She's Been Arrested — Secretary of State Marco Rubio Gives The Order To Go as ICE Arrests Sister of Top Cuban Regime...
New York City – May 28, 2026
Secretary of State Marco Rubio Orders ICE Arrest of Adys Lastres Morera, Sister of Sanctioned Cuban Regime Official, Citing National Security Threat
New York City, New York — Secretary of State Marco Rubio announced last week that U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement has arrested Adys Lastres Morera in Florida. She is the sister of Ania Guillermina Lastres, a high-ranking official in Cuba’s communist regime.
Lastres Morera was taken into ICE custody and will remain detained pending deportation proceedings. Rubio personally revoked her lawful permanent resident status, determining that her presence in the United States posed a threat to American foreign policy interests.
She entered the country as a lawful permanent resident on January 13, 2023, during the Biden administration.
Rubio, who is of Cuban descent, stated that family members of repressive regimes and other adversaries will no longer receive a free pass to live in the United States.
“For far too long, the family members of terrorist organizations, repressive anti-American regimes, and other bad actors who would threaten the national security of the United States have been given a free pass to enjoy the privileges of living in the United States,” he said in a statement.
“Past Administrations have permitted the families of Cuban military elites, Iranian terrorists, and other reprehensible organizations to enjoy lavish lifestyles in our country funded by stolen blood-money, while the people they repress at home suffer in increasingly dire circumstances.”
“No longer. Under President Trump, we are removing from our country the family members of IRGC terrorists and Cuban regime elites.”
“Let me be very clear: if you threaten the national security of the United States, there will be nowhere on this earth — much less in our country — that you and your cronies can live lavishly.”
“We will find you, and we will hold you accountable.”
On X, Rubio added that Lastres Morera had been managing real estate assets in Florida while aiding Cuba’s regime.
“Adys Lastres Morera is the sister of the Executive President of GAESA, the Cuban military-controlled financial conglomerate that steals millions in aid for the Cuban people at the behest of the regime.”
“Morera was managing real estate assets and living in Florida, while also aiding Havana’s communist regime, until I terminated her permanent resident status.”
“I am pleased to announce that today, she was arrested and is now in the custody of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement.”
“There will be nowhere on this Earth – much less in our country – where foreign nationals who threaten our national security can live lavishly.”
ICE Homeland Security Investigations confirmed that her presence posed potential serious adverse foreign policy consequences.
“Adys Lastres Morera’s presence in the United States has potentially serious adverse foreign policy consequences for our nation, and Secretary of State Marco Rubio has determined that she is removable under the provisions of the Immigration and Nationality Act,” said HSI acting Executive Associate Director John Condon.
“Allowing Lastres Morera to remain in the country would send a signal that Cuban regime-affiliated networks could continue to access the U.S.’s financial, educational and social institutions — but that is not the case.”
“HSI will continue to investigate those with ties to our nation’s adversaries and take appropriate actions to neutralize threats against our homeland.”
Ania Guillermina Lastres serves as president of Grupo de Administración Empresarial (GAESA), the military-controlled conglomerate that dominates approximately 70 percent of Cuba’s economy. The entity is accused of controlling tourism, remittances, and the Cuban doctor program, while holding up to $20 billion in illicit overseas funds.
The arrest reflects the Trump administration’s broader policy of tightening immigration enforcement against individuals linked to adversarial foreign governments.
6-3 RULING - Supreme Court Deals Brutal Blow to Hakeem Jeffries
Washington, D.C. - June 5, 2026
Supreme Court Allows Alabama to Proceed with New Congressional Map for 2026 Midterms
The U.S. Supreme Court issued an unsigned 6-3 order on Tuesday permitting Alabama to use a newly enacted congressional district map in the 2026 midterm elections. The decision lifts a lower court injunction and is expected to result in a congressional delegation of six Republicans and one Democrat.
The ruling came after Alabama had already held its congressional primary elections in May. Alabama Gov. Kay Ivey signed legislation authorizing special elections in August for affected districts, contingent on final court approval of the map.
The order relied in part on the Purcell principle, which generally discourages federal courts from altering election rules close to an election. The majority stated that the district court had improperly intervened in Alabama’s efforts to conduct its elections under maps selected by the state’s elected representatives. The court noted that while federal courts should avoid last-minute changes, states retain authority to determine whether such adjustments serve their interests.
Connection to Voting Rights Act Precedent
The decision follows a 6-3 ruling issued by the Supreme Court on April 29 regarding the Voting Rights Act. That earlier decision established that claims alleging racial discrimination in districting generally require plaintiffs to demonstrate a strong inference of intentional discrimination before proceeding with litigation.
The current order addresses ongoing redistricting litigation in Alabama. The new map is anticipated to alter the composition of the state’s seven-member congressional delegation. Democratic Representatives Shomari Figures of the 2nd District and Terri Sewell of the 7th District are currently the only Black members of Alabama’s House delegation. The new configuration could affect representation in one of those districts.
Dissenting Opinion
The three liberal justices dissented from the unsigned order. Justice Sonia Sotomayor wrote that the majority’s approach had created turmoil and harm. She argued that the court was doubling down on prior decisions that she viewed as undermining protections under the Voting Rights Act.
Broader Redistricting Context
The Alabama case is one of several redistricting disputes before the Supreme Court involving states such as Louisiana, Texas, Virginia, and California. With control of the U.S. House expected to be closely contested, these cases have taken on added significance for both parties ahead of the November elections.
The Supreme Court’s recent interventions have already influenced district boundaries in multiple states. Additional litigation remains pending, and further developments could continue to shape the partisan balance of the House in the upcoming midterm cycle.
The Alabama order permits the state to move forward with its chosen map while legal proceedings on related matters continue. The full impact on the composition of Alabama’s congressional delegation will depend on the outcome of the August special elections and any subsequent legal challenges.
GHOST VOTERS' REVEALED — California Elections Rocked After Stunning Discovery
Sacramento, California - June 5, 2026
Lawsuit Filed Against California Secretary of State Alleging Failure to Remove Inactive Voter Registrations
A federal lawsuit has been filed against California Secretary of State Shirley Weber alleging that the state has failed to remove hundreds of thousands of inactive voter registrations from its rolls in violation of federal law. The complaint was brought by Orange County Supervisor Don Wagner, a Republican candidate for Secretary of State, and the American Independent Party of California, with assistance from Judicial Watch.
The lawsuit claims that California has not removed approximately 873,092 inactive voter registrations as required under the National Voter Registration Act. Federal law mandates that states remove certain registrations after voters fail to participate in multiple consecutive federal election cycles and do not respond to address verification notices.
Court filings state that more than 873,000 registrations remained on the rolls despite being inactive through at least three consecutive federal elections. The complaint further alleges that over 151,000 registrations remained active after four consecutive election cycles without voter participation.
California maintains more than 23 million registered voters, the largest voter registration system in the United States. Plaintiffs argue that the state’s practices violate requirements under the National Voter Registration Act for maintaining accurate voter lists.
Previous Actions and Current Allegations
In 2019, Judicial Watch reached a settlement with California and Los Angeles County that resulted in the removal of more than 1.2 million inactive voter registrations. The current lawsuit contends that similar issues persist across much of the state despite those prior efforts.
The complaint notes that 20 California counties removed 50 or fewer inactive registrations over a recent period, even as census data showed substantial population shifts and migration out of the state.
The lawsuit seeks a court order requiring California to implement a more aggressive program for removing registrations that no longer meet federal eligibility requirements. It also asks the court to prevent future violations of federal election law.
State Response and Context
California officials have maintained that the state’s election system includes multiple safeguards, including signature matching, voter identification checks where required, and criminal penalties for fraud. State representatives have stated that the system is secure and employs verification procedures designed to prevent illegal voting.
The lawsuit was filed amid ongoing scrutiny of California’s election processes. Recent incidents include damage to a mail ballot drop box that was vandalized and set on fire, as well as a report of an unsecured ballot center in the Bay Area discovered by a voter outside normal operating hours.
The case will proceed in federal court, where judges will evaluate whether California’s voter registration maintenance practices comply with federal requirements. The outcome could affect procedures ahead of future elections, including the November general election.
