US sets record for child deportation orders
US President Donald Trump has made immigration a central policy since returning to office, accusing his predecessor Joe Biden of enabling mass illegal migration.
Since Trump's inauguration in January, immigration judges have reportedly ordered the removal of more than 53,000 minors, most of them in elementary school or younger. Deportations of teenagers have also risen but remain below the peak seen during Trump's first term in 2020.
Some of the children are reportedly unaccompanied minors without a guardian in the US, with immigration authorities no longer tracking the exact number of such cases.
Lawyers told The Independent that children often do not understand the legal process. In one case, a six-year-old was reportedly separated from his father, detained for four months, and deported without legal aid after federal funding was cut.
Data from the Transactional Records Access Clearinghouse (TRAC) shows children under 11 now face the highest removal rates of any age group. In May, 75% of cases for this group resulted in deportation – compared to 45% in January. For children under four, that number reportedly rose to 78%.
A Department of Homeland Security spokesperson told The Independent that claims Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) targets children are 'false,' saying families are given the option to stay together or designate a caretaker.
Trump's immigration policies have sparked nationwide protests. In Los Angeles, National Guard troops were deployed following unrest in June. Earlier this month, Trump signed a bill allocating $100 billion to ICE for detentions, deportations, and completing the border wall with Mexico.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Russia Today
2 hours ago
- Russia Today
Trump says he's neutral on Ukraine conflict
US President Donald Trump has told reporters that his recent ultimatum to Moscow and promise of weapons for Kiev do not mean he is 'on Ukraine's side' in the ongoing conflict. On Monday, the US leader said he was 'very, very unhappy' with Russia, warning of 'severe' secondary tariffs of up to 100% if no progress is made in diplomacy within 50 days. He also announced upcoming deliveries of advanced weapons systems to Ukraine, which are to be funded by European NATO members. Pressed by reporters on Tuesday, Trump insisted he is 'on nobody's side' and still hopes to resolve the conflict through diplomacy. 'You know the side I'm on? Humanity's side. I want to stop the killing of thousands of people a week. I want to stop the killing. I want the killing to stop in the Ukraine-Russia war. That's the side I'm on,' the US president said. 'I've solved a lot of wars in the last three months, but I haven't gotten this one yet. This is a Biden war. It's not a Trump war. I'm here to try and get us out of that mess,' he added. Since taking office in January, Trump has maintained that he wants the neighboring countries to make peace and has held several phone calls with Russian President Vladimir Putin focused on settling the conflict. Moscow says it remains open to negotiating with Kiev but has yet to receive a response on when new peace talks will take place. The two sides have held two rounds of direct negotiations in Istanbul so far this year, but no breakthroughs have been achieved, aside from agreements to conduct large-scale prisoner exchanges. Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov stated on Tuesday that EU and NATO leaders have put Trump under 'improper pressure' to adopt a hardline stance on the conflict. Deputy Foreign Minister Sergey Ryabkov stressed that 'any attempts to make demands, let alone issue ultimatums, are unacceptable.' Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov also criticized Trump's threat, noting that 'such decisions, made in Washington, in NATO countries, and in Brussels, are perceived by the Ukrainian side not as a signal toward peace, but as a signal to continue the war.'
Russia Today
3 hours ago
- Russia Today
Trump tells Zelensky not to attack Moscow
US President Donald Trump said on Tuesday that he told Ukraine's Vladimir Zelensky not to target Moscow with military strikes. The statement comes in response to media speculation that he had encouraged Kiev to carry out long-range missile attacks deep into Russia. The Financial Times reported on Tuesday that Trump had privately asked Zelensky whether he could hit Moscow and St. Petersburg if Washington supplied long-range weapons. Zelensky reportedly replied that he could. Asked by reporters whether Zelensky ought to fire missiles at Russia's capital, Trump replied 'No, he shouldn't target Moscow.' White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt accused the FT of twisting the president's words, saying it is 'notorious for taking words wildly out of context to get clicks because their paper is dying.' Leavitt insisted that Trump was 'merely asking a question, not encouraging further killing,' stressing that the president was 'working tirelessly to stop the killing and end this war.' Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov also weighed in on the report, noting that 'as a rule, all of this usually turns out to be fake.' He added, however, that 'sometimes there are indeed serious leaks, even in publications we once considered quite respectable.' The FT report followed on Trump's ultimatum to Moscow, in which he threatened to impose 'severe' secondary tariffs on Russia's trade partners if no progress towards peace is made within 50 days. Trump also announced future deliveries of advanced weapons systems to Ukraine, which are to be funded by European NATO members. Since taking office in January, Trump has maintained that he wants the neighboring countries to make peace and has had several phone calls with Russian President Vladimir Putin that were focused on settling the conflict. Moscow says it remains open to negotiating with Kiev but has yet to receive a response on when new peace talks will take place. The two sides have held two rounds of direct negotiations in Istanbul so far this year, but no breakthroughs were achieved, other than agreements to carry out large-scale prisoner exchanges. Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov stated on Tuesday that EU and NATO leaders have put Trump under 'improper pressure' to adopt a hardline stance on the conflict.
Russia Today
3 hours ago
- Russia Today
Fyodor Lukyanov: Here's the fundamental difference between Russian and US strategy towards Ukraine
Donald Trump's recent comments on Ukraine were highly anticipated, especially given his habit of surprising even those who consider themselves seasoned observers. His remarks on 14 July, delivered alongside NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte, were characteristically loud but ultimately underwhelming. That in itself should not be surprising. Over the past six months, Trump's style on major international issues has followed a familiar pattern. Ukraine is no exception. At the heart of Trump's approach lies a calculated strategy of noise. He generates maximum bluster to create the impression of strength and decisiveness. What follows is not action, but an endless repetition of simple slogans. Clarification is deliberately avoided, the aim being to appear both consistent and unpredictable. Behind this theater lies a reluctance to become truly entangled in any foreign conflict. Trump wants short, manageable involvement with low costs and quick exit ramps. Above all, he is not willing to challenge the mainstream consensus in Washington as deeply as he claims. For all the bluster, Trump remains tethered to the very 'Deep State' he rails against. The Israel-Iran confrontation earlier this year offers a textbook example. One dramatic strike on Iranian nuclear sites gave the impression of a bold move. It satisfied different parts of Trump's base, pleased Israel, and sent a message to Tehran – without triggering a regional war. Trump got to claim a geopolitical 'win' and was once again floated as a Nobel Peace Prize candidate. But for all the headlines, little actually changed. Iran's nuclear program continues, and the political dynamics of the region remain largely intact. Still, Trump presented it as a major American contribution to world peace. The problem is, Ukraine is not the Middle East. It is far more complex, and Trump appears to know it. His instinct is to avoid the problem altogether. But he can't. The conflict is now a central issue in US-European relations, and Trump's own supporters are split between isolationists and hawks. He knows he cannot ignore Ukraine outright. Nor can he allow Biden's war to become his. This explains the repeated emphasis in his 'It's Not My War' speech. He said it three times. So, what did Trump actually propose? Not much. He suggested that America's European allies should send Ukraine their old weapons systems – especially Patriot batteries – and then buy new ones from the United States, paying '100 percent.' That, for Trump, is the core of the plan: turn war into business. The logic is simple and familiar. Europe gets rid of its aging stock, Ukraine gets support, and America gets orders. But the practicalities remain vague: what systems, what timeline, what delivery mechanisms? These were left unclear. Then there's the question of exerting economic pressure on Russia. Trump approved a plan to impose 100 percent tariffs on Russian exports to third countries. This is a more moderate version of Senator Lindsey Graham's 500 percent threat. The idea is to squeeze Russia economically without enforcing a full embargo. But here, too, the scheme is light on details. The White House will issue the duties and can cancel them at will. Implementation will be delayed by 50 days – standard Trump trade deal tactics. Nothing is final. Everything is leverage. The real message is that Trump is still negotiating. He can't reach a deal with Putin, but he wants to pressure Moscow without entering into an open confrontation. He still refuses to personally attack Putin, saying only that he is 'very dissatisfied' and 'disappointed.' That signals he is keeping his options open. He wants credit for any peace that might emerge but is unwilling to own the risks of deeper engagement. Trump also repeated his claim to being the world's premier peacemaker, listing off a string of supposed triumphs – India-Pakistan, Israel-Iran, Serbia-Kosovo, Gaza ('well, almost'), the DRC and Rwanda, Armenia and Azerbaijan, and Egypt and a 'neighboring country' (apparently forgetting the name of Ethiopia). These boasts reflect the core Trump method: declare success, repeat it often, and rely on public attention spans being short. Despite the showmanship, the risk of American entanglement in Ukraine remains high. The measures Trump has announced will not meaningfully shift the military-political balance, but they may prolong the war, at increased cost. Meanwhile, the channel of negotiation opened by Trump's call to Putin in February appears to be closing. Trump is reportedly irritated with Moscow, but Russia has not moved an inch. Nor does it plan to. Putin sees no reason to adapt his position simply to accommodate Trump's political timetable. There are rumors that Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov delivered some new proposals to Senator Marco Rubio in Malaysia. But based on past experience, these are almost certainly familiar Russian talking points in new packaging. Moscow's approach to resolving the Ukrainian crisis has remained unchanged for over three years. Trump's rhetoric won't alter that. From the Kremlin's perspective, Washington no longer has the capacity to engage at the same level as it did in 2023–2024. The political will, financial resources, and strategic bandwidth simply aren't there. Half-measures from the US won't deliver results, though they may prolong the conflict. That is unfortunate, but not sufficient cause for Moscow to adjust its course. Trump, for his part, doesn't want to stay on the Ukraine file. He wants to move on – and fast. Many in the Pentagon share that view. But the war will not end just because Washington wants to focus elsewhere. Neither side has a clear long-term strategy. What remains is inertia – and inertia, for now, is stronger than article was first published by the magazine Profile and was translated and edited by the RT team.
