Connect with us

The Center Square

New fine process in place for those in U.S. illegally | National

Published

on

www.thecentersquare.com – Bethany Blankley – (The Center Square – ) 2025-07-03 08:54:00


A new joint federal rule by Homeland Security (DHS) and Justice Department removes the 30-day notice for fines on foreign nationals who illegally enter or overstay in the U.S., allowing DHS to mail fines directly and speeding appeals. Fines range from $100 to $500 per unlawful entry, $1,992 to $9,970 for ignoring voluntary departure orders, and up to $998 daily for willful refusal to comply with removal orders. Nearly 10,000 fines have been issued since May. Those who self-deport using the CBP Home app receive a $1,000 stipend, forgiveness of fines, and reduced detention risk.

(The Center Square) – A new fine process is underway for foreign nationals illegally living in the country.

The departments of Homeland Security and Justice announced a new joint federal rule went into effect with a public comment period extended through July 28.

The rule amends existing DHS and DOJ regulations authorizing DHS to issue civil monetary penalties as stipulated by the Immigration and Nationality Act “for aliens who fail to depart voluntarily during the voluntary departure period, willfully fail or refuse to depart after a final removal order … or are apprehended while improperly entering or attempting to enter the United States.”

The current process requires giving illegal foreign nationals 30 days’ notice of intent to fine them before a fine is issued. The rule eliminates the 30-day notice period, authorizes DHS immigration officers to mail fines to illegal foreign nationals who have addresses on record and shortens the appeal process. It also transfers the appeals process from the DOJ Board of Immigration Appeals to DHS.

The fine process applies to “aliens who enter the United States illegally; aliens who ignore removal orders or delay their removal; aliens who do not honor agreements to comply with judges’ voluntary departure orders,” DHS says.

The fines are incremental, including between:

  • $100 to $500 for each unlawful entry or attempted entry;
  • $1,992 to $9,970 for those who fail to honor a voluntary departure order;
  • up to $998 per day for those who willfully refuse to comply with a removal order from a federal judge.

Under federal law, 8 USC 1324d imposes civil penalties for failure to depart. It stipulates that “Any alien subject to a final order of removal who- (1) willfully fails or refuses to-(A) depart from the United States pursuant to the order, (B) make timely application in good faith for travel or other documents necessary for departure, or (C) present for removal at the time and place required by the Attorney General; or (2) conspires to or takes any action designed to prevent or hamper the alien’s departure pursuant to the order, shall pay a civil penalty of not more than $500 to the Commissioner for each day the alien is in violation of this section.”

This provision of the law wasn’t enforced by any administration until the first Trump administration. The Biden administration halted any enforcement of it. The second Trump administration announced it was reinstituting it in May.

As of June 13, ICE has already issued nearly 10,000 fine notices, DHS says.

“For decades, this law has been ignored – not anymore,” DHS said when announcing it was requiring all noncitizens living in the U.S. legally and illegally to register with the federal government in accordance with the law,” The Center Square reported.

“An alien’s failure to depart the U.S. is a crime that could result in significant financial penalty. An alien’s failure to register is a crime that could result in a fine, imprisonment, or both,” DHS warned.

By contrast, those who self-deport using the CBP Home App will receive a $1,000 stipend after they arrive in their home country, confirmed on the app, The Center Square reported.

“Self-deportation is a dignified way to leave the U.S. and will allow illegal aliens to avoid being encountered by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement” agents, DHS said.

Those who self-deport using the app will receive forgiveness of any civil fines or penalties for previously failing to depart the U.S.

They “will also be deprioritized for detention and removal ahead of their departure as long as they demonstrate they are making meaningful strides in completing that departure,” and “may help preserve the option … to re-enter the United States legally in the future,” DHS said.

Qualifying illegal foreign nationals are encouraged to submit their “Intent to Depart” using the CBP Home app here.

The post New fine process in place for those in U.S. illegally | National appeared first on www.thecentersquare.com



Note: The following A.I. based commentary is not part of the original article, reproduced above, but is offered in the hopes that it will promote greater media literacy and critical thinking, by making any potential bias more visible to the reader –Staff Editor.

Political Bias Rating: Center-Right

The article primarily reports on a new federal rule related to immigration enforcement, outlining the specifics of civil fines for illegal immigrants who fail to depart voluntarily. It references actions taken by both the Trump and Biden administrations to provide historical context. The overall tone is factual and descriptive, focusing on the regulatory changes and governmental statements without overt editorializing or emotional language. However, the choice of specific quotes, such as DHS characterizing self-deportation as “a dignified way to leave” and emphasizing law enforcement, along with the focus on penalties for illegal immigration, traditionally aligns more closely with conservative or Center-Right perspectives on immigration policy. There is no strong critique or praise, but the framing centers on enforcement and compliance, which suggests a moderate Center-Right leaning, rather than a purely neutral stance or a left-leaning immigration advocacy perspective.

News from the South - Florida News Feed

Gruters succeeds Whatley as chairman of Republican National Committee | Florida

Published

on

www.thecentersquare.com – By Alan Wooten | The Center Square – (The Center Square – ) 2025-08-25 14:47:00


State Sen. Joe Gruters of Florida has been elected chairman of the Republican National Committee, succeeding Michael Whatley, a 2026 Senate candidate from North Carolina. Both appointments were influenced by former President Donald Trump. Gruters, 48, an accountant and current state senator, won the post unopposed and emphasized the party’s alignment with Trump’s vision, aiming for a strong 2026 midterm showing. Trump praised Gruters for his role in significant Florida Republican victories since 2016. Gruters’ political career includes serving in the Florida House (2016-18) and Senate (since 2018). He remains in his Senate seat unless running for state CFO in 2026.

(The Center Square) – State Sen. Joe Gruters of Florida has been elected chairman of the Republican National Committee.

He succeeds Michael Whatley, the North Carolinian running for a U.S. Senate seat in 2026. Both were tapped by Donald Trump, Whatley as the 2024 presidential cycle heated up and Gruters in Atlanta on Friday as Trump’s wingman for the party in the 2026 midterms.

Gruters, 48, is an accountant by trade. He is not required to resign his state Senate post; in the “resign-to-run” state law, he would need to if still planning to run for state chief financial officer in 2026.

That post was given to state Sen. Blaise Ingoglia on July 16 by second-term Republican Gov. Ron DeSantis. Jimmy Patronis resigned the position and Ingoglia serves until the 2026 midterms.

Trump, a Palm Beach resident when not at 1600 Pennsylvania Ave., had encouraged DeSantis to choose Gruters for CFO.

In a network broadcast interview after elected, Gruters said, “This is the president’s party. This is the president’s vision, overall. The party fully embraces the president. We’re going to ride the president all the way to victory in the midterms, and we are going to win big.”

Whatley called his time as chairman “the honor of a lifetime.”

“I am immensely proud of the work we accomplished, and I am excited to pass the torch on to Chairman Gruters,” he said. “Now, it’s time to get to work and fight for the people of North Carolina.”

Gruters had no opposition for election. On social media, Trump called Whatley “incredible” and again pledged his support for the senatorial campaign.

“As state senator and chairman of the Republican Party of Florida,” Trump said of Gruters, “Joe helped us deliver massive and historic victories across the state, including my big six wins, including primaries, in 2016, 2020 and 2024, and has helped us turn Florida red as red can be!”

The connection between Gruters and Trump dates more than a decade. History traces it in earnest to a Sarasota County Statesman of the Year dinner in 2012. He followed with support in 2015 while Marco Rubio, now secretary of state in the Trump administration, and Gov. Jeb Bush were presidential candidates.

Gruters is a former member (2016-18) of the state House of Representatives. He has served in the state Senate since 2018.

The post Gruters succeeds Whatley as chairman of Republican National Committee | Florida appeared first on www.thecentersquare.com



Note: The following A.I. based commentary is not part of the original article, reproduced above, but is offered in the hopes that it will promote greater media literacy and critical thinking, by making any potential bias more visible to the reader –Staff Editor.

Political Bias Rating: Center-Right

The article primarily reports on the election of Joe Gruters as chairman of the Republican National Committee, detailing his background, connections to Donald Trump, and statements made by involved parties. The tone is factual and descriptive, focusing on events and quotes without overtly endorsing or criticizing the subjects. However, the content centers on Republican figures and includes positive language from Trump and associates, which may reflect a slight center-right perspective due to the subject matter and source. Overall, it adheres mostly to neutral reporting by presenting information and direct quotes rather than promoting a particular ideological viewpoint.

Continue Reading

News from the South - North Carolina News Feed

Transportation energy prices below national norm as Labor Day approaches | North Carolina

Published

on

www.thecentersquare.com – By Alan Wooten | The Center Square – (The Center Square – ) 2025-08-25 09:11:00


North Carolina motorists are paying about 30 cents less per gallon for gasoline than the national average, with the state average at $2.86 for unleaded gas and $3.45 for diesel. Prices are slightly lower in the mountains and higher along the coast. Compared to last year, gas and diesel prices have decreased. The state follows EPA rules requiring summer blend fuel until September 15, adding 10-15 cents per gallon. North Carolina has over 8 million combustion engine vehicles and more than 100,000 electric vehicles, with EV charging rates below the national average. Motor fuel taxes fund state transportation projects.

(The Center Square) – As they often have throughout the summer, motorists in North Carolina are paying about 30 cents less than the nation on average for gasoline.

Summer’s unofficial closing of Labor Day weekend arrives this week, with many families already in the state’s tourism meccas. The state average for a gallon of unleaded gasoline is $2.86, with prices a little lower in the mountains and a tick higher along the 320 miles of ocean shoreline.

A year ago, the state average was $3.11, according to the American Automobile Association. The average for diesel is $3.45, down from $3.64 a year ago.

Nationally, the unleaded gas average is $3.16, down from $3.35 last year, and diesel is $3.68, down slightly from $3.70, respectively.

Per Environmental Protection Agency rules in place from June 1 to Sept. 15, the less volatile summer blend fuel must be sold. Price impact is generally considered 10 cents to 15 cents higher per gallon.

Combustion engine consumers make up more than 8 million vehicle registrations in the nation’s ninth-largest state.

North Carolina’s electric vehicle charging rate average, according to AAA, is 33.2 cents per kilowatt-hour. The national average is 36.3 cents per kWh. More than 100,000 zero-emission vehicles are registered in the state. At the start of the calendar year, the state norm was 33.5 cents per kWh and the national was 34.7 cents per kWh.

Ten states have lower average prices for a gallon of unleaded; 14 are lower for diesel; and seven are lower in electric.

Among 14 major metro areas, the least expensive average for unleaded gas is in Fayetteville at $2.76. The most expensive area is the Durham-Chapel Hill metro area at $2.92.

Diesel is the most consumer-friendly ($3.29) in the Hickory-Lenoir-Morganton market.

North Carolina’s 40.3 cents per gallon tax rate for 2025 is topped by California (59.6), Pennsylvania (57.6), Washington (49.4), Illinois (47), Maryland (46.1), and New Jersey (44.9).

Motor fuel taxes in the state fund the Department of Transportation’s highway and multi-modal projects, accounting for more than half of the state transportation resources. The revenues go into the Highway Fund and the Highway Trust Fund.

The post Transportation energy prices below national norm as Labor Day approaches | North Carolina appeared first on www.thecentersquare.com



Note: The following A.I. based commentary is not part of the original article, reproduced above, but is offered in the hopes that it will promote greater media literacy and critical thinking, by making any potential bias more visible to the reader –Staff Editor.

Political Bias Rating: Centrist

This article provides a straightforward report on gasoline and diesel prices in North Carolina compared to national averages, along with information about electric vehicle charging rates and state fuel taxes. The language is neutral and factual, focusing on data, statistics, and relevant state policies without endorsing or criticizing any political ideology or party. The content neither advances a particular political perspective nor uses charged language, making it a clear example of neutral, factual reporting rather than an article with discernible political bias.

Continue Reading

The Center Square

Nonprofit files complaints against Trump attorneys but almost no public discipline | National

Published

on

www.thecentersquare.com – Arthur Kane – (The Center Square – ) 2025-08-25 07:24:00


Two nonprofits led by Utah attorney Michael Teter, with Democratic ties, have filed nearly 80 ethics complaints against lawyers representing Trump officials or election-related cases. Despite these efforts, only three attorneys faced public discipline, often unrelated to the complaints. Critics question the nonprofits’ transparency and nonprofit status, as they do not publicly disclose tax returns. America First Legal filed a complaint against Teter, citing harassment of lawyers for their clients’ causes. The groups aim to deter legal challenges to the 2020 election, but many bar associations dismiss or withhold information on complaints. Teter’s organizations focus on holding lawyers accountable for alleged false election claims.

(The Center Square) – Two nonprofits run by an attorney with long-time Democratic connections have been filing ethics complaints against lawyers who represented Trump officials or issues, seeking to get them disbarred or disciplined.

But an investigation by The Center Square found nearly all of the attorneys the groups targeted received no public discipline years after the complaints were filed.

Critics and documents also raise questions about the group’s nonprofit status, lack of transparency and connections to other nonprofits who claim to avoid political issues.

Utah attorney Michael Teter, who worked for the Democratic party and ran Democratic campaigns, is managing director of The 65 Project and executive director of the Legal Accountability Center. Both groups’ websites talk about holding accountable attorneys who filed lawsuits challenging the 2020 presidential election results and supported other “anti-Democratic activity,” charging the lawyers violated their oaths by knowingly filing false lawsuits and supporting disinformation. 

But a Center Square review of nearly 80 complaints filed against attorneys by The 65 Project between 2022 and 2023 in various states show only three resulted in public discipline against the attorneys, and it is not clear whether the nonprofit’s complaints prompted the actions. Two disciplines came after criminal convictions and one was initiated by the California bar six months after The 65 Project complaint.

Last year, America First Legal, a nonprofit law firm that supports right of center issues, filed an ethics complaint against Teter in Utah for The 65 Project’s actions, but the Utah State Bar association does not show any action was taken on the October 2024 complaint.

“For too long, ‘lawfare’ like that undertaken by The 65 Project and other, similarly motivated groups, has chilled attorneys across the country from representing clients or advancing certain lawful positions for those clients,” the firm’s executive director Gene Hamilton said in a news release on their website. “Seeking the personal destruction and financial ruin of another lawyer – simply because of the client he represented or the cause he took up – runs counter to not only the letter and spirit of the law governing the activities of lawyers…

“We seek a return to a world in which lawyers can be lawyers, zealously advocate for their clients, and strive for a better future without fear of harassment or intimidation simply because of the clients or causes they take up,” he added. “The abuses of the system must stop.”

The Teter-run groups repeatedly ignored requests by The Center Square to document their accomplishments and comment on their tactics. 

The Center Square attempted to find discipline against the attorneys on the bar association websites of the jurisdictions where the complaints were filed and reached out to bar associations that didn’t clearly provide the information online. Most of the attorneys that The 65 Project filed complaints against two or three years ago showed no public discipline on the bar websites though that leaves open the possibility of confidential private discipline.

Many of the bar associations The Center Square contacted refused to provide any additional information about the nonprofit’s complaints. 

“The State Bar generally does not confirm the existence or status of a grievance against a Georgia-barred attorney,” wrote Georgia bar spokeswoman Jennifer R. Mason after The Center Square inquired about the status of a half dozen complaints from The 65 Project. “We are unable to comment further.”

The group of about 80 attorneys with complaints filed against them includes 15 former and current Republican state attorneys general, but they all remained in good standing and with no public discipline in their states.

The State Bar of Nevada, however, confirmed The 65 Project complaint filed there was quickly dismissed for lack of evidence.

The “case wasn’t strong enough to meet our clear and convincing standard,” wrote Nevada Bar Counsel Daniel M. Hooge in an exchange with The Center Square. “It involved subjective claims of frivolity and dishonesty. Because they are subjective, we would need some support either from a general community consensus, prior cases creating clear controlling precedent, or judicial action. We didn’t have those in this case.

“It was divided along political lines, there was no prior case law that clearly addressed the same issues, and the judges in the cases did not sanction Mr. [Jesse] Binnall,” he added. “This case had little to no chance of success at hearing.”

Binnall, a Virginia attorney who The 65 Project complaint says joined in a Nevada lawsuit to substitute Biden electors with those who supported Trump, did not respond to requests for comment. 

The group also filed a complaint in Massachusetts against renowned Harvard Law professor and constitutional scholar Alan Dershowitz, charging he knowingly filed a false lawsuit to “discredit elections and voting procedures.”

But Dershowitz said he received no discipline, and the Massachusetts bar website shows no discipline against him.

The “frivolous and politically motivated complaint was dismissed, as it should have been,” Dershowitz wrote in a brief email exchange with The Center Square.

The 65 Project complaint notes that a judge sanctioned Dershowitz for signing a complaint he should have known was frivolous – called a Rule 11 violation. But the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals overturned the judge’s decision, writing “this court has not previously clearly articulated the rule that of-counsel attorneys may be sanctioned under Rule 11, the panel declined to give its holding retroactive effect.”

Neither The 65 Project nor the Legal Accountability Center make their tax returns public as is required of most organizations with federal nonprofit status. In exchange for privileges like not having to pay taxes and donors getting a tax write off, nonprofits must let the public see how much money they collect and what they spend on salaries, fundraising and other expenses. Nonprofits are required to provide those returns to anyone who requests them and most are on websites that track nonprofit activity.

A search of databases for The 65 Project and Legal Accountability Center 990 tax returns produced no results so The Center Square contacted the IRS and the nonprofits. The IRS did not respond.

The 65 Project public relations person Eddie Vale responded to a request for the group’s 990s by saying the group does not have its own tax returns. 

“The 65 Project is a fiscally sponsored project of Global Impact, so the relevant 990s belongs to the fiscal sponsor,” he wrote in response to The Center Square’s request to see the groups tax returns as federal law requires.

While Global Impact’s tax returns are available online, they do not specifically provide income, spending and pay data for either of Teter’s organizations.

Vale didn’t respond to repeated follow up requests asking for an interview with Teter, and no one from LAC responded to repeated requests for 990s or interviews with staff. 

LAC website says they are a 501c(4), which allows them to do campaigning though it is not their primary activity. A web link that has since been taken down connects them to the Democracy Fund, but the Fund’s nonprofit tax returns do not mention the LAC. No one from the Fund responded to requests for comment. 

LAC has filed three complaints against Trump Department of Justice attorneys and is also representing California Gov. Gavin Newsom in a $787 million defamation complaint against Fox News. The complaints against the DOJ attorneys were all filed July 31 and there is nothing about them on the District of Columbia bar website.

Fox News is disputing Newsom’s libel claim but did not provide a comment about the LAC’s involvement in the case.

Teter was deputy finance director for the California Democratic Party in the late 1990s; was campaign manager for U.S. Sen. Herb Kohl, D-Wisc., and Wisconsin field director for John Kerry’s failed presidential run; and worked at the Democratic Campaign Committee, according to his Linkedin profile.

He also worked at Perkins Coie between 2006 and 2008 – a law firm that was targeted by a Trump executive order to suspend security clearances for their attorneys after Trump determined that the firm worked with Hillary Clinton on the Steele Dossier and discriminated in hiring by implementing DEI programs.

Teter’s nonprofits are clearly designed to make it difficult for Trump officials and issues to get legal representation, according to Tom Jones, executive director of the conservative American Accountability Foundation, and the nonprofit’s own website.

“The complaints are intended to harass attorneys and force them to spend money defending themselves because (The 65 Project and LAC) don’t like the policy,” Jones said. 

The 65 Project’s website seems to echo that.

“The 65 Project will work to hold accountable the lawyers who raise fraudulent claims to overturn legitimate elections results, while also creating a rule-based system to prevent future attempts and to strengthen the mechanisms for accountability and deterrence,” according The 65 Project’s website.

One employee anonymously put in much more stark terms in a 2022 Axios story about The 65 Project, which the group’s website said is named after the 65 lawsuits filed by Trump supporters to overturn the 2020 election.

“This is mostly important for the deterrent effect that it can bring so that you can kill the pool of available legal talent going forward,” the story quoted the anonymous source. 

The post Nonprofit files complaints against Trump attorneys but almost no public discipline | National appeared first on www.thecentersquare.com



Note: The following A.I. based commentary is not part of the original article, reproduced above, but is offered in the hopes that it will promote greater media literacy and critical thinking, by making any potential bias more visible to the reader –Staff Editor.

Political Bias Rating: Center-Right

The article predominantly reports on the activities of nonprofits linked to Democratic operatives targeting lawyers involved in Trump-related legal challenges without explicitly endorsing or condemning their actions in clear ideological terms. However, the selection and framing of information—including the emphasis on the limited success of the complaints, the lack of transparency from the groups, critical quotes from conservative sources, and highlighting the political background of individuals involved—suggest a subtle skepticism toward the Democratic-linked groups. The tone is investigative and somewhat critical, aligning with a center-right perspective that questions the legitimacy and motives of left-leaning legal accountability efforts. While it attempts to present facts and statements from multiple viewpoints, the framing leans toward undermining the Democrats’ ethical complaint initiatives, rather than neutrally reporting on the groups’ ideological stances alone.

Continue Reading

Trending