https://aseannow.com/rss/44-thailand-news.xml/National and regional news from all around ThailandenTrump Wins Court Green Light To Fast-Track Deportation of Millions Donald Trump has secured one of the biggest legal victories of his presidency after a federal appeals court ruled that his administration can dramatically expand fast-track deportations across the United States, potentially exposing millions of undocumented migrants to rapid removal without ever appearing before an immigration judge. The ruling allows immigration officers to deport people arrested anywhere in the country if they cannot immediately prove they have lived continuously in the US for at least two years. Instead of lengthy court proceedings, deportations could now take place within days under the controversial "expedited removal" system. The decision overturns a lower court ruling that had blocked the policy last year after civil rights groups warned it could wrongly deport long-term residents with deep family and community ties. Trump-Appointed Judges Back White HouseThe three-judge panel split 2-1 in favour of the administration, with Trump-appointed judges Justin Walker and Neomi Rao siding with the Department of Homeland Security. Walker ruled that immigration officers are not required to explain how someone might avoid deportation—even if they could legally remain in the country. The ruling effectively places broad discretion in the hands of immigration officials rather than immigration courts. Judge Warns Of 'Woefully Inadequate' ProcessThe lone dissent came from Obama-appointed Judge Robert Wilkins, who warned the policy risks sweeping up long-term residents without giving them a meaningful chance to defend themselves. He argued that expedited removal was originally designed for migrants caught near the border shortly after entering the country—not for people arrested hundreds of miles inland. Wilkins warned that deporting people without properly determining how long they have lived in America could violate basic due process protections. Mass Deportation Blueprint Moves ForwardExpedited removal previously applied mainly to migrants caught within 100 miles of the border and within two weeks of crossing illegally. Trump's expanded policy applies nationwide, allowing officers to deport anyone unable to immediately produce evidence of at least two years' continuous residence in the United States. Immigration advocates argue many undocumented migrants simply do not carry years of paperwork with them and could be wrongly removed before obtaining legal advice. Major Boost For Trump's Immigration AgendaThe ruling gives fresh momentum to one of Trump's flagship campaign promises—mass deportations. The Department of Homeland Security hailed the judgment as a major victory, saying it vindicates the administration's immigration strategy. The policy has long been championed by senior White House adviser Stephen Miller, who has pushed for tougher enforcement measures throughout Trump's presidency. Although further legal challenges are expected, the decision hands the White House sweeping new powers to accelerate deportations without lengthy court hearings. For now, one of the most controversial pillars of Trump's immigration crackdown has cleared one of its biggest legal hurdles—and millions of undocumented migrants could now face a much faster path to removal. Original source: International Business TimesSat, 27 Jun 2026 04:11:18 +0000Biggest money earners for Thailand were those investors in kind of industry, hotels, entertainment, tourism, property building selling and renting, now some smart smart aleck in the governments seen that foreigners are over active brunching everywhere making a lot of money, and I mean a lot of money ' and someone up there got up and says: hey, wait a minuet, what about us? they are taking over and not leaving much for our own people to get in ( as if they got the money) so they come up with the nominee rule that they dug up from some old law books, and so the blitz began, now ten of thousand of foreigners who invested in Thailand are going to lose it all if not most of it and get foul with the law and now being labeled as criminals. what is going to happen to the properties in question, or the Thai nominees? that is still to be seen.Sat, 27 Jun 2026 04:11:01 +0000That makes no sense. Do you write in the English language?Sat, 27 Jun 2026 04:10:25 +0000Just a guess, but I see it is easy for you to project your own feelings and thinking onto others. Let's start in reverse; I don't sleep with local women. I've been happily married for the past 31 years. Next, you'd lose your bet. Both my wife and I are active in supporting others in less fortunate situations, especially here in Asia... even though they are not part of 'my' family. And what should be mandatory is helping others. Not ignoring their needs because they aren't related to you. That's what is called 'humanity.' Some folks see that as the highest calling. Some apparently see it as a waste of time and energy because it doesn't do anything directly for them. There is a word for that in English; selfishness. It's not a pretty word, but many seem to revel in it.Sat, 27 Jun 2026 04:09:47 +0000Trial by Facebook posts, eh?Sat, 27 Jun 2026 04:09:35 +0000Chopsticks are best for a rice-based diet. Everybody knows this, as Noam would say: Just read the literature. Why are the spoons so FLIMSY, anyway? One reason is that they must be very thin, because Thai eaters use the spoon as a knife, as well. Also, if you are not careful, and if you are thin-skinned, then the handles of the spoon will cut the hands. Maybe the reason Thais refer spoons is because they eat a lot of soups. Strange that they don't eat peas, though, since spoons are best for peas.Sat, 27 Jun 2026 04:08:47 +0000BangkokSat, 27 Jun 2026 04:08:12 +0000They should stick to BaliSat, 27 Jun 2026 04:06:08 +0000You sound like you're trying to get business, in your example of 3k a year, what was the coverage for medical expenses? I'll take a guess less than 50k baht, post a link if more would be good to read itSat, 27 Jun 2026 04:06:05 +0000None of this applies to the entire comment, in fact, i confirmed thoughts and opinion that are in other posters comments above. Stop lying, you are censoring for zero reason.Sat, 27 Jun 2026 04:05:47 +0000But back to this: I see a guy walking on a beach and some dogs walking on the beach. I don't assume that the guy owns the dogs.Sat, 27 Jun 2026 04:05:05 +0000Post breaking forum rules removed. @aseanexpat take this as the only warning, we know who you are and yet again your are unable follow forum rules. If you break the rules again, this account will be permanently closed. Rule 17.News articles are collected from recognised sources and may be consolidated or rewritten with AI assistance. Respectful discussion of the article content is welcome. Disrespectful comments about the articles, the use of AI, or the news team (e.g. “clickbait,” “slow news day,” mocking grammar, or AI taunts) are not permitted. Posts breaching this rule will be removed, and posting suspension or account closure may resultSat, 27 Jun 2026 04:04:39 +0000If you insist. But dogs are territorial. Most of those "dogs running free" have a limited range which centers at their owners house and spreads outwards until it intersects with another dog's territory. That holds except when some bitch goes into heat, then dogs go wherever their is hot pussy. The other exception to that rule is when the temple's dogs follow the monks on alms rounds. When I was a monk, we'd have upwards of 7 or more of the temple's dogs following us in the morning. We could manage all of the minor dog-vs-dog dust-ups we encountered. In our village, I'd estimate that perhaps 2%+ keep their dogs fenced. I do. My neighbor to the South fence theirs. My neighbor to the North does not. Many of my wife's friends fence their dogs. It's for two reasons: it keeps the dogs safe from getting hit by a car, and their primary job is to protect the house. My dogs take care of security against humans and critters like cobras, or any other things we need to be alerted to (toads, lizards, preying mantis, etc). And if villagers want to let their dogs roam? I'm fine with it. I can get along with the vast majority of the dogs I come across while walking. I have in the past come across rare aggressive dogs. I can handle those too, and given time, befriend them. Here's my take on the difference between you and I. You - you like the Nanny-State and you want the police and government to take care of all the things you don't like, such as dogs roaming. Me - I can't stand the Nanny-State and I want the police and government bureaucracy to mind their own business and I'll mind my own business. Of course some farang is going to say, "I bet you want the police around if someone invades your home!" My thoughts on that: "Just like in the West, when seconds count, the police are minutes away. Here in Thailand more like 20 or 30 minutes. Here we agree 100%. The government could actually solve dog over-population with a cost-effective spay/neuter program if they put one in place. But? After living here almost 20 years, I know that ain't ever going to happen - unfortunately. However, our Tambon has both a rabies vaccination program and about once a year they will spay/neuter dogs and cats that belong to the local temples. I wish they would expand that program to include villagers. It would take care of a pet over-population social problem.Sat, 27 Jun 2026 04:03:16 +0000Posts with derogatory nicknames, intentional misspellings, or personal remarks will be removed. Spell names correctly for all sides of the debate.Sat, 27 Jun 2026 04:02:59 +0000You are correct that it isn't in the original article, but @scubascuba3 responded to your post with that info a couple of hours ago and those details were replicated by @NanLaew again shortly afterwards. It seems that people don't bother to read what comes beforehand before posting. I prefer to do so, rather than to risk looking a fool for not doing so. Sometime updates are posted by members before the official updates by Admin, as they may have to do translations etc before publishing. I certainly read that around the same time as scuba...Sat, 27 Jun 2026 04:00:11 +0000I agree that many relatives of victims often want the maximum pain and torture to be inflicted on the perpetrator. Such basic instinct is understandable for some. However, to regress to torture and maiming as used in the times of the Spanish Inquisition or the Nazi death camps is not what I would like the world to do. You have a different opinion, something you can only freely express in this civilisation.Sat, 27 Jun 2026 03:59:55 +0000My theory is that this was an 'I am under 18' extortion attempt that turned violent. I have heard of cases where the woman becomes hysterical, destroys the room, and demands a large sum of money. Regardless, that gives him absolutely no excuse for killing herSat, 27 Jun 2026 03:58:57 +0000And your point is ..........?Sat, 27 Jun 2026 03:58:18 +0000Always check the hard drives of people who make this distinctionSat, 27 Jun 2026 03:58:13 +0000When one is dead, all wives are ex-wives. All GFs are EX-GFs..... I admit there is slight ambiguity in this part of the story. However, then why would we be shown a Marriage Photo... So..NO...he and the wife were married up to the point when she may have stuck a knife in his head, due to suspiciions of infidelity, even though... He was just doing his job when he consorted with all those other Asian girls.Sat, 27 Jun 2026 03:58:13 +0000rif raf, stealing, robbing raping, no I don't identify as that group who says that your or my world view what really happens over there is true ? you know what happened in 2014 over there ? who was shelling whom ? putin is not invading anything like nato, not our business, you cry foul when UK or France had colonies and killed, raped those countries ? or USA playing unwanted policeman of the world ?Sat, 27 Jun 2026 03:57:37 +0000They will need those factories and the workers for their upcoming suicidal attack on Russia perhaps they think that 3rd times the charm ?Sat, 27 Jun 2026 03:57:13 +0000Note to self... Lock the bathroom door if I'm taking a shower when there's someone else in the hotel room that I don't want in the shower with me.Sat, 27 Jun 2026 03:56:38 +0000Labour Opens New Legal Asylum Routes While Tightening Crackdown On Migrants Home Secretary Shabana Mahmood Universities And Businesses To Sponsor Refugees Under New SchemeLabour is opening new legal routes for asylum seekers to come to Britain, allowing universities, businesses and community groups to sponsor refugees under a Canadian-style system. The Home Office said the new "capped safe and legal" pathways will begin rolling out later this year as part of a major overhaul of Britain's asylum system. Ministers insist the number of arrivals will be strictly limited and tightly controlled, with every applicant subjected to extensive security and eligibility checks. New Immigration System To Replace HotelsThe government says the sponsorship programme will eventually become the backbone of Britain's refugee resettlement system. Applications for a university sponsorship route are expected to open later this year, with the first refugees arriving in 2027. A separate work sponsorship scheme allowing employers to recruit recognised refugees is due to launch next year. Unlike the current system, which relies heavily on local councils, approved organisations will take responsibility for supporting refugees after they arrive in Britain. The Home Office says the reforms are designed to reduce the country's dependence on costly asylum hotels while providing legal alternatives to dangerous Channel crossings. Government Promises Tougher Rules On Illegal ClaimsAlongside the new legal routes, ministers are pressing ahead with tougher immigration laws aimed at speeding up removals and reducing what they describe as abuse of the asylum system. The Home Office will tighten how human rights and modern slavery laws are applied to asylum cases, arguing that existing legislation has too often been exploited to delay deportations. Foreign nationals convicted of serious crimes or found to have used forged documents will lose modern slavery protections under the proposed reforms. Changes will also restrict the use of Article 8 family life claims under the European Convention on Human Rights, which ministers argue are increasingly being used to frustrate removals. Mahmood Defends "Fair But Firm" ApproachHome Secretary Shabana Mahmood said Britain would continue offering sanctuary to people genuinely fleeing war and persecution while restoring public confidence in immigration controls. She said the asylum system could only survive if it was viewed as "fair, controlled and not open to abuse." The proposals form part of Labour's wider Immigration and Asylum Bill, which is expected to be introduced in Parliament this week. Cabinet Split Emerges Over Immigration PlansThe announcement came as divisions emerged inside Labour over wider immigration reforms. Junior Home Office minister Mike Tapp publicly criticised planned changes to visa rules affecting foreign care workers, prompting Mahmood to reportedly request his dismissal. Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer is understood to have rejected the request, exposing growing tensions inside government as Labour attempts to balance tougher immigration controls with maintaining legal routes for refugees. SOURCESat, 27 Jun 2026 03:55:04 +0000Everybody else.Sat, 27 Jun 2026 03:51:59 +0000