Stephen Miller Delivers Chilling Message to ICE as Violence Grows

White House deputy chief of staff and homeland security adviser Stephen Miller delivered an unsettling affirmation to the thousands of federal agents violently attacking and abducting people in neighborhoods across the country.

“To all ICE officers: You have federal immunity in the conduct of your duties, and anybody who lays a hand on you, or tries to stop you, or tries to obstruct you, is committing a felony,” Miller declared Tuesday on The Will Cain Show on Fox. “You have immunity to perform your duties and no one—no city official, no state official, no illegal alien, no leftist agitator or domestic insurrectionist—can prevent you from fulfilling your legal obligations and duties.”

“The Department of Justice has made clear that if officials cross that line into obstruction, into criminal conspiracy against the United States or against ICE officers, then they will face justice,” he added.

The Department of Homeland Security then made sure to amplify Miller’s message.

Miller’s message comes just one week after ICE agents shot and killed Renee Nicole Good in Minneapolis, and as a growing number of federal agents descend on the city.

The Trump administration is closing their eyes, plugging their ears, and screaming about immunity as loudly as they can while their ICE agents beat, maim, and kill people protesting their militant mass immigration raids. Miller’s proclamation will only give these agents—many of them deeply partisan and inexperienced volunteers—even more power to continue their violence.

“REMINDER: To all members of the Trump administration. The incitement and engagement in state violence against the American people is a serious crime. Donald Trump will leave office long before the five-year statute of limitations expires,” House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries said on X, although it’s unclear what exactly he plans on doing at this moment in time. “You are hereby put on notice.”

“Miller will be directly responsible for the next American that an ICE agent kills,” Zeteo’s Mehdi Hasan chimed in. “This is a greenlight for abuse and has no basis in actual law.”

The State Department is taking the drastic step of suspending visa processing for people from 75 countries.

The move, Bloomberg reports, includes countries already subject to bans by the Trump administration, such as Afghanistan, Iran, and Somalia, but also countries with diplomatic relations with the United States, such as Nigeria and Brazil. Now people from nearly a third of the world’s 200 countries won’t be able to travel to the U.S., hurting an already struggling tourism industry ahead of the World Cup later this year.

The full list of countries subject to the freeze is: Afghanistan, Albania, Algeria, Antigua and Barbuda, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Bahamas, Bangladesh, Barbados, Belarus, Belize, Bhutan, Bosnia, Brazil, Burma, Cambodia, Cameroon, Cape Verde, Colombia, Côte d’Ivoire, Cuba, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Dominica, Egypt, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Fiji, Gambia, Georgia, Ghana, Grenada, Guatemala, Guinea, Haiti, Iran, Iraq, Jamaica, Jordan, Kazakhstan, Kosovo, Kuwait, Kyrgyzstan, Laos, Lebanon, Liberia, Libya, Macedonia, Moldova, Mongolia, Montenegro, Morocco, Nepal, Nicaragua, Nigeria, Pakistan, Republic of the Congo, Russia, Rwanda, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Saint Lucia, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Senegal, Sierra Leone, Somalia, South Sudan, Sudan, Syria, Tanzania, Thailand, Togo, Tunisia, Uganda, Uruguay, Uzbekistan, and Yemen.

The pause will go into effect January 21 and is certain to upend job, education, and vacation plans. In a statement, State Department spokesperson Tommy Piggott said, “The State Department will use its long-standing authority to deem ineligible potential immigrants who would become a public charge on the United States and exploit the generosity of the American people.”

“Immigration from these 75 countries will be paused while the State Department reassess immigration processing procedures to prevent the entry of foreign nationals who would take welfare and public benefits,” the statement said.

In December, Customs and Border Patrol announced that visa applicants would have to submit five years of social media history, as well as biometric information, including face, fingerprint, iris, and even DNA. One month before that, the Trump administration issued new guidelines ordering visa officers to deny immigrants who have obesity or other health issues.

Tourism to the U.S., especially from Canada, was already declining prior to these measures, thanks in large part to ICE activity. These new visa restrictions will throttle foreigners who wish to travel to the U.S. even with the violence practiced by Trump’s immigration agents. One would think that the White House would want more tourists to help the economy, but apparently it doesn’t care.

The Supreme Court ruled Wednesday that candidates for office have standing to challenge how a state counts votes—in a major blow to mail-in voting, a particular target of Donald Trump’s.

In a 7–2 decision, all six of the court’s conservative justices and one liberal justice sided with Representative Michael Bost, a longtime Trump ally, who alleged that the Illinois State Board of Elections had violated federal law by counting mail-in ballots received within two weeks of Election Day.

In the majority opinion, Chief Justice John Roberts wrote that the court agreed counting ballots after Election Day threatened election integrity. “Rules that undermine the integrity of the electoral process also undermine the winner’s political legitimacy. The counting of unlawful votes—or discarding of lawful ones—erodes public confidence in election results and the elected representative,” Roberts wrote.

In a concurring opinion, conservative Justice Amy Coney Barrett warned that the ruling wrongly lowered the bar for candidates to challenge state laws.

“By holding that a candidate always has an interest in challenging vote counting rules, even if those rules do not impose a competitive disadvantage on him, the Court today relieves candidates of having to show any real harm,” Barrett wrote.

In a dissenting opinion, liberal Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson wrote that the court had undermined the democratic process and opened up a can of worms by creating a harm-free, status-based standing. She was joined in her opinion by liberal Justice Sonia Sotomayor.

“By carving out a bespoke rule for candidate-plaintiffs—granting them standing ‘to challenge the rules that govern the counting of votes,’ simply and solely because they are ‘candidate[s]’ for office, ibid.—the Court now complicates and destabilizes both our standing law and America’s electoral processes,” she wrote.

The recent anti-mail-in-ballot push has clearly been influenced by Trump’s whims. Despite having voted by mail in the past, Trump has railed against the practice as part of his baseless claims of sweeping election fraud.

This story has been updated.

Senator John Kennedy shared some revealing information about his fellow GOPer Lindsey Graham in his new book, confirming Graham’s hawkish sensibilities and his penchant for alcoholic beverages.

“If you want to stump Lindsey, just ask him to name a country he wouldn’t bomb,” Kennedy wrote in his book, How to Test Negative for Stupid: And Why Washington Never Will.

Then Kennedy moved on to the drink.

“Invite him to dinner, and you don’t know if he’ll sit down for an intelligent conversation or get drunk and vomit in the fish tank. But that’s why I like him.”

This isn’t the first time Graham’s drinking has come up. In 2015, New York magazine wrote that Graham “likes a drink so much he thinks drinking more might just solve the problems in Washington.” And just last month, he appeared visibly drunk while answering questions at a news conference in Charleston, South Carolina.

Senator Elissa Slotkin said Monday that she has learned federal prosecutors are investigating her for a video she made in November, along with other congressional colleagues, urging members of the military to disobey illegal orders.

Slotkin said she found out about the investigation from Jeanine Pirro, appointed by President Trump as the U.S. attorney for the District of Columbia. Pirro had emailed the Senate’s sergeant at arms requesting an interview with Slotkin or her personal attorney, according to The New York Times. Pirro’s office declined to confirm or deny the investigation to the Times.

Slotkin, a former CIA analyst, helped to organize the video, along with five other Democratic members of Congress who served in the military: Senator Mark Kelly and Representatives Jason Crow, Chris Deluzio, Maggie Goodlander, and Chrissy Houlahan. They each urged service members to refuse illegal orders, drawing anger from President Trump, who accused them of sedition and suggested they be executed.

The investigation of Slotkin follows Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth’s attempts to target Kelly, censuring him and going after his military pension. In response, Kelly has sued Hegseth on free speech and due process grounds.

While Slotkin isn’t a military veteran, a Justice Department investigation could result in criminal charges. Is the Trump administration willing to try and punish Slotkin merely for exercising her free speech rights?