Friday, May 08, 2026
Trump Is ‘Bored’ With the War He Started - The Atlantic
Trump Is ‘Bored’ With the War He Started
"He wants out, but Iran could likely keep going for months.
President Trump really, really wants the war with Iran to end. He has declared victory many times, including about three weeks ago, when Iran briefly reopened the Strait of Hormuz. He has repeatedly extended his cease-fire deadlines instead of following through on his (sometimes-apocalyptic) threats to resume hostilities. This week, his administration abruptly abandoned an effort to escort ships through the strait in part because of a fear that it could provoke violent, escalating confrontations.
Trump is tired of the war, which has proved far more difficult and lasted far longer than he had expected. His party is warily watching rising gas prices and falling poll numbers. He doesn’t want to be bogged down in a Middle East conflict like some of his predecessors were. He doesn’t want it to upend his high-stakes summit next week in China. He is ready to move on.
But Iran, it seems, does not want the war to come to a close. Or at least not with any sort of outcome that could be acceptable to American negotiators. Trump is now in a bind. The president, five aides and outside advisers told me, is convinced that he can sell any sort of agreement as a win. But at least for now, the man who wrote The Art of the Dealcan’t even get Iran to the negotiating table. Today, Washington is still waiting for Iran to respond to the latest offering, a one-page memorandum of understanding that is far more of an extension of the cease-fire than a treaty to end the conflict."
How the Iran War Is Shifting Power Toward China | The New Yorker
How the Iran War Is Shifting Power Toward China
"As the U.S.’s credibility and military capacity are tested abroad, China has gained leverage by staying out of the fight and learning from it.
Last week, the German Chancellor, Friedrich Merz, offered a gloomy appraisal of the war in Iran, a two-month-long conflict that has devolved into a standoff in the Persian Gulf. A ceasefire is now in place, but it’s fragile: the U.S. has blockaded Iranian ports and vessels; Iran has attempted strikes on U.S. ships; and, in the midst of negotiations over the Strait of Hormuz, President Donald Trump is reportedly considering whether to resume hostilities. “The Iranians are clearly stronger than expected, and the Americans clearly have no truly convincing strategy in the negotiations, either. . . . An entire nation is being humiliated by the Iranian leadership,” Mertz said—a notable shift from his cautious support for regime change in Iran. Trump fired back, vowing to withdraw U.S. forces that have been stationed in Germany for decades. The episode fits a pattern that has played out in Europe and the Middle East, wherein Trump makes new threats, punishes perceived slights, and shows little regard for allies or for the broader fallout from his decisions. His actions have made an impression at home, too: for the first time in more than two decades of polling on the question, the Pew Research Center recently found that a majority of Americans believe their country largely ignores the interests of others.
This is all welcome news in Beijing. For years, the Chinese Communist Party has tried, with middling success, to cast itself as a responsible world power in the face of what it has labelled imperialist America. It has issued one jargon-filled statement after another warning against American “hegemony,” condemning Washington’s “Cold War mentality,” and framing China as the true custodian of a rules-based international order—the same order that the U.S. helped build but now undermines. In 2023, the Chinese President, Xi Jinping, unveiled a grandiose, if vague, project called the Global Civilization Initiative, which proposed an appeal to comity between civilizations and cultures—something of a Chinese counterpoint to the Western status quo. For China’s neighbors, such airy visions are unlikely to assuage fears over China’s own perceived hegemonic designs; meanwhile, smaller countries in the so-called Global South are already seeing their societies and politics bend to Chinese influence. But the war in Iran—and Trump’s disruptive behavior on the world stage, including his chaotic social-media presence—is helping China reframe its geopolitical role, according to Yuen Yuen Ang, a professor of political economy at Johns Hopkins University. “The war in Ukraine left China in an awkward position: narrowly aligned with Russia and viewed with suspicion by Western powers,” she told me. “For China, the Iran conflict brings no economic upside, but it creates diplomatic space. It allows China to step out of a previously isolating alignment and reposition itself more broadly, not just in the Middle East but globally.”
Trump’s looming defeat in Iran is a personal and political crisis | Robert Reich | The Guardian
Trump’s looming defeat in Iran is a personal and political crisis | Robert Reich
"We are witnessing what happens to a person who is consumed with the need to dominate, but cannot.
Iran is unlikely to give in. It can withstand the economic pressure of a blockade better than Donald Trump can withstand the political pressure that comes with rising gas prices (now nearly $4.50 a gallon, on average), soon followed by rising food prices.
His looming failure in Iran is not just a serious geopolitical defeat for the United States; it’s a personal crisis for Trump.
Those rising prices coupled with an increasingly unpopular war have increased the likelihood that Democrats will take back control of the House and even possibly the Senate in the upcoming midterms.
Here again, it’s not just a political defeat for the Republican party but a personal crisis for Trump.
His ego cannot accept a humiliating loss, as we saw after the 2020 election. His need to bully, dominate and gain submission is so hardwired inside his insecure head that the defeats he’s now facing – to Iran and to Democrats – are already setting off explosions.
He’s posting more wildly than ever – attacking, insulting, ridiculing, threatening.
On Sunday, Trump posted that Democrats had “RIGGED the 2020 Presidential Election. GET TOUGH REPUBLICANS – THEY’RE COMING, AND THEY’RE COMING FAST! They’re no good for our Country, they almost destroyed it, and we don’t want to let that happen again!” He demanded that Republicans “approve all of the necessary Safeguards we need for Elections to protect the American Public during the upcoming Midterms”.
More of his posts are bizarre AI-generated paeans to himself, his godlike powers, his wished-for physique and his self-image of omnipotence. On Friday night, he posted an AI-generated image of himself, JD Vance, Marco Rubio and Doug Burgum, all shirtless and with young physiques, standing in the reflecting pool in front of the Lincoln Memorial, along with an unidentifiable woman in a bikini.
Minutes later he posted an image of the House minority leader, Hakeem Jeffries, holding a baseball bat, with a caption calling Jeffries “low IQ”, “a THUG” and “a danger to our Country”. On Tuesday, he posted AI-generated images of Joe Biden on one knee with the caption “COWARDS KNEEL”, Barack Obama with the caption “TRAITORS BOW” and himself with his fist raised and the caption “LEADERS LEAD”.
His mouth – never in control – is now in diarrheic mode. He’s even back to attacking the pope, accusing him of “endangering a lot of Catholics and a lot of people”, adding, “but I guess if it’s up to the pope, he thinks it’s just fine for Iran to have a nuclear weapon”.
His thin-skinned vindictiveness is beyond anything we’ve seen before, which is saying a lot. Last week, after the German chancellor, Friedrich Merz, said the US was “being humiliated by the Iranian leadership”, Trump repeatedly attacked and ridiculed Merz. The defense department then said it was pulling 5,000 troops out of Germany, and Trump said he was increasing tariffs on European cars and trucks to 25% (from 15%).
He’s becoming ever more obsessed with monuments to himself – his ballroom, his arch, his so-called “garden of heroes”, his Trump-embossed passports, his image on 24k gold commemorative coins, and his name plastered or etched all over Washington. His plans for self-monuments are becoming larger by the day, more grotesque, more grandiose and more expensive. Senate Republicans just proposed $1bn more for Trump’s ballroom, which, recall, was supposed to “cost taxpayers nothing”.
He has even directed the treasury to announce that his own signature – yes, the same one that appears in a book of birthday greetings for Jeffrey Epstein – will replace the treasurer’s on all new US paper currency. This will be the first time in US history that a sitting president’s name will appear on circulating cash money.
His thirst for vengeance is exploding, too. Last week the Department of Justice launched another criminal case against former FBI director James Comey (whose earlier indictment was quashed by the courts) for posting a picture of seashells spelling out “86 47” on Instagram a year ago. Trump is also insisting that the justice department restart its criminal investigation of Jerome Powell and double-down against the former joint chiefs of staff chair Mark Milley and others he considers “enemies”.
Facing the two monumental failures of Iran and control over Congress, Trump is fanatically seeking other ways to assert dominance. On Tuesday, his education department announced a civil rights investigation into Smith College over enrolling transgender students.
On Thursday, Trump demanded that Hakeem Jeffries be charged with “INCITING VIOLENCE”, linking the attempted shooting at the White House correspondents’ dinner with Jeffries’s call for a “maximum warfare” redistricting campaign in response to Republican efforts to gerrymander their states.
Regardless of what happens in Iran, he’ll claim victory. That will be difficult to do convincingly when gas prices remain more than $4 a gallon, but he’ll undoubtedly try.
What if Democrats win control of one or both chambers of Congress in the midterms and he claims they lost or cheated? The nation barely survived the last time Trump’s fragile ego faced a major loss.
We’ll also have to cope with Trump as a lame-duck president who can no longer dominate and gain submission as he did before. Will he try to remain president beyond his second term to avoid this?
The man is unwell. Seriously unwell. Lame-duck presidents fade away, but injured dictators can be dangerous.
Robert Reich, a former US secretary of labor, is a professor of public policy emeritus at the University of California, Berkeley. He is a Guardian US columnist and his newsletter is at robertreich.substack.com. His new book, Coming Up Short: A Memoir of My America, is out now in the US and in the UK"
Supreme court’s Voting Rights Act ruling cited misleading data from DoJ | US voting rights | The Guardian
Supreme court’s Voting Rights Act ruling cited misleading data from DoJ
"The claims Samuel Alito, a supreme court justice, made about voter turnout in Louisiana in a landmark Voting Rights Act case were based on a misleading data analysis, a Guardian review has found.
In his opinion gutting section 2 of the Voting Rights Act last week, Alito said that Black voter turnout had exceeded white voter turnout in two of the five most recent presidential elections, both nationally and in Louisiana. Alito’s claim was copied almost verbatim from a friend-of-the-court brief filed by the justice department. It was a critical data point Alito used to make the argument that the kind of discrimination that once made the Voting Rights Act necessary no longer exists.
“Vast social change has occurred throughout the country and particularly in the South, where many Section 2 suits arise,” Alito wrote in a majority opinion in the case, which concerned Louisiana’s congressional map, joined by the five other conservative justices on the court. “Black voters now participate in elections at similar rates as the rest of the electorate, even turning out at higher rates than white voters in two of the five most recent Presidential elections nationwide and in Louisiana.”
But a review of turnout and racial data in Louisiana reveals that assertion relies on an unusual methodology. The justice department brief that Alito cited calculated Black and white voter turnout in Louisiana as a proportion of the total population of each racial group over the age of 18. Such an approach is not preferred by experts in calculating statewide turnout because the general over-18 population may include non-citizens, people with felony convictions and others who cannot legally vote. But it does yield Alito’s conclusion that Black voter turnout exceeded white voter turnout in the 2012 and 2016 presidential elections in Louisiana.
The widely accepted approach is to consider voter turnout as a proportion of the citizen voting age population or the voter eligible population, the latter of which excludes non-citizens as well as people who cannot vote because of a felony conviction or because they have been deemed mentally incapacitated. When the Guardian analyzed turnout numbers in Louisiana using the citizen voting age population, it found that Black voter turnout in Louisiana only exceeded white voter turnout in the 2012 presidential election.
“[The DoJ approach] is misleading because they’re including ineligible voters in the denominator,” said Michael McDonald, a political science professor at the University of Florida who is one of the nation’s leading experts on voter turnout. “If I wanted to manipulate the numbers in a way that was favorable to the government’s interest, I would be using voting age population.”
McDonald also said that the survey DoJ’s analysis was based on, the Census Bureau’s current population survey, is known to produce misleading turnout statistics.
“They had to fudge how they’re calculating the turnout rate to get there, and they’re not even taking into account margin of error, and all these other methodology issues about the current population survey to arrive at that number,” he said. “Someone knew what they were doing.”
A justice department spokesperson acknowledged that the agency used total voting age population and not the citizen voting age population to compute turnout figures. The spokesperson did not respond to a question asking why the department used that approach. A supreme court spokesperson did not return a request for comment about the methodology.
The Guardian also reviewed data from the Louisiana secretary of state’s office, which calculates voter turnout a third way, as a percentage of registered voters. Using that methodology, Black turnout has not exceeded white turnout in any of the last five presidential elections in Louisiana.
Alito’s claim about national turnout also misses the more recent picture that the turnout gap is actually widening, according to a Guardian review of election data. Barack Obama was the first Black US president on the ballot in 2008 and 2012, the two elections where Black turnout was higher than white turnout. In the three most recent presidential elections since then, Black voter turnout has lagged white voter turnout.
“In zero out of the last three presidential elections, did Black turnout come anywhere close to parity,” said Kevin Morris, a researcher at the Brennan Center for Justice, who has studied the turnout gap extensively. The overall national turnout gap has “exploded” over the last 15 years, he added. Alito’s claim is “simply not factual”, Morris wrote in a post last week.
“They’re both cherry picking a particular year, they’re cherry picking a particular method and they’re ignoring this long term more concerning trend in the data,” said Christopher Warshaw, a professor at Georgetown University who studies elections.
When the Voting Rights Act was enacted in 1965, there were ugly racial disparities in voting across the southern US. Black voter registration rates were 50 percentage points behind the voter registration rates of white people in states such as Louisiana, Mississippi and Alabama. Once the Voting Rights Act went into effect, that gap narrowed, in part because of federal examiners deployed to southern states to register voters. There was also a surge in Black people elected to office. In 2012, Black voter turnout reached an all time high and exceeded that of white people for the first time, at least since the passage of the Voting Rights Act.
After 2012, Black voter turnout dropped and has trailed white voter turnout in every presidential election since. That drop happened amid the supreme court’s 2013 decision in Shelby county v Holder, which gutted a requirement that places with a history of voting discrimination get election changes pre-approved by the federal government before they went into effect. The case was a major blow to the Voting Rights Act and freed up states to pass voting restrictions.
“Shelby county directly increased the racial turnout gap,” Morris said.
Kareem Crayton, a vice-president at the Brennan Center for Justice, also said it was misleading for Alito to argue the Voting Rights Act was no longer needed because disparities had decreased.
“We could have stopped the project in 1970 because things did get immediately a lot better,” he said. “It’s a bit of a ruse to say that the assessment simply is ‘if things have gotten better then the project is over.’”
Revealed: The Trump administration arrested the parents of at least 27,000 kids in seven months | US immigration | The Guardian
Revealed: The Trump administration arrested the parents of at least 27,000 kids in seven months
"The Guardian analyzed ICE records from January-August 2025, as advocates say the family-separation crisis will lead to generational trauma
After three months in immigration detention, 1,500 miles (2,400km) away from her 13-month-old daughter, LT was running out of options.
Her baby, who was allergic to formula and had other food sensitivities, had been vomiting constantly and needed breastmilk. But the government refused to release LT – an asylum seeker from Haiti – on bond. So, the family’s pediatrician petitioned the government to allow her to pump and mail her breastmilk from the Dilley detention center in Texas to her baby in Florida. That request was denied.
Desperate, LT asked whether her child could be brought into the detention center to be with her. The government denied that, too, she said, on the grounds that the child, who is a US citizen, couldn’t be kept at an immigration detention center.
“I’m terrified of losing my baby,” she said.
The US government has targeted thousands of parents like LT for deportation since Donald Trump took office in January 2025. A Guardian analysis of government records has found that, during the first seven months of his presidency, the administrationarrested the parents of at least 27,000 children. During this period in 2025, the US Department of Homeland Security (DHS) was deporting about twice as many parents each month compared with 2024.
The records do not detail how many of these children were detained or deported with their parents, and how many families were split up. But the data provides one of the starkest views yet of how Trump’s mass deportation scheme has affected parents and children. In thousands of cases, DHS sought to deport parents who had a different citizenship or nationality than their children, creating major legal and logistical barriers to keeping families together.
The Guardian’s analysis also revealed:
During the first seven months of 2025, the administration arrested 18,400 parents – including 15,000 fathers and 3,000 mothers. They are the parents of 27,000 to 32,000 children.
The administration arrested the parents of at least 12,000 US citizen children.
Nearly 7,500 fathers and 1,000 mothers who were arrested had a different nationality than at least one of their children. In about half of these families, siblings had different citizenships from each other.
On average, the Trump administration has been arresting about 2,300 parents each month and deporting 1,400 parents every month. The Biden administration, in comparison, deported about 700 per month in 2024.
Taken together, these figures capture the vast scope of a new family separation crisis created by the US government, human rights advocates said, a crisis that has far surpassed in scale the “zero tolerance” policy of the first Trump administration, when the US systematically separated immigrant children from their parents at the US-Mexico border.
The data underlying these findings comes from I-213 forms, which immigration agents fill out each time they make an arrest alleging a person is in the US without authorization. The forms document people’s ages, nationalities, criminal histories – and, crucially, the number and nationalities of their minor children.
A spokesperson for the DHS said the agency “cannot verify the veracity of this data” – even though the Guardian acquired the data via a freedom of information lawsuit. The Guardian cross-checked the records against other government sources.
The government data, said immigration lawyers and researchers, is likely an underestimate of the number of family separations – because in many cases, immigration officials don’t ask the people they arrest whether they have children, and in other cases parents don’t disclose that they have children in order to protect their families from being detained or deported.
The separations will have generational, transnational reverberations, said Faisal Al-Juburi, of the legal aid non-profit RaÃces. “We have now reached the metastasis of family separation under this administration,” he said. “I don’t think we’ve even begun as a nation to grapple with the impact of this type of immigration enforcement and the domino effect it will have.”
LT, 30, fled political violence in Haiti, where, she said, supporters of an opposing political party burned down her house, kidnapped her and raped her. She escaped first to the Bahamas and then arrived by boat in Miami, Florida, in 2019. She fears she would die if she returned now; she said her sister was murdered last year. And her daughter, she worries, wouldn’t be able to get the medical care she needs in Haiti – so she wouldn’t risk bringing her baby there even if she could.
She has also grown increasingly worried that her baby will end up in foster care. LT’s mother is watching the child, but it is impossible for her to work full time and care for an infant – especially not one with complicated medical needs. And, LT has filed a domestic violence complaint against the baby’s father, whom she said has threatened to kill both her and the infant.
“I wish I could be there for my daughter,” LT said in a written statement her lawyers shared with the Guardian. “She is my first child, and I cannot be there for her.”
The Guardian has reviewed more than a dozen cases, and interviewed multiple parents and children who had been separated by detention or deportation. In each case, a sudden arrest or deportation of a parent had radically disrupted the trajectory of a child’s life.
When KO, a 41-year-old Guatemalan mother of three was arrested at an ICE check-in appointment, she told an officer she had a 19-month-old who would be expecting her back home. “The officer said my child and I could die for all he cared,” she said.
While Herminia was held away from her nine-year-old and 16-year-old for eight months, the children’s mental health started to deteriorate, she said. Her young daughter had trouble sleeping through the night, and her teen son considered dropping out of school in order to work and support his sister.
After Marco, 61, was arrested at a Home Depot in Maryland and deported to El Salvador, his 17-year-old, Mark – a US citizen – spent his last months of high school working so that he and his mother could make enough money for rent.
Families described scrambling for funds after a primary breadwinner was detained or deported. Teens and young adults had to drop out of school to take care of younger siblings after both parents were deported. Children were left wondering when or whether they would ever be able to see parents who had been deported back to countries where they faced death threats.
“They are uprooting lives,” said Al-Juburi.
To meet Trump ’s demand for “mass deportations”, the administration has been arresting a record number of immigrants, including people who have been living in the country for many years and have built lives and families in the US. The vast majority of people detained have either no criminal histories, or minor convictions such as traffic offenses.
The push for mass deportation has had a pernicious impact on families, and on mothers in particular. Using the same records as those obtained by the Guardian, ProPublicafound that the Trump administration was deporting four times as many mothers of US citizens each day compared with the Biden administration.
Meanwhile, the administration has also weakened protections for non-citizen parents, and stepped back commitments to keep parents united. In several cases, immigration officials had also threatened to separate families, seemingly in order to coerce parents into voluntarily leaving the US.
Lauren Bis, a spokesperson for the DHS, declined to answer a series of questions from the Guardian, including questions about government policies on family separation. The agency denied separating families, and said that “parents are asked if they want to be removed with their children”. Bis also said “being in detention is a choice”, encouraging immigrant parents to use a government app to “self-deport”.
Many parents who have fled dangerous conditions in their home countries feel they cannot risk bringing their children with them. And if they are deported from the US without their children, their separation could be indefinite.
That is the case for EFA, an asylum seeker from Venezuela who was arrested – unexpectedly – at a routine ICE check-in appointment in October. Her husband struggled both to care for their two-year-old son and to make enough money to support him. Before her arrest, EFA had worked night shifts and her husband had worked days so that one of them was always home with their child.
The family’s church congregation jumped into action, organizing a childcare rotation while her husband worked. But the situation is tenuous. EFA’s husband is also an asylum-seeker, and the family is fearful that he, too, will be detained, leaving their son without a guardian.“I cannot help but feel an immense amount of sadness and helplessness due to this separation,” EFA said in a written statement her lawyers at RaÃces provided to the Guardian.
If she were deported to Venezuela, things could get even more complicated. Both she and her husband still face the threat of violence due to their political activism, she said, and are reluctant to take their son back there. But if she leaves the US without her child, it could become exponentially more difficult for the family to reunite. If she is deported, she would be barred from trying to re-enter the US for a decade. And even if EFA and her husband decided to bring their son to Venezuela, they would likely encounter logistical and legal barriers. There are no Venezuelan consulates in the US, and EFA’s husband wouldn’t be able to get a new passport to travel. Many Venezuelans in the US have been struggling to acquire travel documents to return home, even as the US government continues to encourage immigrants to “self-deport” to their home countries.
Her health and sanity, she said, are unravelling at the Dilley detention center where she’s being held. She cries herself to sleep every night, she said, but “I have not sought psychological help because I do not believe anyone can ease the sorrow in my heart. I just need to be with my son.”
Seven years ago, Trump’s “zero tolerance” separation policy sparked national outrage after the media began sharing images of agents wresting crying children from their parents’ arms and placing them in cages. Trump officially ended the policy after about six weeks, but more than 5,500 children had been separated from their parents by then. Hundreds of parents remain separated from their children years later, because the administration lost track of many of the families it forced apart.
Kelly Kribs, an attorney at the Young Center, said the separation crisis unfolding now is even more insidious.
“It’s leading to all the same forms of trauma that we saw unfold back in 2018,” said Kribs, who worked for years to reunite families separated by the zero-tolerance policy. “But the speed and the scale of the separations now is at a level we’ve never seen before.”
In recent months, she has been working with parents who have been both detained or deported away from their children in the US. A report earlier this year also found that the government was deporting a significant number of parents without first asking whether they had children, or allowing them an opportunity to arrange for the care of their children, in apparent violation of its own policies.
Once families are separated across international borders, it can be extraordinarily difficult to reunite them, Kribs said.
For Oscar, 32, a Honduran environmental activist who was deported back to the country from which he had fled death threats, it could take months or years before he is able to rejoin his wife, Ana, and his seven- and nine-year-old children in Maryland.
The family had applied for asylum together, but then Oscar was arrested at a check-in appointment, moved to a Texas detention facility and deported. Ana and the children, in the meantime, were granted asylum. So Oscar’s lawyer filed a petition to allow him to rejoin his family in the US. But the International Refugee Assistance Project, an advocacy group, found “dramatic delays” in the processing of these petitions.
Oscar, meanwhile, plans to remain in hiding in Honduras – staying alone in an apartment and avoiding going outside – for as long as he can. When he calls the children, he tells them: “Dad is going to come back soon.” He tells them to behave well for their mother, to remember that he didn’t leave them by choice and to consider that, maybe, this is all part of God’s plan. “We are going to get through this, that I know,” he tells them. “I believe in God’s will and I know that I can return to you.”
Things can get doubly complicated when parents and children don’t share the same citizenship. Recently, Kribs said, she was trying to help a Venezuelan man who was deported by the US to Mexico – one of many immigrants that the government has sent to “third countries” that are willing to accept deportees. His son, who was born in Colombia, remained in the US. So at first, Kribs tried to get the US to deport the child to Mexico – but Mexico declined to receive him. Instead, the father had to figure out a way to travel to Colombia, where he was finally able to reunite with his son after two months of separation.
Among the many considerations Kribs had in that case and others was the question of how to help a young child cross international borders alone. Often, the relatives who step in as guardians after children’s parents are deported are also undocumented, and unable to travel with a child. Getting someone who isn’t a relative to accompany them can be challenging to arrange, and it requires notarized paperwork so there’s no risk the adult will be stopped under suspicion of child trafficking.
Complex, and ever-evolving international politics can also affect how easy – or difficult – it is for a child to get the correct travel documents. Airline policies vary on when and how children can fly unaccompanied. Even if the airline allows for it, Kribs said, it can be a scary journey for a young child. “How can a six-year-old be expected to navigate customs and immigration on his own?” she said.
Hundreds of families are facing similarly mundane yet mountainous barriers to reunification, Kribs said. Hundreds of parents do not know when they will be able to hold their children again.
“I think that’s part of what makes this problem harder for the public to wrap their brains around, is now the family separation is all around us every day across the country, which makes it hard to call out as a unique crisis,” she said. “It has become our everyday reality.”
The Guardian has used initials or first names only in some cases, to protect the identities of individuals who fear retaliation within the US immigration system, or who face threats in their home countries"
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)