Category: Breitbart
Trump ramps up vetting of foreign workers to combat Biden’s lax policies
The Trump administration is taking measures to reduce the flood of inadequately vetted foreign labor entering the United States.
The Department of Homeland Security introduced an interim final rule, effective Thursday, that ends the automatic extension of employment authorization for many foreign nationals.
‘All aliens must remember that working in the United States is a privilege, not a right.’
U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services stated that the move aims to prioritize “the proper screening and vetting of aliens before extending the validity of their employment authorizations.”
Foreign nationals who file for employment authorization renewals on or after Thursday will not receive an automatic extension.
USCIS contended that the change will allow for “more frequent vetting” and enable it “to deter fraud and detect aliens with potentially harmful intent” for potential removal.
The final rule notes that it aligns with President Donald Trump’s executive orders “Protecting the American People Against Invasion” and “Protecting the United States From Foreign Terrorists and Other National Security and Public Safety Threats.“
Photographer: Bonnie Cash/UPI/Bloomberg via Getty Images
“Ending the practice of providing automatic extension of employment authorization documents enhances benefit integrity in adjudications of work authorization requests and will better protect public safety and national security by ensuring that aliens are properly vetted and determined to continue to be eligible, and when applicable, merit a favorable exercise of discretion, for employment authorization before such authorization is provided to the alien,” the interim final rule reads.
The new regulation does not apply to those with Temporary Protected Status, as those authorizations are governed separately.
RELATED: Supreme Court rejects case that would reconsider H-1B-related visas
Photo by Michael M. Santiago/Getty Images
“USCIS is placing a renewed emphasis on robust alien screening and vetting, eliminating policies the former administration implemented that prioritized aliens’ convenience ahead of Americans’ safety and security,” USCIS Director Joseph Edlow stated.
“It’s a commonsense measure to ensure appropriate vetting and screening has been completed before an alien’s employment authorization or documentation is extended,” Edlow continued. “All aliens must remember that working in the United States is a privilege, not a right.”
Center for Immigration Studies stated that the new regulation may allow the administration “to more quickly enforce immigration laws, particularly with regard to those who entered the United States illegally but were given work permits.”
The interim final rule repeals a Biden administration regulation, issued in December, that increased the automatic extension period for some applicants from 180 days to 540 days from the expiration date, CIS reported.
“The Biden administration facilitated an invasion of our southern border and abused its parole, asylum, and work authorization authorities. President Trump has a mandate from the American people to stop the invasion and bring common sense back to America’s legal immigration system. Since taking office, President Trump and Secretary Noem have rescinded parole for almost half a million illegal aliens, implemented a new parole fee, and ended decades-long Temporary Protected Status. Now, we are focusing on those who have no right to work here,” a USCIS spokesperson told Blaze News.
“Biden’s automatic extension of Employment Authorization Document (EAD) for aliens posed a security risk that allowed bad actors to continue to work in this country,” the spokesperson continued. “The Trump administration’s interim final rule will ensure that aliens will be properly vetted and screened before USCIS extends their work authorization.”
Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!
Rebuild the republic one classroom at a time
The shocking assassination of Charlie Kirk at Utah Valley University puts an exclamation point on the degraded state of reasoned debate in America.
Like many in the last month or so, I’ve found myself doing a deep dive into Kirk’s YouTube channel, watching debate after debate. You learn something from watching them in full: Kirk was willing to talk to anybody, and he always brought liberals to the front of the line.
We must teach our students to be virtuous, both individually and politically.
He was pugnacious at times, but always civil. His interlocutors sometimes resorted to ad hominem attacks, and their arguments often collapsed under a steady stream of his questions and retorts. Time after time, these students lost the debate with Kirk because they simply didn’t know enough.
‘Action civics’
What causes a person to stake out a position with such confidence before mastering the evidence to support it? For many of the students who challenged Kirk, the answer is “action civics.” This pedagogical theory holds that the highest form of civic participation is protest rather than discussion. Its result is thoughtless grandstanding or worse. The antidote to this state of affairs is classical education rightly understood.
When it comes to civics, knowledge is necessary but not sufficient. Civic life requires more than a grasp of American history and government, as important as those things are. It requires us to be people formed by practice in the habit of reasoned deliberation — people who know how to disagree and be disagreed with and who are willing to change their opinions when they learn something.
Political speech — reasoned discussion about the good within a regime — allows us to improve our opinions by sharing them with others and refining them through conversation and disagreement. Civic education divorced from these practical virtues produces either performative activism or feckless intellectualizing.
These virtues can be cultivated within the classroom through classical education. Reading and discussing works from Aristotle to the Federalist allows students to wrestle with enduring questions about justice, rights, and the good life. They learn not only to discern what is right but also to pursue it amid the complexities of a changing world.
Yet the real formation comes in seminars and Socratic discussions, which are laboratories of civic practice.
After years outside of the classroom, this semester I began teaching a course on moral and political philosophy to 11th graders. These students are young, but after years in a classical school, they have some real learning under their belts. The task this year is to develop within them the habits necessary for a real seminar conversation, with Socratic discussion three days a week and a full-blown seminar on the other two.
Running a seminar
In a well-run seminar, teachers merely provide a question about a great work of literature, history, or philosophy, intervening to guide the discussion only rarely. As in life, no authority swoops in to give the right answer and make decisions for everyone else. It’s the students who lead and who learn to find their way together.
A properly run seminar allows students to disagree and be disagreed with. They are forced to humble themselves before an author and a text, to scrutinize their own opinions, and to discard error in favor of knowledge.
But it isn’t a lawless environment. Students in a well-run seminar know that they are to speak about the text and only the text. Every comment must respond to the previous speaker. Non sequiturs are not allowed, and the students don’t interrupt each other (we are still working on that last one).
If we want a citizenry capable of sustaining liberty, we cannot settle for activist training without understanding, nor abstract lectures without practice.
When they do speak, they have to ground their statements in an argument drawn from the text. If they don’t have an interpretation of the text to offer, they can ask a thoughtful question, which is often just as beneficial to the conversation as a well-reasoned argument.
Disagreement in the seminar room is an opportunity to learn that disputing someone’s argument doesn’t mean impugning their character. Most teenagers are terrified to disagree with someone their own age and even more terrified to be disagreed with. But after a few weeks, they develop thicker skin. They learn to think more about the substance of their argument and less about their social standing.
RELATED: How Charlie Kirk’s life shows the power of self-education
skynesher via iStock/Getty Images
When the arbiter of the debate is the text itself, everyone knows that success means advancing the clearest and most correct reading. And when the text is rich and deep, it takes time, conversation, and disagreement to interpret it well.
Disagreement is an opportunity for clarification. In a well-developed seminar, it’s welcomed. What matters is not superficial civility, but the willingness to examine and revise our opinions in light of reason and fact, to argue from truth rather than feeling, and to labor toward a common understanding.
Dare to disagree
In a way, these classroom discussions on Plato and Virgil, Swift and Shakespeare, are a crash course in practical civics. Not protest, not theory, but character formation through dialogue, study, and experience — all preparing students not only to understand their country but to participate in it responsibly. In a way, classical education creates more people like Charlie Kirk.
If we want a citizenry capable of sustaining liberty, we cannot settle for activist training without understanding, nor abstract lectures without practice. We must teach our students to be virtuous, both individually and politically. Only then will they be capable of self-government — not as activists or spectators, but as citizens.
Editor’s note: This article was published originally at the American Mind.
John Leguizamo’s ‘The Other Americans’ puts art before activism
“Do you know John?”
Yeah, LinkedIn. I know John Leguizamo.
LinkedIn
There is no way John Leguizamo knows me, but following the professional networking platform’s suggestion, I went ahead and sent an invitation to the actor/producer to connect.
I grew up in Queens; my family has a butcher shop in Spanish Harlem. If you think Latinos are so united, see what happens when you call a Puerto Rican a Mexican.
I haven’t kept up with Leguizamo’s career. The only times I see him pop up now is when he’s complaining about the lack of Latino representation in show business. In fact, when it comes to complaining about representation, John Leguizamo is overrepresented.
‘Liquor Store Gunman’
I read in Variety that early on in his career, Leguizamo “felt humiliated” playing the role of “Liquor Store Gunman” in Mike Nichols’ “Regarding Henry” (1991).
“I shoot this white guy [Harrison Ford],” Leguizamo explains. “It was like, ‘Oh my God, I’m perpetuating what they want to see,’ which is negative Latino images.”
It’s interesting that Leguizamo felt humiliated playing a Latino stereotype in “Regarding Henry” but managed to put that humiliation aside a couple years later to play a Latino stereotype in “Carlito’s Way.” To be fair: Latino gangster Benny Blanco from the Bronx is a far more memorable character than Liquor Store Gunman. (What kind of last name is “Gunman” anyway? It ain’t Latin.)
When not at the mercy of other screenwriters and casting agents for roles, Leguizamo, a one-man-show-making machine, made a career out of performing his own Latino characters — which are not all necessarily negative images but certainly stereotypical in many respects. I mean, this is the same artist who made “Freak,” “House of Buggin’,” and “John Leguizamo’s Spic-O-Rama,” which is not to be confused with generic Spic-O-Rama.
In an interview with “NBC Nightly News,” Leguizamo declares, “We’re almost 20% of the population, I want 20% of the executives, 20% of the stories, 20% of the principal leads, then I’ll be quiet.”
Regarding ‘us’
By “we,” of course he means Latinos — which includes me (even though, again, John doesn’t know me).
I doubt a perfectly equitable distribution of roles in show business along ethnic lines will quiet Leguizamo though. Even a world where an Al Pacino can’t swoop in to capture the leading Cuban and Puerto Rican roles will shut Leguizamo up.
Notice Leguizamo isn’t making this appeal for equity when it comes to other industries. Can you picture John Leguizamo showing up to a farm or construction site, demanding fewer Latinos — legal or undocumented — because they’re overrepresented?
So in the year 2025, we’re about 20% of the population, but looking back at the “Regarding Henry” year of 1991 — can you imagine if that were the movie that defined 1991! — Latinos were only about 9% of the population.
In the year of Benny Blanco from the Bronx, 1993, it jumped to about 9.5%. The further you go back, the fewer Latinos there are in the United States. To expect to see yourself represented when there are so few of you out there is quite something. Narcissistic, you might call it. Perfect for a talent like Leguizamo — who has made a lot of work for and about himself. Albeit a lot of good, original, entertaining, and funny work, I must say.
Hate-watch interrupted
Which brings me to his new play, “The Other Americans,” at the Public Theater — which I only heard about because of Leguizamo’s media appearances that come across like he’s on a grievance tour.
So from a marketing standpoint, the Colombian American’s promotional shtick worked. I bought a ticket — but to hate-watch his play.
I don’t like going into a show expecting it to suck — let alone wanting it to suck. I tried to shake those intentions as best as I could. One thing I made sure not to do before the show was to read Leguizamo’s “note from the playwright” that’s printed in the playbill. I don’t know if it really made a difference, because once I stepped into the Anspacher Theater at the Public Theater, he’d won me over.
I had a seat center-stage in the second row. The set looked like an authentic house in Forest Hills, Queens, with a fenced-in backyard and even an above-ground pool that the neighbors could see from their second-story windows. If the Jeffersons had been Latinos, this is what moving on up from Jackson Heights would look like.
The change in neighborhoods is a punch line, as is the pool. One of the first arguments in the play is whether the above-ground pool is a real pool or not, because real pools are in-ground, you know. Yes, an above-ground is kind of trashy, but it still holds water.
RELATED: Bill & Ted share absurdist adventure in new ‘Waiting for Godot’
Bruce Glikas/Michael Ochs Archives/Getty Images
Crowd-pleaser
Leguizamo plays Nelson Castro, a Colombian American laundromat owner, and from his first entrance onto the stage, I’m all in, whether it’s watching him mix a drink or listening to him curse into his cell phone — in English and Spanish. When his wife, Patti (played by actress Luna Lauren Velez), arrives, they’re soon dancing, like a stereotypical Latin couple. The audience loves it.
It feels like I’m on the set of a mult-cam sitcom. The live audience laughs, oohs and aahs. At one point in the play, an audience member caps one of Patti’s lines with what I think was a, “You go, girl!”
I remember Leguizamo saying he was out to create “a new type of American drama” — but what we’re presented with at first is something I could see running on network TV. They’d have to clean up the language and cut back on the Spanglish, but even the plot is perfect pilot material.
Complicated portrayal
Nelson and Patti are preparing for their daughter Toni’s wedding as well as the return of their son, Nick, who’s been gone for some time. Mami’s so nervous she keeps burning the sofrito!
During one of their dance passes in the living room, I notice a run in Patti’s stocking. That image — whether the wardrobe department meant for it to be there or not — has stuck with me.
It turns out their son is coming home after being hospitalized for a nervous breakdown — which his therapist attributes to his family not addressing the trauma he experienced when he was brutally beaten by a group of white boys his last year of high school.
The attack happened at one of his family’s ’mats. The perpetrators even tried to stuff him into one of the washing machines “to wash the brown off of him.” (I guess the racist white boys succeeded? Because the actor who plays Nick, Trey Santiago-Hudson, is rather pale-skinned.)
Nick is in pain and while Nelson wants a do-over with him, the Latin father is not equipped to deal with it. Imagine asking your son who was just released from a mental institution what he has to be anxious about?
It’s in these moments where Leguizamo really shines. He plays such a great dick! Although I don’t think “shines” is the right word for a performance that has so much darkness to it. Nelson is not just a flawed man — in many respects, he’s a wicked man.
The plot to “The Other Americans” is so well-crafted that I don’t want to risk revealing too much, but in one exchange, a family member compares Nelson to Sisyphus of Greek mythology. It’s a setup to a perfect sitcom punch line, where Nelson assumes it must be a real Greek guy from Astoria. But while Nelson shares some traits with Sisyphus, I think he’s even more like Tantalus.
Who’s ‘we’?
In his note from the playwright, John Leguizamo writes:
I wanted to write a play about race, and I wanted it to be complicated. I didn’t want it to be a morality play, but rather I wanted to show life as we Latino people experience it. We don’t always see the microaggressions, or the systemic road blocks in effect. Even though there’s a subtle tokenism at work around us, we often witness the macroaggressions: those obvious, in-your-face type moments. We Latinos experience racism through poverty, the schools in which we are allowed to enroll, and the geographical areas in which we are packed. In New York City, we are equal to the white population, yet you never see us on the cover of newspapers and magazines.
There’s more to his note, but I think this bit above is worth addressing. Firstly, this “we” stuff has got to go. Latinos are not a monolith. I grew up in Queens; my family has a butcher shop in Spanish Harlem. If you think Latinos are so united, see what happens when you call a Puerto Rican a Mexican.
Secondly, in the play Nelson is the one who blames “the system” (which is synonymous with racism) for his lot in life — for example, the failure of his laundromats. “The toxicity of the American dream” is another way I’ve seen it described. But as Nelson’s secrets are revealed, what becomes clear is that he, a tragic figure, is the one responsible for his and his family’s downfall.
The system — if there is one — has actually been very good to the Castros. Just like in real life, the system has been very good to Leguizamo.
With “The Other Americans,” Leguizamo fails to make his political statement but succeeds in making a powerful piece of art. ¡Bravo, hermano! Please accept my invitation on LinkedIn.
Republican candidate narrows the gap in NJ governor race with the help of key Dem endorsements
Democrats were expected to sail through the New Jersey gubernatorial race, but preliminary polls show the GOP candidate is narrowing the gap.
Republican candidate Jack Ciattarelli was at a nine-point disadvantage behind Democratic candidate Mikie Sherrill back in August, according to RealClearPolling. In a matter of weeks, Ciattarelli has managed to narrow Sherrill’s advantage from nearly double digits to just 3.6 points.
‘He is the right person to lead New Jersey in the right direction.’
Ciattarelli secured an endorsement from President Donald Trump, who called him “a terrific America First Candidate.” At the same time, the Republican has earned endorsements from local Democrats, which may have helped Ciattarelli close in on Sherrill’s lead.
“Why would anyone vote for New Jersey and Virginia Gubernatorial Candidates, Mikie Sherrill and Abigail Spanberger, when they want transgender for everybody, men playing in women’s sports, High Crime, and the most expensive Energy prices almost anywhere in the World?” Trump asked in a recent Truth Social post. “VOTE REPUBLICAN for massive Energy Cost reductions, large scale Tax Cuts, and basic Common Sense!”
RELATED: Kelsey Grammer endorses Republican in dead-heat NJ governor race
Photo by Spencer Platt/Getty Images
Although securing support from the MAGA base is key, New Jersey’s traditionally blue voting record makes bipartisan endorsements key in the gubernatorial race.
Ciattarelli recently received an endorsement from New Era Democrats President Celia Iervasi, who emphasized the issue of affordability and taxes.
“As life continues to become unaffordable for the working class, and New Jersey continues to be one of the highest-taxed states in the country, Jack is the right person that is needed to make life more affordable for the residents of the Garden State,” Iervasi said. “We look forward to joining a coalition of organizations that are supporting Jack in the upcoming election and know that he is the right person to lead New Jersey in the right direction.”
Photo by Spencer Platt/Getty Images
Iervasi is just one of several Democrats and Democrat supporters who have thrown their support behind Ciattarelli. Democrats like North Bergen Mayor Nick Sacco, North Bergen Commissioner Allen Pascual, Dover Mayor Jim Dodd, Branchville Mayor Anthony Frato, Branchville Councilman Jeff Lewis, and former Hudson County Democratic Organization Chair Anthony Vainieri have all come out in support of the Republican candidate.
Garfield Mayor Everett Garnto also endorsed Ciattarelli as he announced that he was changing his party affiliation from Democrat to Republican.
“It’s not just Republicans who are crying out for change,” Ciattarelli told a crowd following Garnto’s endorsement. “It’s unaffiliated, independent voters and yes, even moderate Democrats who’ve come to the realization that this current administration has failed.”
Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!