• AI data centers boom out West
  • Savewith a NBCUniversal ProfileCreate your free profile or…
  • Oct. 11, 2025, 8:00 AM EDTBy Alicia Victoria…
  • Palestinians Begin Return Home As Ceasefire Takes Effect

Be that!

contact@bethat.ne.com

 

Be That ! Menu   ≡ ╳
  • Home
  • Travel
  • Culture
  • Lifestyle
  • Sport
  • Contact Us
  • Politics Politics
☰

Be that!

ICE director says Dallas facility shooting was his 'worst nightmare'

admin - Latest News - September 25, 2025
admin
14 views 19 secs 0 Comments



NBC News’ Tom Llamas spoke with acting ICE Director Todd Lyons about the shooting at a Dallas Immigration and Customs Enforcement facility that left one person dead. He said the situation was his “worst nightmare.”



Source link

TAGS:
PREVIOUS
Sept. 24, 2025, 7:57 PM EDTBy Rich Schapiro, Chloe Atkins and Erik OrtizA 29-year-old Texas man opened fire on an Immigration and Customs Enforcement facility in Dallas on Wednesday, the second instance in two weeks of a gunman setting up with a rifle on a rooftop, opening fire and communicating a message through writing on bullets.Authorities identified the shooter as Joshua Jahn. He was found dead with a self-inflicted gunshot wound. Vice President JD Vance said evidence that is “not yet public” indicates the shooter was “politically motivated” to go after law enforcement and people enforcing the border.Vance called Jahn “a violent left-wing extremist.” Authorities have yet to release an official motive. The FBI special agent in charge in Dallas, Joe Rothrock, said the attack was “targeted violence.”Three detainees in a van in the facility’s sally port were shot. No ICE officers were hurt in the shooting, Dallas police said at a news conference.A bullet found near the shooter had the words “anti-ICE” written on it, according to the FBI. Other recent shooters, including those who assassinated Charlie Kirk and killed UnitedHealthcare CEO Brian Thompson, have also engraved messages on bullets.The anti-ICE messaging surprised Joshua Jahn’s brother, Noah Jahn.“He didn’t have strong feelings about ICE as far as I knew,” Noah Jahn said of his brother, who DHS officials said fired at the ICE building “indiscriminately.”Public records show that Joshua Jahn registered as an independent in Oklahoma and last voted in November.In 2016, he was charged in Texas with delivering marijuana in an amount greater than ¼-ounce but less than 5 pounds. He pleaded guilty to the felony charge, records show.Noah Jahn described his brother as “unique” but said he was not one he ever would have thought would be involved in a politically motivated shooting.“I didn’t think he was politically interested,” he said. “He wasn’t interested in politics on either side as far as I knew.”He said they grew up about 30 miles away in Allen, Texas. He said that they were Boy Scouts and that his brother took an interest in coding but was unemployed. Joshua Jahn had been planning to move onto their parents’ property in Oklahoma, his brother said.Noah Jahn said that the last time he saw his brother was two weeks ago at their parents’ house and that nothing seemed out of the ordinary.A man who said he had known Joshua Jahn since his early teens as a member of the same Boy Scout troop in Texas said Jahn did voice his opinions about politics, and he recalled a conversation several years ago about migrant caravans entering the United States.“He was just upset about how people were not understanding people’s desperation to get out of bad situations and how immigration was being handled as a whole,” the troop member said.The troop member, who asked not to be named for fear of harassment, said that the shooter was “passionate” about his stance on issues but that he did not know him to be “the action type of person.” The troop member was surprised that Jahn had been identified as the shooter.“He was pretty against it,” the fellow troop member said of the notion of gun violence, “so that’s why this is making it even more surprising. He was not somebody that would condone those kind of actions.”The troop member said he remained friends with him as an adult but lost touch about five years ago when Jahn said he was planning to move to Oklahoma. He said the shooter’s father was an active troop leader. He said Jahn had helped him move a couple of times.“He was one of those people that I would call for help, just in different situations, whether it be emotional support or physical support,” the troop member said.According to Noah Jahn, his brother was “not a marksman” but knew how to use their parents’ rifle. Noah said he did not think his brother would have been able to fire accurately from a nearby roof.Rich Schapiro Rich Schapiro is a reporter with the NBC News national security unit.Chloe AtkinsChloe Atkins reports for the NBC News National Security and Law Unit, based in New York.Erik OrtizErik Ortiz is a senior reporter for NBC News Digital focusing on racial injustice and social inequality.Minyvonne Burke contributed.
NEXT
Justice Dept. weighs on whether to charge James Comey
Related Post
October 7, 2025
Oct. 7, 2025, 5:00 AM EDTBy Lawrence HurleyWASHINGTON — The Supreme Court on Tuesday considers a free speech challenge to a Colorado law that bans conversion therapy aimed at young people questioning their sexual orientations or gender identities in a case likely to have national implications.The ruling could affect more than 20 states that have similar bans and raise new questions about other long-standing state health care regulations.The court, which has a 6-3 conservative majority that often backs conservative free speech claims, will hear oral argument in a case brought by Kaley Chiles, a Christian therapist, who says the 2019 law violates her free speech rights under the Constitution’s First Amendment.Conversion therapy, favored by some religious conservatives, seeks to encourage gay or lesbian minors to identify as heterosexual and transgender children to identify as the gender identities assigned to them at birth. Colorado bans the practice for licensed therapists, not for religious entities or family members.At issue is whether such bans regulate conduct in the same way as regulations applying to health care providers, as the state argues, or speech, as Chiles contends. Chiles says she does only talk therapy.The Supreme Court has, in major cases, backed LGBTQ rights, legalizing same-sex marriage in 2015 and ruling five years later that a federal law barring employment discrimination applies to both gay and transgender people.But in another line of cases, the court has backed free speech and religious expression rights when they conflict with anti-discrimination laws aimed at protecting LGBTQ people.The court backed a religious rights challenge this year to a Maryland school district’s policy of featuring LGBTQ-themed books in elementary schools. It also handed a major loss to transgender rights advocates by ruling that states could ban gender transition care for minors.Colorado Attorney General Phil Weiser, a Democrat, said in court papers that a ruling against the state would imperil not just conversion therapy bans but also other health care treatments that experts say are unsafe or ineffective.”For centuries, states have regulated professional healthcare to protect patients from substandard treatment. Throughout that time, the First Amendment has never barred states’ ability to prohibit substandard care, regardless of whether it is carried out through words,” he wrote.Chiles, represented by the conservative Christian group Alliance Defending Freedom, countered in her court papers that therapy is “vital speech that helps young people better understand themselves.”The state is seeking to “control what those kids believe about themselves and who they can become,” the lawyers said.Chiles’ lawyers cite a 2018 Supreme Court ruling in which the conservative majority backed a free speech challenge to a California law that requires anti-abortion pregnancy centers to notify clients about where abortion services can be obtained.The court might not issue a definitive ruling on conversion therapy bans; it could focus more narrowly on whether lower courts that upheld the ban conducted the correct legal analysis.If the law infringes on speech, it must be given a closer look under the First Amendment, a form of review known as “strict scrutiny,” which the justices could ask lower courts to do instead of doing it themselves. Under that approach, judges consider whether a government action that infringes on free speech serves a compelling interest and was “narrowly tailored” to meet that goal.The Trump administration filed a brief urging the court to find that the law does burden speech while also saying a ruling in favor of Chiles would not upend state regulations in other areas.Lawrence HurleyLawrence Hurley is a senior Supreme Court reporter for NBC News.
October 3, 2025
Hamas says it agrees to release all Israeli hostages
September 24, 2025
Sept. 24, 2025, 3:47 PM EDTBy Tyler KingkadeAfter dozens of school districts and colleges fired employees or placed them on leave over social media posts about Charlie Kirk’s assassination, some of those employees are turning to federal courts to get their jobs back. A former Ball State University staff member is suing the Indiana school’s president after she was fired for posting on Facebook: “Charlie Kirk’s death is a reflection of the violence, fear and hatred he sowed. It does not excuse his death, AND it’s a sad truth.”An art teacher in central Iowa filed a suit last week after the Oskaloosa school board voted to fire him for posting “1 Nazi down” about Kirk’s assassination.An elementary school teacher assistant is suing her Spartanburg County, South Carolina, district over what her lawsuit calls an unconstitutional social media policy. According to the suit, she was fired for posting a quote from Kirk in which he said it’s worth having “some gun deaths every single year” to protect the Second Amendment, and then adding the phrase “thoughts and prayers.” And on Wednesday, an art professor will plead his case before a federal judge in Sioux Falls, hoping to stop the University of South Dakota from firing him for posting on Facebook: “Where was all this concern when the politicians in Minnesota were shot? And the school shootings? And capital police? I have no thoughts or prayers for this hate spreading nazi. A shrug, maybe.”The schools have not yet responded in court. The universities and two districts declined to comment on pending litigation.The lawsuits are among the first actions educators have taken to combat a campaign propelled by conservative influencers and Republican lawmakers who urged schools and other employers to fire people who they say made light of or celebrated Kirk’s death. Those pushing for the firings have argued that teachers and professors with abhorrent views shouldn’t be allowed to influence students. Liberal-leaning critics have accused conservatives of embracing so-called cancel culture, which they had long condemned. Death of Charlie Kirk raises questions about future of free speech in America02:00Civil liberties groups have warned that some of the firings could violate the First Amendment, regardless of whether they simply criticize Kirk or openly celebrate his death. The legal challenges filed over the past two weeks will be important test cases on whether public employees can post statements deemed offensive, said Adam Goldstein, vice president of strategic initiatives at the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression.“It’s an unfortunate necessity that the courts will have to weigh in here,” Goldstein said. “There’s no option here other than a number of cases where courts hopefully reinstruct us on how the First Amendment is supposed to work.”In the days after Kirk was shot earlier this month, Vice President JD Vance and other top Republicans urged citizens to report people who mock Kirk’s assassination to their employers. Secretary of Education Linda McMahon told Fox News last week that she’d “like to see more” college faculty who celebrate Kirk’s death fired or suspended.Some Democrats have shared similar sentiments. In Iowa, a leading Democratic gubernatorial candidate echoed calls to remove the Oskaloosa teacher. “I’d be pretty uncomfortable with my kids having teachers that celebrated someone’s murder,” Rob Sand, the candidate and current state auditor, told the Des Moines Register this week. Because the cases involve public employees, the employers have a higher bar to meet before firing them for speaking out, legal experts say. They will have to show the staff members’ posts created a disruption that interfered with classes, for instance, or the operation of a school. Goldstein said generating controversy or complaints is typically not enough to warrant a firing. Michael Hook, the University of South Dakota art professor, deleted his remarks after a few hours, and shared an apology that stated he regretted the original post. Through his lawyer, Hook declined to be interviewed.Hook filed a motion Tuesday to get an emergency order to block the university from moving forward with the next step in his termination process. He alleges his firing stems from angering “the wrong people,” noting that the governor and speaker of the state house had called for his termination. “When I read this post, I was shaking mad,” Gov. Larry Rhoden, a Republican, posted on X.An online petition to reinstate Hook has over 8,000 signatures.In many cases, Goldstein said, the teachers’ punishment seems disproportionate to their alleged offense, noting that an inappropriate post could be flagged without termination.“It’s very weird to live in a world where Charlie’s wife can forgive the shooter,” Goldstein said, “but we can’t forgive a teacher who quoted him.”Tyler KingkadeTyler Kingkade is a national reporter for NBC News, based in Los Angeles.
October 7, 2025
Nobel Physics prize awarded to U.S. trio for discoveries in quantum mechanics
Comments are closed.
Scroll To Top
  • Home
  • Travel
  • Culture
  • Lifestyle
  • Sport
  • Contact Us
  • Politics
© Copyright 2025 - Be That ! . All Rights Reserved