The Department of Homeland Security’s U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) issued the rule for cases in which the agency determines that a person did not meet the statutory definition of a refugee when admitted to the United States. The change does not automatically revoke the status of every refugee in the country.

The regulation changes the response period following a Notice of Intent to Terminate (NOIT), which identifies the government’s reasons for proposing termination and gives the individual an opportunity to respond. Under the revised procedure, a person who does not respond within the deadline forfeits the opportunity to rebut the allegations in the notice, and DHS says it will terminate the person’s refugee status.

The rule creates a shorter window for responding to the government’s case. Its practical effect will depend on the circumstances of each notice, the evidence available and whether the person requests an interview or submits a response in time.

What the new rule requires

Under the revised regulation, a NOIT must explain the grounds for the proposed termination and tell the recipient how to submit evidence or request an opportunity to provide oral evidence through an interview.

The 10-day period begins when the notice is served personally or mailed, under the applicable service rules. Saturdays, Sundays and federal holidays count toward the deadline. If the final day falls on a weekend or federal holiday, the deadline moves to the next business day.

For notices served by mail, three additional days apply under the regulation cited by DHS, producing a 13-day response period. The rule says the notice is dated on the day it is mailed.

A refugee does not have to submit a complete evidentiary response within the initial period if the person instead requests an interview. However, that request must be made within the deadline.

The distinction is important: the deadline concerns a proposed termination based on eligibility at the time of admission. It is not a general deadline for asylum applications, refugee admissions or every immigration case.

DHS says the change addresses screening concerns

DHS says the shorter response period is intended to improve the integrity of the refugee program, address national-security and public-safety risks, and allow the agency to act more quickly when it concludes that someone was admitted without meeting the statutory refugee definition.

In the rule, the department cites a review of refugee cases and argues that some earlier screening procedures relied on incomplete records, insufficient questioning or inadequate examination of identity and eligibility. It also describes examples of cases in which officials said they found inconsistencies or concerns during later reviews.

Those are the administration’s stated findings and rationale. The rule’s publication does not independently establish that refugees generally admitted under previous procedures were ineligible, nor does it show that every person who receives a termination notice committed fraud or presents a security risk.

DHS says the new procedure retains an opportunity to respond and request an interview while allowing the government to move more quickly. The department issued the measure as an interim final rule without prior notice-and-comment procedures, relying on its stated legal grounds for doing so.

The public-comment period remains open until November 13, 2026. The agency may consider comments as it evaluates the rule, but the published rule took effect immediately on October 14.

Refugee advocates question whether 10 days is sufficient

The American Immigration Lawyers Association has warned immigration practitioners that the reduced period could make it more difficult for refugees to gather documents, obtain records, secure legal representation and prepare a response.

The International Refugee Assistance Project has also criticized the measure, arguing that the shortened period weakens protections for people contesting allegations that could lead to the loss of their status.

These are advocacy and professional assessments rather than judicial findings. Their concerns focus on the practical demands of responding to a government notice within a compressed period, particularly when evidence or supporting records may be difficult to obtain quickly.

The regulation itself allows recipients to request an interview within the deadline instead of submitting a full written response. Whether that option provides a sufficient opportunity to contest a particular case will depend on the facts and how USCIS applies the procedure.

The new rule does not establish how many people will receive notices under the revised process. The materials reviewed for this report did not establish a verified total of affected refugees under the new deadline.

What happens if refugee status is terminated?

The rule addresses termination of refugee status where USCIS determines that the individual did not qualify as a refugee at the time of admission. It does not treat a proposed termination notice as a final decision.

If USCIS terminates status, the regulation says the agency will process the individual under the applicable provisions of the Immigration and Nationality Act. That can lead to removal proceedings, but termination and removal are distinct legal steps.

The Federal Register states that a person whose status is terminated may seek other forms of relief or protection from removal where the law permits them in subsequent proceedings. The availability of such relief depends on the individual’s circumstances and the applicable legal process; it is not a guarantee that removal will be prevented.

The rule also states that there is no appeal from a USCIS termination decision under the relevant regulatory chapter. That language concerns the administrative process described by the regulation and should not be read as resolving every possible question about judicial review in federal court.

A recent appeals ruling adds a separate legal question

On October 5, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit issued a published decision in Mukantagara v. Mullin, reversing a lower court’s judgment for the government and remanding the case for further proceedings.

The court held that the statutory bar on judicial review at issue did not prevent district-court review of USCIS’s threshold determination about whether a person qualified as a refugee when admitted. The decision concerned the distinction between that eligibility determination and the agency’s ultimate decision to terminate refugee status.

The ruling predates the new 10-day rule. It does not invalidate the interim final rule, establish a nationwide right to appeal every termination decision or guarantee that a particular challenge will succeed. Its effect must be understood in the context of the court’s jurisdiction, the legal claims raised and the specific decision under review.

The decision nevertheless illustrates why the distinction between an administrative appeal and judicial review matters. The new regulation’s statement that there is no appeal under its chapter does not, by itself, answer every separate question about whether a federal court may review an agency action under applicable law.

The materials reviewed for this report did not establish that a court had blocked the new rule as of October 15. That is not a finding that no legal challenge exists or that the rule has been upheld on its merits.

The scope of the change remains central

The immediate change is procedural: a person who receives a covered notice now has less time to respond before USCIS may proceed toward termination. The rule applies to the specific question of eligibility at the time of admission, rather than automatically reopening every refugee’s status.

The government says faster action is needed to address screening and program-integrity concerns. Refugee advocates argue that the shorter window could make it harder for individuals to challenge the government’s conclusions before losing their status.

The significance of the rule will depend on how USCIS implements it, what evidence is cited in individual notices, whether recipients can respond within the deadline and how courts interpret the available avenues for review. Those questions remain separate from the rule’s effective date, which is confirmed in the Federal Register.

Reporting Credit: U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, Department of Homeland Security; U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit; American Immigration Lawyers Association; International Refugee Assistance Project.

The post US Cuts Refugees’ Deadline to Challenge Status Termination to 10 Days appeared first on Journos News - Breaking News, World News, Top Stories, Todays Headlines and Flash Reports.

The proposed ceiling would cover the federal fiscal year beginning Oct. 1, 2026. The State Department said the admissions would be “primarily” allocated to Afrikaners, the predominantly white Afrikaans-speaking community descended largely from European settlers in South Africa.

The administration says Afrikaners face racial discrimination and other risks in South Africa. Pretoria has repeatedly rejected that characterization and says its policies are intended to address the legacy of apartheid rather than persecute the country’s white minority.

The new plan continues a refugee policy that has sharply reduced U.S. admissions from most parts of the world while creating a specific pathway for Afrikaners.

State Department outlines 2027 refugee plan

The State Department’s notice to Congress says the United States intends to allocate 17,500 refugee places for fiscal year 2027.

The notice says the admissions will primarily involve Afrikaners and argues that they face agricultural property seizures without compensation, government policies affecting employment, education and business, and rhetoric that the administration says contributes to violence against racial minorities.

The administration also estimates that resettling refugees under the proposed ceiling would cost approximately $500 million.

The notice says the United States expects Afrikaners admitted under the program to assimilate into American society and says the administration does not anticipate other countries resettling Afrikaners.

The announcement follows an earlier expansion of the refugee ceiling during fiscal year 2026.

From 7,500 to 17,500

The administration initially established a fiscal 2026 refugee ceiling of 7,500.

In May, President Donald Trump issued an emergency presidential determination raising the ceiling to 17,500. The determination said the increase was justified by what the administration described as an unforeseen emergency involving racially motivated violence and disruptions to U.S. refugee-processing operations in South Africa. The additional admissions were designated for Afrikaners.

The May determination also stated that eligible Afrikaners could be considered for refugee admission while processed in South Africa, subject to U.S. immigration and security requirements.

The fiscal 2027 plan now carries the same 17,500 ceiling into the next year, while again identifying Afrikaners as the primary group expected to receive admissions.

The administration has therefore moved the Afrikaner program from an exception within an already reduced refugee system toward a central component of its refugee admissions policy.

Washington and Pretoria disagree over persecution claims

The central dispute is not whether South Africa has serious violent crime or whether some Afrikaners have experienced attacks.

The disagreement concerns whether those circumstances amount to persecution of Afrikaners as a racial or ethnic group under refugee standards.

The Trump administration says they do.

South Africa says they do not.

The South African government has repeatedly rejected claims that white South Africans are being subjected to systematic racial persecution. In a May 2025 Cabinet statement, the government said allegations of discrimination did not meet the threshold for persecution under international refugee law and said official police statistics did not support claims of genocide against farmers or a particular racial group.

South Africa’s foreign ministry has also said that violent crime affects people across racial groups and disputed descriptions of farm crime as evidence of a coordinated racial campaign.

The dispute has become part of a wider deterioration in U.S.-South African relations.

Crime remains a major issue, but its causes are disputed

South Africa has one of the world’s serious violent-crime problems, and farm attacks are a genuine security concern for people living and working in rural areas.

The disagreement is over how those crimes should be interpreted.

South African government data and statements have said rural crime affects people of different racial groups and does not demonstrate a coordinated campaign against white farmers. In 2025, the South African Police Service said it was reviewing claims that official statistics had understated farm murders and reported that its preliminary verification had not identified additional farm-owner murders beyond those already recorded.

The United States has nevertheless used the situation involving Afrikaners as a basis for its refugee policy.

The Trump administration has also cited land policy and employment and affirmative-action measures as evidence of discrimination against white South Africans. Pretoria argues that such measures are designed to address economic and social inequalities created during apartheid.

The competing interpretations remain central to the refugee dispute.

The U.S. refugee program has been dramatically reduced

The Afrikaner policy is taking place against a much broader contraction of the U.S. refugee program.

Pew Research Center reported that the United States admitted 10,258 refugees during the first 10 months of fiscal year 2026, compared with 38,102 during fiscal 2025 and 100,034 during fiscal 2024. The 17,500 ceiling for fiscal 2026 was already the lowest annual ceiling in at least several decades.

The administration’s fiscal 2027 plan therefore represents a major change in the composition of an already much smaller program.

The State Department’s notice specifically identifies Afrikaners as the primary beneficiaries rather than distributing the ceiling broadly among refugees from regions experiencing war, persecution or other humanitarian emergencies.

That approach has drawn criticism from refugee advocates, who argue that focusing admissions on one nationality or ethnic group leaves people facing crises elsewhere with fewer opportunities for resettlement.

A policy with wider diplomatic consequences

The refugee program has become one part of a broader dispute between Washington and Pretoria.

In September, the United States announced new visa restrictions targeting foreign nationals it said were involved in South African policies concerning racial discrimination. South Africa rejected the U.S. characterization and said Washington was misrepresenting domestic policies intended to address historical inequalities.

The refugee program has similarly become a point of disagreement.

South Africa has argued that Afrikaners do not meet the international definition of refugees because the evidence does not establish systematic persecution based on race. The U.S. government has adopted a different assessment and has created a specific admission pathway for them.

The disagreement therefore extends beyond immigration policy into competing interpretations of South Africa’s post-apartheid political and social order.

What the 2027 number means

The 17,500 figure is an admissions ceiling, not a guarantee that exactly 17,500 people will enter the United States.

Refugees must still pass the applicable screening and eligibility requirements. The administration’s own notice describes the number as a ceiling rather than an automatic entitlement to admission.

The fiscal 2027 plan also does not mean that every person admitted will necessarily be an Afrikaner. The State Department said admissions would be primarily Afrikaners, leaving room for other refugee admissions within the overall ceiling.

The policy nevertheless establishes Afrikaners as the principal group targeted by the administration’s refugee admissions plan for the coming fiscal year.

For Washington, the program reflects its determination that Afrikaners face circumstances warranting special consideration.

For Pretoria, the same policy rests on a characterization of South African society and government policy that it rejects.

The fiscal 2027 refugee program will put that disagreement into practice, with the United States preparing to admit thousands more South Africans under a policy that has already become one of the most contentious elements of its immigration relationship with Pretoria.

Reporting Credit: U.S. Department of State — fiscal 2027 refugee admissions notice and stated criteria for Afrikaner admissions; White House — presidential refugee determinations and executive policy governing Afrikaner admissions; South African Presidency and Department of International Relations and Cooperation — South African government’s position on Afrikaner persecution claims and refugee policy; South African Police Service — official crime statistics and verification of farm-crime claims; U.S. Refugee Processing Center — refugee admissions data.

The post U.S. Plans to Admit 17,500 Mostly Afrikaner Refugees in 2027 appeared first on Journos News - Breaking News, World News, Top Stories, Todays Headlines and Flash Reports.

Sudan has been engulfed in conflict since April 2023, when fighting erupted between the Sudanese military and the paramilitary Rapid Support Forces (RSF). UNICEF said the conflict is now concentrated in the Kordofan, Darfur and Blue Nile regions, where drone warfare accounts for about 60% of reported casualties involving children.

The latest warning comes as the United Nations, the United States, the United Kingdom and other governments have expressed growing concern over reports of possible atrocities as the Sudanese military and the RSF battle for control of the strategic city of El-Obeid in North Kordofan.

On Monday, the U.N.-backed Human Rights Council in Geneva approved a resolution introduced by five European countries condemning the escalating violence by the RSF and its allied forces in and around El-Obeid.

The measure, adopted without a vote, also called for increased support for countries hosting Sudanese refugees and condemned “all forms of external interference” in the conflict.

Humanitarian Crisis Deepens

The war has killed at least 59,000 people, displaced approximately 13 million and pushed large areas of Sudan into famine, according to humanitarian agencies.

More than 30 million people now require humanitarian assistance.

UNICEF said drone strikes and shelling have repeatedly targeted civilian infrastructure, including schools, markets, fuel depots and water facilities, placing more than 500,000 people at risk. In several communities, civilians have endured conditions resembling prolonged sieges for more than a year.

“Children are being caught in a relentless cycle of violence, displacement and deprivation,” said Sheldon Yett, UNICEF’s representative for Sudan.

The United Nations urged all parties to the conflict to protect civilians and civilian infrastructure, allow safe and unhindered humanitarian access, and take all possible measures to protect children from harm.

Gold Mine Collapse Kills Informal Miners

In a separate incident on Monday, at least 15 informal miners were killed after part of an abandoned gold mine collapsed near Wadi Halfa, close to Sudan’s border with Egypt, authorities said.

One additional miner was injured in the collapse at the Mohamed Taqfiq mine, according to the state-run Sudanese Mineral Resources Company.

The company said miners had resumed operations at the site despite authorities previously closing it because of safety concerns.

Sudan remains one of Africa’s leading gold producers, with official figures showing production reached 70 tons last year, up from 64 tons in 2024.

Most of the country’s gold is extracted through artisanal and small-scale mining, where safety regulations are often poorly enforced.

Fatal mine accidents occur frequently. In May, at least seven miners died in a collapse in Red Sea State, while another 13 were killed in South Kordofan in January.

This report is based on reporting by The Associated Press. 

Topics: Sudan | UNICEF | Children | Humanitarian Crisis | Rapid Support Forces | Civil War | Gold Mining | World News

The post More Than 300 Children Killed or Injured in Sudan War Over Six Months, UNICEF Says appeared first on Journos News - Breaking News, World News, Top Stories, Todays Headlines and Flash Reports.

Addressing the U.N. Human Rights Council in Geneva on Friday, Türk described the developments in North Kordofan as a “red alert,” urging world leaders to intensify diplomatic efforts to prevent additional violence against civilians. According to the Associated Press, the warning came during an emergency debate convened by the council as fighting intensifies around the strategically important city.

Concerns Grow Over Civilian Protection

Türk told council members that conditions in and around el-Obeid point to a worsening human rights emergency, saying civilians remain caught between Sudan’s armed forces and the paramilitary Rapid Support Forces (RSF).

He urged governments to prioritize efforts aimed at preventing further atrocities not only in el-Obeid but across the wider Kordofan region, where violence has continued despite repeated international appeals for restraint.

According to Türk, communities around the city have endured prolonged insecurity, including months of severe restrictions and repeated drone attacks linked to the ongoing fighting.

Human Rights Council Considers New Resolution

The emergency session comes as the Human Rights Council considers a draft resolution introduced by Britain, Germany, Ireland, the Netherlands and Norway.

The proposed measure condemns the escalating violence attributed to the RSF and allied groups in and around el-Obeid, calls for increased international assistance to countries hosting Sudanese refugees and denounces external interference in Sudan’s conflict.

Council members are expected to continue discussions on the draft as concerns mount over the humanitarian situation.

Conflict Continues Into Fourth Year

Sudan’s war began in April 2023 following a power struggle between the Sudanese military and the RSF after months of political tensions.

According to figures cited by the Associated Press, the conflict has killed at least 59,000 people, displaced approximately 13 million, and contributed to famine conditions in several parts of the country. More than 30 million people now require humanitarian assistance.

Strategic City Faces Renewed Threat

The Sudanese military lifted a siege of el-Obeid in February 2025 after more than a year of isolation. Since then, the RSF has launched multiple offensives aimed at regaining control of the surrounding area and reimposing pressure on the city.

The United Nations and several governments have expressed concern over reports that RSF forces are reinforcing positions near el-Obeid, a city with an estimated population of around 500,000.

Humanitarian Conditions Continue to Deteriorate

The Office of the U.N. High Commissioner for Human Rights has warned that repeated attacks on critical infrastructure have sharply reduced access to food, fuel, clean water, healthcare and transportation for civilians living in and around el-Obeid.

As diplomatic efforts continue, international officials have stressed that preventing further civilian suffering will require increased humanitarian support alongside renewed efforts to de-escalate the conflict.

Tags: Sudan, el-Obeid, United Nations, Volker Türk, Human Rights Council, Rapid Support Forces, Sudan Conflict, North Kordofan, Humanitarian Crisis, Africa, War, Civilians

The post U.N. Human Rights Chief Warns of Escalating Risk of Atrocities Around Sudan’s el-Obeid appeared first on Journos News - Breaking News, World News, Top Stories, Todays Headlines and Flash Reports.

The case, filed Tuesday before the Community Court of Justice of the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS), is the latest legal challenge involving African countries that have signed third-country deportation agreements with the administration of U.S. President Donald Trump.

The coalition, which includes the Global Strategic Litigation Council, argues that Ghana accepted non-Ghanaian deportees from the United States before facilitating their return to countries where they allegedly faced persecution, despite existing legal protections.

Case Centers on 27 Deportees

The lawsuit represents 27 people among at least 60 individuals the United States has deported to Ghana since September 2025 under a bilateral agreement between the two governments.

According to the coalition, many of those deported had previously received protection orders from U.S. immigration judges preventing their removal to their countries of origin because of potential risks to their safety.

The legal filing alleges that after arriving in Ghana, most of the 27 individuals were transferred to their home countries within hours or days, despite informing Ghanaian authorities about those U.S. protections.

Some deportees also reported being shackled during flights from the United States.

After arriving in Ghana, they said they were detained under armed guard in military facilities, hotels and airport holding areas, often in difficult conditions while awaiting onward deportation.

Rights Lawyers Cite International Law

The coalition argues that Ghana violated the international principle of non-refoulement, which prohibits states from returning individuals to countries where they face persecution, torture or other serious harm.

Medical evaluations submitted with the lawsuit reportedly identified symptoms of post-traumatic stress disorder and severe depression among several of the deportees represented in the case.

The lawsuit asks the ECOWAS court to halt additional deportation transfers under the agreement, require Ghana to disclose the terms of its arrangement with the United States, award compensation to affected individuals and prohibit the country from entering similar agreements in the future.

A spokesperson for Ghana’s government did not immediately respond to requests for comment.

Growing Legal Challenges to U.S. Deportation Agreements

According to rights advocates, Ghana is one of at least nine African countries that have entered agreements with the United States to accept deportees who are not their own nationals.

Advocacy organizations say the Trump administration has deported thousands of migrants to nearly two dozen third countries under similar arrangements as part of broader immigration enforcement efforts.

Immigration lawyers argue that such agreements can serve as an indirect mechanism for returning asylum seekers to countries from which they were previously protected.

Earlier this month, another coalition of rights lawyers filed a separate legal challenge against Equatorial Guinea before the African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights, alleging that the country similarly returned U.S. deportees to their home countries in violation of international human rights obligations.

The Ghana case marks the first lawsuit brought under a 1979 ECOWAS treaty guaranteeing freedom of movement across West Africa, potentially setting an important legal precedent for future regional migration and human rights disputes.

Tags: Ghana, United States, ECOWAS, Global Strategic Litigation Council, Donald Trump, Deportation, Human Rights, Non-Refoulement, Immigration, Asylum Seekers, Equatorial Guinea, West Africa

The post Rights Groups Sue Ghana Over U.S. Third-Country Deportation Agreement appeared first on Journos News - Breaking News, World News, Top Stories, Todays Headlines and Flash Reports.

The Congolese Ministry of Health said Sunday that the outbreak, concentrated in Ituri province, had reached 1,003 confirmed cases since it was declared on May 15. The ministry reported that 100 people have recovered, while at least 365 patients remain hospitalized or in isolation.

The outbreak is caused by the Bundibugyo strain of the Ebola virus, a rare variant for which officials say there are currently no approved vaccines or specific treatments. Health authorities have warned that the true scale of the outbreak may be significantly larger than current figures indicate.

Contact Tracing Remains a Critical Obstacle

Efforts to identify and monitor people exposed to the virus continue to lag behind the pace of transmission.

According to the Ministry of Health, contact tracing coverage has reached only 55%, limiting authorities’ ability to quickly isolate new infections and interrupt chains of transmission.

Dr. Jean Kaseya, Director-General of the Africa Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, told The Associated Press last week that uncertainty surrounding the outbreak’s origin remains a major concern.

“If you want to control an outbreak, especially Ebola outbreak, you must know the index case. We don’t have confidence on when this outbreak started,” Kaseya said.

Authorities have not yet identified the outbreak’s first known patient and were still attempting to trace more than 35,000 individuals who had contact with infected people as of last week.

Conflict Complicates Health Operations

The outbreak is unfolding in a region already affected by armed violence and displacement.

Officials said attacks by the Allied Democratic Force, an armed group linked to the Islamic State organization, have restricted access to numerous communities across Ituri province. The insecurity has forced many residents to flee their homes, making surveillance and medical response efforts more difficult.

Health authorities acknowledged that the disease may still be spreading faster than containment measures can address, and officials say the outbreak may not yet have reached its peak.

Concerns Grow in Displacement Camps

Fears of wider transmission have intensified following reports of unexplained deaths at a major displacement site near Bunia, the provincial capital.

Officials at the Kigonze displacement camp reported Friday that 10 people had died during the previous week under unusual circumstances. While no Ebola cases had been confirmed at the camp, local administrators said the number of deaths was unprecedented and warranted investigation.

The camp houses more than 20,000 displaced people living in crowded conditions, raising concerns about the potential consequences of an infectious disease outbreak.

The U.N. refugee agency said at least 2 million internally displaced people and more than 320,000 refugees are currently living in areas considered at risk from Ebola transmission in Congo.

In a statement issued Friday, the agency said it was “deeply concerned by the accelerating spread” of the virus and warned of increasing risks facing displaced populations across the region.

Humanitarian Risks Continue to Increase

Humanitarian organizations and local leaders have warned that overcrowded living conditions could accelerate transmission if the virus reaches displacement camps.

Charité Banza, a civil society leader in Ituri, said the vulnerability of camp residents remains a major concern as health authorities work to determine the cause of recent deaths.

“If a disease or epidemic were to spread among the thousands of people living at this site, it would be a real catastrophe given our already very precarious living conditions,” Banza said.

Authorities continue to investigate the outbreak while expanding surveillance, treatment, and tracing operations. However, officials acknowledge that significant uncertainty remains regarding the outbreak’s full extent and future trajectory.

The post Ebola Cases Surpass 1,000 in Eastern Congo as Health Response Faces Growing Challenges appeared first on Journos News - Breaking News, World News, Top Stories, Todays Headlines and Flash Reports.

The measure was adopted on Monday after a closely contested parliamentary vote, receiving 174 votes in favor and 172 against. The legislation forms part of Sweden’s broader strategy to address unauthorized migration as the European Union moves forward with reforms aimed at streamlining deportation procedures and strengthening migration management across member states.

The law requires employees in several government agencies, including tax authorities, employment services, social insurance offices, prison services and probation agencies, to report cases where they have reason to believe a person lacks legal permission to remain in Sweden.

Critics argue that the policy could discourage migrants from interacting with public institutions and create wider social consequences.

Jacob Lind, a migration expert at Malmo University, described the legislation as one of several controversial migration measures adopted in recent years. Speaking to The Associated Press following the vote, Lind said the policy carries symbolic significance because it introduces reporting duties within important state institutions.

Exemptions Added Following Public Opposition

The government modified the proposal after criticism from professional groups and civil society organizations. Teachers, healthcare professionals and social workers were exempted from the reporting requirement.

Despite those exemptions, advocacy organizations remain concerned about the broader impact of the law.

John Stauffer of the Swedish nonprofit Civil Rights Defenders told The Associated Press that the narrow margin of approval reflected significant divisions within Swedish society regarding migration policy.

Louise Bonneau of the Brussels-based Platform for International Cooperation on Undocumented Migrants (PICUM) said reporting obligations within public institutions could create fear among undocumented migrants and potentially discourage them from seeking essential services.

According to Bonneau, concerns extend beyond migration enforcement and include possible effects on public health and access to social services.

Government Defends Need for Stronger Enforcement

Swedish authorities have argued that additional measures are necessary to ensure individuals who are not legally entitled to remain in the country can be returned to their countries of origin.

However, researchers from three Swedish universities warned earlier this year that the legislation could conflict with fundamental human rights protections and increase the risk of racial profiling. The researchers said public employees interviewed during their study expressed concerns about ethical dilemmas that could emerge when implementing the law.

One example cited by the researchers involved a mother without legal residency status giving birth in Sweden. While healthcare workers would not be required to report her, information later processed through tax authorities could trigger a reporting obligation affecting the family.

Part of a Wider European Debate

Mandatory reporting requirements for undocumented migrants remain relatively uncommon across Europe, although some countries have adopted comparable measures.

Germany introduced legislation in 2005 requiring certain public authorities to report migrants lacking valid residency permits. The policy applies to selected government institutions, while schools and hospitals are exempt.

Even with those exemptions, migrant advocacy groups have reported concerns that some individuals avoid seeking medical treatment because administrative procedures may expose them to immigration authorities.

Several German cities have subsequently developed healthcare services specifically intended for people without valid residency status.

The United Kingdom also revised a controversial information-sharing arrangement in 2018 that allowed immigration authorities access to certain patient records held by the National Health Service. The policy was narrowed after concerns emerged that migrants were delaying medical treatment due to fears about confidentiality and immigration enforcement.

Under the revised British rules, immigration authorities are generally limited to accessing information involving individuals suspected or convicted of criminal offenses who are subject to deportation proceedings.

Sweden’s new legislation now places the country at the center of an ongoing European debate over balancing migration enforcement, public services and the rights of undocumented migrants.

Tags: Sweden, Migration Policy, European Union, Undocumented Migrants, Human Rights

The post Sweden Approves Reporting Requirement for Public Workers Dealing With Unauthorized Migrants appeared first on Journos News - Breaking News, World News, Top Stories, Todays Headlines and Flash Reports.

The vessel, carrying 33 people, overturned near the coastal city of Tobruk while en route to Greece, leaving only seven survivors and nine others still missing, according to the United Nations. The incident is the latest in a series of fatal crossings that have intensified international concern over migrant safety and the effectiveness of regional response efforts.

Officials from the International Organization for Migration (IOM) said survivors had been stranded at sea for several days before rescue, with some migrants reportedly dying from hunger and dehydration during the ordeal. Rescue operations were conducted by Libyan naval forces, the coast guard, and the Red Crescent, which recovered bodies from the water.

Humanitarian Emergency Intensifies Along Libya Route

The latest tragedy reflects a sharp escalation in migrant deaths along one of the world’s most dangerous sea crossings. The central Mediterranean route, linking North Africa to southern Europe, has seen a significant rise in fatalities this year.

According to UN data cited by The Associated Press, more than 765 migrants have died along the route in 2026 alone, marking a roughly 150% increase compared with the same period last year.

Analysts say the increase is driven by a combination of conflict, economic hardship, and expanding smuggling networks, particularly affecting migrants from countries such as Sudan, Bangladesh, and Afghanistan. The deteriorating situation in Sudan has been identified as a key factor pushing more people toward dangerous migration routes.

Regional Instability Fuels Migration Pressures

Libya continues to serve as a major transit hub for migrants attempting to reach Europe, despite ongoing instability since the 2011 uprising that toppled longtime leader Moammar Gadhafi. Weak state control and fragmented governance have allowed trafficking networks to operate with limited oversight.

Humanitarian organizations warn that migrants passing through Libya face severe risks even before reaching the sea, including detention, exploitation, and violence. These conditions, combined with unsafe vessels and limited rescue capacity, contribute to high fatality rates during crossings.

Recent incidents, including another shipwreck earlier in April that left more than 80 migrants missing, highlight the persistent dangers facing those attempting the journey.

International Response Under Strain

The growing number of fatalities has intensified calls for coordinated international action, particularly from European governments and UN agencies. However, divisions over migration policy and border enforcement continue to complicate efforts to establish a unified response.

Officials and analysts interviewed by Reuters note that while rescue operations remain active, they are increasingly stretched by the scale of migration attempts and the frequency of maritime emergencies.

Humanitarian groups have urged expanded search-and-rescue missions, improved legal migration pathways, and stronger action against trafficking networks to prevent further loss of life.

Strategic Outlook for Migration Policy

The latest shipwreck highlights the persistent gap between migration pressures and existing policy frameworks in Europe and North Africa. As conflicts and economic crises continue to drive displacement, experts warn that fatalities are likely to remain high without systemic changes.

The central Mediterranean is now experiencing one of its deadliest periods in over a decade, raising urgent questions about the sustainability of current approaches to migration management.

With crossings expected to continue in the coming months, the international community faces increasing pressure to address both the immediate humanitarian crisis and its underlying causes—before further tragedies unfold at sea.

The post Mediterranean Migration Crisis Deepens After Deadly Libya Shipwreck Kills at Least 17 appeared first on Journos News - Breaking News, World News, Top Stories, Todays Headlines and Flash Reports.

The renewed fighting underscores the fragility of regional diplomacy in South and Central Asia, where militant activity, refugee movements and rival geopolitical alignments intersect. While both governments insist they are acting in self-defense, the scale and intensity of the latest operations have heightened concerns of broader instability.

Pakistan’s Defense Minister Khawaja Mohammad Asif said on social media that Islamabad’s “patience has now run out,” framing the confrontation as a direct response to Afghan military action. Afghan officials, for their part, described their initial strikes as retaliation for earlier Pakistani air operations in border areas that they say killed civilians.

Cross-border strikes and conflicting casualty claims

Afghanistan said it launched attacks on Pakistani military targets late Thursday in response to Pakistani airstrikes days earlier in Afghan border provinces. Pakistan then carried out further airstrikes early Friday, including in Kabul and other provinces, saying it targeted military installations.

Zabiullah Mujahid, spokesman for Afghanistan’s Taliban-led government, said the Afghan action was intended as a warning to Pakistan, accusing Islamabad of refusing dialogue. He rejected Pakistani casualty figures as inflated.

Pakistan’s military spokesperson, Lt. Gen. Ahmed Sharif Chaudhry, said air and ground operations had killed at least 274 Afghan forces and affiliated militants and wounded more than 400. He reported 12 Pakistani soldiers killed and 27 wounded, with one missing. Afghan officials disputed those numbers, saying far fewer Afghan personnel were killed and alleging higher Pakistani losses, including captured soldiers.

Later Friday, Afghan authorities said 19 civilians were killed and 26 injured in Pakistani strikes on Khost and Paktika provinces, accusing Islamabad of deliberately targeting residential areas. Pakistan has not confirmed those civilian casualty figures. The competing claims could not be independently verified.

Pakistan’s air force also struck targets in Laghman province, according to two senior Pakistani security officials who spoke on condition of anonymity. They said an arms depot and two military installations were destroyed.

Separately, Pakistan’s Information Minister Attaullah Tarar said anti-drone systems intercepted several small drones over the northwestern cities of Abbottabad, Swabi and Nowshera. He described the incident as a failed attack by the Pakistani Taliban and alleged links between militants and the Afghan Taliban government. Kabul has repeatedly denied providing sanctuary to anti-Pakistan groups.

Deepening mistrust and militant accusations

Tensions between the neighbors have been high for months. Border clashes in October left dozens of soldiers and civilians dead, prompting Qatar-mediated talks that produced a temporary ceasefire. Subsequent negotiations in Turkey failed to secure a lasting agreement.

Islamabad accuses Afghanistan’s Taliban government of harboring militant groups, including the Tehrik-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP), which has intensified attacks inside Pakistan. The TTP, though separate from Afghanistan’s Taliban, is considered closely aligned. Both Kabul and the TTP deny operating from Afghan territory with official backing.

Asif also accused Afghanistan of aligning more closely with India, Pakistan’s longtime regional rival. Relations between Pakistan and India have been strained since independence in 1947, and Islamabad has previously accused New Delhi of supporting insurgent groups in Pakistan — claims India denies.

Afghan officials say Pakistan’s internal security challenges are longstanding and should not be attributed to Kabul. Mujahid described Pakistan’s conflict with the TTP as a domestic issue that predates the Taliban’s return to power in 2021, following the withdrawal of NATO forces.

International mediation efforts intensify

Diplomatic channels have been activated as fighting intensifies. Qatar’s Minister of State Mohammed bin Abdulaziz al-Khulaifi held separate calls with the foreign ministers of both countries in an effort to de-escalate tensions, according to Qatar’s Foreign Ministry.

Turkey’s Foreign Minister Hakan Fidan also spoke separately with counterparts in Pakistan, Afghanistan, Qatar and Saudi Arabia. In October, Turkey, Qatar and Saudi Arabia helped facilitate talks between the two sides.

In a statement, U.N. Secretary-General António Guterres urged both governments to exercise maximum restraint and resolve differences through diplomacy while protecting civilians. Russia called for an immediate halt to hostilities, with Russian envoy Zamir Kabulov saying Moscow would consider mediating if requested. Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi similarly encouraged dialogue during the holy month of Ramadan and offered Tehran’s assistance.

Despite the strong rhetoric, Afghan officials said they remain open to negotiations. Mujahid reiterated Kabul’s preference for a peaceful solution, though he insisted Afghanistan would respond to further attacks.

Refugees and regional fallout

The renewed fighting comes against the backdrop of large-scale population movements. Pakistani authorities said dozens of Afghan refugees near the Torkham border crossing had been relocated to safer areas.

Since October 2023, Pakistan has implemented a crackdown on undocumented migrants, leading to the return of millions of Afghans. Many had lived in Pakistan for decades, building businesses and families. According to the U.N. refugee agency, 2.9 million people returned to Afghanistan in 2025, including nearly 80,000 so far this year.

The security crisis adds to Afghanistan’s economic and humanitarian challenges, as well as Pakistan’s own domestic pressures from militant violence and political strain.

A volatile moment

The declaration of “open war” marks one of the most serious breakdowns in relations between Pakistan and Afghanistan in recent years. While past clashes have flared and subsided, the scale of the latest strikes and the sharp language from senior officials suggest a dangerous moment.

International actors appear keen to prevent further escalation. Whether mediation efforts can restore calm may depend on both sides’ willingness to separate immediate security grievances from broader political mistrust that has defined their relationship for decades.

Source: AP News – Pakistan is in ‘open war’ with Afghanistan after latest strikes, defense minister says

The post Pakistan–Afghanistan ‘Open War’ Escalates After Cross-Border Strikes appeared first on Journos News - Breaking News, World News, Top Stories, Todays Headlines and Flash Reports.

Specialist Sarah Beckstrom, 20, died late Thursday, hours after President Donald Trump announced during a Thanksgiving call with service members that she had succumbed to her injuries. Staff Sgt. Andrew Wolfe, 24, remains in critical condition and is “fighting for his life,” the president said.

The shooting — now a homicide investigation — has cast a spotlight on the suspect’s background as a former member of an elite CIA-backed Afghan unit, adding new complexities to an already fraught debate over U.S. responsibility toward Afghan partners after the 2021 withdrawal.

A deadly attack in the heart of Washington

The West Virginia National Guard shooting unfolded Wednesday afternoon, just blocks from the White House, in what authorities described as a sudden ambush. Investigators say Rahmanullah Lakanwal, 29, opened fire with a .357 Smith & Wesson revolver before being shot and apprehended by U.S. forces at the scene. His injuries were not believed to be life-threatening.

U.S. Attorney Jeanine Pirro, who is overseeing the case, said the attacker used an “ambush-style” approach, though she declined to comment on a possible motive. Initial charges included assault with intent to kill and unlawful firearm possession, but prosecutors signaled they would be upgraded following Beckstrom’s death.

The rare attack on uniformed Guard members inside the nation’s capital comes at a time of elevated political tension over federal authority, public safety, and the continued deployment of military personnel in domestic roles.

A politically charged announcement

President Trump revealed Beckstrom’s death during a holiday call to U.S. troops, describing her as “an incredible person” whose parents were with her at the end of her life. The White House said he spoke directly with the family shortly after his remarks.

The president also labeled the incident a “terrorist attack” and sharply criticized the vetting of Afghan nationals who were resettled in the U.S. during and after the withdrawal from Kabul in 2021. Holding up a photo from the chaotic airlift, he argued that insufficient screening allowed dangerous individuals to enter the country.

“He went cuckoo,” Trump said of the suspect. “It happens too often with these people.” His comments quickly drew attention for their broad characterization of Afghan evacuees, many of whom risked their lives assisting U.S. forces for two decades.

Immigration groups and veteran advocates have accused the administration of weaponizing isolated incidents to justify sweeping deportation and screening policies. Trump’s critics argue that individual cases should not be used to define tens of thousands of former interpreters, fixers, and partner forces now living in the United States.

Who is Rahmanullah Lakanwal?

According to officials familiar with the investigation, Lakanwal previously served in Zero Units, CIA-backed Afghan paramilitary teams that fought alongside U.S. personnel in some of the war’s most dangerous areas.

A cousin from eastern Afghanistan told the Associated Press that Lakanwal began as a security guard in 2012 before becoming a team leader and GPS specialist. Zero Units played a significant role in frontline combat and were deeply involved in security operations around Kabul airport during the 2021 evacuation.

CIA Director John Ratcliffe said Lakanwal’s formal relationship with the agency “ended shortly following the chaotic evacuation,” adding that he no longer maintained any connection with U.S. intelligence services.

Lakanwal entered the United States under Operation Allies Welcome, the Biden-era initiative that resettled more than 76,000 Afghans. His asylum case, however, was approved during the Trump administration, according to #AfghanEvac, an advocacy group.

He had been living in Bellingham, Washington, with his wife and five children.

A debate shaped by the legacy of the Afghanistan War

The shooting has reignited long-running arguments over U.S. obligations to Afghan partners, many of whom now face threats from the Taliban. It also underscores the complexities of screening individuals from war zones, where documentation is limited and the effects of prolonged conflict can be severe.

Advocacy groups stress that evacuees underwent intensive security checks involving multiple federal agencies, biometric analysis, and intelligence vetting. They warn that framing the attack as evidence of systemic failure risks putting thousands of former allies in legal limbo.

At the same time, administration officials say the case highlights gaps that must be addressed. U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services Director Joseph Edlow announced additional screening procedures for individuals from 19 “high-risk” countries, though he did not specify which nations were included.

Earlier this year, the government suspended or restricted travel from 19 countries over national security concerns, citing an evolving global threat landscape.

Troop presence in Washington under renewed scrutiny

The shooting has also intensified debate over the president’s continued deployment of National Guard units to Washington and other U.S. cities.

Though Trump’s August emergency order federalizing the D.C. police expired after one month, Guard members remained in the capital. Nearly 2,200 troops have been stationed in the city, conducting patrols, manning checkpoints, assisting with crowd control and event security, and even performing municipal services such as trash collection.

Following Wednesday’s attack, the administration ordered 500 additional Guard members to Washington, citing the need for heightened readiness and “full operational control” of key areas.

Civil liberties groups and several lawmakers have questioned the scope of the deployment, warning that the increasing militarization of domestic policing could set a precedent difficult to reverse.

A moment of national mourning — and lingering uncertainty

As Wolfe continues to receive treatment, tributes have poured in for Beckstrom, who enlisted shortly after high school and deployed to Washington as part of the administration’s public-safety initiative. Her death marks one of the few cases in recent history of National Guard soldiers being killed in a targeted attack on U.S. soil.

Federal investigators are now piecing together the suspect’s movements, communications, and mental-health history. Authorities have not indicated when additional charges will be filed.

For many U.S. veterans, aid workers, and Afghan families, the incident is a painful reminder of the war’s unfinished business — the human costs, the tangled loyalties, and the unresolved questions about America’s responsibilities to those who fought alongside it.

Whether this tragedy becomes a turning point in immigration policy, military deployment, or U.S.–Afghan relations remains to be seen. For now, Washington is left grappling with the grief of a young soldier lost and a debate that shows no sign of quieting.

Source: AP News – Trump says one of the two West Virginia National Guard members shot by Afghan national has died

The post West Virginia National Guard Shooting Leaves One Dead Near White House appeared first on Journos News - Breaking News, World News, Top Stories, Todays Headlines and Flash Reports.