Blog

Washington, D.C., Mayor Muriel Bowser, a Democrat, said she is skeptical that the federal deployment of the National Guard to cities across the country is legal, as President Trump has moved to send troops to respond to crime.

Speaking Wednesday at the Fortune Most Powerful Women conference in Washington, the mayor was asked about not supporting the use of the National Guard to crackdown on crime.

“I don’t think it’s legal, let me start there, for the National Guard to police Americans on American soil,” Bowser said.

The mayor went on to explain how the National Guard in D.C. is under the authority of the president, while a state’s National Guard is typically controlled by the governor.

DEMOCRATS TRY TO FLIP THE SCRIPT ON ‘STATES’ RIGHTS’ TO DEFY, UPEND TRUMP’S NATIONAL GUARD PLAN

“The mission and the way we use the National Guard — unlike most states where a governor can call up the chief of his National Guard or her National Guard — in D.C., our D.C. National Guard reports to the president,” Bowser said.

“While I can request the National Guard, they are completely federally operated. And so D.C. is a little different than in other places for the D.C. National Guard,” she continued.

The mayor added: “We use the Guard to respond to emergencies. We use the Guard for large scale events. We do not use the Guard or to police our local laws.”

In recent months, Trump has boosted the presence of federal law enforcement in Washington, D.C., in an attempt to cut down on crime. Hundreds of federal agents and National Guard troops have been deployed to the streets of D.C. as part of the federal takeover of the district.

Trump has also deployed troops to several other Democratic-led cities, including Chicago. The city, as well as its home of Illinois, took the federal government to court over the deployment.

A federal appeals court partially returned control of the National Guard in Illinois to the federal government, but it blocked Trump from deploying troops to the streets of Chicago or across Illinois.

Trump had also deployed the National Guard to Los Angeles over the summer to respond to anti-ICE protests sparked by federal immigration raids targeting migrant workers at local businesses. California officials sued over the federal deployment.

‘THEY’RE EMBARRASSING US’: NATIONAL GUARD PRESENCE IN DC SPARKS FIERY CAPITOL CLASH

CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP

Bowser said in her remarks on Wednesday that Americans in Washington and across the country should be concerned by what the deployments mean for the nation’s democracy.

“We should all be concerned about the military being used because it’s a slippery slope,” she said.

“You use it for crowd control one day, or presence the next day — it’s not a long jump to using it in other ways that could interfere with the very nature of American democracy,” Bowser said.

President Donald Trump confirmed he would be authorizing Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) activity in Venezuela amid his efforts to combat Latin American drug traffickers with force. 

Trump indicated during a press conference alongside FBI Director Kash Patel on Wednesday that his administration was next looking “at land” in Latin America after the U.S. military conducted at least five fatal strikes against alleged drug boats in the Caribbean since last month. The president also confirmed at the Wednesday press conference that he was authorizing intelligence activity by the CIA in Venezuela to help continue the administration’s offensive against Latin American drug traffickers.

Trump told reporters there were “two reasons” why he was authorizing the CIA to conduct such work. 

TRUMP NEXT EYES ‘LAND’ IN DRUG WAR, WARNS CARTEL BOATS ARE ‘NOT FASTER THAN MISSILES’

“Number one, they have emptied their prisons into the United States of America. They came in through the border. They came in because we had an open border policy. And as soon as I heard that, ‘I said a lot of these countries’ – they’re not the only country, but they’re the worst abuser, and they’ve allowed thousands and thousands of prisoners, people from mental institutions, insane asylums – emptied out into the United States,” Trump told reporters Wednesday after they asked why he took the move to authorize CIA activity in Venezuela. 

“We’re bringing them back… they did it at a level that probably –—many, many countries have done it also, but not like Venezuela — they were down and dirty,” Trump continued. “And the other thing is drugs. We have a lot of drugs coming in from Venezuela.”

TRUMP PRAISED AFTER PUTTING ‘NARCO TERRORIST’ MADURO ON NOTICE 

Following Trump’s comments about why he was authorizing CIA activity in Venezuela, the president was pressed by a reporter on whether the intelligence agency would have the authority to take out Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro, who Trump and his administration have accused of leading a “narco-­dictatorship.”

However, the president didn’t bite on that question, telling reporters he thought it was a “ridiculous question” for him to answer during the press conference. “I don’t want to answer a question like that,” Trump shot back.  

Trump’s comments about authorizing unspecified actions by the CIA in Venezuela came after the New York Times reported earlier in the day that the president had authorized the spy agency to carry out lethal, covert actions in Venezuela.

“I think Venezuela is feeling heat. But I think a lot of other countries are feeling heat too,” Trump said Wednesday.

CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP

“We’re not going to let this country, our country, be ruined because other people want to drop, as you say, ‘their worst’ — they have given us their worst. They’ve loaded up our country with prisoners, with mentally ill people that are seriously ill, criminally ill, and we’re not going to take it,” the president continued. “And I can tell you we’ve taken care of the sea. There’s nobody. And we’re watching, we’re watching. And if we see it, we’ll save it.”

Fox News Digital’s Diana Stancy contributed to this report.

FIRST ON FOX: Parents from Northern Virginia late Wednesday night surpassed the massive $125,000 bond that a judge ordered them to pay to defend their sons, who were suspended and found responsible for sexual harassment after objecting to a transgender classmate using their male-only locker room, in court.

The parents, who are suing the Loudoun County Public Schools district, raised over $125,000 ahead of the Friday deadline and even met the original Wednesday deadline before it was granted an extension. 

They were originally ordered by a federal judge last Friday to come up with the funds by the end of the day on Wednesday if they wanted to keep fighting for their sons in court. The $125,000 “bond” was ordered by the judge in the case, Leonie Brinkema, who said the money is meant to ensure that the parents would be able to pay for the school district’s attorney fees if they end up losing.  

“We have serious doubts that such a bond can be legally required, and this requirement that the plaintiffs put up the money to pay the government’s attorneys fees is certainly very unusual and unexpected, especially when the government acknowledged in court that its insurance policy is covering legal costs,” Josh Hetzler, co-counsel for the parents, said in a statement to Fox News Digital.

PARENTS: VIRGINIA BOYS SUSPENDED AFTER QUESTIONING TRANSGENDER LOCKER ROOM POLICY WERE IGNORED BY SCHOOL

Before taking the case to federal court, Hetzler, Wolfe and Smith sought other avenues to ensure the two boys were not suspended or marked as sexual harassers on their permanent record. They sought to appeal the Loudoun County Public Schools Title IX sexual harassment investigation finding, which came after the boys were videotaped by a biological female who identified as transgender inside the boys’ locker room. The video caught them outwardly complaining to each other about the fact that there was a girl using their facilities, which resulted in the boys’ suspension and the district’s harassment finding against them.

However, the appeal was ultimately denied by the district, so the decision was made to take the matter to federal court with the help of Trump-aligned law group America First Legal (AFL). 

Meanwhile, on Friday, Judge Brinkema, for the Eastern District of Virginia, extended a temporary halt to the boys’ suspension so that they could continue attending class as the case is adjudicated. But, simultaneously, Brinkema also expressed “significant weaknesses in aspects of the plaintiffs’ allegations” in another ruling that same day, which ultimately required Wolfe and Smith to drum up $125,000 over the next three business days if they wanted to keep fighting the matter in court.

FEDERAL JUDGE RULES IN FAVOR OF ALLOWING SCOTUS CASE OVER TRANS ATHLETES TO PROCEED AFTER ATTEMPT TO DISMISS   

“Fortunately, we have an extension until Friday,” Ian Prior, AFL’s attorney assisting on the case, said as the Wednesday bond deadline approached, and it appeared they would not have the funds.

According to Prior, it is not entirely “atypical” for the prevailing party in a preliminary injunction to have to put up a bond. However, Prior noted, in public interest cases such as this one, bond requirements are often set very low, sometimes even at $0. Prior also said he was not aware of bonds being required to cover attorneys’ fees.

“In most cases, it is done where a company is enjoined from doing something, like selling a certain kind of widget for example, and the injunction will cost them something,” Prior told Fox News Digital. “The bond helps assure that if the prevailing party does not ultimately succeed, the other party is made whole from the impact the injunction had. We are not aware of bonds being required to cover attorneys’ fees however.”

In Brinkema’s order, she explicitly indicated the bond was to ensure “that if the defendant prevails on dispositive pre-trial motions, it can recover from that bond its attorney’s fees.” 

Wolfe and Smith, following the bond order, set up an online fundraiser to help them raise the funds. As of Wednesday morning, the online fundraiser had collected around $50,000, but before the end of the day, a single donation of $50,000, from Michael Dearing, who appears to be an angel investor, pushed the parents within $25,000 of their $125,000 goal. 

CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP

When asked about what their plans would be if they were unable to raise the full amount, Prior indicated that there were “a multitude of options” that could be taken. 

“The more that the students raise, the easier it will be to post bond, even if they do not get to the full $125k,” Prior told Fox News Digital. “To be clear, the case does not get dismissed without posting the bond – rather, we would lose the preliminary injunction and the suspensions would take place immediately and the findings would be put into the students’ records at a time when they would likely be applying for higher education.”

President Donald Trump on Wednesday signed a directive ordering the Department of War to keep paying U.S. troops despite the ongoing government shutdown, bypassing Congress after lawmakers failed to reach a funding deal for weeks.

The White House said the move is necessary to protect “military readiness” as the budget standoff stretched into its third week. The order, issued as National Security Presidential Memorandum-8 (NSPM-8), directs the department to use available fiscal year 2026 funds to cover military pay and allowances.

“The current appropriations lapse presents a serious and unacceptable threat to military readiness and the ability of our Armed Forces to protect and defend our Nation,” the memo states.

Trump cited his Article II powers as commander-in-chief in issuing the order, which covers active-duty troops and reservists on service orders. The directive instructs officials to use only funds that are legally tied to military pay, in coordination with the Office of Management and Budget (OMB).

TRUMP MOVE SPARES TROOPS’ PAY, BUT REPUBLICANS WARN SHUTDOWN RISKS REMAIN

More than one million service members were expected to miss paychecks starting this week if Congress didn’t act. Trump’s move marks a break from past administrations, which often waited for bipartisan deals instead of intervening directly.

Rep. Nick LaLota, R-N.Y., told Fox News Digital that “Trump’s mid-month action was welcome news to the military community. But now that same community is anxious about what happens at the end of the month, where mortgages and rents and car payments all become due.”

“Democrats were wrong to try to use troop pay as leverage to accomplish their political goals. And it would be wrong, it would be just as wrong, for a Republican to hope that that lack of pay would be a catalyst to get Democrats to acquiesce,” LaLota said. “[Trump is] protecting the troops when Congress won’t.”

WHITE HOUSE MAY ‘RUN OUT’ OF FUNDS TO PAY MILITARY IF SHUTDOWN CONTINUES, JOHNSON WARNS

The Pentagon has not said which specific accounts will be used. Reports from Roll Call and Reuters indicate the administration has identified roughly $8 billion in unobligated defense funds as potential options.

Critics warn the move could face legal challenges under the Antideficiency Act, which bars spending money not appropriated by Congress. But White House officials argue the law permits spending that has a “reasonable, logical relationship” to the purpose of the original funds: in this case, keeping troops paid.

Fox News has reached out to the White House, OMB and Department of War for further comment. None have responded.

CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP

The directive follows Trump’s Oct. 11 order to keep troop payments flowing during the shutdown. The White House’s latest move Wednesday with Congress still in gridlock could shape government shutdowns for generations to come.

Fox News Digital’s Elizabeth Elkind contributed to this report.

A federal judge has temporarily blocked key parts of Texas’ new law limiting expression on campuses after dark, preventing the University of Texas System from enforcing a ban on overnight expression as well as restrictions on inviting outside speakers and using amplified sounds during the last two weeks of a semester.

U.S. District Judge David A. Ezra said on Tuesday that the student groups who brought the lawsuit are likely to succeed in their claims that the law violates their First Amendment rights to free speech.

“The First Amendment does not have a bedtime of 10:00 p.m.,” the court held. “The burden is on the government to prove that its actions are narrowly tailored to achieve a compelling governmental interest. It has not done so.”

The judge wrote that the clause lawmakers added to the bill directing universities to uphold the First Amendment “does not change the fact that the statute then requires universities to adopt policies that violate those very constitutional protections.”

FEDERAL JUDGE LAUNCHES SCATHING BROADSIDE OF TRUMP’S EFFORTS TO DEPORT PRO-PALESTINIAN PROTESTERS

“The Court cannot trust the universities to enforce their policies in a constitutional way while Plaintiffs are left in a state of uncertainty, chilling their speech for fear that their expressive conduct may violate the law or university policies,” Ezra continued.

The Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (FIRE) filed the lawsuit last month against the University of Texas System to block the legislation, which creates rules for campus protests and gives university systems’ governing boards the authority to limit where they can be held.

FIRE attorneys said that the law violates the First and 14th Amendments because it bans protected speech on campuses from 10 p.m. to 8 a.m.

Tuesday’s ruling “is a victory not only for our plaintiffs, but all of those who express themselves on college campuses across Texas,” FIRE senior supervising attorney JT Morris said in a statement. “The First Amendment protects their freedom of speech on campus, every hour of the day, every week of the year.”

University of Texas System spokesperson Ben Wright said in a statement that the system cannot comment on the lawsuit but that it “complies with the law and court orders.”

SB 2972, authored by former GOP state Sen. Brandon Creighton creates new limits on how people can protest on campus and establishes bans on expressive activity during overnight hours.

The law, which took effect Sept. 1, essentially walks back a previous state law passed in 2019 that required all outdoor spaces at state universities be available as open forums for speech.

On top of the overnight speech restrictions, the law bars demonstrators from using microphones or other devices to amplify sound while protesting during class hours or if doing so intimidates others or interferes with campus operations, university employees or peace officers doing their job.

Protesters would also be prohibited from building encampments, removing an institution’s U.S. flag to put up one from another country or organization and wearing coverings to avoid being identified or to intimidate others.

University employees and students participating in a campus protest would also be required to provide proof of their identity and status with the school if a university official inquires.

“Texas’ law is so overbroad that any public university student chatting in the dorms past 10 p.m. would have been in violation,” FIRE senior attorney Adam Steinbaugh said. “We’re thankful that the court stepped in and halted a speech ban that inevitably would’ve been weaponized to censor speech that administrators disagreed with.”

FEDERAL JUDGE BLOCKS TEXAS PUBLIC SCHOOLS FROM DISPLAYING TEN COMMANDMENTS IN CLASSROOMS

CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP

Republican lawmakers pushed for SB 2972 in response to the pro-Palestinian protests held last year on campuses across the country.

Creighton, who resigned from the Texas Senate earlier this month to become Texas Tech University System’s chancellor, claimed that his legislation strengthens free speech protections on college campuses by promoting openness while also protecting students, faculty and campus property from disruption by outside groups.

“The ruling represents only a temporary stay by one judge, and I’m confident the law will ultimately be upheld,” Creighton said in a statement.

The Associated Press contributed to this report.

The Trump administration plans to withhold $40 million from California over its refusal to enforce English language requirements for truckers, Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy said Wednesday.

The move came weeks after an investigation found that an illegal immigrant truck driver, Harjinder Singh, killed three people after making an illegal U-turn on a Florida road in August. California had issued the driver a commercial license, but these English rules predate the crash.

Duffy cited failures by California to enforce English proficiency rules following one of President Donald Trump’s executive orders.

DUFFY RESPONDS WITH ‘CROCODILE TEARS’ COMMENT ON BANNED CALIFORNIA TRUCK DRIVER CASE

“California is the only state in the nation that refuses to ensure big rig drivers can read our road signs and communicate with law enforcement. This is a fundamental safety issue that impacts you and your family on America’s roads,” Duffy said.

“The Golden State thinks it’s OK to ignore @USDOT English language requirements for truckers. You can play all the games you want, but not at the expense of American lives,” Duffy wrote on X.

Duffy said the truck driver in the Florida crash should not have been given a commercial license because of his immigration status.

Diana Crofts-Pelayo, a spokesperson for California Gov. Gavin Newsom, told Fox News Digital that California commercial truck drivers have a lower crash rate than the national average.

“It seems the Secretary of Transportation needs a lesson about the laws of his own roads,” Crofts-Pelayo said. “The reality is simple: Commercial driver’s license holders in California had a fatal accident rate nearly 40% LOWER than the national average. Texas, the only state with more commercial driver’s license holders, has a rate nearly 50% higher than California’s.” 

“The facts don’t lie, although for the Trump Administration, they seem optional,” she added. 

GOP REP TARGETS TRUCKER’S ENGLISH SKILLS AFTER ILLEGAL MIGRANT CHARGED IN DEADLY FLORIDA CRASH

Singh, an Indian citizen, is being held without bond after being charged with three state counts of vehicular homicide and immigration violations.

Investigators said he failed an English proficiency test but was still issued a license to drive trucks. Duffy and Florida officials have blamed California as well as Washington state for issuing him a commercial driver’s license.

However, California officials said Singh had a valid work permit at the time. Authorities said he entered the United States illegally from Mexico in 2018.

CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP

To have the funding reinstated, California must enforce the English rules and ensure that state inspectors test truck drivers’ English skills during roadside inspections and remove anyone from the road who fails.

The Associated Press contributed to this report. 

Los Angeles County GOP chair Roxanne Hoge ripped the county’s Democratic leaders for having “no shame” and declaring a state of emergency over federal immigration enforcement operations, which she called a “slap in the face” to Americans.

The Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors voted 4-1 on Tuesday to declare a local state of emergency in the region. The declaration, which the board stated was in response to U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) operations, provides residents with rent relief and legal aid if they have been affected by the raids.

County departments were also ordered to “take necessary emergency actions to protect and stabilize communities impacted by federal immigration actions.”

In an interview with Fox News Digital, Hoge said that “living in California, especially living in Los Angeles, is like playing a constant game of whack-a-mole” with outlandish policies and declarations.

DEMOCRATS CREATING ‘TWO-TIERED’ LEGAL SYSTEM THAT KEEPS LATINOS DOWN, SAYS LA GOP LEADER

She said the progressive-dominated L.A. County Board of Supervisors “have no shame in how far they will go” to upend citizens’ lives and prioritize illegals over citizens.

“They keep coming up with more and different ways to spend taxpayer money and to not give us the services that a local government should give you, you know, public safety, freedom from crime, clean streets. None of those are available in Los Angeles,” said Hoge.

“You would think that the emergency is having an entire community burned down and not having water in the hydrants. You would think a state of emergency is due to criminal cartels taking over our streets, but no.”

TRUMP FOES MELT DOWN THAT SCOTUS IS UNLEASHING ‘RACIAL TERROR’ ON US WITH ICE RAID RULING

Addressing the county board directly, Hoge said, “I would say to the ladies who run the most powerful county board of supervisors in the country, that it would be really nice if they would pay attention to the needs of Californians living in Los Angeles for just a moment.”

“To turn around and give money to people who, by the way, don’t have to prove that they’re here legally or illegally or even that they are going to use the money for rent is a complete slap in the face to every hardworking person who makes Los Angeles their home,” she went on, adding, “Do your jobs, ladies. Please protect the Americans living in Los Angeles.”

The proclamation notice, dated Oct. 9, said that it will remain in effect until terminated by the board of supervisors.

TRUMP’S WAR ON CARTELS ENTERS NEW PHASE AS EXPERTS PREDICT WHAT’S NEXT

County officials claimed the raids have “created a climate of fear, leading to widespread disruption in daily life and adverse impacts to our regional economy,” including decreased workplace attendance, temporary or permanent business closures, and increased strain on schools, hospitals, and places of worship.

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

In response to a Fox News Digital request for comment, a spokesperson for the L.A. County Board of Supervisors clarified that the declaration “currently provides no funding.” 

A spokesperson for board Chair Kathryn Barger, who issued the sole vote against the declaration, shared a statement with Fox News Digital in which she said that “declaring a local emergency is not the right or responsible way to respond” to the federal immigration enforcement operations. 

“I want to be clear: my opposition to this motion is about good governance, not immigration status,” Barger said. “Emergency powers exist for crises that pose life and death consequences like wildfires—not as a shortcut for complex policy issues. Stretching emergency powers for federal immigration actions undermines their purpose, invites legal challenges, and circumvents the public process.”

Barger added that “families across Los Angeles County are afraid, and that fear is real,” but said, “We need real solutions, not symbolic gestures”

Fox News Digital’s Emma Bussey contributed to this report

A former Massachusetts shelter director-turned-whistleblower is calling the sentencing of yet another illegal alien for raping a child at a taxpayer-funded shelter further evidence of a “total government failure” in the sanctuary state.

Haitian illegal alien Cory Alvarez, 27, was found guilty of aggravated rape of a child at a migrant shelter in Rockland, Massachusetts, and sentenced to 10 to 12 years in prison, according to NBC 10 Boston.

Alvarez was arrested by Rockland police in 2024 on suspicion of sexual assault on a 15-year-old female victim. Both Alvarez and the victim were living at a state-run shelter at a Comfort Inn.

Alvarez was arrested by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) officers in August. According to the agency, he entered the country lawfully in 2023 but violated the terms of his admittance, meaning he was present in the country illegally.

MIGRANT CRIMES AGAINST CHILDREN PILE UP IN BOSTON AREA AS MAYOR SLAMS BONDI OVER ‘SANCTUARY’ WARNING

In response, Fetherston, who ran a similar migrant shelter in Marlborough, Massachusetts, from 2023 to 2024, said Alvarez’s sentencing “exposes a much bigger problem.”

“Call it what you will, but this is total government failure,” he said. “You have documented cases now of these girls being assaulted in shelters run with taxpayer dollars. No one at the top, including Governor Maura Healey, is taking any of the responsibility.”

Fetherston has previously blown the whistle on “rampant” sexual abuse of children taking place in the Massachusetts-run shelter system.

Speaking with Fox News Digital in February, he detailed the case of another Haitian illegal alien, Ronald Joseph, who raped and impregnated his own 14-year-old daughter at the Marlborough shelter. Fetherston said that when he and the authorities confronted Joseph about the rape, he became agitated and threatened him. Despite the gravity of the crime, Fetherston said he was instructed to order Joseph a ride to another state-run shelter.

Joseph was not arrested until months later. He has since been sentenced to 12 to 15 years in prison for aggravated rape of a child.

Fetherston said that these two cases are not isolated but rather part of a larger disturbing pattern of child sexual abuse that has largely gone unpunished.

“The state didn’t protect these children, and when you don’t protect children, you have no moral authority to run these programs,” he said, adding, “If you’re not going to protect children, you shouldn’t be in office.”

Earlier this year, a Healey spokesperson told the Boston Herald that the governor “inherited a disaster of a shelter system” and that Healey “is the one who took action to implement a length of stay limit, mandate criminal background checks, require residents to prove Massachusetts residency and lawful immigration status, and get families out of hotels.” 

Fetherston said that despite claims that shelter residents had all been vetted through criminal background checks, “not a single one of these people was vetted” and “nobody knows who they are.”

“The governor opened up the doors wide open and didn’t vet anybody, and that is on her,” he said.

ILLEGAL IMMIGRANT CHARGED WITH REPEATED SEXUAL ASSAULT OF 14-YEAR-OLD GIRL: FLORIDA SHERIFF

He also noted that “98 percent of the people that I was dealing with were really good people and they were just here to make a better life for themselves. But the 2% that weren’t were some of the worst people I have ever seen.”

He emphasized that “all of these shelters are paid for with taxpayer dollars.”

“The taxpayers need to realize that essentially, and horribly, you’re funding these rapes and assaults of little girls,” he said, adding, “Nobody wants that.”

In August, Healey ordered the closure of the state’s shelter system and made some of the residents eligible to receive at least $30,000 in state housing assistance over a two-year period.

Since then, Fetherston said that local police have told him there has been an uptick in auto accidents. He also said that school districts, especially in small-town communities, have been overwhelmed by the influx of foreign students.

$30K IN MIGRANT HOUSING AID HAS DEM GOV ON HOT SEAT FOR ‘REVOLVING DOOR’ POLICY

“Where do you pull the money from? Do you pull money from police? Do you pull the money from fire? Do you not fix the roads that year? Because you do have to educate these children. So, I mean it has devastating effects on small communities.”

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

Fox News Digital previously reported that Alvarez arrived in June under the parole process for Cubans, Haitians, Nicaraguans and Venezuelans (CHNV) instituted by the Biden administration. The policy was first announced for Venezuelans in October 2022, which allowed a limited number to fly directly into the U.S. as long as they had not entered illegally, had a sponsor in the U.S. already and passed certain checks.

Fox News Digital reached out to Healey’s office for comment but did not immediately receive a response.

A federal judge in Oregon on Wednesday extended an emergency order blocking President Donald Trump from immediately deploying some 200 National Guard troops into Portland, delivering a blow, if only temporarily, to Trump’s federalization push.

U.S. District Judge Karin Immergut, a Trump appointee, issued the 14-day extension to keep in place her earlier temporary order, which was slated to expire this weekend.

That order blocked Trump from immediately deploying Oregon National Guard troops into the city despite the objections of local officials, who have argued that Trump’s description of the violence in Portland is hyperbolic and does not warrant intervention from federal officers. 

Judge Immergut described Trump’s actions in her earlier order as “untethered to reality,” and said the federalization effort risks “blurring the line between civil and military federal power — to the detriment of this nation.”

‘UNTETHERED FROM REALITY’: LAWYERS FOR TRUMP, OREGON, SPAR OVER NATIONAL GUARD DEPLOYMENT IN COURT CLASH

The extension comes as lawyers for the state of Oregon and for the Trump administration both await a ruling from the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, which heard oral arguments on appeal from the Trump administration last week.

Judges on the three-member appeals court seemed largely sympathetic to the Trump administration, especially the two Trump appointees, who noted in court that presidents do enjoy broad latitude to deploy the National Guard.

They ended arguments by telling both parties they would rule as soon as possible on the issue, though the judges did not provide a more formal timeline.

PORTLAND POLICE CHIEF TOUTS ‘CROWD SUPPORT’ APPROACH AS ICE FACILITY FACES ONGOING VIOLENCE

The extension from the lower court judge comes as Trump has sought to deploy hundreds of National Guard troops to Democratic-led cities despite stated opposition from local and state leaders. 

Senior administration officials have argued that the deployment is a necessary step to crack down on what they say is an uptick in violent crime and protect against threats from protesters, including anti-ICE demonstrations in many downtown areas.

The panel’s majority otherwise did little to disguise their skepticism of arguments presented by Oregon Attorney General Stacy Chaffin — including that Trump’s assessment of violence in the city did not justify federalizing the National Guard.

CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP 

CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP 

Democrats have countered that Trump’s descriptions are hyperbolic and inaccurate, and are merely a legal pretext for Trump to try to “federalize” Democratic-led cities. 

The issue is one of several similar cases centered on Trump’s troop deployment, a matter widely expected to be eventually punted to the Supreme Court.

President Donald Trump is next looking “at land” in Latin America, after the U.S. military has conducted at least five fatal strikes against alleged drug boats in the Caribbean since September. 

“We are certainly looking at land now because we’ve got the sea very well under control,” Trump told reporters Wednesday. “We’ve had a couple of days where there isn’t a boat to be found, and I view that as a good thing, not a bad thing.” 

Trump said he wasn’t interested in having the Coast Guard simply stop the alleged drugs boats because “we’ve been doing that for 30 years and it has been totally ineffective.” 

“They have faster boats. Some of these boats are seriously, I mean, they’re world class speedboats,” Trump said. “But they’re not faster than missiles. But we’ve been trying to do that for years.” 

This is a breaking news story and will be updated.