Category: Columnists

Many Americans were shocked by the killings of Renee Good and Alex Pretti at the hands of federal immigration agents. Many more were repulsed by the federal government’s lack of transparency, victim blaming, and obfuscation of the facts regarding the shootings.

But as border residents can tell you, what’s playing out in places like Chicago and Minneapolis is, in many ways, nothing new.

Although the administration has taken that lack of accountability to a nauseating low — interfering in federal and local investigations — impunity around immigration enforcement did not begin when Donald Trump took office.

Since 2010, more than 300 people have been killed in incidents involving on-duty Border Patrol agents, according to a tally kept by the Southern Border Communities Coalition. Out of that number, 74 have been killed by agents using force.

Those figures are likely an undercount, as the agency has a history of failing to report deaths its agents are involved in. It also consistently fails to seriously discipline agents who face abuse complaints. A 2017 report by the American Immigration Council found a host of problems with the complaint system and investigation process, resulting in little accountability.

Focusing on the use-of-force killings, I am not saying that all 74 were unjustified. As Gil Kerlikowske, who led U.S. Customs and Border Protection from 2014 to 2017, told me, agents often work by themselves in rural border stretches and can run into dangerous smugglers.

But as Kerlikowske also told me, when he arrived at CBP, the agency had an outdated use-of-force policy that wasn’t available publicly, had no internal affairs division, and the only tools available to agents were firearms.

“They’ve always had a culture that’s distinct, you know, going back to their early days,” he said. “They did have that kind of Wild West kind of culture.”

That’s putting it mildly. While Kerlikowske instituted a series of important reforms around use of force, which he said his successors continued and improved upon, deep lasting change is slow and difficult.

As a 2021 report detailed, the agency “has been steeped in institutional racism and has committed violent acts with near impunity” since its creation in 1924. Lest you think that attitude got left behind last century, in 2019, a Facebook group that included around 9,500 current and former agents was found to be littered with racism and misogyny.

While I’ve known Border Patrol agents who zealously enforce the law while never losing sight of their humanity, who would hand over their lunch to a hungry migrant they just detained, current and former CBP agents were involved in the killings in Minnesota.

The men who shot Pretti were identified by ProPublica as Border Patrol agent Jesus Ochoa and CBP officer Raymundo Gutierrez. Jonathan Ross, the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement agent who killed Good, began his law enforcement career in 2007 as part of the Border Patrol.

I hate to be cynical, but if past is prologue, President Trump and administration officials needn’t have bothered putting their thumb on the scale after the shootings. The few times agents are held to account, the result is rarely justice.

In the last 35 years, only three Border Patrol agents have been charged and tried for killing someone in the line of duty. In all three cases, juries failed to convict.

Michael Elmer was charged with second-degree murder after the 1992 shooting of Dario Miranda Valenzuela in Nogales, Ariz. Elmer fired 12 shots, hitting Valenzuela twice in the back. He then moved the body and didn’t immediately report the incident, according to the Arizona Daily Star. He was acquitted.

Nicholas Corbett was charged with murder for killing Francisco Javier Domingo Rivera near Douglas, Ariz., in 2007. The agent’s account did not match up with eyewitness testimony or the physical evidence. The Cochise County Attorney’s Office eventually declined to prosecute after two trials ended in hung juries.

Lonnie Swartz was tried twice, once for second-degree murder and later for involuntary manslaughter, in the 2012 shooting death of 16-year-old Jose Antonio Elena Rodriguez. I was an opinion writer at the Daily Star in Tucson, Ariz., when this case went to trial in 2018. The facts were undeniable: Swartz shot across the Nogales border fence into Mexico a total of 16 times. He stopped and reloaded. He hit the unarmed Elena Rodriguez eight times in the back and twice in the head from an elevation of around 14 feet.

That two juries found Swartz not guilty is unconscionable.

Taken in total, the message that federal immigration agents keep receiving — from the government and from juries — is that they can continue to operate with impunity.

Those who have long advocated for reform in these agencies say perhaps things will begin to change as a result of the deaths of Good and Pretti because they were white Americans. But this isn’t about race or immigration status, it’s about unchecked power.

Kerlikowske, at least, is optimistic about what happens once Trump is out of the White House.

“The Border Patrol isn’t trained to work in cities. That’s not why they hired on. They didn’t hire on to go work in Chicago or Minneapolis,” he said. “I think the vast majority of these folks will be happy to be back doing what they were doing.”

Let’s hope that when they do, they do so with a renewed commitment by the government to transparency and accountability. Otherwise, it may be back to business as usual.

The slow drip of the U.S. government’s still grossly incomplete release of its files on late financier and sex trafficker Jeffrey Epstein has nonetheless become a who’s who of Planet Earth’s rich and famous — from billionaires like Bill Gates and Elon Musk to cultural icons like filmmaker Woody Allen and, of course, two presidents.

The average American paying any attention to this global bonfire of the vanities probably barely noticed this name: longtime British politico Peter Mandelson, who most recently served as the U.K.’s ambassador to the United States.

Across the pond, it was another story. The Fleet Street tabloid press went wild over revelations that Mandelson — a key insider in the ruling Labour Party, long known to have been one of Epstein’s globe-trotting pals — maintained his close ties even after the American’s 2008 child prostitution conviction, writing Epstein in 2009 to hail his release from jail as “liberation day.”

But unlike the fallout in the United States, Mandelson’s Epstein problem didn’t end with some embarrassing headlines. Back in September, when an initial batch of Epstein’s emails went public, Prime Minister Keir Starmer — Mandelson’s longtime ally — immediately fired his friend from his ambassador’s post in Washington, D.C., and the scandal has only intensified.

Last week, Scotland Yard investigators raided Mandelson’s two U.K. homes in a reported criminal investigation into whether the government official leaked secret and sensitive financial information to Epstein around the time of the Great Recession in 2008. (Headline in the tabloid Sun: “Police rummage through Mandy’s drawers.”)

Meanwhile, Americans watching Britain’s rush to hold a powerful man to account for his unconscionable relationship with modern history’s most notorious sex creep are probably all asking the same thing.

Wait, you can do that?

Here in the land where Epstein sex trafficked scores of underage girls — including the U.S. Virgin Islands hideaway now known as “Rape Island” — the sound of any type of justice or accountability for the financier’s powerful confederates has been an ear-splitting silence.

Since Epstein’s mysterious August 2019 death in a Manhattan federal jail cell, only his longtime companion and procurer of young women, Ghislaine Maxwell, has been criminally charged and convicted, and she has been moved by her longtime friend Donald Trump’s Justice Department to a low-security prison where she reportedly gets special perks.

Most of the corporate CEOs, company or university board members, NFL team owners, scientists, etc., etc., etc., who maintained close Epstein ties even after his 2008 state conviction on lurid crimes with minors have faced no sanctions, or just minor ones. Last week’s news that Brad Karp — chair of the powerful law firm Paul Weiss, already under fire for a controversial deal with Trump to head off a lawsuit with pro bono legal aid — is stepping down over revelations of his Epstein contacts stood out because it was such a rare nod toward accountability among U.S. elites.

This is why the reaction in Europe to Epstein’s close ties with some of its top leaders ought to be a wake-up call for the United States and our own rotten system of justice.

The Epstein accountability party isn’t just breaking out in Great Britain, although our cross-Atlantic ally has led the way ever since the artist formerly known as Prince Andrew was booted from the royal family as allegations mounted that he took part in some of the illegal sexual activities on Epstein’s island.

Despite the aggressive moves against Mandelson and the ex-royal now called Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor, some observers think Starmer’s already tottering Labour government could collapse amid questions over what it did know about Mandelson’s Epstein connection, and when it did know it. A pointed headline in the Guardian newspaper bluntly summed up an increasingly prevalent U.K. viewpoint: “Deceit, betrayal and a scandal that demands historic change.”

But the fallout has spread well beyond the British Isles. When it came out that Joanna Rubinstein, a Swedish U.N. official, visited Epstein’s island in 2012, and that Miroslav Lajčák, national security adviser to Slovakia’s prime minister, discussed “gorgeous” girls in emails with the financier, both of them quit their jobs.

Imagine that.

Norway, much like the U.K., has been rocked to its core by revelations that so many of the nation’s elite leaders had Epstein ties. That even includes the nation’s crown princess, Mette-Marit, who had a running, jovial email conversation with Epstein that included such mundane matters as teeth whitening. More seriously, Norway’s economic crimes unit — yes, some countries actually have such a thing — has opened a corruption investigation into former Prime Minister Thorbjørn Jagland’s relationship with the disgraced U.S. moneyman.

There’s more. Latvia, Lithuania, and Poland have also announced their own investigations. In particular, Poland is digging into mounting evidence over associations between Epstein and Russian intelligence — an existential matter for a nation that’s been overrun and dominated by its eastern neighbor in the past.

In the United States, officials seem more likely to investigate chemtrails or what happened to Amelia Earhart than conduct a serious probe of whether Trump’s former friend was with the Russians, too.

Rob Ford, a professor at the U.K.’s University of Manchester, told the Associated Press that Europe has “a more functional media, we have a more functional accountability structure, that there is still a degree of shame in politics, in terms of people will say: ‘This is just not acceptable, this is just not done.’”

And that goes beyond Epstein. Also last week, French authorities raided the Paris office of U.S. citizen and world’s richest person Elon Musk’s social media giant X (formerly Twitter) as part of a sweeping probe into the site’s allegedly unlawful data extraction, as well as the recent scandal involving its artificial intelligence platform Grok spreading child sexual abuse material. The U.K. is also investigating Grok.

Musk’s X is, of course, headquartered in San Francisco, but no one expects the FBI to burst into his office — not after the electric vehicle magnate donated a staggering $288 million in 2024 to push Trump back into the White House. (Although California’s Democratic attorney general has begun an investigation.)

The time-lapsed release of the Epstein files hasn’t yet produced a smoking gun concerning his close friendship with Trump, but the fact that lurid tips to federal authorities about the two-time president don’t seem to have been really investigated speaks volumes about the utter lack of elite accountability on this side of the Atlantic.

The true meaning of the Epstein files may be less what it says about any specific sex crime — horrific as those may be — and more what they show about how the most powerful men in this country understood that they can get away with anything.

Indeed, it now feels like the 1970s Watergate scandal that looked at the time like the height of accountability — Richard Nixon was forced to resign the presidency, while 48 of his allies were convicted of crimes — was actually the end. Nixon’s subsequent pardon by Gerald Ford — which emboldened the disgraced ex-POTUS to declare that “when the president does it, that means it is not illegal” — was like a bat signal for elites that their brief moment of responsibility for their actions was over.

There were virtually no criminal charges for the economic crime of the 21st century: the Wall Street-driven collapse of the global economic system in 2008. And the lack of justice is bipartisan. Prosecution of white-collar criminals in the United States hit an all-time low under Joe Biden, even before Trump began his obscene spree of pardoning the wealthiest crooks.

It was grotesque when the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in 2024 that presidents can’t be prosecuted for crimes that are “official acts,” yet that seemed pretty obvious after George W. Bush and Dick Cheney got away with their illegal torture regime. Who do you think we are, Europe?

If the Epstein scandal “demands historic change,” as the Brits put it, then that change has to be a newfound drive to somehow renew the spirit of ‘74 — as in 1974. The assault on the foundation of American democracy that is the Trump regime — with its billion-dollar White House corruption, brutal and murderous immigration raids, perversions of criminal justice, and much more — won’t be cured just by Republicans losing a couple of elections, assuming free and fair balloting can even take place.

The small-d democratic government that finally ends this nightmare must do the hard work Biden and his miserably failed attorney general, Merrick Garland, did not do the last time. Immigration agents who maim and kill, government officials enriching themselves, and all other crooks — especially those now being exposed in the Epstein files — must be prosecuted, convicted, and sent to prison.

Maybe that’s not the American way. But there’s a whole wide world out there that is doing things a lot better.

When Donald Trump posted a meme on his social media platform that portrayed former President Barack Obama and his wife, Michelle, as apes, it was an act of racism.

Trump engaging in this behavior during Black History Month is no accident. His childish attempt to taint the legacy of America’s most accomplished Black couple is about more than insulting the Obamas. It is meant to demean all of us.

After all, if a Black president is nothing more than a monkey, a Black doctor, lawyer, or executive is even less than that. Therefore, in the minds of those who embrace that kind of racist reasoning, Black history should not be celebrated. It should be mocked, undermined, and erased.

That’s why we can’t ignore the timing of Trump’s decision to pry Black history from the walls at the President’s House slavery memorial at Sixth and Market.

We must not downplay his sudden fixation with controlling the voting apparatus in cities like Philadelphia with large Black populations.

We cannot pretend that portraying the Obamas as monkeys is isolated from his ongoing attack on diversity, equity, and inclusion.

Trump has chosen to use the 100th anniversary of Black History Month to send a message: It is now open season on Black people.

The White House, through a statement from press secretary Karoline Leavitt, initially sought to downplay the president’s social media post. “This is from an internet meme video depicting President Trump as the King of the Jungle and Democrats as characters from The Lion King,” Leavitt said. “Please stop the fake outrage and report on something today that actually matters to the American public.”

But here’s the thing. The president’s racist post does matter to the American public, as evidenced by the immediate backlash from major figures on both sides of the aisle. Even Black Republican U.S. Sen. Tim Scott, who normally declines to criticize the president’s racial broadsides, responded.

“Praying it was fake because it’s the most racist thing I’ve seen out of this White House. The President should remove it,” Scott wrote on social media.

Scott, who chairs the Senate Republicans’ midterm campaign arm, is right to pray, because with each outrageous act by the president, Republican odds in the upcoming elections get a little longer.

But Trump’s overtly racist post was never about the elections. It was about reshaping the society in which we live.

Though Trump deleted the post after Americans reacted with outrage, the message was sent. Black people are the enemy, and they are to be treated as such.

As if to underline that point, a white listener called my radio show on Friday morning and called me the N-word on the air. I was neither surprised nor angry. Rather, I experienced a moment of great clarity. America should, too.

Trump is inviting the white conservatives who comprise much of his political base to follow his lead and embrace racism. He is reaching back for vile racist tropes to get them to do so.

In some ways, I’m grateful Trump waited until Black History Month to do this. History, after all, is a strong and determined teacher. We must strive to be the kind of students who embrace history’s lessons.

In 1906, for example, the determination to portray Black people as monkeys took an unimaginably cruel turn. A young African named Ota Benga, who had been taken from what was then the Belgian Congo, was placed in a cage at the Bronx Zoo with actual monkeys. Historians speculate he may have been 12 or 13 — caged with monkeys so crowds of white people could gawk at him, laugh at him, demean and humiliate him.

Benga was freed when outraged Black ministers and others complained about his treatment. Ten years later, Benga killed himself, and the Wildlife Conservation Society, which oversees the Bronx Zoo, spent nearly a century trying to cover up what was done to him. It was only after the murder of George Floyd that the organization fully acknowledged and apologized for the incident.

History teaches us that when racism is left unchecked and unchallenged, people die.

This Black History Month, as Trump seeks to take us backward, he must know that we will not go quietly.

In fact, we will not go at all.

This week’s column covers housing debates in Harrisburg, admissions policies at the school district, and more bad zoning overlays.

Go big or go home

Philadelphia Mayor Cherelle L. Parker is no longer the only person with an ambitious housing plan. Gov. Josh Shapiro joined her this week, pledging in his budget address to create a billion-dollar state fund to encourage housing production in local communities. The guv is echoing a bipartisan consensus that there simply aren’t enough homes to meet the demand. There’s just one problem: Many housing experts say Shapiro’s ideas won’t move the needle on production.

That’s because his plan is based entirely on carrots, avoiding the creation of the kind of statewide building standards that have been most effective elsewhere.

While factors like interest rates and the cost of construction impact housing starts, local zoning rules are also a key constraint on homebuilding. Many municipalities maintain strict rules that make it impossible to build anything other than McMansions. In the few towns that do allow for new construction, the mismatch between supply and demand means developers can charge outlandish prices. The new Coulter Place in Ardmore starts at around $3,000 a month for a one-bedroom unit.

In states like California, the debate over housing has been going on for over a decade. State leaders there also sought to use an incremental approach and avoid attracting the ire of interest groups that are committed to the current system of regulating housing. The result has been the legislature routinely needing to revise the plan. Instead of starting with a half-measure, Pennsylvania should get things right the first time.

Thankfully, there are plenty of initiatives to do exactly that. State Sen. Sharif Street (who is also running for Congress) is circulating a bill that would align Pennsylvania with international standards on stairwell construction. Advocates claim that allowing for buildings with just one set of stairs will facilitate construction on unique parcels, increase access to natural light for residents, and do so without increasing any safety risks.

State Rep. Tarik Khan has proposed what he calls the “Golden Girls Law,” named after the famed ‘80s sitcom. Many municipalities restrict unrelated women from living together, which would have made scofflaws out of Blanche, Rose, Dorothy, and her mother if the show were set in Pennsylvania. Khan’s bill would end those bans.

State Rep. Greg Scott wants to eliminate parking minimums, and State Rep. John Inglis III has introduced bills that would require municipalities to allow for more duplexes and triplexes. Shapiro should put his weight behind these efforts, as well.

Polarizing magnets

During the pandemic, the Philadelphia School District was faced with a conundrum: how to decide who got spots at the city’s well-regarded magnet schools, given the state’s cancellation of the Pennsylvania System of School Assessment, or PSSA, standardized tests.

The schools — and standardized tests — have often been criticized for having cultural and socioeconomic biases. The demographics at Masterman and Central (where I attended) do not match those of the district overall, while standardized test scores tend to reflect the socioeconomic status of the students taking them. To many, this is enough evidence to scrap the magnet system, the tests, or both.

The district’s solution was to take over admissions, which had traditionally been handled by the schools themselves, and subject applicants to a lottery process. To address equity concerns, some zip codes were given priority access to the schools. Students at predominantly Black George Washington Carver Middle School, who had been promised a spot at the partner high school if they maintained good grades, saw those pledges revoked. The district also created a computer-graded writing test, although that was quickly phased out. Some parents saw the revamp as a blatant attempt to discriminate against Asian students. A bipartisan federal appeals court ruled this week that these families have a case.

With the state once again administering PSSAs, and with the new lottery system not having a substantial impact on demographics at the schools, it is worth questioning whether the new process represents any improvement at all.

Day of Jay

This column’s favorite City Council member, the 5th District’s Jeffery “Jay” Young Jr., decided not to advance his controversial bill to ban housing construction on or near the former Hahnemann University Hospital campus after serious pushback from local community groups and the Planning Commission. Unfortunately, the attention given to the Hahnemann bill may have helped two of his other bad ideas evade scrutiny.

Young got two bills through the Rules Committee. One bill is aimed at preventing blight by restricting demolitions of vacant property. Ironically, most development experts say the bill will likely increase blight by incentivizing owners to create hazards to justify demolition or providing more space for squatters to operate.

Young also introduced a bill creating an 11 p.m. curfew for some businesses within his district, which he said is aimed at stopping nuisance businesses that are selling drug paraphernalia and, per Young, sometimes the drugs themselves.

By that logic, selling drugs at 10:59 p.m. will still be allowed.