Appeals court says Trump’s order suspending asylum claims at the border is unlawful
A Border Patrol Vehicle Stands Watch at the Mexican American Border Wall Outside of El Paso Texas. (Photo by Joey Ingelhart/E+)
(WASHINGTON) — An appeals court on Friday affirmed a district court’s ruling that an executive order invoked by President Donald Trump to suspend immigration asylum claims is unlawful.
In a divided 2-1 ruling, the Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit affirmed a court order saying the Immigration and Nationality Act allows migrants who cross the southern border apply for asylum.
“The INA does not allow the President to remove Plaintiffs under summary removal procedures of his own making,” the court wrote. “Nor does it allow the Executive to suspend Plaintiffs’ right to apply for asylum, deny Plaintiffs’ access to withholding of removal under the INA, or curtail mandatory procedures for adjudicating Plaintiffs’ Convention Against Torture claims.”
On Day 1 of his second term in office, President Trump issued an executive order he called “Guaranteeing the States Protection Against Invasion,” which aimed to block immigrants from seeking asylum and other forms of relief once they enter the United States and to allow for their swift removal from the country.
Friday’s ruling means that migrants who make it to U.S. soil, whether at a legal port of entry or in between, can legally seek asylum as has been allowed in previous administrations.
The Trump administration will likely appeal the decision, which could set up a possible showdown at the Supreme Court.
“This decision will potentially save the lives of thousands of people fleeing grave danger who were denied even a hearing under the Trump administration’s horrific asylum ban,” said ACLU attorney Lee Gelernt, who argued the appeal.
A spokesperson for the Department of Homeland Security said they “strongly disagree” with the ruling and that “this will not be the last word on this matter.”
“America’s asylum system was never intended to be used as a de facto amnesty program or a catch-all, get-out-of-deportation-free card. President Trump’s top priority remains the screening and vetting of all aliens seeking to come, live, or work in the United States,” the spokesperson said. “We will use all of the tools in our toolbox to ensure that the integrity of our legal immigration system is upheld, fraud is uncovered and expeditiously addressed, and illegal aliens are removed from the country.”
Bill Clinton speaks onstage during the Clinton Global Initiative 2025 Annual Meeting at New York Hilton Midtown on September 25, 2025 in New York City. (Photo by JP Yim/Getty Images for New York Hilton Midtown)
(WASHINGTON) — Former President Bill Clinton, in his opening statement at his historic closed-door deposition before the Republican-led House Oversight Committee on Friday, denied any knowledge of the crimes committed by convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein, going on to say making his wife Hillary Clinton testify “was simply not right.”
In his statement as released, he stated that he will often say, “I do not recall” throughout his questioning because the events were “all a long time ago.”
“I saw nothing, and I did nothing wrong,” Clinton said, according to the statement.
The former president is being grilled by the committee as part of its investigation into Epstein in Chappaqua, New York — marking a historic moment for a former president. Friday’s deposition is the first time a former president has been compelled to testify before a congressional panel.
He is facing questions under oath about his relationship with Epstein and photos that show the former president with both Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell, Epstein’s co-conspirator who was sentenced to 20 years in prison for sex trafficking and other crimes.
The former president’s testimony comes a day after the committee questioned former Secretary of State and first lady Hillary Clinton over the couple’s dealings with the convicted sex offender.
On Friday, Bill Clinton said he had to “get personal” and blasted the committee for forcing his wife to answer their questions.
“You made Hillary come in. She had nothing to do with Jeffrey Epstein. Nothing. She has no memory of even meeting him. She neither traveled with him nor visited any of his properties,” he said in his statements as released. “Whether you subpoenaed 10 people or 10,000, including her was simply not right.”
In her deposition Thursday, Hillary Clinton said she did not know Epstein, could not recall ever encountering him and never visited him on his island or at his home or office.
Hillary Clinton, on Thursday, also gave a preview of how her husband, former President Bill Clinton, will handle his own deposition.
“I think it is fair to say that the vast majority of people who had contact with him before his criminal pleas in ’08 were like most people — they did not know what he was doing. And I think that that is exactly what my husband will testify to tomorrow,” she said.
Neither Bill Clinton nor Hillary Clinton has been accused of wrongdoing and both deny having any knowledge of Epstein’s crimes.
No Epstein survivor or associate has ever made a public allegation of wrongdoing or inappropriate behavior by the former president or his wife in connection with his prior relationship with Epstein.
Bill Clinton said in his opening statement that he had “no idea of the crimes Epstein was committing.”
“No matter how many photos you show me, I have two things that at the end of the day matter more than your interpretation of those 20-year-old photos. I know what I saw, and more importantly, what I didn’t see. I know what I did, and more importantly, what I didn’t do,” he said in his statement as released.
Oversight Committee Chairman James Comer reiterated Friday morning that the Clintons have been called to testify to try to answer questions about Epstein.
“No one’s accusing anyone of any wrongdoing, but I think the American people have a lot of questions, and our House Oversight Committee is committed to getting answers,” Comer said Friday morning.
Bill Clinton’s association with Epstein was first noted publicly in 2002 after reporters learned of the former president’s flight that year on Epstein’s jet for a humanitarian mission to multiple African nations.
Bill Clinton told New York Magazine through a spokesperson at the time that “Jeffrey is both a highly successful financier and a committed philanthropist with a keen sense of global markets and an in-depth knowledge of 21st century science.”
Maxwell said in a recorded interview last year with Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche, that it was she, not Epstein, who had a friendship with Bill Clinton, and that she was the one who suggested and organized his trips on Epstein’s aircraft.
The Clintons were subpoenaed to appear under oath in front of the committee for a deposition in January, but failed to comply, arguing the subpoenas were without legal merit. Rather, they proposed a four-hour transcribed interview instead.
David Kendall, the Clintons’ lawyer, argued that the couple has no information relevant to the committee’s investigation of the federal government’s handling of investigations into Epstein and Maxwell, and should not be required to appear for in-person testimony.
Kendall contended the Clintons should be permitted to provide the limited information they have to the committee in writing.
Comer had long threatened to hold the Clintons in contempt if they failed to appear before the committee, so when they didn’t, a contempt resolution was drafted and put to a vote.
The Oversight Committee passed the contempt resolution with nine Democrats voting in favor of it, teeing it up for a full House vote.
At the last minute, just before the resolution was to be voted on in the House, the Clintons agreed to sit for a deposition, postponing further consideration of a contempt vote.
Democrats on the committee said they hope this week’s testimony from the Clintons spark Republican committee members to investigate more of Epstein’s ties to President Donald Trump.
Trump has repeatedly denied any knowledge of Epstein’s crimes and has said that he cut off contact with his former friend more than 20 years ago.
“We have said from day one that we want to talk to former President Bill Clinton, and the other person we want to talk to is current President Donald Trump,” Rep. Robert Garcia, the top Democrat on the committee, said Friday. “And so we should be very clear that now that we’re going to hear from former President Clinton, I hope that Chairman Comer and the Republicans will join us in demanding that the person who actually appears more times in the files than the former president who we want to speak with is President Donald Trump.”
While the Clintons have agreed to speak with the committee behind closed doors, they have still pushed for public hearings as part of the committee’s investigation.
“I will not sit idly as they use me as a prop in a closed-door kangaroo court by a Republican Party running scared,” Bill Clinton wrote in a lengthy post on X. “If they want answers, let’s stop the games & do this the right way: in a public hearing, where the American people can see for themselves what this is really about.”
Linda McMahon, US education secretary, during a cabinet meeting at the White House in Washington, DC, US, on Tuesday, Dec. 2, 2025. (Yuri Gripas/CNP/Bloomberg via Getty Images)
(NEW YORK) — U.S. Secretary of Education Linda McMahon granted Iowa a first-of-its-kind waiver to use millions of unrestricted federal dollars on education in a move that inches the Trump administration closer to its goal of transferring education power and decision-making to states.
“States should lead — Washington should support their sound approaches and get out of the way,” McMahon announced on Wednesday. “We hope that as we partner with congressional leaders to return education to the states we can work with them [Iowa] to expand these opportunities for states and local leaders to run their education systems.”
The over $9 million waiver will help the Hawkeye State save millions in “compliance costs” over four years as the money flows directly back into the classroom, McMahon said in a post on X.
“Iowa now has the flexibility to cut paperwork and simplify a hundred percent of state activities funding streams. It can invest in proven strategies to build a world-class teacher pipeline, close achievement gaps, and open post secondary opportunities to prepare for a great career,” McMahon said.
Under the waiver, certain federal requirements will be dropped so that less strings are attached giving the state more flexibility in using the aid. Prior to the formal waiver request, the state submitted a Unified Allocation Plan to show how it would use its funds to improve academic outcomes for Iowa’s education programs. The plan includes supporting effective educator development, English language acquisition, among other topics, according to state education leaders.
The approval of the waiver bolsters McMahon’s mission to reduce the federal government’s role in education nationwide. But education is already a local-level issue in the U.S. On average, state and local education agencies provide about 90% of public school funding across the country.
The agency is also working with about six additional states on their waiver requests, an Education Department spokesperson confirmed to ABC News.
Title VIII of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 allows states and tribes to submit requests to waive any statutory or regulatory requirement seeking to “reduce administrative burden” and align programs with the needs of its students, according to a release from the Department of Education.
In addition to Iowa’s $9 million in flexible federal funding, the Education Department approved the state’s application for “Ed-Flex authority,” which allows the state to grant individual school districts waivers from certain federal requirements without first having to submit individual waiver requests, according to the release from the department.
McMahon made the announcement during her “Returning Education to the States Tour.”
During her first year as the nation’s top education official, McMahon has made about two dozen stops in states across the country aiming to identify the best educational practices on the local level and work with local leaders to scale those practices nationwide, she says.
Wednesday’s announcement allows state leaders to focus federal dollars on work that best improves the achievement of Iowa students, according to the release from the department. For the announcement, McMahon was joined by Iowa Gov. Kim Reynolds, director of Education McKenzie Snow, and surrounded by about a dozen students at Broadway Elementary School in Denison.
Reynolds touted Iowa’s education models, including teaching the science of reading and using evidence-based math and reading practices. She stressed that the move Wednesday means “moving the dial” towards returning education to the states.
“The more red tape that we cut from the federal level, the more Iowa can increase education quality,” she added.
“I look forward to continuing to improve student outcomes, reduce red tape for schools, support teachers, and ensure federal education dollars are focused toward state and local priorities where they make the greatest difference,” Reynolds said in a statement.
However, critics of the Trump administration’s education initiatives say they believe abolishing the agency and giving sole power to the states could harm the millions of students across the country.
The top Democrat on the House Education and Workforce Committee slammed McMahon’s approval of the education waiver for allegedly ignoring the law and abandoning marginalized students.
In a statement, Ranking Member Bobby Scott, D-Virginia, urged the Department to “refrain” from granting similar waivers to other states.
“Congress must not sit idly by as the Trump administration makes every effort to drag students, educators, and parents back into an era where students were denied the opportunities and resources they needed to succeed,” Scott said.
Three minutes and two seconds before the first shot is fired, Alex Pretti holds a phone before a federal officer on Nicollet Ave in Minnesota. Obtained by (ABC News)
(MINNEAPOLIS) — The interaction that ended in the death of Alex Pretti in Minneapolis on Saturday morning began at least three minutes earlier when Pretti appeared to be using his phone to record CBP officers, according to videos reviewed and verified by ABC News.
Minutes later, Pretti was pinned on the street by multiple federal agents — visibly being hit by one of them — when one of the officers can be seen leaving the struggle with what appears to be a gun.
Those videos appear to contradict, at least in part, claims by federal officials that Pretti “approached U.S. Border Patrol officers with a 9mm semi-automatic handgun” and “attacked” officers carrying out immigration duties.
During a news conference Saturday, DHS Secretary Kristi Noem said Pretti “arrived at the scene to inflict maximum damage on individuals and to kill law enforcement.”
Videos verified by ABC News show that Pretti appeared to be using his phone to record the agents before he was shoved by a federal officer. Seconds later, a federal officer repeatedly pepper-sprayed Pretti and then appeared to pull him into the street.
While Pretti seems to have been pinned on the street by officers, one of the agents is seen in multiple verified videos emerging from the scrum with a handgun that appears to match the weapon federal officials say Pretti was carrying. Before the first shot is fired, another agent can be seen drawing his own handgun, while another repeatedly hits Pretti.
In total, 10 shots were fired in less than five seconds, according to a forensic audio analysis of the videos. Pretti was declared dead on the scene.
“What the videos depict is that this guy did not walk up to anybody from CBP in a threatening manner,” said former acting DHS undersecretary for intelligence John Cohen, a police trainer and ABC News contributor. “For [DHS] to construe that he arrived at that location with the intent to shoot those border patrol officers, there’s nothing in the video evidence that we’ve seen thus far that would support that.”
This is a timeline based on five different verified videos of the incident.
8:58:11 a.m. — Three minutes and two seconds before the first shot is fired, Alex Pretti holds a phone before a federal officer on Nicollet Ave. in Minnesota, in what appears to be an apparent attempt to record a nearby detention by immigration authorities.
8:58:22 a.m.— A second federal officer carrying a canister of pepper spray approaches Pretti, who continues to hold up his phone.
8:58:29 a.m. — One federal officer appears to push Pretti towards the sidewalk.
8:59:08 a.m. — Another eyewitness begins recording the incident, showing Pretti continuing to lift his phone towards officers, as they appear to detain someone in the street.
8:59:24 a.m.— Pretti is seen lifting a phone towards the officers as they move a detainee into a nearby vehicle.
9:00:12 a.m. — Pretti continues to lift his phone towards nearby federal officers as they interact with two unidentified individuals, one with an orange backpack and another in a parka.
9:00:21 a.m. — The two individuals, who were later pepper-sprayed alongside Pretti, speak with a federal agent. Several people honk and whistle. “Watch out for that car,” the officer says as a car passes the group.
9:00:41 a.m. — Three different cameras capture the next interaction. The officer shouts at one of the civilians, “Do not push them into traffic,” and pushes them towards Pretti. Pretti continues to raise his phone towards the officers.
9:00:44 a.m. — The individual who was pushed appears to hold onto Pretti as the federal officer approaches them.
9:00:45 a.m. — The federal officer appears to push Pretti.
9:00:47 a.m. — The officer is seen pushing the individual with the orange backpack.
9:00:50 a.m. — The officer uses pepper spray on Pretti, and Pretti appears to raise his hand towards the officer to get between the officer and the person with the backpack, but the officer immediately pepper-sprays him. According to ABC News contributor and former acting DHS undersecretary Cohen, it appears Pretti used his hand in an attempt to signal that he was not a threat to officers.
9:00:53 a.m. — The officer pepper-sprays the other two civilians again.
9:00:54 a.m.— After being sprayed, Pretti appears to fall into the person with the backpack and possibly grab that person to stabilize himself.
9:00:56 a.m. — The federal officer appears to pull Pretti into the street, appearing to tug him by the hood of his coat.
9:01:02 a.m.— Three officers hold down Pretti, while another group of officers surrounds Pretti. According to ABC News contributor and former acting DHS undersecretary Cohen, the officers do not appear to be following the tactical steps to control and arrest Pretti. “This just seemed to be a free-for-all, and they didn’t seem to have any understanding from a tactical perspective on how to gain control of that individual,” he said.
9:01:05 a.m. — A nearby woman can be heard screaming, “That is police brutality. They are hitting an observer. They’re kicking them in the face.” At one point, at least five officers are on top of Pretti, pinning him down.
9:04:11 a.m. — One of the agents appears to hit Pretti, swinging his hand to repeatedly punch Pretti.
9:01:12 a.m. — One of the officers appears to draw a handgun.
9:01:13 a.m.— One of the federal officers appears to remove a gun from Pretti’s waist that seems to match the handgun federal officials said he was carrying.
9:01:14 a.m. — Another video shows the officer in the grey jacket emerging from the scrum, holding a firearm that appears to match Pretti’s weapon. The video of the officer entering the scrum did not show the agent carrying a weapon. Three cameras capture the moment.
9:01:14 a.m. — First shot is fired. At least one officer immediately steps away from Pretti.
9:01:16 a.m. — One second after the first shot, three additional shots are fired. Pretti appears to go limp and fall to the ground.
9:01:19 a.m.— Within three seconds, six more shots are fired. The six agents have stepped back from Pretti’s body.
9:01:45 a.m. — Twenty-nine seconds after the first shot, an officer approaches Pretti. According to a sworn affidavit from a doctor who says they treated Pretti at the scene, Pretti had at least three bullet wounds in his back, an additional wound on his upper chest, and another possible wound on his neck.
09:02:28 a.m. — Seventy-four seconds after the first shot is fired, the officer in a grey jacket is heard saying, “I got the gun. I got the gun,” and walks towards the officers surrounding Pretti.
An analysis conducted by Robert Maher, a professor at Montana State University specializing in audio forensics, concluded that 10 shots were fired in less than 5 seconds.
