Low-income migrants fined up to $1.8 million by Trump admin
WASHINGTON: Wendy Ortiz was surprised to find out she was being fined by US immigration authorities for being in the country illegally - but it was the amount that truly shocked her: $1.8 million.
Ortiz, 32, who earns $13 an hour in her job at a meatpacking plant in Pennsylvania, has lived in the US for a decade, after fleeing El Salvador to escape a violent ex-partner and gang threats, she said in an interview and in immigration paperwork. Her salary barely covers rent and expenses for her autistic US-citizen son. "It's not fair," she said. "Where is someone going to find that much money?"
In the last few weeks, US President Trump has started to operationalise a plan to fine migrants who fail to leave the US after a final
deportation order
, issuing notices to 4,500 migrants with penalties totaling more than $500 million, a senior Trump official said, requesting anonymity.
Reuters spoke with eight immigration lawyers around the country who said their clients had been fined from several thousand dollars to just over $1.8 million.
The recipients of the notices were informed that they had 30 days to contest, in writing, under oath, and with evidence as to why the penalty should not be imposed.
The steep fines are part of Trump's aggressive push to get immigrants in the US illegally to leave the country voluntarily, or "self deport." The
Trump administration
plan, details of which were first reported in April, include levying fines of $998 per day for migrants who failed to leave the US after a deportation order.
Sponsored Links
Sponsored Links
Promoted Links
Promoted Links
You May Like
Switch to UnionBank Rewards Card
UnionBank Credit Card
Apply Now
Undo
The administration planned to issue fines retroactively for up to five years. Under that framework, the maximum would be $1.8 million. The govt would then consider seizing the property of immigrants who could not pay. It remains unclear exactly how the Trump administration would collect the fines and seize property.
The fines reviewed by Reuters were issued by
US Immigration and Customs Enforcement
(ICE), but a separate agency - Customs and Border Protection (CBP) - has been asked to process them and handle potential forfeitures, Reuters reported in April. The US department of homeland security did not respond to a request for comment.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Time of India
a minute ago
- Time of India
"Have we become so weak?" Congress MP Sukhdeo Bhagat on Trump's 25% tariff on India
Congress MP Sukhdeo Bhagat has criticised PM Modi's silence on the 25% tariff imposed by the US, questioning the government's vulnerability to US interference in strategic matters. Trump's announcement of tariffs and threats of further penalties for importing Russian oil have sparked concern. The government is examining the impact and engaging with stakeholders to safeguard national interests. Tired of too many ads? Remove Ads Tired of too many ads? Remove Ads New Delhi: Congress MP Sukhdeo Bhagat criticised Prime Minister Narendra Modi for his silence on the 25 per cent tariff imposed by US President Donald Trump on questioned whether the BJP government has become so vulnerable that discussions regarding strategic initiatives or oil procurement are subject to interference from US President Trump."Trump has created a state of confusion. Neither the government nor PM Modi made any statement in the House or took responsibility... Have we become so weak that even discussing strategies prompts interference from Trump?... The saddest part is when we discuss the trade balance, especially since we have about 130 billion dollars worth of trade with the US. Our position is strong on this, so there is no reason for America to dominate us... PM Modi should come forward and clarify the entire situation regarding India's decision... We are a sovereign country, but such interference contradicts the dignity of the nation," he on Wednesday made a shocking statement on his social media platform Truth Social after the announcement of 25 per cent tariffs against India and threatened an additional "penalty" for importing Russian oil."I don't care what India does with Russia. They can take their dead economies down together, for all I care. We have done very little business with India; their tariffs are too high, among the highest in the world," Trump later signed a fresh executive order imposing revised tariffs for 70 countries, including imposed on India's neighbouring countries are less than India's 25 per cent, except for Myanmar at 40 per cent. The new tariffs for Pakistan, Afghanistan, Bangladesh, Indonesia, Japan, and Sri Lanka are 19%, 15%, 20%, 19%, 15%, and 20%, new tariffs, outlined in a sweeping order signed on Friday (IST), will come into effect from 12:01 a.m. Eastern Daylight Time on August the government told the Parliament on Thursday that it is examining the impact of the recent events and will take all necessary steps to safeguard the national interest. Commerce and Industry Minister Piyush Goyal made a statement in the lower House of Parliament a day after Trump announced the tariff. He later made a similar statement in the Rajya said the Ministry of Commerce and Industry is holding talks with exporters, industries and all stakeholders and gathering information on their assessment of this issue.
Time of India
13 minutes ago
- Time of India
Brent crude oil may hit $80 per barrel: Indian refiners may struggle - how will unavailability of Russian oil impact prices?
Brent crude prices could climb to $80 per barrel in the coming months amid escalating tensions between the United States and Russia, predicts oil market analysts. The forecast came after US President Donald Trump issued a deadline for Russia to end the war in Ukraine, threatening additional sanctions and secondary tariffs of up to 100% on countries trading with Moscow. Tired of too many ads? go ad free now NS Ramaswamy, Head of Commodities & CRM at Ventura, said Brent Oil (Oct '25) has already moved up from $72.07 and may hit a short-term target of $76. "Year-end 2025 could see Brent at $80–82, with downside support and cap at $69," he added, reported ANI. Energy analyst Narendra Taneja said sharper price surge if Russian oil is removed from the global supply chain. Russia exports 5 million barrels of oil into the global supply system every day. Crude oil prices would rise significantly $100 to $120 per barrel, if the Russian oil is forced out of the global supply chains'. He added that while Indian refiners, which import crude from 40 different countries, may not face supply shortages, they would struggle to balance prices for consumers if Russian oil is no longer accessible. WTI Crude Oil (Sep '25), prices are currently around $69.65, with a short-term target of $73 and a year-end projection of $76–79. Downside support is pegged at $65. The potential for supply disruption comes at a time when global spare production capacity is limited. Experts say even if Saudi Arabia and other OPEC members increase output to bridge the gap, it will take time and may not be enough to avert short-term deficits. 'President Trump wants lower oil prices, but a quick increase in US oil production is not possible. It requires infrastructure, labour, and investment,' according to market analysts. Tired of too many ads? go ad free now Recent US-EU trade agreement has offered some support to oil markets, as has the extension of the US-China trade truce. However, continued volatility in geopolitical relations and uncertainty around US inventory levels and upcoming interest rate decisions are expected to keep oil prices on edge. Analysts noted that a stronger US dollar has kept some lid on oil prices, but the broader trend remains tilted upward due to geopolitical uncertainties and potential supply shocks.
Hindustan Times
31 minutes ago
- Hindustan Times
Why Smithsonian removed Donald Trump impeachment references from an exhibit
The Smithsonian Institution has quietly removed a reference to US President Donald Trump's two impeachment proceedings from a key exhibit at the National Museum of American History. The decision comes as the White House exerts pressure to offer a more positive and selective view of American history. A Smithsonian spokesperson confirmed its removal.(AFP) The label referencing all Presidential impeachment proceedings was added in 2021 to the museum's "American Presidency" exhibit under the section "Limits of Presidential Power." It also addressed Trump's unprecedented dual impeachments. A Smithsonian spokesperson confirmed its removal, which comes as the new Trump administration has called for intensified efforts to reshape how federal cultural institutions portray American history. Why were the impeachment exhibits removed? Smithsonian spokesperson Phillip Zimmerman said Friday that the section, which includes materials on President Bill Clinton's impeachment and the Watergate scandal that led to President Richard Nixon's resignation, needed to be overhauled. He said the decision came after the museum" reviewed our legacy content recently." "Because the other topics in this section had not been updated since 2008, the decision was made to restore the Impeachment case back to its 2008 appearance," Zimmerman said in an email. He said that in September 2021, the museum installed a temporary label on content concerning Trump's impeachment. "It was intended to be a short-term measure to address current events at the time," he said. But the label remained in place. "A large permanent gallery like The American Presidency that opened in 2000 requires a significant amount of time and funding to update and renew," he said. "A future and updated exhibit will include all impeachments." Did political pressure play a role? While museum officials framed the decision as part of routine exhibit maintenance, the timing has raised eyebrows. Since his return to the Oval Office, Trump and his allies have called for efforts to eliminate what they describe as divisive or unpatriotic narratives. In March, Trump issued an executive order entitled "Restoring Truth and Sanity to American History," in which he alleged that the Smithsonian was beholden to 'a divisive, race-centred ideology.' He has placed Vice President JD Vance in charge of an effort to ensure no funding goes to "exhibits or programmes that degrade shared American values, divide Americans based on race, or promote programmes or ideologies inconsistent with Federal law and policy."
