Trump Week 19, Continued: Immigration Raids, Tariff Increases, and New Legal Battles
Week 19 continues with aggressive immigration enforcement, environmental rollbacks, and heightened tensions between the Trump administration and major institutions.
Trump’s nineteenth week continued to bring escalations in anti-immigrant sentiment, environmental policies, tariffs, and lawsuits. The Supreme Court allowed the Trump administration to deport more than 530,000 immigrants from Cuba, Haiti, Nicaragua and Venezuela, following a previous Introspective report that highlighted Temporary Protected Status (TPS) being revoked for more than 350,000 Venezuelan immigrants.
Meanwhile, following the president’s prior attempt to prohibit Harvard University from enrolling international students, a federal judge continued to block the administration’s efforts. The State Department later began scanning social media accounts of visa applicants who plan to attend, work or visit Harvard University, citing antisemitism allegations.
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) proposed eliminating emissions limits for coal and gas plants, raising implications as global temperatures continue to rise. At the same time, as backlash over the ongoing trade war continues, Trump announced that tariffs on steel and aluminum would rise to 50%, escalating tensions with the European Union.
Meanwhile, PBS has filed a lawsuit against the Trump administration over an executive order that cuts funding for the television network and NPR, following a previous report from The Introspective that highlighted NPR and local radio stations in Colorado filing a lawsuit.
Immigration and Harvard University
Anti-immigrant sentiment continued to escalate after the Supreme Court allowed the Trump administration to deport more than 530,000 immigrants from Cuba, Haiti, Nicaragua and Venezuela, following a previous report that enabled the Trump administration to end Temporary Protected Status (TPS) for 350,000 Venezuelans.
In a dissenting opinion, Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson accused the court’s majority of “undervaluing the devastating consequences of allowing the government to precipitously upend the lives and livelihoods of nearly half a million noncitizens while their legal claims are pending.”
“Even if the government is likely to win on the merits, in our legal system, success takes time,” Jackson wrote.
“And the stay standards require more than anticipated victory. I would have denied the government’s application because its harm-related showing is patently insufficient.”
At the same time, following a previous Introspective report that detailed Trump officials banning Harvard University from enrolling international students, District Judge Allison D. Burroughs blocked the administration’s efforts.
“I want to maintain the status quo,” said Burroughs, who previously halted the president’s efforts to bar international students.
“I do think an order is necessary. It doesn’t need to be draconian, but I want to be sure it is worded in a way that nothing changes.”
In response to the decision, the university released a statement promising to support its international students.
“Harvard will continue to take steps to protect the rights of our international students and scholars, members of our community who are vital to the university’s academic mission and community—and whose presence here benefits our country immeasurably,” the university said.
The State Department later began reviewing social media accounts of visa applicants who plan to attend, work or visit the university, as allegations of antisemitism against Harvard continue.
“If you are not satisfied that the applicant’s credibility, and to your personal satisfaction, meets the standards required by the visa classification for which he is applying, refuse the applicant,” read a memo obtained by the Associated Press, stating that vetting applicants will identify those with a history of antisemitism and “duly consider their visa eligibility under U.S. immigration law.”
Environmental Policy and Trade War Update
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) proposed ending all limits on greenhouse gases from coal and gas plants. A report from The New York Times detailed the agency claiming that carbon dioxide and other forms of greenhouse gases “do not contribute significantly to dangerous pollution,” despite research from the EPA finding that the power sector was the second-largest source of greenhouse gas emissions, with emissions increasing by 7% in 2021.
“Fossil fuel power plants are the single largest industrial source of climate-destabilizing carbon dioxide in the United States, and emit pollution levels that exceed the vast majority of countries in the world,” said Vickie Patton, member of advocacy group the Environmental Defense Fund, in the report.
“It flies in the face of common sense and puts millions of people in harm’s way to say the single largest industrial source of carbon dioxide in the United States is not significant.”
However, in that same report, Jonathan Adler, a professor at Case Western University, claimed that the proposal is the “strategically smartest way.”
“If they’re successful with regard to power plants, they’re pretty much going to be successful with everything else,” said Adler.
Meanwhile, with the trade war ongoing, President Trump announced that tariffs on steel and aluminum would be increased to 50%, double the current rate.
“We are going to be imposing a 25% increase,” said Trump on Friday.
“We’re going to bring it from 25% to 50%, the tariffs on steel into the United States of America, which will even further secure the steel industry in the United States. Nobody’s going to get around that.”
Trump previously said that he was considering a 40% tariff but decided on 50%.
“At 25% they can sorta get over that fence,” he added.
“At 50% nobody’s getting over that fence.”
The European Union (EU) later criticized Trump’s announcement, telling CNBC that increasing tariffs “undermines” efforts for negotiations.
“We strongly regret the announced increase of U.S. tariffs on steel imports from 25% to 50%,” said an EU spokesperson in the report.
“This decision adds further uncertainty to the global economy and increases costs for consumers and businesses on both sides of the Atlantic.”
The EU is also considering retaliatory measures following the tariff increase, with the spokesperson saying that “both existing and additional EU measures will automatically take effect on 14 July — or earlier” if there is no deal reached.
The new tariffs go into effect June 4.
PBS Lawsuit
Following a previous Introspective report that highlighted NPR and local Colorado radio stations filing a lawsuit over an executive order that cuts funding for public broadcasting, PBS filed a separate lawsuit Friday claiming that the “Constitution and laws forbid the President from serving as the arbiter of the content of PBS’s programming, including by attempting to defund PBS.”
“That is blatant viewpoint discrimination and an infringement of PBS and PBS Member Stations’ private editorial discretion,” read the lawsuit.
In a statement to Politico, the White House dismissed PBS’ allegations.
“The Corporation for Public Broadcasting (CPB) is creating media to support a particular political party on the taxpayers’ dime. Therefore, the President is exercising his lawful authority to limit funding to NPR and PBS,” said Deputy Press Secretary Harrison Fields.
“The President was elected with a mandate to ensure efficient use of taxpayer dollars, and he will continue to use his lawful authority to achieve that objective.”
The lawsuit argues that the executive order violates the First Amendment, while simultaneously naming Education Secretary Linda McMahon as a defendant.
These are truly frightening times.