Department of Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem announced Monday that the ban on deporting Afghans had been lifted due to improvements in their home country. The United Nations has warned this isn’t the case, and deportees could be in danger.

The about-face is yet another example of the Trump administration reversing a Biden-era policy. Beginning in 2022, Afghan refugees were granted Temporary Protected Status (TPS), according to NPR. In addition to stopping deportation, TPS also gives refugees authorization to work in the United States.

Noem said the decision to rescind TPS was due to improving conditions in Afghanistan, citing an “improved security situation” and “stabilizing economy,” according to The Hill. The TPS designation expires on May 20, and becomes effective July 12, 60 days after the announcement is scheduled to be officially published in the Federal Register.

READ MORE: Trump Team Pushing ‘Utter Propaganda’ on Deportations to Create ‘Climate of Fear’: Experts

Despite Noem saying Afghanistan is safe for refugees, the State Department still gives the country a “Do Not Travel” designation. The State Department warns “travel to all areas of Afghanistan is unsafe,” according to NPR.

The United Nations also disputes Noem’s claims. A report published by the U.N. last month refers to an “escalating humanitarian crisis” in the country, and say increase deportations could further destabilize things. Iran and Pakistan have forcibly deported 96,000 Afghan refugees in April alone, the U.N. reported.

Afghan refugees in America—even those with green cards—say they’re afraid to return.

“It doesn’t matter just how you got here,” Muhammad Amiri, a Afghan refugee with legal permanent residency, told NPR. “We don’t feel safe, and we don’t feel good because now, we feel threatened, if they send us back to our country, it will be the same story. [We] feel threatened to be tortured, maybe be killed by [the] Taliban.”

Though Amiri has a green card, the Trump administration’s crackdown on immigration has many worried. Amiri’s fiancée is in Afghanistan, and he told NPR he was afraid to visit her, due to fears he may not be allowed back into the country. Amiri’s fears are not unfounded; Immigration and Customs Enforcement officers at airports have already turned away or detained those who come to the United States legally, according to The Verge.

The Taliban,a militant Islamic fundamentalist group, is still in control of Afghanistan. The Taliban bans women from working or being educated. This week, it also banned chess, according to the Telegraph. The Taliban has been in control since the 2021 withdrawal of U.S. forces from the country, ending the longest war in which America has been involved.

Image via Reuters

The nation of Qatar has reportedly promised to give President Donald Trump a new deluxe jet for use as Air Force One—but White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt said that it isn’t a quid pro quo situation, as they know not to expect anything in return.

This weekend, ABC News broke the story that Qatar’s royal family is planning to give the Defense Department a Boeing 747-8 jumbo jet. The jet is reportedly so tricked out that it’s been called a “flying palace,” according to ABC News. After Trump leaves office, the ownership of the plane will transfer from the DoD to the Trump presidential library foundation.

Some might see the gift as an attempt by the Qatari government to curry favor with the American president. But on Monday morning, Leavitt denied that the jet would earn the country special privileges.

READ MORE: During Aviation Crisis Trump Is Shopping for Used Luxury Jet to Replace Air Force One

“They know President Trump and they know he only works with the interests of the American public in mind,” told Brian Kilmeade on Fox News, adding saying the Trump administration and DoD had “[committed] ourselves to the utmost transparency and that the gift was fully legal.

KILMEADE: Do you worry that if they Qataris give us something like this that they'll want something in return?

LEAVITT: Absolutely not, because they know President Trump and they know he only works with the interests of the American public in mind pic.twitter.com/WnoBO4Beh3

— Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) May 12, 2025

Qatar’s gift to Trump has been controversial with many Americans, including some members of Trump’s base. The far-right influencer Laura Loomer—a longtime ally of the president—called the acceptance of the gift “a stain on the admin” in a post to X (formerly Twitter) on Sunday.

Other critics have said the gift violates the Constitution’s Emoluments Clause, which requires government officials to reject gifts unless they get explicit approval from Congress. While a president may accept small, token gifts from leaders, a federal law puts a cap on politicians from receiving gifts worth more than $480.

Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-MD) said the gift is in clear violation of the emoluments clause, and called on Trump to seek Congress’ approval to take the gift, according to The Hill.

“The Constitution is perfectly clear: no present ‘of any kind whatever’ from a foreign state without Congressional permission,” Raskin said on X. “A gift you use for four years and then deposit in your library is still a gift (and a grift).”

During President Joe Biden’s administration, Trump pushed a conspiracy theory that Biden had offered loan guarantees to Ukraine in exchange for the dismissal of a prosecutor investigating the Burisma energy company. The then-president’s son, Hunter Biden, was a board member of Burisma.

While Trump’s claims were repeatedly debunked, Trump’s first impeachment was over proven reports that Trump blocked a $400 million military aid package to Ukraine—already approved by Congress—in an attempt to get the country to investigate Joe Biden and damage his presidential campaign.

That is not the only time Trump has been accused of making quid pro quo—latin for “this for that”—deals. Earlier this year, comments made by “border czar” Tom Homan on Fox News implied an agreement was made to drop federal charges against New York City Mayor Eric Adams  in exchange for his support.

Much of President Donald Trump’s rhetoric about his on-again/off-again tariff plan is based around the idea that the U.S. is in a trade deficit with many countries around the world. But a deficit isn’t always a bad thing.

On Monday, the White House released a new statement that the U.S. and China had come to an agreement to lower tariffs. Earlier this year, Trump had proposed a 145% tariff against China, and the country retaliated with a proposed 125% tariff on U.S. goods. The new plan sees the tariffs drastically lowered to 30% on imported Chinese goods and 10% on American goods imported into China. The new deal is temporary, lasting 90 days.

“For too long, unfair trade practices and America’s massive trade deficit with China have fueled the offshoring of American jobs and the decline of our manufacturing sector,” the White House said in a statement.

READ MORE: Walz Mocks Trump Not Knowing ‘How a Tariff Works’ as Companies Ready ‘Massive’ Price Hikes

Earlier this year, Trump characterized the United States’ trade deficit with Canada as subsidizing our neighbors to the north. But a trade deficit is just a gap between the amount of goods and services exported and imported to and from a country. For example, the U.S. imports $412.7 billion of goods from Canada while exporting $349.4 billion. While that might look like a $63.3 trade deficit, that doesn’t take into account money coming in the services sector, so our trade deficit with Canada is actually $35.7 billion.

The U.S. has a trade surplus with some countries, too. Brazil buys a lot of energy resources from the U.S., according to the New York Times, but doesn’t sell nearly as many other goods and services back to the states.

The concept of trade deficits and surpluses is wholly neutral—and in fact, a trade deficit can be a good thing.

“America is getting more cheap goods, and in return it is giving foreigners financial assets: dollars issued by the Federal Reserve, bonds from the US government and American corporations, and stocks in newly created firms,” Tarek Alexander Hassan, a professor of economics at Boston University, wrote. “That is, a trade deficit can only arise if foreigners invest more in the US than Americans invest abroad.”

But, of course, sometimes trade deficits can be problematic for a country. If a country has a very large trade deficit for a long time, that can make it more susceptible to the winds of change, according to Jason Furman, who served on the White House Council of Economic Advisors during President Barack Obama’s second term. But, as Furman told NPR, that doesn’t apply to the United States.

Furman also pointed out that while tariffs can be a useful thing, Trump’s tariffs in particular are not.

“Let’s say you wanted to use trade policy to bring manufacturing jobs back. You wouldn’t do what the president just did, which is to put tariffs on all the bananas, mangoes, avocados and coffee coming into the United States. Those just aren’t things that we’re really ever going to make at enormous scale,” he said. “Moreover, the types of things that they do in Vietnam – you know, making clothing, making shoes – that’s not the jobs that we should be aspiring to have in the United States. We don’t want to give up jobs making airplanes in order to have more jobs making shoes.”

Featured image via Reuters