The suspect in a brutal killing outside a Fort Myers, Florida, gas station has been captured, becoming another statistic in the national immigration debate, after federal officials confirmed the suspect had been released into the United States and later shielded from deportation. Rolbert Joachim, a Haitian national, is accused of murdering Nilufa Easmin, known to friends and family as Yasmeen, by bludgeoning her with a hammer outside the Chevron station where she worked. The attack, captured on surveillance video, unfolded in broad daylight. This criminal illegal alien from Haiti BARBARICALLY MURDERED an innocent woman by hitting her in the head multiple times with a hammer. He was RELEASED into our nation by the Biden administration. Not only did they release this heinous murderer into our communities, but they… https://t.co/vbIKRNiIgx pic.twitter.com/P6NgTzCUQy — Homeland Security (@DHSgov) April 7, 2026 According to the Department of Homeland Security, Joachim first entered the U.S. in August 2022 and was “caught and released” at the border. Later that same year, an immigration judge issued a final order of removal against him. But instead of being deported, DHS says he was allowed to remain in the country under Temporary Protected Status, which expired in 2024. “This illegal alien barbarically hit this woman in the head multiple times with a hammer,” said Acting DHS Assistant Secretary Lauren Bis. “This heinous murderer was released into the country by the Biden administration. Not only did the administration release him, but they then gave him temporary protected status. Their reckless immigration policies cost this woman her life.” Surveillance footage shows Joachim allegedly smashing a car windshield in the gas station parking lot. That vehicle, according to coworkers, belonged to Easmin. Moments later, she walked outside to confront him. He then rushed toward her and struck her in the head with a hammer. She collapsed, and investigators say he struck her repeatedly again. Police launched an intensive manhunt, ultimately locating Joachim nearby. “I would just say one word — persistence,” a Fort Myers police official said. “We were not going home until we found him. We had a cop on every single block in the last confirmed area, and we used every resource — from aviation support to canine units to boots on the ground.” Joachim is now in custody and being held without bond. Immigration and Customs Enforcement has placed a detainer on him, and DHS says he will be deported following the resolution of his case. Neighbors described her as kind, devout, and consistent in her daily routine. “She was good,” said M.D. Islam, a local man who knew her. “She came and did her prayer in the morning … just minutes before the attack.” “Everybody right now is sad,” Islam added. “Not only me or my Bangladeshi community — all of us. People around the world are very sad to see this news.” A growing memorial now sits outside the gas station on Martin Luther King Jr. Boulevard and Highland Avenue, where flowers and candles mark the place where Easmin was killed. But alongside mourning, the case is raising broader questions, particularly about how an individual ordered deported was able to remain in the country. According to DHS, Joachim’s case reflects a wider system that has relied on release mechanisms and temporary protections rather than immediate removal. An immigration judge had already determined Joachim should be removed, yet he remained in the country for years after that order, long enough, tragically, for the April 3 killing to occur. For neighbors like Islam, the policy debate is secondary to the senselessness of the violence. “I don’t know why some people become like this,” he said. “I cannot explain.”

This piece is part of MI x DW, a collaboration that brings Daily Wire readers exclusive commentary and research from the Manhattan Institute’s world-class team of scholars. In this piece, originally published in City Journal, Christopher Rufo and Kenneth Schrupp investigate California’s IHSS home-care program, arguing that weak oversight has allowed massive fraud while politically connected unions profit from its expansion. * * * California Governor Gavin Newsom is embroiled in a national fraud scandal. Thus far, much of the coverage has focused on alleged schemes related to unemployment insurance, hospice care, and food stamps. In this exclusive investigation, we shine a light on one of California’s largest initiatives: the In-Home Supportive Services Program, or IHSS, which pays family members and other individuals to provide home-based care for the elderly and disabled — at a cost of nearly $30 billion per year. On the surface, IHSS presents itself as an instrument of compassion, directing billions to caregivers who help with cooking, personal care, laundry, and other daily needs inside recipients’ homes. But a growing number of experts and critics argue that the program is rife with fraud, losing roughly an estimated $6 billion to $12 billion yearly to scammers. Meantime, the state’s powerful home-care unions collect more than $149 million in membership dues, funneling money into the political network supporting Newsom and California Democrats. This is the story of a government that has allowed compassion to become a mask for fraud, creating a self-reinforcing system that keeps the Democratic establishment in power. In 1973, California created what became the IHSS program to provide in-home care to the elderly and disabled. The IHSS caseload exploded in the 1980s, prompting the state to impose hour caps on care providers. California offers the program through Medi-Cal, its version of Medicaid, and pays providers with a combination of federal, state, and county funds. IHSS has long been considered a magnet for fraud. In 2009, then-Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger estimated that up to 25 percent of IHSS claims were fraudulent. A Sacramento grand jury report that year found that providers had “no meaningful oversight, no assessment of skills to meet client needs, no monitoring of the validity of service hours, and no background checks.” After growth of the program’s rolls exploded in the early 2000s, Schwarzenegger signed legislation aimed at curbing abuse, requiring IHSS providers to undergo criminal background checks and introducing random claim reviews. But soon after the law’s passage, a state workgroup, teaming with representatives from “labor organizations,” introduced a key loophole. Citing concerns about disruptions for “vulnerable members of the IHSS community,” the task force barred regulators from conducting fully randomized, unannounced home visits, leaving the program more exposed to scammers. Since then, the program has expanded dramatically again. “IHSS provider” has become the largest low-wage occupation statewide, with more than 800,000 taxpayer-funded caregivers offering everything from grocery shopping to personal care. Applying for IHSS care is straightforward. First, a prospective beneficiary files a California Department of Social Services application. Second, a county social worker visits his home to determine his need for care. Third, the county or public authority reviews the application and, if it approves, designates the applicant as a beneficiary, who can then use taxpayer funds to hire the caregiver of his choice — in more than 70 percent of cases, a direct family member. The system operates largely on trust. Providers self-report their timecards and check-in records. In roughly 60 percent of cases, providers and beneficiaries live together, delivering care in private homes — typically without the threat of random, unannounced visits. County-level fraud controls appear to be lacking. State regulations prevent IHSS staff from making unannounced visits unless a whistleblower files a “specific” complaint or regulators identify clear red flags. Even when complaints are lodged, investigations apparently can be slow, and prosecutions slower still. According to the state’s Department of Social Services, for one 12-month period between 2023 and 2024, counties received nearly 7,000 fraud complaints; 28 counties recorded 964 fraud investigations, resulting in just 39 cases prosecuted. County-level regulators face additional problems. A 2021 Riverside County audit claimed that the local IHSS program did “not adhere to review and approval procedures for program integrity referrals.” In addition, more than 60 percent of county staff at the Department of Public Social Services, which, according to the auditor, handles program oversight, were IHSS providers themselves — meaning they had an interest in maintaining the status quo. California, in other words, is sending billions of dollars per year to a program that is easy to exploit, difficult to administer, and almost impossible to supervise. In 2024, the federal government began a series of enforcement actions. As part of a nationwide crackdown on health-care-related crimes, the United States Department of Justice announced prosecutions for alleged IHSS fraud in California. In one case, the DOJ alleged that San Dimas resident Giacomo Lorenzo Garbarino billed the state for more than $170,000 in fraudulent IHSS and Medi-Cal services over a five-year period. The patient in his care was reportedly hospitalized or living in a facility at the time and thus ineligible for IHSS reimbursement. In another case, Joseph Depiazza allegedly billed the state for more than $50,000 in fraudulent IHSS services. According to prosecutors, he kept submitting claims after the patient entered the hospital — and even after she had died. Last year, federal officials announced another round of IHSS fraud prosecutions. In one case, prosecutors alleged that Maryam Erambakhsh falsely claimed payments for caring for her parents while they were outside the United States. In another, Cindy Lynn Fromm allegedly billed the program for more than a year of services while the recipient was incarcerated. These cases may be the tip of the iceberg. Haywood Talcove, CEO of LexisNexis Risk Solutions for Government and a nationally recognized fraud expert, estimates that annual IHSS fraud could amount to 20 percent to 40 percent of total program spending. Applied to projected IHSS outlays for fiscal year 2025–26, that suggests roughly $6 billion to $12 billion in losses. Multiple senior officials at the Department of Health and Human Services have described a similar pattern, estimating that about 25 percent of the Medi-Cal budget is lost to fraud. The share is likely higher for IHSS, given the program’s structure and its susceptibility to abuse. Earlier this year, Mehmet Oz, head of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, set off a firestorm of controversy with the claim that criminal networks, including the “Russian Armenian mafia,” were running massive hospice and home care scams in Los Angeles. He suggested that Armenians in Los Angeles were disproportionately represented among the leaders of hospice fraud rings. One red flag for social-services fraud, Talcove suggested, is high community usage rates, and Armenian speakers in Los Angeles do appear to be significantly overrepresented among the county’s IHSS providers and recipients. Armenian speakers represent 14.6 percent of IHSS recipients and 6.5 percent of IHSS caregivers, per state data. People who speak Armenian fluently and English less than “very well,” however, make up just 0.8 percent of L.A. County’s population, according to Census data. Assuming that these Armenian speakers are identical to self-reported Armenian speakers in IHSS data, Armenian speakers who speak English less than “very well” are 18 times more likely to be IHSS recipients and eight times likelier to be IHSS caregivers than their share of the county population would suggest. These high utilization rates do not, on their own, prove fraud. But analysts such as Talcove argue that “organized criminal groups” are “taking advantage of the program at scale.” Using a conservative 25 percent fraud estimate — within Talcove’s range and consistent with HHS officials’ broader Medi-Cal assessments — scammers may have siphoned at least $35 billion from IHSS during Gavin Newsom’s administration. “There’s virtually no incentive for them to stop,” Talcove said. “California has limited to no controls in place.” Perhaps the biggest beneficiaries of California’s IHSS program are labor unions, which have enrolled more than 600,000 IHSS providers. Two leading unions for the state’s in-home care workforce, SEIU Local 2015 and United Domestic Workers (UDW), collectively raked in more than $149 million in dues in 2024. Both have a direct stake in the program’s expansion, since every new IHSS worker is a potential dues-paying member. These unions are some of the most powerful institutions in California politics and collectively send millions of dollars to the state’s Democratic establishment. SEIU Local 2015 contributed $2 million to Newsom’s anti-recall campaign; spent another $2 million in favor of Proposition 50, a measure to redraw the state’s congressional districts in favor of Democrats; and donated over $90,000 to Newsom across his two campaign years. UDW donated $20,000 to Newsom’s 2022 reelection campaign. Both unions have contributed heavily to Democrats. SEIU Local 2015 and United Domestic Workers of America have also allegedly used coercive tactics to expand their membership. Nathan Vu, a caregiver in San Diego, says that UDW pressured him to join during his IHSS orientation in February 2024. Though he says he declined, the union allegedly began deducting dues from his paycheck anyway. “I vividly remember not wanting to enroll in the union,” Vu said. “I specifically said no.” Vu says he told UDW to stop deducting dues and demanded that they provide a copy of his membership agreement and proof of authorization. UDW, he claims, provided neither and kept deducting dues for a full year before terminating his membership. UDW did not respond to our request for comment. SEIU 2015, which claims to represent “thousands of long-term care workers,” has allegedly one-upped UDW. According to one former member, the group locked IHSS workers in a room and “coerced” at least one to become a member. In a sworn statement filed as part of a lawsuit against the union, Chaquan May alleges that, in September 2023, the union “coerced” her into signing up for a membership at an IHSS orientation. May claimed that union employees locked the doors and told her and the other new IHSS providers, “we’re waiting for everyone to sign … no one is leaving until everyone signs.” May claimed to have signed under duress. On September 3, 2024, she alleged, the union began deducting dues. She claimed to have sent a certified-mail opt-out letter the following day, which the union allegedly ignored. SEIU Local 2015, which did not respond to our request for comment, allegedly continued deducting dues from her paycheck until at least April 2025. Unfortunately for May and other allegedly mistreated IHSS workers, these disputes between public employees and their unions are handled by the California Public Employment Relations Board (PERB). Each of the board’s five members is appointed by the governor, and three of the current members have former union ties. “The Public Employment Relations Board is run by former union officials,” said Shella Alcabes, a lawyer representing May and other plaintiffs. “You think I’m going to get a fair hearing there? Absolutely not.” The system itself seems designed to prevent accountability. Governor Newsom is responsible for all the main components of the IHSS operation: he oversees the program, the enforcement, and, effectively, the Public Employment Relations Board. He has no incentive to crack down on a program that is enriching his most powerful allies, and, according to coauthor Schrupp’s reporting, is responsible for more than 40 percent of the net jobs created during his administration. And so, the system expands. Despite making some initial noise about reforming the program last year, for this upcoming budget season, Governor Newsom has sought to increase IHSS funding by an additional $1.1 billion, to a total of $33.4 billion, boasting that his administration has invested billions of state taxpayer dollars into the program. (When we reached out to Newsom’s office for this story, a California Department of Social Services spokesman said that “[f]raud in the IHSS program is not widespread.”) Given these political realities, the only plausible check on IHSS may come from Washington. The Trump administration could condition federal funding on rigorous audits and structural reforms. HHS Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. could require California to mandate re-registration of all caregivers and recipients using third-party identity verification and expand random, unannounced visits. Absent such intervention, the corruption in California is unlikely to abate. It will take a countervailing authority — willing to confront not only fraudsters but also the political system that sustains them — to force meaningful change. * * * Christopher F. Rufo is a senior fellow at the Manhattan Institute, a contributing editor of City Journal, and the author of America’s Cultural Revolution. Kenneth Schrupp is an investigative reporter at City Journal.

In the 2009 corporate comedy film Up in the Air, George Clooney, playing a frequent-flyer-obsessed downsizing consultant, coaches a new colleague on the quickest path through airport security. “Never get behind old people. Their bodies are littered with hidden metal, and they never seem to appreciate how little time they have left. Bingo, Asians. They pack light, travel efficiently, and they have a thing for slip-on shoes. Gotta love ’em,” he says. If Clooney’s character were traveling in American airports today, even the slickest stereotyping strategy or high-miler status wouldn’t save him from long queues, especially in near-routine government shutdowns. That’s because airport security has, like too many things in our daily lives, been ceded to funding, management, and control by Washington, D.C., staffed by blue-gloved agents of the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) under the Department of Homeland Security. And as with every government shutdown, disappearing checks for TSA screeners means fewer agents on duty while lines balloon. President Donald Trump’s latest budget request for DHS includes an eyebrow-raising suggestion that many of us have waited for far too long: putting airport security back in private hands. Specifically, Trump’s plan would shift TSA from operating airport security to serving as a regulator, resulting in $52 million in net savings while expanding the Screening Partnership Program already in place at nearly two dozen airports. That includes major hubs like San Francisco (SFO) and Kansas City, which were immune to shutdown-induced security slowdowns that caused chaos at other airports. The arguments about putting TSA on the chopping block are not a new invention of the Trump era or even fever dreams of libertarian think tanks. Even the godfather of the TSA recognized that it became a bureaucratic behemoth within just a decade of its creation. U.S. Rep. John Mica (R-FL), an architect of early TSA legislation, later regretted the agency’s creation, calling it his “little bastard child.” “The whole thing is a complete fiasco,” Mica said. He advocated dismantling the agency entirely and privatizing airport security. His own committee found the switch could save taxpayers as much as 40%. But we should go further than that. While we’re at it, give me more private airports like in other parts of the world. Europeans are simply better (airport) capitalists than us in America. Many of them are even listed on the stock markets. According to the Airport Council International, 41% of European airports have some private sector involvement in airport ownership, representing nearly three-quarters of all passenger volume. In North America, meanwhile, we have a paltry 2 percent of our airports with any private investment. Transitioning to a model in which airports would not only manage their own security operations but also open their ownership and management to public-private partnerships and more accountable private firms is an idea many travelers should welcome. And taxpayers even more. With transparent private competition, answerable to airports and travelers rather than agency budgets, the American traveler would once again feel like traveling is a joyful and pleasant experience rather than a bureaucratic nightmare. Just because Congress voted to federalize airline security in the wake of 9/11 does not mean that we have somehow forgotten how to properly screen for security threats at airports without large government bureaucracies. The model already exists and seems to please the Silicon Valley fliers out of San Francisco just fine without any measurable drop in security effectiveness. Congress should follow the Trump administration’s lead by extending the program to every willing airport and creating a clear pathway for greater private involvement. Not just screening, but ownership and operation. Let airports raise private capital, compete for travelers, and answer to passengers instead of appropriations committees. Defunding the TSA and redefining its role as a regulator won’t end airport security. It will just make it work. Let’s give it a shot. *** Yaël Ossowski is deputy director of the Consumer Choice Center.

Nancy Grace is the host of “Crime Stories with Nancy Grace,” and she’s been bringing justice to victims of violent crime for years — both through her television programs and before that in court as a prosecutor. She’s opinionated and thorough. Empathetic and vulnerable. In an interview with me yesterday, she didn’t hold back on her thoughts on how the Nancy Guthrie case is being handled in Pima County — but first, Grace dove into the new ransom notes sent to her friend Harvey Levin at TMZ. “I think the last two are bids for money by hyena,” Grace told me Tuesday.  “Is it real? If it is real, why don’t they just accept the 1.2 plus million dollar reward for information leading to Miss Guthrie’s whereabouts?” The “Crime Stories With Nancy Grace” host did not like how the author of the recent notes sent to TMZ insinuated the Nancy Guthrie case was going cold. “Just because some ‘a-hole’ out of nowhere that floats down out of the ether says it’s cold does not mean it’s cold,” Grace said. TMZ received two more ransom notes from a repeat sender claiming to know where the 84-year-old is. The other ransom notes that came with a deadline to TMZ are from the kidnapper, according to what the FBI told Levin. Grace has her theories on those notes, too. “I think one likely scenario is that Miss Guthrie passed away before they could see a proof of life,” Grace said. “I thought there was a good chance the deadlines were the kidnapper. Then Savannah confirmed that when she said she believed it. Now why would Savannah believe it? Savannah is very smart. I worked with her at Court TV. She’s not just a pretty face. She’s genuine. She’s real. What you see on TV is real. She really is very kind and gracious, but she’s also a trained lawyer. So for her to come out and say she thought the two ransom notes were real tells me that the FBI and that Harvey Levin is correct. The FBI does think they’re real, because I’m sure Savannah consulted with them and is convinced that they are real. Now, I don’t think that bodes well for Ms. Guthrie. It does not mean she’s passed away, all right, but it does not bode well.” Grace has been following the Guthrie case as she’s followed thousands of cases over her decades-long career. The one case she may be best known for is the Casey Anthony case. Grace covered that case on HLN every day, fighting for justice for two-year-old Caylee Anthony, whose remains were found in December 2008 — months after the toddler was reported missing, which itself came 31 days after she was last seen. “I felt like someone needed to be the voice for Caylee, because all the focus was on ‘Tot Mom,’ Casey Anthony, and Caylee seem to be just like a peripheral player. And I didn’t like that,” Grace said. Grace herself was the victim of a crime when her fiancé was murdered in 1979. The mom of twins — who has been married to her husband since 2007 — still battles the grief and emptiness from the crime that ultimately changed the trajectory of her life. After her fiancé’s death, Grace went back to school to become a prosecutor. She worked in inner-city Atlanta, and she says on a “fluke” landed a TV show with Johnnie Cochran, the famous defense lawyer for O.J. Simpson, who led the “Dream Team” that got Simpson acquitted of murder. “Cochran and Grace” aired on Court TV — and the rest is history. For the full interview, be sure to check out “Talking with the True Crime Queen Nancy Grace” on That’s So Criminal.

DeCarlos Brown Jr., the man accused of fatally stabbing Ukrainian refugee Iryna Zarutska in North Carolina, has been deemed mentally incapable of proceeding to trial in the state murder case. Brown was evaluated at Central Regional Hospital, and a December 29, 2025, report found him “incapable to proceed,” according to court documents. Under North Carolina law, incapacity to proceed involved a court determination of a defendant’s ability to understand the proceedings and assist in their defense. A defendant who is incapable of proceeding in a criminal case cannot be tried or punished by the state, according to the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. On August 22, 2025, Zarutska, 23, was riding the LYNX Blue Line in Charlotte, looking at her phone, when Brown allegedly jumped from his seat, wielding a knife and slashing her multiple times in the neck. The case sparked international outrage over the blue city’s public safety policies and Brown’s lengthy rap sheet, which includes 14 previous arrests for offenses such as armed robbery and assault with a deadly weapon, The Daily Wire previously reported. He served five years for the armed robbery but avoided jail time in several other cases. Two months after the killing, Democratic Gov. Josh Stein signed “Iryna’s Law,” legislation passed by the Republican-led legislature overhauling aspects of the state’s criminal justice system. The law eliminated certain forms of cash-free bail and imposed stricter pretrial release requirements for violent offenses. Brown’s public defender, attorney Daniel Roberts, asked the court to delay his Rule 24 hearing to determine whether state prosecutors intend to seek the death penalty. Brown also faces a federal charge alleging he committed an act of violence resulting in death on a mass transportation system. In September 2025, President Trump called for Brown to face the death penalty. “The ANIMAL who so violently killed the beautiful young lady from Ukraine, who came to America searching for peace and safety, should be given a “Quick” (there is no doubt!) Trial, and only awarded THE DEATH PENALTY. There can be no other option!!! PRESIDENT DONALD J. TRUMP,” Trump said.  Late last year, murals honoring Iryna started popping up nationwide. Elon Musk pledged to donate $1 million to the project.   View this post on Instagram   A post shared by WBTV News (@wbtv_news)