BRUSSELS — The EU border agency Frontex is suspending a support program for deported migrants after its budget for the year ran out earlier than anticipated, emails seen by POLITICO show. 

The border agency paused new applications for reintegration support under its program on Oct. 2 after estimating that costs had “reached a level that does no longer ensure full financial coverage,” according to an email sent by Executive Director Hans Leijtens to staff on that date.

The program, which has operated since 2022, offers financial assistance, healthcare, vocational training and counseling to people who are returned to their home countries after being refused the right to stay in the EU. Reintegration support forms part of the EU’s plan to boost returns of unsuccessful asylum-seekers.

The suspension comes as the EU seeks to step up deportations from the bloc — a leading pillar of EU migration policy, and the object of new legislation adopted earlier this month — and weeks before the European Commission is expected to propose expanding the mandate of the border agency, including its role in returns and reintegration.

Frontex cannot resume the program without additional cash. The agency asked the Commission for more funds, but is waiting for clarity on the EU budget for 2027, and the next seven-year budget starting in 2028, the emails said.

“There is no point in talking about a more ambitious European return policy without also talking about the resources needed to deliver it,” Frontex spokesperson Chris Borowski told POLITICO. “Ambition and funding have to go hand in hand.”

Borowski confirmed that the agency had suspended new cases, but stressed that individuals already been accepted into the program wouldn’t be affected and that Frontex would also continue to offer EU countries “other forms of assistance” on returns, such as operational and technical support.

“Returns do not end when a plane lands. Helping people rebuild their lives after returning to their home countries is an important part of making migration management work. It takes planning, people and money,” he said.

With 2,368 new cases per month on average, the agency took on significantly more migrants seeking reintegration support than it expected. Cases in September were 63% higher than Frontex’s target, according to Leijtens’ email to staff. In the first half of this year, the agency took on around 75% more cases than it did in the same period last year.

In previous years, Frontex was able to assign additional funds from other parts of its budget, the email says — signaling the agency has had to search to find the cash to keep the program running in the past.

“Frontex does not have the necessary appropriations to cover the needs further as MFF allocations did not consider that Frontex would be expected to take over EURP funding at the scale we have seen today,” Leijtens wrote, referring to Multiannual Financial Framework, the EU’s seven-year budget.

The agency has raised the issue with the Commission but “no further commitments could be made onwards,” according to the email.

The program’s suspension raises questions about the future of the bloc’s migration approach. Reintegration is “the key ingredient” to making the EU’s returns strategy work, Lukas Gehrke, the director of the U.N.’s migration organization’s global office in Brussels, told POLITICO.

Forced returns are expensive and come with a higher risk of human rights infringements, whereas reintegration support boosts voluntary returns, reduces people’s propensity to attempt to reach the EU again, and tends to ease cooperation with the country to which they return, he argued.

“That means every euro spent on return with reintegration is a euro spent in a more sustainable way,” Gehrke said.

‘Do not argue or defend the EU policy’

In emailed guidance on how to communicate the suspension to migrants who applied for support, seen by POLITICO, staff were told to “acknowledge the institutional problem” with reintegration program funding “so the returnee does not feel personally targeted or punished.”

Counselors should be transparent, validate migrants’ disappointment, wait for their emotions to pass and shift the conversation to what they could still do upon their return, the guidance read, advising: “Do not argue or defend the EU policy.”

Potential returnees “may feel deceived, leading to anger, despondency, or complete withdrawal from the return process,” it also warned.

Expanding the agency’s Frontex mandate featured in the Commission’s five-point plan to address sudden mass movements of people, in the aftermath of migration crisis in the Spanish exclave of Ceuta. Besides stepping up the agency’s role in returns and reintegration, the plan also noted an intention to charge Frontex with monitoring the bloc’s external borders and add capacity to quickly deploy forces in the event of an emergency.

“The Commission will propose that Frontex becomes a genuinely European capability with the scale, tools and agility to support Member States wherever and whenever needed,” Commission President Ursula von der Leyen wrote in a letter to EU leaders ahead of a summit on Thursday and Friday, where migration is likely to be a flashpoint.

The plans have already raised concerns that the border agency’s mandate is being expanded more quickly than its resources.

Strengthening the border agency’s emergency response capacities, for example, comes with a tradeoff as staff that can be deployed on a moment’s notice cannot be deployed elsewhere, Leijtens, Frontex’s executive director, said at an event earlier this month.  “If they’re in Narva in Estonia, you can’t use them in Italy right now.”

Zoya Sheftalovich contributed to this report.

BRUSSELS — European leaders came for the budget. They’re staying for everything else.

A two-day European Council starting Thursday was supposed to be all about the money. Instead, leaders of the 27 EU member countries are heading into one of their most crowded summits in years, with a succession of geopolitical crises threatening to hijack the EU’s carefully laid plans.

European Council President António Costa originally wanted the gathering to accelerate negotiations on the bloc’s next seven-year budget, hoping to seal a deal before elections in France, Italy and Poland in 2027 make an already difficult agreement even harder.

But the world had other plans. Soaring energy prices, tensions with China, Russia’s war in Ukraine (and U.S. President Donald Trump’s ambiguity over it), migration and turmoil in the Middle East have all elbowed their way onto the agenda.

The result is a two-day marathon covering virtually every major challenge facing the EU, from keeping European factories competitive to ensuring the world’s most important shipping lanes stay open.

For anyone trying to follow the action without spending 48 hours glued to Brussels, here’s your guide to what matters.

With the usual warning: EU leaders are notorious for letting discussions drag on or reshuffling the agenda — that’s what our liveblog is for.

Thursday at dawn: The pre-match warm-up

Before the summit even starts, Europe’s political families will gather at the crack of dawn.

The European People’s Party meets from 7:30 a.m. at the Sofitel Brussels Europe — the place to be if you can get in, given how many center-right leaders will be at the summit table.

The Socialists gather from 8:30 a.m. at PES headquarters, with Costa, Spain’s Pedro Sánchez and Denmark’s Mette Frederiksen expected.

Renew kicks off at 8 a.m. at the Palais d’Egmont, with French President Emmanuel Macron and top EU diplomat Kaja Kallas among those expected.

Even without leaders in the summit room, the far-right Patriots got a head start Wednesday, with Marine Le Pen delivering a scathing attack on the state of the EU.

Thursday morning: The energy blame game and China

Leaders kick off with discussions on Europe’s struggle for economic competitiveness, starting with energy — potentially the most politically explosive debate.

Governments want immediate relief from soaring energy prices as a result of the war in Iran, and will push the Commission to introduce new measures on top of the wide-ranging but somewhat toothless package it announced back in March.

Expect finger-pointing between capitals and Brussels over who should act, and for climate policies like the upcoming Emissions Trading System on heating and transport to come under fire.

Next comes China. European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen will brief leaders on efforts to tackle the EU’s enormous trade imbalance with Beijing, following trade chief Maroš Šefčovič’s negotiations with Chinese officials.

Leaders are expected to renew their demand for Brussels to “urgently” tool up with further trade defenses to prevent further deindustrialization of the bloc and to shield further industrial sectors from Chinese competition.

There’s also time for the familiar fight over EU red tape, with calls for Brussels to stop legislating.

Thursday afternoon: Costa’s budget gamble

This was supposed to be the main event. Leaders will discuss Ireland’s negotiating proposal for the EU’s 2028–2034 budget slashed by €159 billion from the Commission’s original proposal.

The positions are well known: The self-styled “modernists” — essentially the old frugals in disguise — want to contain costs, while countries benefiting from EU spending are determined to defend their allocations, under the less glamorous banner of “friends of cohesion.” Positions on new EU-wide taxes are similarly entrenched.

But the real story is timing.

Governments have watered down a commitment to secure an agreement by December, according to draft conclusions seen by POLITICO. Costa wants a deal before a series of high-stakes elections in 2027 complicate negotiations; capitals fear a deadline could weaken their bargaining power.

Most importantly, Costa is moving into the driving seat as budget talks enter their most politically sensitive stage. Watch for clues about a possible extraordinary summit in late November — and whether December remains a credible deadline or leaders quietly start preparing for negotiations to spill into 2027.

Thursday dinner: Making room for new members

Over dinner, leaders will tackle enlargement and the EU reforms needed to accommodate new members — after all, October’s summit has historically been devoted to the bloc’s hopefuls.

Montenegro is edging closer to completing accession negotiations, while progress elsewhere raises questions about whether the bloc is institutionally and financially ready to grow.

The Commission has outlined proposals to prepare the EU for enlargement, and leaders will discuss how internal reforms should accompany the accession process. Watch for a positive signal to Montenegro and commitments on reforming the bloc itself.

Friday morning: Ukraine’s wish list

The second day begins with Ukraine and an expected appearance by President Volodymyr Zelenskyy. Declarations of European solidarity are all but guaranteed. The more interesting question is what leaders are actually prepared to do.

Kyiv needs air defense systems, interceptors and financing as Russian attacks intensify. Leaders could discuss tougher action against Moscow’s shadow fleet and visa restrictions for Russians. And while EU financing for Ukraine has already been agreed for 2026, the country’s needs beyond that remain an increasingly pressing issue.

Could this mean reopening the debate on using frozen Russian assets to plug future funding gaps? That remains a question mark — although no immediate breakthrough is expected.

Friday pre-lunch: Defense and three dangerous waterways

Before breaking for lunch, leaders will turn to Russian hybrid attacks, maritime security and the Middle East.

In the Black Sea, recent attacks on civilian shipping threaten Ukraine’s crucial grain export route. Turkey has floated new protected shipping corridors, while countries including Romania and Bulgaria are pushing to give the issue more attention.

Will leaders back concrete measures or stop at condemnation? That’s the question.

Discussions then turn to the Middle East and two other critical shipping routes: the Strait of Hormuz and the Red Sea. The fallout from the Iran–U.S. war, increased Iranian attacks around Hormuz and renewed Houthi threats in the Red Sea have disrupted global trade and energy flows.

The EU’s Aspides naval mission is short of vessels, and Kallas wants governments to contribute more. Watch whether leaders put ships behind their promises.

The broader Middle East discussion will also touch on Iran, Yemen, the West Bank and Lebanon.

Friday lunch: The migration showdown

Spain’s Pedro Sánchez, Italy’s Giorgia Meloni and Denmark’s Mette Frederiksen are worth watching as leaders discuss migration over lunch, following the crisis in Spain’s North African exclave of Ceuta.

Irregular arrivals have been declining, but disagreements remain over border crises, solidarity and tougher migration controls.

And with an election looming in Spain on Nov. 29, this could be Sánchez’s last tango — and a final chance to defend his government’s handling of the crisis while venting his frustration over the lack of European solidarity.

Watch whether the debate produces agreement or another political clash, as happened last time.

Bonus: Two pressers are better than one

With such a packed agenda, leaders won’t wait until the end of the summit for the usual joint press conference by von der Leyen and Costa. An additional one is planned for Thursday, after the budget debate.

On Thursday, watch Costa’s language on the budget deadline and whether von der Leyen offers any concrete measures on energy prices.

On Friday, look for promises of additional support for Ukraine, whether commitments on maritime security come with actual ships and resources — and commentary on how the migration showdown over lunch went.

Martina Sapio contributed to reporting.

EU leaders returned Friday for their second day of marathon talks, with a discussion on migration set to descend into a showdown over whether to push for tougher controls.

Before those talks, Denmark called for new, tougher language linking migration to crime.

Earlier, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy made a direct pitch for more help amid a crisis of faith among allies over Donald Trump’s latest steps favoring Russia.

Leaders are expected to turn to the question of how to protect the bloc from Russian hybrid attacks, maritime security and the Middle East.

On Thursday, a three-hour argument over taxing car emissions derailed Antonio Costa’s carefully laid plans to tackle the biggest challenges facing the bloc: fixing its economy and sorting out its spending priorities, drawing ire from some diplomats.

As leaders piled into their motorcades around midnight after 14 hours of talks, they seemed as far away as ever on negotiations over the bloc’s next long-term budget — with the next serious round of talks slipping to November.  

BRUSSELS — European governments have watered down a commitment to secure a deal over the bloc’s next seven-year budget by the end of the year, according to draft Council conclusions seen by POLITICO.

European Council President António Costa is pushing leaders to finalize negotiations during a summit in December — before elections in France, Italy and Poland in 2027 threaten to derail the talks.

But governments are unwilling to commit to the end-of-year deadline, fearing that time pressure will undermine their leverage in the negotiations.

Leaders are gathering in Brussels on Thursday and Friday to react for the first time to an Irish budget proposal that envisages €159 billion cuts. They will also discuss energy prices, enlargement, Ukraine and migration.

Several countries, including Italy and France, urged Costa’s team to drop a reference to “reaching a final agreement by the end of the year” from the Council conclusions, two EU diplomats who were briefed on the discussions told POLITICO on condition of anonymity.

During a parliamentary speech Wednesday, Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni said that “we will not sign an agreement that is not beneficial to us just to meet a deadline,” adding “we will sign an agreement only when it is right for Italy.”

There are also lingering concerns that Spain’s snap elections on Nov. 29 could work against the end-of-year deadline.

The new draft conclusions from Tuesday evening merely call for a “timely agreement,” adding that reaching a deal by the end of the year would allow EU funding to start flowing when the next budget takes effect in 2028. This is the same wording used in the Council conclusions from last June.

In another significant addition, EU leaders condemned U.S. President Donald Trump’s decision to lift sanctions on Russian diesel in the conclusions.

They also expressed “regret” towards U.S sanctions against the International Criminal Court and pledged to engage with Washington to reverse these measures.

Mathieu Pollet contributed to reporting.

This article is part of Cafe, TPM’s home for opinion and news analysis.

Donald Trump’s ability to jail millions of people without even a bond hearing depends on what the Supreme Court thinks about one man’s case. 

BRUSSELS — European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen wrote to European leaders urging a series of measures to respond to illegal migration ahead of this week’s summit in Brussels.

Among the measures von der Leyen called for were establishing an emergency response framework when migration has been weaponized, expanding the powers of the EU’s border agency Frontex, and increasing the bloc’s deportation rate. The letter follows a migration crisis in the Spanish exclave of Ceuta over the summer, which saw around 70,000 migrants arrive from Morocco.

“We must prevent such threats and make clear that we will never compromise the protection of our external borders: no state or non-state actor will be allowed to exploit our rules or our values to destabilise the Union,” von der Leyen wrote.

The letter, sent to all 27 leaders of EU member countries, will inform a discussion about migration scheduled for Friday, the second day of this week’s European Council summit.

In the wake of a summer migration crisis that rocked Madrid, Spaniards fear ongoing tensions could spiral into an armed conflict with the country’s North African neighbor.

The sudden arrival of more than 70,000 migrants in the Spanish exclave of Ceuta in late July fueled criticism of Pedro Sánchez’s Socialist government and its handling of the border, as well as its lone opposition to tough new EU migration policies. It also raised questions about Morocco’s role in the mass influx—something Sánchez repeatedly rejected.

A September poll by POLITICO, conducted by independent pollster PF Global weeks before Sánchez called a snap election and published exclusively in POLITICO’s new Madrid Playbook, found that 58 percent of respondents believed tensions over Ceuta and Melilla — which Morocco considers occupied territories — were likely to trigger an armed conflict between Spain and Morocco within the next decade.

Alberto Núñez Feijóo, the leader of the conservative People’s Party currently polling ahead of Sánchez’s Socialists, claimed the crisis has been “spearheaded and coordinated by Morocco” and that the government had covered it up. Sumar, a junior partner in Sánchez’s government, also questioned Rabat’s role, and a police report alleged Moroccan agents had helped orchestrate the mass movement. 

Sánchez described the surge as an attack on Spain’s territorial integrity but repeatedly dismissed claims that Rabat was behind it, instead accusing smugglers.

Still, in the POLITICO survey, three-quarters of Spaniards said Morocco poses a real threat to their country’s territorial integrity.

People who said they’d cast their votes for Feijóo or the far-right Vox party in the next election were both more likely to consider Morocco a threat to Spain, and more likely to think that tensions over the exclaves could lead to an armed conflict this decade. More than three-quarters of Vox supporters and 68% of People’s Party supporters thought a conflict in the next decade was likely.

Even among supporters of Sánchez’s own Socialist Party, nearly two-thirds considered Morocco a genuine threat. The party’s support base was split about the likelihood of a conflict, with 47% saying an armed conflict is likely but 43% saying it is not.

The poll shows that Morocco was widely seen as a threat to Spain. Over 80% of Spaniards said it posed a moderate to significant risk to Spain, putting the country well ahead of other foreign powers such as China, the U.S. and Russia.

Still, two-thirds of Spaniards in the survey said they expected Ceuta and Melilla would still be under Spanish control in 20 years’ time.

The bloc is now discussing emergency measures to deal with mass movements that may be engineered or weaponized, but both the Commission and ministers have connected that emergency response framework to the role of smugglers and criminal networks.

For Spaniards, the idea that Morocco could engineer a situation to annex Ceuta and Melilla is far from theoretical speculation. Many still remember Morocco’s 1975 “Green March,” an operation mobilizing tens of thousands of civilians to force Madrid to hand over the territory of Spanish Sahara.

The numbers show Madrid is walking a tightrope in its handling of the exclaves, just as Spanish King Felipe VI’s tours Ceuta and Melilla from Tuesday — a visit which is being closely watched on both sides of the Strait of Gibraltar and expected to put Madrid’s diplomatic relations with Rabat further on edge.

Felipe is expected to visit the Sidi Embarek cemetery, where around 90 people who died in the crisis are buried. Ceuta’s Deputy Mayor Kissy Chandiramani told POLITICO that Morocco refused to repatriate them — a gesture which analyst Ignacio Cembrero described as “a slap in the face.”

Critics will also be looking out for the king’s carefully worded evening speech at the Parador hotel after Defense Minister Margarita Robles called Ceuta and Melilla “unquestionably Spanish” this week.

Morocco’s response so far has been notably muted: In King Mohammed VI’s first public appearance since the crisis, he said cooperation with Spain faced “major challenges” but did not refer directly to the visit.

While Chandiramani hopes the Spanish king’s visit will unite the “broken city,” a protest is expected in Fnideq, across the border, on Oct. 14 as soon as he leaves the exclave.

LYMPNE, England — A Reform UK government would take a “keen look” at Britain’s support to Ukraine, the populist right-wing party’s leader Nigel Farage said Monday.

Farage said Ukraine is “one of the most corrupt countries on earth” and that he is “very worried” about where some of Britain’s money has ended up — while also acknowledging the threat from Russian President Vladimir Putin is now the greatest it has ever been.

The Reform leader added: “I’ve never said we shouldn’t support Ukraine — ever. But I have said I would like to have a keen look to make sure British taxpayers’ money is not being swallowed up in corruption.”

The Ukrainian embassy in London declined to comment.

The U.K. has committed £25 billion to Ukraine since Russia’s full-scale invasion, according to government figures published in July 2026. That includes £16 billion of military support, up to £5.6 billion in non-military support and a £3.5 billion cover limit for export finance.

Farage was answering questions at a press conference after Donald Trump deepened the gulf between Washington D.C. and Kyiv by saying he would suspend sanctions on Russian diesel exports. After Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy criticized the deal, Trump said Saturday: “It’s time for Ukraine to get a new president.”

Farage, an old ally of Trump who previously spoke at his campaign rallies, said he did not agree with the U.S. president’s decision to buy diesel from Russia, but criticized EU nations for “buying vast amounts of Russian petrochemicals” during the course of the war.

Farage also declined to agree with Trump’s call for regime change, saying: “I understand that Trump and Zelenskyy have a somewhat tempestuous relationship, so it’s not any particular surprise. At some point, Ukraine needs an election. That’s true if it is to be a country that aspires to have Western-style values. As to when that election comes, we’ll have to see. After all, we did have an election during World War Two.”

Asked if there is a limit to his support for Ukraine, Farage added: “No one’s support for Ukraine is limitless, is it? Is [U.K. Prime Minister] Andy Burnham’s support for Ukraine limitless? No, it’s not. But do we need to go on supporting Ukraine? 

“Look, this is one of the most corrupt countries on earth. We know that. I’ve been very, very worried about where some of our money has gone. And goodness me, Zelenskyy’s administration has been rocked by corruption claims, which perhaps makes at some point a general election there an important thing to do.

“But I am in no doubt at all that Putin now poses a greater threat than he’s posed at any point.”

Farage accused his critics of a “willful attempt to misconstrue” comments he made in 2024, when he said the eastward expansion of NATO and the EU gave Putin “reason to his Russian people” to justify the war. Farage said at the time: “We provoked this war. Of course it’s his fault — he’s used what we’ve done as an excuse.”

Farage said Monday that he believes NATO has been a “huge success over many, many years” and Britain’s role in the alliance is “a vital one, as a bridge between Europe and America, and keeping America on side with NATO.”

Right-wing rifts

Reform’s opinion poll lead ended in the summer and the party now trails four points behind Burnham’s center-left ruling Labour Party in POLITICO’s Poll of Polls. Polls currently predict that the right-wing vote would be split between Reform and the Conservative Party in a general election, due by 2029.

While Conservative Leader Kemi Badenoch said last week that she would sooner force a second general election than form a governing pact with Reform, Farage said he “would work with anybody from any party” after an election to see his plans through.

Farage was speaking at an industrial estate in Kent to pledge a series of hardline reforms to the migration system, including halting all asylum claims for five years and deporting anyone left on the waiting list for a decision.

Reform officials previously said that Farage planned to meet France’s National Rally Leader Marine Le Pen in late October, around the time the party holds its conference, and that he was examining a possible visit to Ukraine.

Farage avoided saying, when asked by POLITICO, if he would travel to meet leaders of the far-right Alternative for Germany (AfD) party. Instead he appeared to suggest that Reform was a more moderate alternative to far-right politics rising up in parts of Europe.

“I have friends in the AfD. I have some of the AfD I’m less certain about,” he said. “But it is quite ironic when people attack Reform and say Reform is extreme. I’ll tell you what. There is a politics now developing in Europe directly as a failure of migration policy that would make most people in Reform blush. And this is why our fighting the next general election and winning it is so important — because it might just be the last chance to re-establish trust and faith in the electoral system.”

PARIS — France’s Jordan Bardella and Spain’s Santiago Abascal are joining forces ahead of potential milestone elections in their countries, with the duo using a visit by the French far-right leader to Spain to discuss campaign strategy and common themes for their platforms.

Spaniards are heading to the polls on Nov. 29 for snap elections in which Vox, the country’s leading right-wing nationalist force, is hoping to make significant gains. The National Rally, its ally in the European Parliament, is hoping a strong performance by Vox will create broader momentum in Europe as Marine Le Pen eyes victory in next year’s French presidential race. Bardella has been working on firming up his party’s European alliances as well.

Bardella’s two-day trip to Spain began Monday with a stop in the territory of Ceuta, where a mass influx of migrants in July triggered chaos and reignited the political debate on migration, alongside Vox’s Abascal.

Standing next to Bardella in Ceuta, Abascal said the French far-right leader’s presence was “a demonstration that a new era can open for [the two] nations” and praised “collaboration among patriotic forces.”

Spain’s snap elections “will allow the Spanish people to speak their mind, just as the French presidential election in a few months will allow the French people to take back control of their own destiny,” said Bardella, framing migration as an existential issue for both countries, epitomized by the crisis in Ceuta over the summer.

The trip to Ceuta, discussed between the two leaders’ teams over the summer, was finalized after the Spanish elections were called last week. In his address, Bardella also praised Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni’s decision to institute border checks on Spanish arrivals to Italy after the Ceuta crisis.

Vox and the National Rally are currently allied within the Patriots group in the European Parliament and are hoping to see more of their members access executive power in the coming months, as Spain, France, Poland, Italy and Greece all vote in national elections.

Vox is currently polling third at 18%, according to POLITICO’s Poll of Polls, putting the party on track to gain a significant number of seats. A strong performance by Vox would position it as a key coalition partner for the center-right People’s Party, which is polling first.

Spain’s snap elections are “a significant milestone because a change in government is within reach,” National Rally MEP and former Frontex boss Fabrice Leggeri told POLITICO ahead of the Ceuta trip, which he attended.

On Tuesday, Abascal and Bardella are scheduled to hold closed-door meetings on their campaign strategy. They will also introduce their respective staffs and exchange ideas on key themes for their platform, including housing, according to Thibaut François, the secretary general of the National Rally delegation in Brussels and an adviser to Bardella. Both leaders “are working on their accession to [executive] power,” François said.

The men will also speak at the high-level Nueva Economía business forum in Madrid, where Abascal is invited to speak on stage for the first time.

Bardella has made a breakthrough in business circles and is now a regular guest at high-level events of this nature.

For him, the Spanish trip is also a welcome escape from the domestic controversy surrounding investigative outlet Mediapart’s reporting that he expressed antisemitic views in private messages when he was 17. The French far-right leader has repeatedly denied the accusations.

Sarah Paillou contributed to this report.

LONDON — Andy Burnham said Monday it would be a “dereliction of duty” for Britain not to seek closer ties with the EU.

In a House of Commons statement reopening Britain’s highly-charged Brexit debate, the prime minister said the vast majority of the public would back a closer relationship with the EU if it helps to control immigration and boost economic growth.

Announcing a long-anticipated U.K.-EU summit will take place on Nov. 20., he said: “Sticking with the status quo is not good enough for Britain. Worse, it would be a major dereliction of duty to turn away. We need to take a calm, clear-eyed, rational look at the world as it is today to consider what is best for our country.”

At Labour’s annual conference last month, Burnham said Britain’s departure from the bloc had done more harm than good.

In subsequent interviews he said it’s possible a future Labour manifesto could include a pledge to hold an “in-out” referendum on rejoining the EU.

The U.K. prime minister addressed MPs after telling the Rest is Politics podcast in an interview aired over the weekend that it is “clear” Russia interfered in the 2016 Brexit referendum.

“I asked the question coming to Downing Street: ‘Was there interference in the 2016 referendum from Russia?’ And I’ve had the clear answer that yes, there was,” Burnham said.

But his spokesperson told reporters Monday:  “We do believe the referendum result to be legitimate.”

Reform UK Leader Nigel Farage, one of the most high profile campaigners for Brexit in 2016, said Burnham’s Russian interference claim was “outrageous” and accused the prime minister of being a “liar.”

At a press conference in Kent, he acknowledged Brexit had led to more inconvenience for some businesses, like the haulage firm where he was giving the speech, but said: “When you have borders to protect your country, there is some level of inconvenience.”

Dan Bloom contributed reporting.

This story has been updated to include comments from Nigel Farage.

Germany has rejected Ireland’s proposal for the EU’s next seven-year budget, despite €159 billion in cuts. And it’s not alone: Governments are divided over where the cuts should fall, while the European Parliament is threatening to block the deal.

Zoya Sheftalovich and Nick Vinocur unpack the backlash and what it means for this week’s EU leaders’ summit.

Plus, Zoya interviews Migration Commissioner Magnus Brunner about Europe’s efforts to curb irregular migration and plans to tighten restrictions on Russian visitors and former soldiers.

And why the influencers expected at this week’s EU summit won’t be showing up after all.

Questions? Comments? Let us know on our WhatsApp here or at +32 491 05 06 29.

BRUSSELS — EU countries must “do their job” to prevent travelers from being stuck in airport queues over Christmas, Migration Commissioner Magnus Brunner told POLITICO, as he singled out Brussels Airport for the way it has handled the new Entry/Exit System.

In an interview, Brunner defended the bloc’s digital border system and blamed its problems on national authorities and airports.

“Member states had enough time to prepare themselves for this system. They agreed on the system,” Brunner said. “It’s a security issue. It has to work … it’s up to the member states to do their job.”

EU countries began rolling out the Entry/Exit System, which records the fingerprints and facial images of non-EU visitors to the Schengen area, a year ago. It has been fully operational at all external Schengen border crossings since April.

But it has led to long waits at many airports — particularly over the summer, when some countries switched it off during peak periods. Delays persist at some airports, including at Brussels Zaventem, where travelers were forced to wait in lines for up to five hours last month.

“Some member states are a bit behind,” Brunner acknowledged. “We have some challenges, like Zaventem for instance, in Belgium, but also in other member states. And they have to do their job. They agreed on the new system, and now it’s up to the member states to do their job.” 

Brunner also said the Commission had offered support from border agency Frontex and funding to help countries implement the system, adding that he was “very confident” the problems would be ironed out before the next holiday rush.

Belgian Interior Minister Bernard Quintin pushed back at Brunner’s criticism, with a spokesperson saying his responsibility was to ensure there were enough police officers to staff the infrastructure provided by Brussels Airport Company.

The police have “been fully staffing the 12 positions at arrivals,” the spokesperson said, but the airport can process only 500 to 600 non-Schengen passengers an hour, compared with nearly 3,500 who may arrive between 6 a.m. and 10 a.m. on busy days. The airport’s infrastructure “cannot cope” with that demand, the spokesperson said, and the company must “make significant changes.”

Brussels Airport did not directly address the criticism from Brunner or Quintin, instead saying in a statement that “all parties involved” were working to fix the delays, including testing new e-gates and pre-registration kiosks, and training more police. “The need for additional infrastructure is also being assessed,” the statement said.

The Entry/Exit System has logged almost 230 million entries and exits across roughly 1,500 border points, Brunner said. Authorities have refused entry to about 80,000 people, including 2,000 considered security threats because of links to activity such as terrorism or organized crime.

“So you see, it actually works. And it pays off,” the Austrian commissioner said.

“This is the most modern border management system in the world,” he added. “We have the comparison to the U.S., to Canada, to others, and they’re all jealous.”

Ceuta stress test

As the EU’s migration commissioner, Brunner also faced another major test over the summer, when tens of thousands of people crossed from Morocco into Spain’s North African exclave of Ceuta.

The crisis remains an ongoing challenge for Spain and the EU.

Madrid initially said almost all those who crossed from Morocco had returned within days. But thousands remained in Ceuta. More than 3,000 people were living at Trampolín beach when authorities cleared an encampment last week; more than 1,200 then chose to return voluntarily to Morocco rather than go through the asylum-screening process, according to local authorities.

Images of thousands of people swimming toward Ceuta and overwhelming the area quickly became political ammunition, with far-right politicians campaigning for tougher migration policies — turning the crisis into a potent election issue and putting pressure on Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez.

Brunner described Ceuta as a warning that the EU needs to be better prepared for sudden arrivals. He recently proposed a plan for cooperation with partner countries, stronger external borders, early-warning systems, and action against smuggling networks. Migration will be a key topic of conversation at this week’s EU leaders’ summit in Brussels.

Among the Commission’s plans to tackle migration is a proposal to strengthen Frontex that would see it have a reinforced standing corps of officers able to be deployed more quickly, a bigger role in returning people to non-EU countries, closer cooperation with partner countries and more capacity to monitor the EU’s borders. The Commission has also proposed giving the agency a role in monitoring social media to help spot emerging migration movements.

Brunner said the reforms would not mean countries would be forced to host Frontex operations if they did not want them. The plan envisages EU support during border emergencies, but member countries remain responsible for their own external borders.

Greece and other countries want the EU to be able to suspend asylum applications during a large influx and Brunner said he is “definitely going ahead” with an emergency response framework, as requested by Commission President Ursula von der Leyen. EU leaders will discuss “concrete steps” at this week’s leaders’ summit.

The goal is to make the EU “more flexible” and “more agile” if events like Ceuta occur, where “mass movements are actually engineered and weaponized” against the bloc, he said.

Brussels also wants to help partner countries protect their borders to reduce irregular arrivals into Europe. To that end, Brunner on Monday begins a trip to Bangladesh and Pakistan, seeking to strengthen cooperation on migration with the two countries, he said.

“We want to help them to protect their borders,” Brunner stated, adding that the EU could support Bangladesh “via Frontex, for instance.”

This story has been updated with statements from Interior Minister Bernard Quintin’s office and Brussels Airport.

Brussels officials are finalizing plans to tighten visa rules for hundreds of thousands of Russians who visit EU countries as tourists each year, in a move designed to strengthen the bloc’s defenses against hybrid attacks. 

EU officials told POLITICO the European Commission is planning to put forward proposals in the new year, after a group of countries — including Poland, Sweden and Estonia — pushed for tougher visa rules for Russians, including former fighters who served on the battlefields in Ukraine.

Last year, some 478,000 Schengen area tourist visas were issued to Russian citizens, many of which were multiple-entry visas, which enable holders to come and go repeatedly without needing to apply for documentation each time. 

That system is a security threat to Europe at a moment of heightened concern over Moscow-sponsored acts of sabotage, arson and other forms of hybrid warfare, Sweden’s Justice Minister Gunnar Strömmer told POLITICO. 

“It’s obvious I think for everyone that we have vulnerabilities in our system that can be used by our enemies,” Strömmer said in an interview.

“As far as I understand things, the Commission is preparing a proposal that, according to what I have heard, should be launched in January next year. From a Swedish point of view, we would love to see it even earlier.” 

Strömmer welcomed the “progress” and “growing support” for a tougher visa regime.  

Other countries are planning to push the issue during Monday’s Foreign Affairs Council meeting — and also propose more restrictions on Russian diplomats in the EU. 

Estonia has proposed an outright ban on allowing ex-soldiers from Russia’s armed forces access to the EU. There are around 650,000 of these former combatants, according to Estonian Foreign Minister Margus Tsahkna, which would be banned “person by person.”  But a tighter EU-wide approach is vital for the bloc’s security, he told POLITICO. 

“I think a large number of these ex-combatants will come, supported by the Russian secret services, to Europe,” Tsahkna said. “And they will take over our organized crime and they will be heavily weaponized and supported by Russia to commit terror attacks or attacks against our societies. So this is very serious.” 

After an initial fall in the number of Russian nationals receiving travel visas to the EU, “the numbers are not going down anymore,” Migration Commissioner Magnus Brunner told POLITICO. “We urge the member states there to do a better job and to give less visas … to Russian citizens,” he said. “Work is progressing.”

Brunner said a Commission proposal to restrict visas “early next year makes sense” alongside new visa rules. “You never know who these tourists actually are,” he said. “So that’s why we urge the member states to decrease the number.”

In June, a group of ministers from nine EU countries plus Iceland and Norway wrote to the Commission calling for “a more uniform and coordinated approach” to Russian visas across all member states.

“A restrictive visa policy towards Russian citizens is essential to safeguard the security and integrity of the Schengen area,” they said. “A divided approach risks undermining — and even counteracting — the pressure we seek to uphold against the Russian Federation.”

Newly released NYPD body-camera footage showing the aftermath of an immigration enforcement shooting in New York City has intensified scrutiny of federal agents who shot a man with his 5-year-old son in the car.

The footage shows officers arriving Thursday in Marble Hill to find Oscar Belgal, 28, wounded, handcuffed and seated on the ground. NYPD officers rendered aid and rushed him to a hospital. Police later located his unharmed son with a family member.

Mayor Zohran Mamdani condemned the shooting in an initial social media post, saying Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents had shot a New Yorker while his child was in the vehicle.

This afternoon in Marble Hill, a New Yorker was shot by an ICE agent in a residential neighborhood. Early reports indicate agents surrounded him and a 5-year-old child in his car before firing multiple rounds. We believe the child was physically unharmed.

This is an unconscionable and incredibly serious situation. I have called the President; when we speak I will demand that he ends all ICE enforcement actions in our city. I will not stand by while ICE agents terrorize our communities.

Our thoughts are with the injured New Yorker and his family tonight. We are praying for his recovery.

Get ICE out of our neighborhoods. Get ICE out of our hospitals. Get ICE off our streets. Get ICE away from our children.

Abolish ICE.

— Mayor Zohran Kwame Mamdani (@NYCMayor) October 8, 2026

ICE defended the operation, alleging that Belgal, a Dominican national with a criminal record, accelerated his vehicle toward federal agents who feared for their lives. The agency also accused him of gang involvement.

On October 8, at approximately 4:00 PM ET, ICE officers were conducting a targeted enforcement operation in the Bronx, New York, to arrest a criminal illegal alien from the Dominican Republic with a prior criminal conviction for grand larceny, and multiple prior arrests for assault, robbery, possession of drugs, and weapons possession. He has associations to the Trinitarios gang, the same gang who brutally shot a CBP officer last year.

This criminal illegal alien was arrested by the NYPD on December 7, 2023, but was released into the community a few days later by reckless Democrat sanctuary policies that put American lives at risk.

During the incident, an ICE officer discharged his weapon and the criminal illegal alien was injured.

ICE officers immediately rendered aid. The individual is alive and at a local hospital. The FBI and HSI are on the scene. The incident remains under investigation. More information will be shared as it becomes available.

When dangerous illegal aliens are released back onto the streets by radical sanctuary politicians, our officers are forced to make arrests at large in the community in unpredictable and dangerous environments. Our officers should not have to risk their lives, and innocent Americans should not have to face unnecessary danger, because sanctuary politicians refuse to cooperate with federal law enforcement.

— U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (@ICEgov) October 9, 2026

NYPD Commissioner Jessica Tisch said at least one federal agent fired seven rounds, striking Belgal in the neck. Surveillance footage shows armed, plainclothes officers approaching his vehicle but does not capture the shooting itself.

The incident sparked demonstrations across the city, including a Friday march from Foley Square to federal immigration offices in Manhattan.

Mamdani said he unsuccessfully appealed to President Donald Trump and Homeland Security Secretary Markwayne Mullin to release Belgal. He subsequently called for ICE’s abolition.

---

Start your day with essential news from Salon.
Sign up for our free morning newsletter, Crash Course.

---

Belgal’s attorneys said he was transferred to New Jersey after the shooting before being returned to federal detention in Brooklyn. A judge has restricted his transfer and temporarily blocked his deportation while his legal challenge proceeds.

New York Attorney General Letitia James called for a “full and transparent investigation conducted without fear or favor.”

The Bronx district attorney’s office is investigating. ICE has not publicly released its own body-camera footage of the shooting.

The post NYPD footage fuels scrutiny of ICE shooting appeared first on Salon.com.

BRUSSELS ― EU governments expect the proposed size of the bloc’s next seven-year budget to be slashed by €100 billion to €200 billion from the previous plan announced in June, 12 EU diplomats told POLITICO.

Ireland, which holds the presidency of the Council of the EU and is steering the talks, will unveil the proposal on Saturday, setting the scene for fraught discussions among EU leaders at their summit next week.

The bloc is split between so-called frugal countries — Germany, Austria, the Netherlands and others — that want to slash several hundred billion euros from the nearly €2 trillion proposal on the table, and a rival coalition of southern and eastern countries, the Friends of Cohesion, that opposes the cuts.

Dublin is expected to cut the budget by between €100 billion and €200 billion as a goodwill gesture to the German camp, the diplomats said. However, the Irish plan to shield agriculture and regional spending from major cuts as a concession to the Friends of Cohesion.

At next week’s summit, EU leaders will react to the latest numbers, known as the “negobox” because it gives governments something to negotiate on, and signal early whether an agreement is possible by the end of the year.

Governments are rushing to secure a deal among themselves before national elections in France, Poland and Italy in 2027 threaten to derail the negotiations.

As a neutral broker in the discussions, Ireland hasn’t publicly disclosed its intentions on the negotiating document. 

Dublin’s European Affairs Minister of State Thomas Byrne told the European Parliament earlier this week that EU member countries have made “substantial progress” toward an agreement. But he warned: “we cannot satisfy everybody.”

Germany and its allies criticized the previous Cyprus Council presidency for cutting only €32 billion in the last negobox in June.

Ireland’s looming cuts

The frugals’ calls for budget savings have ignited fears among the Friends of Cohesion. 

The 17 countries — including heavyweights Italy, Spain and Poland — issued a joint statement last week opposing cuts to agriculture and cohesion. 

In a concession to this camp, Ireland is expected to propose budget savings in other policy areas. Governments are bracing for major reductions to the Global Europe fund, the EU’s €200 billion pot of development aid and external relations cash, and the €410 billion European Competitiveness Fund to boost the bloc’s industrial capacity. 

Cuts to administrative costs, with €118 billion earmarked for the EU’s institutions and staff, are also popular among EU governments, though they will yield fewer savings.

However, frugals have warned against shielding agriculture and cohesion from a smaller budget. They argue instead that more money should be steered away from traditional priorities towards new challenges such as defense and competitiveness.

“We are very concerned that Ireland would decide to smash funding for research and external action, which is a major issue for development, our economic interests and migration,” said one EU diplomat, granted anonymity like others in this article to speak frankly about their expectations for the sensitive negotiations.

Tax game

Another sensitive issue is EU-wide taxes — known as “own resources” — to finance the budget and reduce national contributions.

In 2025, the European Commission proposed five new levies that are expected to generate €66 billion per year. During negotiations, governments opposed levies that would overwhelmingly affect their economies.

Several European governments lobbied Ireland to remove a corporate tax, known as CORE, that is unpopular across the bloc. But Dublin is expected to refrain from doing so, and keep the Commission’s five levies in the negobox.

To make CORE more palatable, Dublin might exempt small and medium enterprises from the scope of the levy. It could also make tweaks to a tobacco levy that is opposed by many.

Instead, the European Parliament’s proposed taxes on digital levies, online gambling and crypto firms are expected to be left out entirely from the negobox.  

An EU diplomat criticized these incremental changes as “disappointing and minimal.”

“There has been no company in the United States, unfortunately, that has abused this system more than Microsoft,” Vice President JD Vance said on Thursday.

MADRID — Spanish Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez has finally done something the far right approves of — calling a snap election on Nov. 29 that the anti-immigrant Vox party is hailing as “Spain’s last chance to be Spain again.”

Polling third in the race, Vox is Spain’s leading nationalist, euroskeptic force and it sees next month’s contest as its prime opportunity to remold the country after eight years of Sánchez’s socialist premiership by getting its people into top ministerial jobs.

Party leader Santiago Abascal greeted Monday’s election announcement as “excellent news.” His delight is hardly surprising given that polls suggest Vox is on track to make the biggest gains of any major party.

While the center-right People’s Party is expected to come first — with about 33% of the vote, according to POLITICO’s Poll of Polls — it will almost certainly have to team up with Vox, which commands support of about 18%, to build a stable coalition.

Abascal will then be able to demand the inclusion of key elements of Vox’s agenda as its price for that partnership. Its goals include deportations of undocumented migrants, a benefits preference for Spaniards over foreign nationals, slashing EU health and safety rules in the farming sector and rolling back support for gender equality and the LGBTQ+ community.

Vox secured 33 of the 350 seats in Congress in 2023, but is now set to double that. Under the PP’s coalition leadership, it should be able to form part of a comfortable majority.

“This time round, Vox is much stronger,” José Antonio Fúster, spokesperson for the party and a member of the Madrid regional parliament, said. “We are going into a very important election, not so much for us, as for Spaniards … This is the last hope for Spain to be Spain again.”

Fúster would not be drawn on which ministries his party has set its sights on, warning against “selling the bearskin before it has been hunted.”

Pointing to talks with the PP in recent months in four regions where the two parties now govern in coalition, he said the shaping of policy was being prioritized ahead of institutional power. “That is the last thing we negotiate because it is the least important,” he said.

Pet portfolios

In August, Vox MEP Jorge Buxadé told POLITICO that forming part of the government was not the only option open to his party, but that in a hypothetical coalition with the PP, his party would seek a number of ministries “in proportion to our vote share.”

That would amount to a significant percentage. If current polls translate into results in November, Vox would be in a position to claim about a third of ministerial posts.

Analysts expect Vox to press for portfolios that focus on its pet policies, such as agriculture, domestic policy, immigration and industry. The culture and education portfolios could also be of interest to the party, given their relevance in the hard right’s campaign against so-called wokeism.

The regions where the PP and Vox currently govern together — Andalusia, Aragón, Castile and León, and Extremadura — offer clues: The government departments that Vox controls are mainly linked to agriculture, welfare benefits and the family.

The party is heading into the election campaign espousing three main ideas: the concept of “national priority” — ensuring that Spaniards have access to public services and benefits ahead of foreign nationals — a clampdown on immigration and broad deregulation.

Although Vox’s rise to prominence was driven by its fierce stance against Catalan nationalism nearly a decade ago, that debate has faded from the political arena. Now, its focus is, like its European far-right counterparts, more firmly on immigration-related matters.

“Before, Vox talked about immigration, but it wasn’t the nuclear issue it has become,” said Guillermo Fernández Vázquez, a political scientist at Carlos III University and author of a book about the European far right. “Now, when Vox talks about social security payments, it talks about immigration; when it talks about the economy, it talks about immigration. Immigration is the issue that dictates everything.”

Vox also subscribes to the “remigration” policy being touted by many far-right parties, under which undocumented migrants and those who commit crimes would be deported. The PP has appeared to respond to Vox’s hard line by toughening its own stance, calling for the expulsion of foreign criminals and opposing a government migrant legalization program.

In each of the regions where the two parties are in coalition, Vox has ensured that its senior partner agreed to formally include the national priority principle in their governing agreement.

“But when it comes to national priority, the PP has added the caveat that it has to be implemented in line with the law,” said Miguel González, a journalist at the El País daily newspaper and author of a book about Vox. Legislation prevents discrimination against foreign nationals when it comes to accessing public benefits and services, meaning the policy is currently little more than symbolic in those regions. 

“In reality, in order to implement this properly, you’d have to change the immigration law,” González added.

Vox is eyeing an overhaul of that legislation to make it a workable policy.

“It’s very possible to change laws that are bad for Spaniards, so we have to roll them back and introduce new laws, making sure that Spaniards are not last in line,” Fúster said.

Deregulation nation

Deregulation also offers a platform from which to attack EU health-and-safety norms that are reviled by the farming sector, one of Vox’s main voter bases.

Fúster accepted that this could lead to clashes with the European Commission, but insisted that pressure from what he described as a rising tide of European parties sharing Vox’s values would “make sure that Brussels returns to the path of common sense.”

PP leader Alberto Núñez Feijóo has criticized phytosanitary restrictions on farmers but has shown little appetite for conflict with European institutions.

In social policy, González said Vox might use the broader notion of deregulation to dismantle funding for gender equality and LGBTQ+ departments and projects, as it has done on a local level. Fúster was reluctant to be drawn on this: “We believe in the equality of Spaniards,” he said. “We don’t believe that anyone should have privileges above others.”

Fernández Vázquez of Carlos III University said that the origins of Vox suggest a bumpy ride for the PP. Vox would be the first far-right party to enter government in half a century since the death of Francisco Franco in 1975 — and there would likely be clashes.

The far-right party formed in 2013 as a breakaway from the conservatives in frustration at what its founders saw as the pusillanimity of the PP in the face of Catalan separatism. 

“I think the relationship between Vox and PP [in government] will be a bad one,” the researcher said. “Abascal and his colleagues are going to enjoy showing up Feijóo whenever they can, portraying him as lukewarm and weak.”

Fúster accepted “it could be a difficult relationship,” adding that the PP “don’t see things the way we do and we don’t share their vision.”

“We’re not willing to make concessions, we’re willing to have a frank, open and reasonable negotiation.”

But for now, the priority is simply to remove the Socialists. In his traditionally combative style, Abascal insisted the election was a chance to hold on to “the peace, prosperity and freedom that a mafioso government wants to snatch from us forever.”

Max Griera contributed to this article.

To the degree that a “respectable” or “moderate” right exists today in America, Christopher Rufo is considered part of it. He is a senior fellow at the Manhattan Institute, the tony midtown think tank that holds black-tie galas; he recently enjoyed a polite sit-down interview with Ezra Klein on Klein’s massively popular New York Times podcast; and he has over 120,000 subscribers on Substack, a publishing platform whose owners have celebrated Rufo as one of their “best” political writers who readers can “trust.” 

Welcome to The Midterms, Actually. Every week I’ll be writing about two things: one big idea or trend I see forming across the 2026 primaries, and one thing I’m hearing from a voice on the ground. You can sign up here to get it in your inbox every week. Let’s get into it.

One big idea: Democrats’ Laken Riley vote is aging badly

Two things happened this week that reveal how quickly the politics of immigration enforcement are shifting.

First, Republican Sen. Jim Justice of West Virginia, a staunch ally of President Donald Trump, urged the administration to dial back its enforcement push. “Before you know it, you get people that get carried away in their job and whatever it may be, and all of a sudden, then you’re dragging people away that have lived on your street corner for 15 years,” Justice told Politico this week. “I don’t know that we need to be doing that stuff.” And he’s not the only red-state Republican who’s been pushing back on ICE lately, including some facing voters in tough races next month.

The second thing flew under the radar: Sen. Jon Ossoff, the Georgia Democrat running for reelection who has also been floated as a 2028 presidential candidate, struggled to explain himself when a reporter confronted him on camera about his vote for the Laken Riley Act in January 2025. Passed within days of Trump’s inauguration and signed nine days into his second term, the law requires ICE to detain undocumented immigrants who are merely arrested for or charged with theft-related crimes, before any conviction.

In the exchange with a reporter from Drop Site News, Ossoff talked about his Senate work investigating alleged ICE abuses, but didn’t directly address his vote after being asked if he regretted it. “Laken Riley was my constituent and what happened to her should happen to no American, to no person in this world,” Ossoff said. “I think that immigration enforcement should be focused on those who are convicted or charged with serious crimes.” He excused himself to walk into a meeting as the reporter pressed him on whether the law undermined due process. 

In both cases, you see changing winds of electoral politics. Back in 2025, when Ossoff and 11 other Senate Democrats joined Republicans in supporting Trump’s immigration bill, they implicitly validated Trump’s premise on immigration enforcement: that not only was the border out of control, but that there also needed to be new efforts to step up interior enforcement through expanding agencies like ICE. In the year-plus since that vote, Trump has hired more ICE officers, launched sweeping raids in cities like Minneapolis, Chicago, and Los Angeles, and fueled a cauldron of chaos that’s led to shootings across the country. Politically, it has now put Democrats like Ossoff in a pickle, one that will matter more the closer we get to 2028.

How do you explain giving more immigration powers to a Stephen Miller-led White House? How can one argue you couldn’t have seen this coming?

In some ways, you can understand the political logic of the time. Ossoff, who is running in a state Trump carried, and many of the congressional Democrats who supported the Laken Riley law were in competitive races, and Democrats left the 2024 election thinking they had misread the electorate on the issue, particularly after Latino voters swung hard toward the right. But given what’s happened since, it’s clear many congressional Democrats made a familiar mistake: prioritizing political triangulation over standing on their values of protecting marginalized communities.

Take a look at some of the Democrats who have already had to walk back their votes. In the Democratic primary for Minnesota’s open Senate seat, Lt. Gov. Peggy Flanagan made US Rep. Angie Craig’s vote for the law a key focus of her campaign, calling it “disqualifying.” The attacks were so effective that Craig eventually expressed remorse, saying, “I wanted to be honest with the people of Minnesota. I will tell you when I get it wrong, and I got that one wrong.” Craig lost the August 11 primary to Flanagan.

Maryland’s April McClain Delaney, another congressional Democrat, also said she regretted her vote: “I will say that this was in the beginning of my term. And I never thought that ICE immigration and the horror of what has happened would happen.” (She survived her primary, defeating David Trone by 6 points.)

It’s easy to see where the buyer’s remorse is emanating from. Trump’s ICE is broadly unpopular. And as we’ve talked about on this Substack and in our reporting on America, Actually, Trump is doing worse and worse with Latino voters, with both prices and immigration enforcement driving the slide. A Hart Research poll for TelevisaUnivision of 1,500 Latino registered voters in battleground House districts (August 6–17) found 63 percent disapprove of Trump’s job performance and 62 percent disapprove of his handling of immigration enforcement and deportations. Sixty-four percent view ICE unfavorably. 

When I recently talked to Stephanie Valencia of Equis Research, she said this: 

The people who feel most regretful who voted for Trump in 2024 are most regretful because of immigration. They feel like there was a broken promise there. Like, they were told he was gonna focus on the border, which everybody agreed was chaos, and he was gonna focus on violent criminals and serious threats, and at the end of the day, he has not complied with that.

But while the shift in public opinion helps explain the elected officials’ political logic, it doesn’t change the material harm of their votes. Just this week, ICE announced plans to hire 5,000 more employees, most of them deportation officers, by the end of the year as enforcement continues to ramp up.

And these raids have a lasting effect on targeted communities, like in Maine, the Chicago area, and Texas. It’s the No. 1 issue that has come up in my conversations with local reporters. The chief architect of this chaos is the president, but make no mistake: Trump had help from shortsighted Democrats.

One thing I’m hearing 

Maya Miller is a Report for America corps member covering democracy and government for the Gulf States Newsroom, a public radio collaboration that includes Louisiana’s WWNO and WRKF. She’s been reporting on Mississippi’s redistricting fight and what residents are saying about their representation and the upcoming midterms.

You’ve been reporting from redistricting hearings in Mississippi. What are residents most concerned about, and is there a conversation or moment that captures the mood?

Residents are most concerned about their representation. In Mississippi in particular, race and party are strongly intertwined, and Black residents worry that by being drawn into new districts, voters may elect a Republican candidate. There was a bit of secrecy around redistricting earlier this summer, with Gov. Tate Reeves, a Republican, canceling a special session to redraw judicial lines. So advocates created the People’s Hearings, a series of meetings held across the state to voice concerns and create a public record of testimonies from Mississippians. Quickly after, lawmakers decided to host their own public hearings, and at these hearings, hundreds of residents showed up, mostly to urge them not to redistrict.

“It seems to me that the threat of losing representation has made people more aware of the moving parts.”

At one hearing, I spoke to Joyce Arceneaux-Mathis, president of the Natchez NAACP. She’s frustrated that the state is going to spend millions on new maps when people are struggling with day to day expenses. And Ramona Sanders of Meridian, Mississippi, has a lot of concerns on whether mid-decade redistricting is illegal. While it’s not, she says that lawmakers are opening themselves up to legal action. I haven’t heard anything from voter advocacy groups that points to future lawsuits, but only time will tell, if and when lawmakers redraw the maps, if these maps are constitutional or not.

Redistricting is often covered as a fight over which party wins more seats. What would these changes mean for the communities you cover and their ability to have a voice in Congress?

One change that could happen is that residents who are Democrats might lose the state’s only Democrat leader. Out of four congressmen, there’s only one Democrat, Bennie Thompson, who represents District 2. His district spans much of the west, from the capital city of Jackson to most of the Mississippi Delta and southwest Mississippi. It’s a heavily Black district, somewhere around 63 percent Black. He’s held this seat for 33 years and has brought millions to the district for health care, infrastructure, and agriculture. 

So residents are worried that Republicans are trying to edge him out and replace him with a more conservative leader who may not have the same concerns as the community. 

How are these fights affecting people’s interest in the midterms? Are you hearing more determination to vote, more doubt that voting matters, or something else?

People are fired up. They’re incredibly engaged. I’m hearing from a lot of people who are more determined to vote in November than when I covered redistricting in Alabama in 2024. It seems to me that the threat of losing representation has made people more aware of the moving parts. So they’re attending hearings, participating in rallies, registering to vote and checking their registration, phoning a friend and making plans to be at the polls on November 3.

What is the national conversation about redistricting missing that becomes clear when you spend time in these communities?

I think the national conversation is missing the voice of the community. It’s one thing to report on the politics of redistricting, but there’s a layer of real concern from residents that shouldn’t be ignored. They’re worried about hospitals closing. They’re worried about public schools losing funding. They’re worried about the rising cost of groceries and gas. I find that talking to and listening to residents helps me understand a community more than calling up a lawmaker and asking them their thoughts. There’s a place for that side of the conversation, of course, but I’ve always tried to center people who will be most impacted in my reporting, and I feel that leads to a better story for our listeners.

A proposed change to a key tax form could help the Trump administration achieve new anti-immigrant policy objectives, including preventing undocumented immigrants from receiving federal tax benefits. But it could also be used to accomplish a more sweeping objective: Shifting the balance of power in Congress by excluding many classes of immigrants from apportionment, the process through which power in the House of Representatives is allocated.