Core Points - The U.S. government is considering adding 36 countries to its travel ban list, which would mark a significant escalation in immigration control efforts [1][2] - The countries under review include Egypt, Djibouti, Angola, Ethiopia, Ghana, Nigeria, Kyrgyzstan, Cambodia, Tonga, Tuvalu, and Syria, among others [1][2] - The memorandum from the State Department outlines that these countries failed to meet requirements for easing entry restrictions due to issues like lack of reliable identification, government corruption, and citizens overstaying their visas [2] Immigration Enforcement - President Trump has called for increased detainment and deportation of illegal immigrants in major cities like Los Angeles, Chicago, and New York, labeling them as Democratic strongholds [3] - This initiative represents a comprehensive escalation of actions by the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), which has faced significant opposition from Democratic leaders [3] - The deployment of military forces to Los Angeles to quell protests against ICE raids has drawn criticism from California's governor and the mayor of Los Angeles [3]

Core Viewpoint - The protests in Los Angeles are a precursor to a nationwide movement, triggered by the arrests of 44 undocumented immigrants by ICE, reflecting deeper structural conflicts between the "Rust Belt" and "Sun Belt" regions of the U.S. [1][3] Group 1: Economic Impact of Immigration Policy - The U.S. economy could face a GDP loss of 4.2% to 6.8% (approximately $1.1 trillion to $1.7 trillion) if 1 million undocumented immigrants are deported annually until they are eliminated [1][10] - The construction industry could lose up to 1.5 million workers, agriculture could lose 225,000 workers, and the hotel industry could lose 1 million workers due to mass deportations [6][7] - A report indicates that deporting 500,000 undocumented immigrants could lead to approximately 44,000 native workers losing their jobs, and deporting all 11 million could result in 968,000 native job losses [7] Group 2: Tax Revenue and Government Costs - Undocumented immigrants contributed approximately $967 billion in taxes in 2022, with over one-third being payroll taxes that fund social security and Medicare [11] - The annual cost of deporting 1 million undocumented immigrants is estimated to be around $88 billion, which is significantly higher than the budgets of major government agencies [11] - The Social Security fund could lose about $23 billion annually, and the Medicare fund could lose around $6 billion if undocumented immigrants are fully deported [11] Group 3: Consumer Impact and Inflation - The removal of undocumented immigrants could lead to increased living costs for ordinary Americans, potentially causing inflation [8] - Research suggests that deporting 1.3 million immigrants could raise prices by 1.5%, while deporting 8.3 million could lead to a price increase of up to 9.1% by 2028 [8]

Core Viewpoint - The introduction of the "Gold Card" by former President Trump aims to attract wealthy immigrants to the U.S. by offering a high-priced alternative to the existing EB-5 visa program, potentially generating significant revenue for the country [1][2][3]. Group 1: "Gold Card" Overview - The "Gold Card" is priced at $5 million and is intended for wealthy immigrants, providing similar rights to a green card without directly granting U.S. citizenship [1][2]. - The program is expected to have a high demand, with estimates suggesting that 37 million people worldwide could afford to purchase the card, and the goal is to sell 1 million cards [3]. Group 2: Economic Implications - Trump suggested that selling 10 million "Gold Cards" could eliminate the U.S. national debt and generate an additional $15 trillion [2]. - The "Gold Card" program is designed to stimulate the U.S. economy by creating jobs and attracting foreign investment, similar to the original intent of the EB-5 visa program [3]. Group 3: Comparison with EB-5 Visa - The "Gold Card" serves as a higher-priced alternative to the EB-5 visa, which was established in 1990 to encourage foreign investment in the U.S. [3]. - The new program aims to address potential fraud issues associated with the EB-5 visa, thereby enhancing the integrity of the immigration process [2][3]. Group 4: Legal Considerations - The "Gold Card" may be revoked if the holder violates U.S. laws, similar to the conditions applied to other immigration statuses [4].

Core Viewpoint - The article discusses the escalating tensions in the United States following the arrest of 44 undocumented immigrants in Los Angeles, leading to widespread protests and a significant military response from the Trump administration [1][3]. Group 1: Government Response - The Trump administration deployed 2,000 National Guard troops and approximately 700 Marines to Los Angeles to quell the protests, indicating a strong determination to restore order [1][3]. - The concentration of military forces in California has resulted in a noticeable depletion of resources in other regions, creating opportunities for protests to emerge in various cities across the country [3]. Group 2: Nationwide Protests - Protests have begun to organize in over a dozen cities, including Harrisburg, New York, Philadelphia, and Chicago, suggesting a nationwide movement with implications across different economic and cultural regions [3][4]. - The protests reflect deep-seated issues related to immigration policy, with significant divisions between the Democratic and Republican parties, particularly regarding Trump's hardline stance on immigration [4]. Group 3: State-Level Reactions - California Governor Gavin Newsom has vocally opposed the Trump administration's actions, mobilizing 800 state police to key areas and filing a lawsuit against the federal government for constitutional violations [4][6]. - The protests in California have seen thousands of demonstrators demanding the release of detained individuals, indicating strong local opposition to federal immigration policies [6]. Group 4: Legal Implications - The upcoming Supreme Court ruling on the legality of Trump's military deployment will be crucial, as a ruling in favor could undermine state autonomy and alter the balance of power between federal and state governments [6][8]. - Conversely, a ruling against the deployment could lead to increased state independence and exacerbate divisions between states and the federal government [6][8].

Core Viewpoint - The ongoing protests in Los Angeles are escalating tensions between the Trump administration and California government, particularly regarding immigration policies and enforcement actions [1][5]. Group 1: Immigration Enforcement Actions - Stephen Miller, a key figure in the Trump administration, expressed dissatisfaction with ICE's efforts to deport illegal immigrants and urged for more aggressive actions, including targeting temporary worker gathering spots like Home Depot and 7-11 [3][4]. - Following Miller's directives, ICE agents began conducting widespread arrests in various locations, leading to significant numbers of undocumented immigrants being detained without notifying their families or lawyers [3][8]. - ICE has reportedly set daily arrest quotas, and failure to meet these targets has resulted in consequences for agents, contributing to a more militarized approach to immigration enforcement [8][10]. Group 2: Public Response and Protests - The aggressive enforcement actions sparked protests in Los Angeles, with demonstrators clashing with law enforcement, who responded with tear gas and rubber bullets [5][7]. - The situation has drawn criticism from civil rights organizations, which argue that the current administration's tactics differ significantly from previous administrations, allowing for arrests without proper identification [10][11]. - The protests and ICE's actions have raised concerns about the safety and rights of immigrants, as well as the implications of such enforcement strategies on public perception and community relations [10][11].

Core Viewpoint - The article discusses the political dynamics in California, particularly focusing on Governor Newsom's response to immigration policies and the tensions arising from them, as well as the implications for future elections and political maneuvering [1][17]. Group 1: Political Context - California is a hub for tech elites who are largely immigrants, and the anti-immigration policies of the Trump administration have created significant resentment among these groups [2][3]. - The article draws parallels between the current immigration tensions and the Black Lives Matter movement, suggesting that both are fueled by emotional responses rather than rational discourse [3][4]. Group 2: Governor Newsom's Strategy - Governor Newsom is leveraging the current political climate to position himself against Trump, aiming to attract swing voters by emphasizing the importance of immigration and state rights [7][17]. - Newsom's approach includes framing the immigration debate in a way that separates American interests from Trump's policies, thereby appealing to a broader audience [15][18]. Group 3: Implications for Future Elections - The article suggests that Newsom's actions are not just about immediate political gains but are also aimed at positioning himself for the 2028 presidential election [14][17]. - By focusing on the perceived threats to American law and political traditions posed by Trump, Newsom seeks to galvanize support among moderate voters [18][22]. Group 4: Broader Political Landscape - The article highlights the ongoing tensions within the U.S. political landscape, noting that while there are significant conflicts, the elite class tends to find compromises to maintain the status quo [21][26]. - It argues that the real conflict in America is not between different social classes but rather among the elite, who share common interests in preserving American hegemony [25][26].

Core Viewpoint - The recent deployment of the National Guard in Los Angeles by President Trump has escalated tensions between federal authorities and local governments, particularly in response to increased immigration enforcement actions [1][3]. Group 1: Government Actions and Responses - President Trump signed a memorandum to deploy 2,000 National Guard personnel to Los Angeles to address ongoing protests related to immigration enforcement [1]. - California Governor Newsom announced plans to sue the federal government over the deployment of the National Guard, indicating a significant conflict between state and federal authorities [1]. - Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass described the federal government's actions as a "dangerous escalation" that instills fear among local residents [1]. Group 2: Political Context and Implications - The conflicts in Los Angeles and other major cities are seen as a direct consequence of Trump's administration's aggressive immigration policies, which have intensified under his leadership [2][4]. - California, a stronghold for the Democratic Party, has historically opposed many of Trump's policies, making it a focal point for his administration's enforcement actions [3]. - The use of the National Guard and potential future deployment of federal military forces represent a significant shift in the relationship between state and federal governments, raising concerns about the implications for federalism in the U.S. [3]. Group 3: Societal Impact - The ongoing immigration enforcement actions are contributing to societal divisions, particularly as they disproportionately affect areas with high immigrant populations, such as Los Angeles [2][4]. - The Republican Party's stance on immigration reflects a broader concern about the declining status and influence of the white demographic in the U.S., leading to heightened tensions and conflicts within society [4].

Core Viewpoint - The article discusses the recent actions taken by the Trump administration regarding illegal immigration in California, highlighting the deployment of National Guard troops and the political implications of these actions on both the Republican and Democratic parties [2][3][6]. Group 1: Government Actions - On June 6, 2023, federal agencies began large-scale enforcement actions against illegal immigrants in Los Angeles County, leading to public confrontations [2]. - President Trump signed a memorandum to deploy 2,000 National Guard personnel to assist federal agents in these operations [2]. - Defense Secretary expressed readiness to mobilize active-duty Marines if violence escalates [2]. Group 2: Political Reactions - Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass condemned the federal actions, stating they spread fear in the community and undermine safety principles [2]. - California Governor Gavin Newsom accused the Trump administration of staging a publicity stunt rather than addressing law enforcement needs [3]. Group 3: Immigration Policy Context - The article notes that U.S. immigration policy has fluctuated over the years, generally leaning towards leniency, especially under Democratic leadership [3]. - The Republican establishment has a complex relationship with illegal immigration, often opposing it publicly while benefiting from immigrant labor to control wage inflation [3][4]. Group 4: Economic Implications - The article argues that the struggles faced by the white working class are primarily due to structural changes in the U.S. economy, including the outsourcing of manufacturing jobs [5]. - The influx of illegal immigrants has intensified competition for low-end jobs that cannot be outsourced, exacerbating the plight of domestic workers [5][6]. Group 5: Educational Challenges - The decline in the quality of education due to policy shifts has made it increasingly difficult for the working class to improve their circumstances through education [5]. - The focus on attracting international students has diverted resources away from domestic education, further complicating the situation for local workers [5][6]. Group 6: Political Strategy - The Trump administration's aggressive stance on immigration is seen as a strategy to provoke the Democratic Party into a more confrontational position, thereby undermining their credibility [6][7]. - The actions taken are also viewed as a means to reinforce Trump's image as a defender of the working class against perceived threats from immigration policies supported by Democrats [7].

此外，特朗普还宣布对另外七个国家的公民实施部分限制入境措施，这七个国家是布隆迪、古巴、老挝、塞拉 利昂、多哥、土库曼斯坦和委内瑞拉。 该禁令和相关限制措施包含若干豁免情形，包括美国永久居民、阿富汗特别移民签证持有者、外交人员、运动 员，以及持有未被该命令波及国家护照的双重国籍人士。 特朗普今年1月20日就职当天曾签署行政令，要求国务院列出"审查和筛查信息不足的国家，以部分或全部暂停 这些国家国民入境"，在60天内向白宫提交报告。据央视新闻此前报道，今年3月，特朗普政府考虑对数十个国 家的公民实施广泛的旅行限制，作为新禁令的一部分。 综合自：央视新闻 特朗普全面暂停12个国家的公民进入美国。 当地时间6月4日，根据美国白宫发布的一份声明，美国总统特朗普全面暂停12个国家的公民以移民和非移民身 份进入美国，这些国家分别是阿富汗、缅甸、乍得、刚果共和国、赤道几内亚、厄立特里亚、海地、伊朗、利 比亚、索马里、苏丹和也门。 转载与合作可联系证券时报小助理，微信ID：SecuritiesTimes END 点击关键字可查看 潜望系列深度报道丨 股事会专栏 丨 投资小红书 丨 e公司调查 丨 时报会客厅 丨 十大明星私募访 ...

两名消息人士称，米勒在会上的强硬态度令与会者担忧，"完不成目标可能会丢掉工作"，还有人认为米勒 意在用严厉语气激励团队。消息人士称，这并非米勒首次因驱逐移民问题对国土安全部官员"大喊大叫"。 《联合早报》称，"每日逮捕3000人"这一新目标是特朗普第二任期初期每日逮捕人数的三倍。在特朗普执 政的前四个月，非法越境人数明显下降，执法重点逐渐从边境转向美国本土社区。非边境地区的逮捕行动 因此变得更加激进。然而，这种高压手段也导致特朗普在移民问题上的支持率出现下滑，部分原因是公众 对误捕合法居民乃至美国公民的担忧日益加剧。 【环球网报道 记者 赵建东】综合Axios新闻网、新加坡《联合早报》报道，据两位知情人士透露，在上周 一场气氛紧张的会议上，美国白宫办公厅副主任斯蒂芬·米勒与国土安全部部长克丽丝蒂·诺姆要求移民执 法局将每日逮捕目标提高至3000人，部分与会者担心，如果未能完成目标可能会"丢掉饭碗"。 Axios报道称，特朗普政府移民政策的"操盘手"斯蒂芬·米勒5月21日在移民与海关执法局华盛顿总部会议 上，向高级移民执法官员透露了相关信息。米勒要求各主管"尽可能提高逮捕和驱逐数量"，并指责拜登政 府时期移民管 ...