Connect with us

Biden Administration

BREAKING: Massive Surge in Illegal Immigration Sees Nearly 1.4 Million Undocumented Migrants Have Entered the U.S. Since January

Published

on

In a striking revelation, newly obtained internal data from U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) has shown that 7.4 million illegal migrants are currently on the agency’s non-detained docket.

This staggering figure includes individuals who crossed the border illegally and were released back into the country while awaiting future court dates, as well as those who have been ordered deported by a judge but remain in the country.


From January to May 2024, nearly 1.4 million undocumented immigrants from 177 countries entered the United States through Mexico, according to Mexico’s National Institute of Migration. This surge, spanning nearly every nation globally, represents an unprecedented level of diversity in the migrant population.


Currently, each ICE officer is responsible for managing approximately 7,000 cases. With the number of cases expected to surpass 8 million by October 2024, the caseload per officer is projected to increase even further, straining an already overwhelmed system.


Mark Krikorian, executive director of the Center for Immigration Studies, emphasized the unusual nature of this situation. “Surges of illegal immigration ‘over brief periods of time’ have happened in the past,” Krikorian said. “But this ‘huge variety’ of countries is unprecedented.” He noted that with 193 member states in the United Nations, nearly the entire world seems to be taking advantage of the perceived “open invite” by the current administration.

“There were always a few exotics, that’s kind of my term,” Krikorian told Fox News Digital. “But President Biden essentially invited mass illegal immigration by letting people get across the border, and word spreads, so you’re getting people from everywhere.”


Krikorian pointed out that the influx of undocumented immigrants has overwhelmed the country’s social services system, crowded school districts already bursting at the seams, and flooded the streets with homeless encampments.


The global nature of the influx presents significant challenges for enforcement. Each country has different requirements for travel documents and proving nationality. Many illegal aliens destroy their documents, complicating identification and repatriation efforts.

“Each country is going to have different requirements about what kind of travel documents do you need? Can you prove that they’re from that country?” Krikorian said. “If someone is from Honduras but he says he’s from Peru, what are you going to do?”


Managing deportations for immigrants from 177 countries means exponentially more flights and dealing with numerous consular services and diplomatic agencies. Some countries may not even accept undocumented immigrants back or will “slow walk” the process.

“Some countries would prefer we just keep them, so they’ll make it difficult,” Krikorian said. “They’ll lose the paperwork, or that kind of stuff, and each one of those things is one more complication in trying to enforce the law.”


The strain is visible in makeshift shelters, such as the one at Chicago’s O’Hare International Airport, where recently arrived migrants are housed on cots and the floor.


The situation highlights the immense challenges facing U.S. immigration policy and enforcement as it grapples with an unprecedented surge in illegal immigration from around the world. As ICE officers manage ever-increasing caseloads and logistical hurdles mount, the debate over how to address this issue continues to intensify.

Biden Administration

Former Obama-Biden Advisor Claims “The First Amendment Is Out of Control,” Hinders Government Action

Published

on

In a controversial opinion piece published recently, Tim Wu, an advisor to both the Obama and Biden administrations, argued that the First Amendment is becoming a significant obstacle to effective governance. The essay, titled “The First Amendment is Out of Control,” has sparked widespread debate and criticism.

Wu’s argument centers on the assertion that the First Amendment, designed to protect free speech, is now being exploited by powerful entities, including Big Tech companies, to resist regulation and oversight. He cites recent Supreme Court rulings regarding Texas and Florida laws aimed at regulating social media platforms as examples of this exploitation.

According to Wu, the collaboration between the government and major social media platforms is often hindered by the First Amendment, which is used as a defense to protect free speech in digital public forums. He suggests that this constitutional protection is being misused to prevent necessary government action aimed at safeguarding citizens.

Critics, however, argue that Wu’s perspective misinterprets the fundamental purpose of the First Amendment. They contend that the amendment’s role is precisely to protect citizens from government overreach and censorship, ensuring that free speech remains a cornerstone of democracy. The idea that the First Amendment is an obstacle rather than a protector is seen by many as a dangerous and misguided interpretation.

Furthermore, Wu’s essay touches on the issue of banning platforms like TikTok and implementing age verification laws, such as California’s Age-Appropriate Design Code. He suggests that the First Amendment stands in the way of these actions, which he believes are necessary for national security and protecting minors online. Critics counter that these measures, if implemented, could set precedents for broader and potentially harmful censorship practices.

Wu’s reference to the First Amendment as a “suicide pact,” borrowing language from a 1949 dissenting opinion in the Terminiello v. City of Chicago case, underscores the dramatic tone of his argument. He suggests that the amendment, while intended to safeguard freedoms, can also be interpreted in ways that undermine societal safety and security.

In conclusion, Tim Wu’s essay has reignited the debate over the balance between free speech and governmental regulation. While Wu argues that the First Amendment’s current application hinders effective governance and protection of citizens, his critics maintain that the amendment is essential for safeguarding democratic principles and preventing government overreach. As this debate continues, the interpretation and application of the First Amendment remain at the forefront of discussions about free speech and public safety in the digital age.

SOURCE: NEW YORK TIMES

Continue Reading

Biden Administration

DHS and FBI Issue Warning About Large Fourth of July Events as ‘Attractive’ Targets for

Published

on

The Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) and the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) issued a warning on Wednesday regarding potential threats to large Fourth of July celebrations. According to an internal bulletin obtained by ABC News, these events are considered “attractive” targets for lone offenders and small groups with malicious intentions.

The bulletin emphasizes the risk posed by individuals and small groups who might exploit the gatherings for terrorism or other harmful activities. The warning comes as the nation prepares for Independence Day festivities, which traditionally draw large crowds to public spaces.

The FBI and DHS are urging local law enforcement and event organizers to increase vigilance and security measures. The agencies highlight the importance of public awareness and cooperation, encouraging individuals to report any suspicious activities immediately.

Continue Reading

Biden Administration

Biden is 7 Times More Popular with Ukrainians than Trump, Poll Reveals

Published

on

In a recent poll conducted by The Counteroffensive/Kyiv International Institute of Sociology, President Joe Biden emerges as significantly more popular among Ukrainians compared to former President Donald Trump. This inaugural poll offers insights into Ukrainian sentiment towards American leadership during their ongoing conflict with Russia.

According to The Hill, a striking 46.7 percent of Ukrainian respondents expressed a preference for President Biden as the leader they believe would better support Ukraine’s war effort. In contrast, only 6.5 percent of those polled favored Trump in this regard.

Continue Reading

Trending