Marines killed in vehicle crash during border deployment identified
Lance Cpl. Albert A. Aguilera, 22, and Lance Cpl. Marcelino M. Gamino, 28, both combat engineers assigned to 1st Combat Engineer Battalion, 1st Marine Division, were killed in a crash during a convoy movement supporting Joint Task Force Southern Border operations near Santa Teresa, New Mexico, the 1st Marine Division said in a release Thursday.
A third, unnamed Marine injured in the crash remains in critical condition, according to the release.
The three Marines were transported to University Medical Hospital in El Paso, Texas, where Aguilar and Gamino were pronounced dead, officials said.
'The loss of Lance Cpl. Aguilera and Lance Cpl. Gamino is deeply felt by all of us,' said U.S. Marine Corps Lt. Col. Tyrone A. Barrion, commanding officer for 1st Combat Engineer Battalion and Task Force Sapper. 'I extend my heartfelt condolences and prayers to the families of our fallen brothers. Our top priority right now is to ensure that their families, and the Marines affected by their passing, are fully supported during this difficult time.'
A native of Riverside, California, Aguilera enlisted in March 2023 and was promoted to lance corporal in May 2024. Gamino, from Fresno, California, enlisted in May 2022 and was promoted to lance corporal in August 2024. Gamino deployed to Darwin, Australia, with Marine Rotational Force-Darwin in 2024.
The accident, which occurred about 20 miles from Fort Bliss, is under investigation, officials said.
The Marines are among thousands of troops deployed to America's southern border under President Donald Trump's executive order to bolster border security. Roughly 7,100 active duty troops and 4,600 National Guard troops under state control are currently assigned to border operations, according to The Associated Press.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
New York Times
11 hours ago
- New York Times
Some Chinese Weigh Painful Question: Stay or Flee Under Trump?
Ever since immigration raids swept Los Angeles in June, Han Lihua, 46, has spent much of his time hiding in his apartment, skipping his Amazon delivery shifts and scrolling on social media to look for nearby sightings of Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents. In 2022, he fled China, where he ran an independent student newspaper and taught high school literature. He crossed the treacherous Darién Gap on the border of Colombia and Panama before crossing the Southern border of the United States illegally in early 2023. Now, with the Trump administration carrying out a sweeping immigration crackdown, he is among the Chinese immigrants who say fear has eclipsed their fragile new lives, forcing difficult questions about whether the United States can offer them a better situation after they fled an authoritarian government. 'Everyone is so afraid,' Mr. Han said. 'I didn't expect this would happen in the United States.' Since China reopened its borders in January 2023 after Covid lockdowns, more than 63,000 Chinese nationals like Mr. Han have fled and crossed the U.S. southern border without authorization, according to the U.S. Customs and Border Protection, making them the fourth-largest group by nationality after migrants from Venezuela, Haiti, and Ecuador. Under Trump's policies, however, illegal crossings along the southern border have dropped dramatically, reaching 6,000 arrests in June, a low not seen in decades. Most Chinese immigrants fled strict censorship, growing political repression or Beijing's zero-Covid policies, which often shut down entire cities for weeks, if not months, trapping people in their homes with little access to food, medical care or work. Those who spoke out against the policies could face harassment or detention. But with the Trump administration's escalating immigration enforcement, many Chinese immigrants like Mr. Han now confront a question they never imagined they would face: Should they stay or leave? Huang Xiaosheng, a Los-Angeles-based Chinese immigration lawyer, described the situation as 'much harsher' since May, when the Trump administration set a goal of a minimum of 3,000 arrests a day. Securing bail has become nearly impossible, he said. Want all of The Times? Subscribe.
CNBC
a day ago
- CNBC
Appeals court keeps order blocking Trump administration from indiscriminate immigration sweeps
A federal appeals court ruled Friday night to uphold a lower court's temporary order blocking the Trump administration from conducting indiscriminate immigration stops and arrests in Southern California. A three-judge panel of the Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals held a hearing Monday afternoon at which the federal government asked the court to overturn a temporary restraining order issued July 12 by Judge Maame E. Frimpong, arguing it hindered their enforcement of immigration law. Immigrant advocacy groups filed suit last month accusing President Donald Trump's administration of systematically targeting brown-skinned people in Southern California during the administration's crackdown on illegal immigration. The lawsuit included three detained immigrants and two U.S. citizens as plaintiffs. In her order, Frimpong said there was a "mountain of evidence" that federal immigration enforcement tactics were violating the Constitution. She wrote the government cannot use factors such as apparent race or ethnicity, speaking Spanish or English with an accent, presence at a location such as a tow yard or car wash, or someone's occupation as the only basis for reasonable suspicion to detain someone. The appeals court panel agreed and questioned the government's need to oppose an order preventing them from violating the constitution. "If, as Defendants suggest, they are not conducting stops that lack reasonable suspicion, they can hardly claim to be irreparably harmed by an injunction aimed at preventing a subset of stops not supported by reasonable suspicion," the judges wrote. A hearing for a preliminary injunction, which would be a more substantial court order as the lawsuit proceeds, is scheduled for September. The Los Angeles region has been a battleground with the Trump administration over its aggressive immigration strategy that spurred protests and the deployment of the National Guard and Marines for several weeks. Federal agents have rounded up immigrants without legal status to be in the U.S. from Home Depots, car washes, bus stops, and farms, many of whom have lived in the country for decades. Among the plaintiffs is Los Angeles resident Brian Gavidia, who was shown in a video taken by a friend on June 13 being seized by federal agents as he yells, "I was born here in the states, East LA bro!" They want to "send us back to a world where a U.S. citizen ... can be grabbed, slammed against a fence and have his phone and ID taken from him just because he was working at a tow yard in a Latino neighborhood," American Civil Liberties Union attorney Mohammad Tajsar told the court Monday. The federal government argued that it hadn't been given enough time to collect and present evidence in the lawsuit, given that it was filed shortly before the July 4 holiday and a hearing was held the following week. "It's a very serious thing to say that multiple federal government agencies have a policy of violating the Constitution," attorney Jacob Roth said. He also argued that the lower court's order was too broad, and that immigrant advocates did not present enough evidence to prove that the government had an official policy of stopping people without reasonable suspicion. He referred to the four factors of race, language, presence at a location, and occupation that were listed in the temporary restraining order, saying the court should not be able to ban the government from using them at all. He also argued that the order was unclear on what exactly is permissible under law. "Legally, I think it's appropriate to use the factors for reasonable suspicion," Roth said The judges sharply questioned the government over their arguments. "No one has suggested that you cannot consider these factors at all," Judge Jennifer Sung said. However, those factors alone only form a "broad profile" and don't satisfy the reasonable suspicion standard to stop someone, she said. Sung, a Biden appointee, said that in an area like Los Angeles, where Latinos make up as much as half the population, those factors "cannot possibly weed out those who have undocumented status and those who have documented legal status." She also asked: "What is the harm to being told not to do something that you claim you're already not doing?" Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass called the Friday night decision a "victory for the rule of law" and said the city will protect residents from the "racial profiling and other illegal tactics" used by federal agents.
Boston Globe
2 days ago
- Boston Globe
Appeals court keeps order blocking Trump administration from indiscriminate immigration sweeps
In her order, Frimpong said there was a 'mountain of evidence' that federal immigration enforcement tactics were violating the Constitution. She wrote the government cannot use factors such as apparent race or ethnicity, speaking Spanish or English with an accent, presence at a location such as a tow yard or car wash, or someone's occupation as the only basis for reasonable suspicion to detain someone. Get Starting Point A guide through the most important stories of the morning, delivered Monday through Friday. Enter Email Sign Up The appeals court panel agreed and questioned the government's need to oppose an order preventing them from violating the constitution. Advertisement 'If, as Defendants suggest, they are not conducting stops that lack reasonable suspicion, they can hardly claim to be irreparably harmed by an injunction aimed at preventing a subset of stops not supported by reasonable suspicion,' the judges wrote. A hearing for a preliminary injunction, which would be a more substantial court order as the lawsuit proceeds, is scheduled for September. Advertisement The Los Angeles region has been a battleground with the Trump administration over its aggressive immigration strategy that spurred protests and the deployment of the National Guards and Marines for several weeks. Federal agents have rounded up immigrants without legal status to be in the U.S. from Home Depots, car washes, bus stops, and farms, many who have lived in the country for decades. Among the plaintiffs is Los Angeles resident Brian Gavidia, who was shown in a video taken by a friend June 13 being seized by federal agents as he yells, 'I was born here in the states, East LA bro!' They want to 'send us back to a world where a U.S. citizen ... can be grabbed, slammed against a fence and have his phone and ID taken from him just because he was working at a tow yard in a Latino neighborhood,' American Civil Liberties Union attorney Mohammad Tajsar told the court Monday. The federal government argued that it hadn't been given enough time to collect and present evidence in the lawsuit, given that it was filed shortly before the July 4 holiday and a hearing was held the following week. 'It's a very serious thing to say that multiple federal government agencies have a policy of violating the Constitution,' attorney Jacob Roth said. He also argued that the lower court's order was too broad, and that immigrant advocates did not present enough evidence to prove that the government had an official policy of stopping people without reasonable suspicion. He referred to the four factors of race, language, presence at a location, and occupation that were listed in the temporary restraining order, saying the court should not be able to ban the government from using them at all. He also argued that the order was unclear on what exactly is permissible under law. Advertisement 'Legally, I think it's appropriate to use the factors for reasonable suspicion,' Roth said The judges sharply questioned the government over their arguments. 'No one has suggested that you cannot consider these factors at all,' Judge Jennifer Sung said. However, those factors alone only form a 'broad profile' and don't satisfy the reasonable suspicion standard to stop someone, she said. Sung, a Biden appointee, said that in an area like Los Angeles, where Latinos make up as much as half the population, those factors 'cannot possibly weed out those who have undocumented status and those who have documented legal status.' She also asked: 'What is the harm to being told not to do something that you claim you're already not doing?' Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass called the Friday night decision a 'victory for the rule of law' and said the city will protect residents from the 'racial profiling and other illegal tactics' used by federal agents.
