by steel posts, topped with floodlights and cameras, with a patrol road and a 150-foot-wide “enforcement zone” extending from its base and encompassing the chapel. 

The next day, the people brought their protest to the Santa Ana National Wildlife Refuge. News had leaked that Santa Ana, set aside as habitat for the migratory birds that fill South Texas’ skies every autumn and spring and for the endangered ocelots that move silently through a wildlife corridor alongside the Rio Grande, was slated for the first new stretch of wall. The Trump administration would ultimately condemn the property of hundreds of landowners along the planned wall’s path, but those court proceedings would take time. The wildlife refuge was federally owned, so the conversion of the levee that ran between the visitors center and the trails could start right away. Those who cared about the refuge joined hands, forming a line nearly a mile long on the levee and denouncing its planned replacement with a barrier that would devastate the refuge. 

These protests and the many that followed repeated the same refrain: “No Border Wall.” Some politicians took notice.

Protesters form a human chain on the levee at the Santa Ana refuge in 2017 (Eugenio del Bosque Gomez)

At the La Lomita rally, U.S. Representative Vicente Gonzalez spoke against the walls that would hit his constituents, and his colleague Filemon Vela, whose district included Santa Ana, spoke at a protest at the refuge. 

Congressman Henry Cuellar, whose district then included La Lomita, eventually inserted a provision into the appropriations bills that paid for wall construction which prohibited the use of those funds in places where protests had made the news: Santa Ana and La Lomita, Bentsen State Park, the National Butterfly Center, historic cemeteries, and wildlife refuges around the SpaceX launch site. 

In doing so, Cuellar and his congressional colleagues missed the larger message of the protests—No Border Wall—a demand that was not restricted to a few select locations. But at least these places would be spared from the destruction that subsequently ripped apart so much of the border.

Then, last July, Congress passed the so-called One Big Beautiful Bill, a budget reconciliation act that, among other onerous provisions, gave the Trump administration $46.5 billion for border barrier construction (more money, based on prior costs, than would be needed to wall off the entire U.S. Mexico divide). Dozens of federal laws have already been waived, and billions of dollars worth of contracts have already been awarded, to build 629 miles of new border wall and install 536 miles of river buoys. 

Crucially, the One Big Beautiful Bill did not include the provision that spared La Lomita, Santa Ana, or any other sensitive location—meaning this new tranche of funding is not explicitly subject to the restrictions that previously shielded these places—and a map posted by U.S. Customs and Border Protection indicates that Trump’s new walls will tear through them.

The La Lomita chapel in 2018 (Gus Bova)

The Trump administration claims that border walls and river buoys will halt the cross-border movement of people, but both academic and government studies, not to mention the ladders one can find left alongside walls for the past decade, show that a desperate or determined person will not be so easily stopped. Walls do, on the other hand, block terrestrial animals. Habitat loss is the primary reason that ocelots are endangered, and while they have no problem walking up and over a gently sloping levee, they cannot build a ladder to climb a 30-foot-tall vertical wall. Walls through Santa Ana, Bentsen State Park, and the National Butterfly Center would restrict animal movement, bottling up wild creatures in bits of forest that are too small to support them.

The Lower Rio Grande Valley is also periodically lashed by hurricanes, something that is sure to happen with greater frequency and ferocity as climate change intensifies. When a 2010 hurricane caused the Rio Grande to swell, inundating for months the land between the river and some stretches of levee that had been converted to border walls under Barack Obama, animals that encountered sheer concrete and steel barriers instead of sloping earthen levees were trapped. After the water receded, U.S. Fish and Wildlife staff found the remains of hundreds of animals that drowned. Border walls had turned wildlife refuges into death traps for the animals they were meant to protect. This will happen again and again if Santa Ana, Bentsen, and the National Butterfly Center are walled off.

The candles that flicker on La Lomita’s altar testify to its continued place in the religious lives of the faithful. Though historic, it is not a museum; it is a house of worship. The chapel would be in a no-man’s-land between the new border wall and the river, and just as with the nature preserves there is no word on how, or if, anyone will be able to reach it. It is possible there will be nothing left to reach, as the chapel sits within the enforcement zone projected to extend out from the wall. If the Trump administration does not alter its design, the chapel may be leveled.

When word got out early this month that the coming border walls could desecrate the chapel and devastate the nature preserves, people once again gathered at Santa Ana. They called upon elected officials to protect these places—and all of the threatened border communities and borderlands—from these mindlessly destructive (and staggeringly expensive) monstrosities. 

So far, politicians have not gotten the message.

Inside La Lomita in February (Scott Nicol)

If Representatives Gonzalez and Cuellar, or other Congress members who care about the Texas border, don’t act soon to explicitly reapply the protections during the ongoing Department of Homeland Security funding fight, there’s no reason to think the Trump administration will respect the Valley’s treasured spaces. Democrats may bemoan their lack of a majority in the U.S. House—but they should realize that they need to give their constituents, including those on the border, a reason to give them one. (Meanwhile, walls could be headed for the remote Big Bend region too, an area even many Republicans traditionally believed had no need for a barrier.)

Santa Ana and La Lomita are now in the gerrymandered district held by Republican Representative Monica De La Cruz, who has not uttered a word in their defense. She voted for the One Big Beautiful Bill and trumpeted its border wall funding, forgetting that she was sent to Washington, D.C., to work on behalf of South Texans, including her constituents whose farms and businesses are set to be condemned and walled off. Senators Ted Cruz and John Cornyn likewise voted to fund the destruction of the southern border of the state they represent.

For them, the border wall is just politics. 

But their actions or inactions, and their votes, have real-world impacts, because the concrete damage inflicted by border walls and river buoys will be permanent. If border walls destroy La Lomita, Santa Ana, Bentsen State Park, and the National Butterfly Center, they will not be magically resurrected when the White House has a less malignant occupant. Once walls are built, history shows that administrations of either party will maintain and even expand them.

The levee running through the National Butterfly Center in 2018 (Gus Bova)

Representatives Cuellar, Gonzalez, and De la Cruz, and Senators Cornyn and Cruz, need to start working for the border residents who sent them to Washington and fight to reinstate protections for these special places. Beyond that, they need to stop viewing the demolition of the borderlands as a political game, and redirect the $46.5 billion set to be wasted on walls toward beneficial federal projects. Saving Santa Ana, La Lomita, and other sensitive sites in and beyond the Valley is an important first step.

In a statement to the Texas Observer, Congressman Henry Cuellar said the following: “I secured these site protections during the first Trump administration through the appropriations process, and they were enacted into law. They remain the law today. Congress deliberately adopted exemptions to protect historic, environmental, and community sites in South Texas, including La Lomita Historical Park and the National Butterfly Center, from federally funded wall construction. I’m also working to protect sensitive sites in Webb and Zapata counties.”

Cuellar’s office also provided a copy of  appropriations language, which passed the U.S. House last month but not the Senate, that applied the site protections to that appropriations bill but did not explicitly do so for the earlier reconciliation act.

The congressman added: “As new funding proposals move forward—including provisions in the so-called One Big Beautiful Bill—I’m working to ensure those same legal protections continue to apply and these sites remain protected. You cannot circumvent established appropriations law. It’s not how the power of the purse works.”

The Observer contacted the offices of Congress members Vicente Gonzalez and Monica De La Cruz, but they did not provide comment. 

The post Trump’s New Wall Will Destroy Irreplaceable Border Treasures—Unless Congress Acts appeared first on The Texas Observer.

US pays about $160 million of the nearly $4 billion it owes the United Nations

posted in: All news | 0

UNITED NATIONS (AP) — The United States has paid about $160 million of the nearly $4 billion it owes the United Nations, the U.N. said Thursday.

The Trump administration’s payment is earmarked for the U.N.’s regular operating budget, U.N. spokesman Stéphane Dujarric told The Associated Press.

The U.N. has said the United States owes $2.196 billion to its regular budget, including $767 million for this year, and $1.8 billion for a separate budget for the far-flung U.N. peacekeeping operations.

U.N. Secretary-General Antonio Guterres warned last month that the world body faces “imminent financial collapse” unless its financial rules are overhauled or all 193 member nations pay their dues, a message clearly directed at the United States.

The disclosure of the payment came as President Donald Trump convened the first meeting of the Board of Peace, a new initiative many see as his attempt to rival the U.N. Security Council’s role in preventing and ending conflict around the world.

Trump has said the United Nations has not lived up to its potential. His administration did not pay anything to the United Nations in 2025, and it has withdrawn from U.N. organizations, including the World Health Organization and the cultural agency UNESCO, while pulling funding from dozens of others.

U.N. officials have said 95% of the arrears to the U.N.’s regular budget is from the United States.

Related Articles


FCC chairman says the agency is investigating ABC’s ‘The View’ over equal time rule


Federal judge accuses Trump administration of ‘terror’ against immigrants in scathing ruling


Slavery exhibit removed by Trump administration is returning to Independence Mall in Philadelphia


US civil rights agency sues Coca-Cola distributor for excluding men from casino work trip


Governors arrive in Washington eager to push past Trump’s partisan grip

Music Review: Mumford & Sons finds a new folk rhythm on the collaborative ‘Prizefighter’

posted in: All news | 0

By ELISE RYAN

Less than a year since the release of Mumford & Sons’ long-awaited fifth studio album “Rushmere,” the English folk rock band is back with a sixth: “Prizefighter,” an introspective but still upbeat return to their stomp-clap form, now bolstered by new voices.

The album finds the band, made up of lead singer Marcus Mumford, Ted Dwane and Ben Lovett, alongside many collaborators. Aaron Dessner of The National coproduces all 14 tracks; features from Chris Stapleton, Gigi Perez of “Sailor Song” viral fame, Hozier and Gracie Abrams punctuate the album. Brandi Carlile, Finneas, Kevin Garrett, Jon Bellion and Justin Vernon of Bon Iver round out the writing credits, alongside Dessner and the band.

Related Articles


Travel: Trekking around the Himalayan foothills in northern India


27 independent press books to add to your 2026 TBR list


Gretchen’s table: Make cheesy broccoli chicken bake like you remember


U2 release ‘a song of fury’ about Renee Good, who was killed by ICE agents


Where to celebrate the Lunar New Year in Minneapolis-St. Paul

Carlile provided inspiration for the single “Rubber Band Man,” a banjo and acoustic guitar-set reflection on flexibility and recovery featuring verses from Hozier. (Mumford said lyrics for the song came to Carlile in a dream.)

Hozier’s verse, lyrically dense but sonically open, distills the song’s thesis: “But don’t hold to yourself / With hard mortar and stone / Be a rubber band man / Make the water your bones.”

There are some worthy additions to the band’s canon between those features: “Begin Again” and “Stay” are fast-paced and earnest while the poetic closer “Clover” sees Mumford fall into a lullaby-like pace that, sung atop a piano melody, recalls the aching movie musical hit “Falling Slowly” by Glen Hansard and Markéta Irglová. “Conversation With My Son (Gangsters & Angels)” is lyrically repetitive, but still moving.

The feature tracks feel like tentpoles for the project, offering unique and memorable takes on the genre when other songs start to blend together. “Here,” with Stapleton, is the simplest, opening the album with a country-tinged, guitar and drum-forward ballad. Abrams’ whisper-sung tones add layers to Mumford’s on “Badlands.” The lyrics have a sentiment the two artists likely share, a desire to push limits: “Running away from a tame life / Running away like a wild child / Give me a vision, give me a dime.”

Perez’s rich vocals demand attention in the soaring duet “Icarus.” After Mumford’s introduction, Perez offers a warning over piano and guitar. “You’re a fool, you’re a climber / You shoulda called it a night.” Perez and the band sing together at the song’s climax — also, the album’s climax — shakers, maracas and synth bass filling out the track. “I was blinded, I was in love,” they sing together. “But then all at once / I was back to where I begun / I was burned by morning / I got too close to the sun.”

This collaborative approach reflects the spirit of Mumford & Sons’ unique summer tour last year, which saw the group travel by train from Louisiana to Vermont with dozens of musicians and crew, continuing a journey started during a 2011 version of the Railroad Revival Tour. Stops along the way brought out the likes of Nathaniel Rateliff, Trombone Shorty, Lucius, Chris Thile, Maggie Rogers, Noah Kahan and Lainey Wilson, among others. Onstage together, they sang a mix of the band’s songs, featured guests’ songs and other covers.

As the band sings (together) on the uplifting “Run Together”: “But when we run we run together / When we’re apart we fall apart.” Collaboration is king.

“Prizefighter” by Mumford & Sons

Three and a half stars out of five.

On repeat: “Icarus (with Gigi Perez),” “Begin Again”

Skip it: “Alleycat,” “I’ll Tell You Everything”

For fans of: Aaron Dessner’s production universe, like Brandi Carlile’s “Returning to Myself,” Laufey’s “A Matter of Time,” Gracie Abrams’ “The Secret Of Us”