Inside the White House ‘battle lines' over immigration raids, and which illegal migrants ICE should target
'Battle lines' have been drawn between Deputy Chief of Staff Stephen Miller and Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins over the issue, a source close to the White House told The Post.
Miller, an avowed immigration hawk, along with Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem, uncorked on Immigration and Customs Enforcement leadership last month, demanding agents triple the number of daily migrant arrests being made to 3,000, according to reports.
3 White House deputy chief of staff Stephen Miller has pushed for a sharp increase in the number of daily ICE arrests.
AFP via Getty Images
Advertisement
This promptly led to a 'leadership alignment' at ICE involving more than half a dozen personnel changes, a shake-up the agency said would help it 'achieve President Trump and the American people's mandate of arresting and deporting criminal illegal aliens and making American communities safe.'
As the agency clamored to meet the new Trump-blessed edict, ICE agents began casting a wider net in their raids, rounding up meat processing plant workers, farmhands and day laborers at Home Depot, instead of strictly detaining those with criminal records or active deportation orders.
Days later, ICE raided a meat processing plant in Omaha, Neb., and detained workers at a California blueberry field, according to the Los Angeles Times.
Advertisement
Last week, Rollins warned Trump that US farmers were concerned that the spike in arrests was harming their business.
'Severe disruptions to our food supply would harm Americans,' wrote Rollins on X Sunday. 'It took us decades to get into this mess and we are prioritizing deportations in a way that will get us out.'
That same day, the hotel magnate president took to Truth Social to acknowledge that the crackdown was negatively impacting American industries, including hospitality and agriculture.
3 Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins warned against excessive targeting of farm workers by immigration authorities, saying 'severe disruptions to our food supply would harm Americans.'
Getty Images
Advertisement
'Our great Farmers and people in the Hotel and Leisure business have been stating that our very aggressive policy on immigration is taking very good, long time workers away from them, with those jobs being almost impossible to replace,' he wrote, adding that, 'Changes are coming.'
The 'unmaintainable' marching orders also stretched federal immigration officers thin as they grappled to achieve the new sky-high arrest figures, dampening the spirits of agents, according to ICE insiders.
'All that matters is numbers, pure numbers. Quantity over quality,' one source The Post.
'It's killing morale,' they added.
Advertisement
White House spokeswoman Abigail Jackson on Tuesday emphasized the 'critical' need for ICE to receive more funding from Congress through 'Trump's One, Big, Beautiful Bill' to continue the mass deportation raids. The bill would fund 'at least' one million deportations, 10,000 new ICE officers and 3,000 border agents, she said.
It would also give immigration agents 'bonuses,' which Jackson said 'they've more than earned.'
The enforcement shift Trump outlined came swiftly, with the administration ordering immigration agents to stop busting farm, restaurant and hotel workers — which have higher proportions of illegal migrants in their workforce — just two days later.
3 ICE agents have been pushed to the brink by the new mandates, which see them going after low-hanging fruit like agricultural workers rather than wanted criminals or those under deportation orders, sources tell The Post.
James Keivom
'Effective today, please hold on all work site enforcement investigations/operations on agriculture (including aquaculture and meat packing plants), restaurants and operating hotels,' senior ICE official Tatum King wrote in an agency-wide email, the New York Times reported.
But the back-and-forth wasn't over yet. Just a day later, Trump was back on Truth Social, emphatically restating his intention to initiate 'the largest mass deportation program in history,' and heralding a broadening of ICE's mandates in migrant-laden US cities including New York, Chicago and Los Angeles.
The abrupt about-face was buttressed by Homeland Security, which ordered ICE leadership to continue raiding the very same businesses Trump was defending just 24 hours earlier.
Advertisement
'Worksite enforcement remains a cornerstone of our efforts to safeguard public safety, national security and economic stability,' DHS spokeswoman Tricia McLaughlin said in a statement, adding, 'These operations target illegal employment networks that undermine American workers, destabilize labor markets and expose critical infrastructure to exploitation.'
Echoing Trump's mass deportation push, Jackson at the White House said 'anyone' who is in the US illegally is at risk of deportation.
'President Trump is working hand-in-glove with DHS and ICE agents to deliver on his campaign promise to remove criminal illegal aliens from the country while executing the largest mass deportation program in history,' she added.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Forbes
19 minutes ago
- Forbes
Can States Handle Disasters Without FEMA? The Legal Gaps Business Leaders Should Know
HUNT, TEXAS - JULY 6: Vehicles sit submerged as a search and rescue worker looks through debris for ... More any survivors or remains of people swept up in the flash flooding on July 6, 2025 in Hunt, Texas. Heavy rainfall caused flooding along the Guadalupe River in central Texas with multiple fatalities reported. (Photo by) A year already marked by record-smashing heatwaves, catastrophic storms, and deadly flash floods is forcing business leaders to reckon with an unsettling question: What happens if the federal government pulls back from disaster response? The idea of handling disasters without FEMA is not an abstract worry. In recent weeks, political debates have intensified over proposals to reduce federal spending on disaster relief or even eliminate the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) after the 2025 hurricane season, as reported by NBC News. Former President Trump and some congressional leaders have floated plans to shift primary responsibility for disaster recovery to state governments—a move that could leave businesses navigating a patchwork of legal systems without the backstop they've come to rely on for decades. This uncertainty comes as disasters batter communities from coast to coast. In the first half of 2025 alone, the U.S. suffered at least 15 billion-dollar weather disasters, including historic flooding, tornado outbreaks, and prolonged heat waves, according to Yale Climate Connections. Just this past weekend, flash floods devastated Kerr County, Texas, forcing rescues and shutting down businesses in a region still recovering from earlier storms. For business owners, investors, and insurers, this brewing shift raises urgent questions: If FEMA disappears, can state laws and budgets fill the gap? Will private enterprises have to shoulder more responsibility for disaster planning and recovery? And which states are prepared—or dangerously unprepared—to protect their residents and economic lifelines in a post-FEMA landscape? A Federal Safety Net Under ThreatALTADENA, CALIFORNIA - JANUARY 30: People walk past a FEMA sign following a press conference at the ... More Altadena Disaster Recovery Center on January 30, 2025 in Altadena, California. House Democratic leaders and local officials held the press conference near the Eaton Fire burn zone to call for federal disaster assistance following the devastating wildfires in Los Angeles County. (Photo by) Since its founding in 1979, FEMA has been the cornerstone of America's disaster response. It funds emergency shelters, debris removal, rebuilding grants, and cash assistance for displaced families. Critically for businesses, FEMA programs like the Building Resilient Infrastructure and Communities (BRIC) grant fund projects that reduce future risks, a crucial buffer as extreme weather grows more frequent. Yet the agency has long faced political crossfire, with critics labeling it bloated or inefficient. Earlier this year, a lawsuit was filed against the Trump administration's previous halt to BRIC funding for certain states, highlighting how political swings can upend even well-established federal programs. If proposals to wind down FEMA proceed, business leaders would be left relying on a fragmented patchwork of state disaster laws—many of which, my research suggests, lack the resources or legal frameworks to handle large-scale crises. State Disaster Laws Are A Patchwork of Authority Every U.S. state has laws empowering governors and local officials to declare emergencies and coordinate response efforts. Yet those powers vary widely in scope, funding, and legal protections for vulnerable communities. Despite these structures, most states still rely heavily on FEMA for funding, specialized teams, and logistical support. Without FEMA, states would have to cover enormous costs themselves. For example, after Hurricane Harvey, Texas received over $13 billion in FEMA aid, money that state coffers alone could not match. The Business Risks Of A FEMA Void Businesses have more skin in this game than ever. Beyond humanitarian concerns, legal and financial risks loom if federal safety nets vanish. Federal aid often helps cover costs insurers won't, such as temporary housing, debris removal, and infrastructure repair. Without that aid, insurance companies may face larger payouts or withdraw entirely from high-risk markets. In Florida, for example, multiple insurers have already exited the market due to hurricane risks, leaving businesses scrambling for coverage. A weakened federal role could mean higher premiums, stricter underwriting, or outright denial of coverage in disaster-prone regions, especially for small and midsize enterprises without deep cash reserves. If state laws differ significantly on evacuation orders, business owners may be caught between conflicting mandates. For instance, if local officials order an evacuation, but state law vests that authority only in the governor, businesses face legal ambiguity about when to close operations, protect staff, or move inventory. Disaster response gaps also raise potential civil rights issues. Federal laws like the Stafford Act prohibit discrimination in disaster aid based on race, disability, or language. Many states lack comparable mandates, meaning vulnerable communities—and businesses serving them—could fall through the cracks if federal oversight disappears. Companies with operations across multiple states face a regulatory minefield if FEMA's uniform national standards vanish. Without coordinated federal logistics, restoring supply chains and reopening businesses could take longer, increasing downtime and losses. Which States Are Ready? Which Aren't? Few states are fully prepared to absorb FEMA's responsibilities. According to my analysis of disaster laws across the South and Mid-Atlantic, only a handful—like Virginia and Texas—have begun integrating equity planning, vulnerable population registries, and robust local emergency powers into state statutes. Other states, particularly smaller ones with limited budgets, may lack: That leaves gaps businesses can't ignore. A company operating in Virginia might navigate disaster recovery relatively smoothly, while the same company in Mississippi or Georgia could face a chaotic patchwork of legal obligations, prolonged closures, and community backlash. What Business Leaders Should Do Now While FEMA's fate remains uncertain, businesses should: FEMA's potential dismantling would represent the biggest shift in American disaster management in generations. Businesses that fail to prepare for handling disasters without FEMA amidst a state-led disaster regime risk higher costs, legal headaches, and reputational damage. Disasters don't respect state lines, but the laws governing them increasingly do. For business leaders, understanding those legal boundaries might be the key to survival in a future where the federal safety net is no longer guaranteed.
New York Post
20 minutes ago
- New York Post
Robert Kraft's son, Josh, leaves Patriots with focus on Boston mayoral race
The Kraft family is focused on more than football. Robert Kraft's son, Josh Kraft, has left the Patriots franchise as he zeroes in on the Boston mayoral race, where early polling shows he's trailing substantially to incumbent Michelle Wu. Josh, 58, is trailing Wu in the polls, 59-29 percent, ahead of this November's election cycle. Advertisement Robert Kraft [right] embraces his son Josh Kraft [left]. MediaNews Group via Getty Images Josh previously held a role with the team as the head of the New England Patriots Foundation, but a recent media guide released by the team points out the changes being made. Josh is one of four brothers in the Kraft family, three of whom have been involved in the operations of the Patriots, with Jonathan Kraft currently serving as team president. Advertisement Daniel Kraft also works within the family business and is the president of The Kraft Group. The Patriots are looking to turn it around after a turbulent run since Tom Brady left the franchise in 2020. New England's 29-56 record is the sixth-worst in the NFL over the past five seasons. There is optimism in Foxborough, though, as second-year QB Drake Maye impressed as a rookie and the team brought back Mike Vrabel to be head coach after Jerod Mayo went 4-13 in his lone season. Advertisement Mayo replaced Bill Belichick after he led the franchise to six Super Bowl wins. Robert Kraft is the Patriots' leader as they look to turn the team around in 2025. AP At one point during the end of the season, Jonathan was seen complaining about Mayo's play-calling. 'The last two years were the worst years of my 31 years of ownership. We have to change that,' Robert Kraft said in June.
The Hill
20 minutes ago
- The Hill
Coca-Cola confirms it will launch cane sugar version in US amid Trump ‘enthusiasm'
Coca-Cola Company confirmed on Tuesday that it will launch a cane sugar version of its iconic drink in the U.S. amid President Trump's ' enthusiasm,' coming less than a week after the president revealed the change on social media. 'As part of its ongoing innovation agenda, this fall in the United States, the company plans to launch an offering made with U.S. cane sugar to expand its Trademark Coca-Cola product range,' the company said in a news release. The Atlanta-based company said the addition is 'designed to complement the company's strong core portfolio and offer more choices across occasions and preferences.' Trump said in a post on Truth Social last week that Coca-Cola agreed to use cane sugar in its flagship drink instead of high-fructose corn syrup. 'I have been speaking to Coca-Cola about using REAL Cane Sugar in Coke in the United States, and they have agreed to do so,' the president wrote on Wednesday. 'I'd like to thank all of those in authority at Coca-Cola. This will be a very good move by them — You'll see. It's just better!' The soft drink giant did not confirm the change last week, but said it appreciated Trump's 'enthusiasm' for the brand and that more details on 'new innovative offerings within our Coca‑Cola product range will be shared soon.' The soda sold in the U.S. is usually sweetened with corn syrup, while other countries — like Mexico, already use cane sugar. The 'Mexican Coke' is also sold in the U.S. Trump has been a longtime aficionado of Diet Coke, with the president having a red button installed at the Resolute Desk during his first term. When pressed, a staffer would bring the drink to the president.
