Despite numerous political and even legal hurdles, President Donald Trump and his administration are working hard to deliver on the promise of a secure border and the deportation of illegal immigrants. Here are some of the latest updates surrounding the president’s immigration agenda.

National Guard Tackles Deportation Paperwork

The president has already federalized the National Guard to assist in immigration-related operations in several instances, but now he’s asking National Guardsmen to help fill out U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) paperwork. According to several reports, thousands of National Guard troops will be deployed across at least 20 states and stationed at ICE facilities. Initially, Guardsmen will be tasked with “alien processing,” filling out detention and deportation paperwork so that ICE agents can continue their field operations.

The National Guard troops will not be federalized but will be operating under Title 32 authorities, which allows for Guardsmen to perform law enforcement duties as long as they are under state — not federal — command. At present, U.S. Marines and Naval Reserve soldiers are assisting ICE in an operational capacity, but they will soon be replaced by the National Guard.

Lora Ries, director of the Heritage Foundation’s Border Security and Immigration Center, told The Washington Stand, “The fact that ICE needs to supplement its ranks with the help of the National Guard to speed up deportations shows: (1) millions of deportable aliens continue to reside in the U.S.; and (2) the deportation process is too slow.” She added, “Americans continue to support mass deportations, but the Left obstructs and delays deportations for political power.” Ries continued, “In addition to prosecuting those who interfere with the execution of federal law, the Justice Department should streamline the deportation process to end third and more bites at the apple that deportable aliens currently get to remain in the country.”

Dissident Maryland Judges Claim Immunity

The U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) filed a lawsuit against all 15 U.S. district court judges for the District of Maryland back in June. At issue is a “standing order” from the judges, automatically granting an injunction to any illegal immigrant detained within the court’s jurisdiction who files a habeas corpus complaint. In short, the standing order temporarily bars the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) or Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) from carrying out any deportation.

Andrew Arthur, resident fellow in law and policy at the Center for Immigration Studies (CIS) said in comments shared with TWS, “It’s certainly unusual for DOJ to sue judges, let alone all of the judges on a court, and sue them in that same court, but then these are not your usual standing orders, either.” He observed that the DOJ first brought its concerns to the Judicial Conference, the policymaking body which oversees the federal courts, but Maryland’s district judges made it clear that they would not rescind their standing order. Arthur observed, “If any court issued automatic stay orders like the ones in the U.S. District Court in Maryland, it would have been incumbent on DOJ to challenge them, regardless of who was in the White House.”

In response to the Trump administration’s lawsuit, Maryland’s federal judges claimed immunity. “The district court itself possesses sovereign immunity, and the judges and clerk of court have immunity for their official acts,” the judges wrote. They added, “The complaint does not identify any statutory waiver — unequivocal or otherwise — of district courts’ sovereign immunity from suits seeking injunctive or declaratory relief, and Defendants are not aware of one.” The judges argued that “when a plaintiff attacks the official acts of members of the Judiciary in a standalone lawsuit, judges generally have absolute immunity.” They concluded, “Sovereign immunity bars this suit as to the district court itself, and judicial immunity bars it as to the judges and clerk in their official capacities.”

The DOJ, however, argued that neither sovereign nor judicial immunity would prevent a challenge against an unlawful standing order. “Unlike issuing rulings in particular cases, promulgating standing orders and local rules that violate procedural and substantive requirements is not a ‘function’ traditionally protected by judicial immunity. Thus, courts have often ruled on challenges to local rules with nary a peep about immunity,” the DOJ countered. Furthermore, sovereign immunity does not apply, the DOJ noted, in cases where judges have “acted beyond the scope of their powers and/or in an unconstitutional manner.” The DOJ said that its “lawsuit asserts that Defendants acted outside the scope of their authority — here, the scope as delineated both by Congress and by the Federal Rules. … Immunity does not apply.”

Since the judges of the Maryland district have had to recuse themselves from the case, being defendants, the case is being overseen by Judge Thomas Cullen of the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Virginia, a Trump appointee, who was assigned by Albert Diaz, Chief Judge of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit.

Biden-Appointed Judge Halts Deportations

One of the first moves the Trump administration made was shutting down the parole program used by former President Joe Biden and his administration to usher hundreds of thousands of illegal immigrants into the country. The program allowed U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) and Border Patrol (USBP) to arrest foreigners attempting the enter the U.S. illegally but, instead of detaining them or removing them, simply “parole” them into the U.S. to await an appointment in immigration court. Trump’s DHS ended the program and moved to deport those who had been “paroled” into the country.

On Friday, Judge Jia Cobb of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, a Biden appointee, issued a “stay of agency action,” barring the Trump administration from deporting many of those paroled into the country by the Biden administration. Cobb wrote that illegal immigrants “arrived for inspection at the United States border pursuant to procedures created and advocated by the U.S. Government. They were paroled into this country under those procedures and given the chance to prove their claims for asylum or other relief authorized by our laws. In a world of bad options, they played by the rules.” She continued, “Now, the Government has not only closed off those pathways for new arrivals but changed the game for parolees already here, restricting their ability to seek immigration relief and subjecting them to summary removal despite statutory law prohibiting the Executive Branch from doing so.”

The Trump administration has already requested a stay of Cobb’s order and has appealed her decision to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit. “The Court’s order effectively prevents the Government from applying expedited removal to potentially hundreds of thousands of paroled arriving aliens, thereby halting its ability to expeditiously remove aliens who have no basis to remain in the country,” the administration argued. It further argued that Cobb’s order is in violation of the Supreme Court’s recent decision in Trump v. CASA barring district courts from issuing universal injunctions. “Indeed, in Trump v. CASA … the Supreme Court held that this sort of intrusion on the Executive Branch’s enforcement policies establishes irreparable harm. Finally, CASA also means that the Court’s nationwide remedy is impermissibly broad and instead the remedy should be tailored to Plaintiffs’ members.”

Overstaying Visas Now Costs $15,000

The U.S. State Department implemented a new pilot program on Tuesday, requiring a $15,000 bond for most tourism and work visas, in an effort to curb illegal overstaying. “Aliens applying for visas as temporary visitors for business or pleasure (B-1/B-2) and who are nationals of countries identified by the Department as having high visa overstay rates, where screening and vetting information is deemed deficient … may be subject to the pilot program,” the State Department’s announcement said.

Early in June, Trump and Secretary of State Marco Rubio issued a travel ban impacting countries identified as high terror and crime risks, but also barring travel from countries noted for high visa overstay rates.

DOJ Puts ‘Sanctuary’ Cities on Notice

On Tuesday, the DOJ published a list of nearly three dozen “sanctuary” cities, counties, and states that shield illegal immigrants from federal authorities and refuse to enforce immigration law. “Sanctuary” states named include California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Illinois, Minnesota, Nevada, New York, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont, and Washington. Cities, counties, and other jurisdictions include Albuquerque, Boston, Chicago, Denver, Los Angeles, New Orleans, New York City, Philadelphia, Portland, Seattle, San Francisco, the District of Columbia, Baltimore County in Maryland, Cook County in Illinois, and San Diego and San Francisco Counties in California, among others.

U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi said in a statement, “Sanctuary policies impede law enforcement and put American citizens at risk by design.” She continued, “The Department of Justice will continue bringing litigation against sanctuary jurisdictions and work closely with the Department of Homeland Security to eradicate these harmful policies around the country.” Already, the DOJ has filed lawsuits against the three largest U.S. cities, all of which are “sanctuary” cities: New York City, Los Angeles, and Chicago.