The temporary restrictions, which were put into effect at noon Monday, extend from the western boundary of unincorporated Jefferson County through the eastern limits of Golden, including Vanover Park.

Kayaks, river boards, whitewater canoes and multi-chambered professionally guided rafts are exempt but are encouraged to take extreme caution due to the safety concerns surrounding swift moving water and floating debris. All authorized users and occupants must use a Type I, Type III or Type V Coast Guard-approved flotation vest and helmet.

Water height and flows are expected to rise as the heavy snowpack continues to melt in the coming days.

The restrictions will be strictly enforced and violators may be issued a summons for a class 2 petty offense, punishable by a fine of up to $100.

Get more Colorado news by signing up for our daily Your Morning Dozen email newsletter.

Evans, who represents Colorado’s competitive 8th Congressional District, criticized the state’s “radical leftist leaders” in a news release Monday after his resolution passed, saying they have enacted laws that “prioritize illegal immigrants over public safety.”

“The passing of my resolution ensures we condemn all acts of antisemitism and affirms that the free and open collaboration between state and local law enforcement with their federal counterparts is key in preventing future attacks like this,” he said.

All Republicans in Colorado’s congressional delegation voted in favor, except Lauren Boebert, who did not vote.

How is the Colorado congressional delegation voting?

One-hundred-thirteen Democrats, including Colorado's U.S. Reps. Jason Crow and Diana DeGette, voted against Evans' measure. The other two Democrats in Colorado's congressional delegation, U.S. Reps. Brittany Pettersen and Joe Neguse, voted in favor.

DeGette, in a news release, said Evans' resolution "exploits this incident to demonize migrants, celebrate ICE and ignore the real concerns of Jewish Americans."

She said she sided with a separate resolution introduced by Neguse that also condemns the attack but doesn't mention the alleged perpetrator, Mohamed Sabry Soliman, the Egyptian national who used Molotov cocktails to injure more than a dozen people -- some severely -- who were marching along the Pearl Street Mall in solidarity with hostages still being held captive by the militant group Hamas in Gaza.

Soliman faces 118 charges, including dozens of counts of attempted first-degree murder and first-degree assault.

Neguse's resolution has not yet received a vote in the House.

A third resolution introduced by New Jersey Republican U.S. Rep. Jeff Van Drew that condemned the Boulder attack and called for combating antisemitism in the United States passed the House on Monday by a 400-0 vote.

Evans' resolution lays out the various immigrant violations that authorities say were committed by Soliman, 45, since he first came to the country in 2022. He was living in Colorado Springs when authorities say he drove to Boulder on June 1 and targeted the hostage-advocacy group Run for Their Lives.

The attack, the resolution states, "demonstrates the dangers of not removing from the country aliens who fail to comply with the terms of their visas." And it "expresses gratitude to law enforcement officers, including U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement personnel, for protecting the homeland."

The votes on the competing resolutions came after a weekend of increasing violence and chaos in Los Angeles, as protesters demonstrated -- and in some cases rioted -- in response to federal immigration authorities acting under orders from the Trump administration arresting groups of suspected immigrants on Friday.

Protesters standing above the closed southbound 101 Freeway threw chunks of concrete, rocks, electric scooters and fireworks at California Highway Patrol officers and their vehicles that were parked on the highway. Officers ran under an overpass to take cover.

Nearby, at least four self-driving Waymo cars were set on fire, sending large plumes of black smoke into the sky and exploding intermittently as the electric vehicles burned.

Stay up-to-date with Colorado Politics by signing up for our weekly newsletter, The Spot.

Questions mounted, too, over the legality of the governor’s move to turn over personal information to the agency leading the Trump administration’s mass deportation efforts, prompting a news conference that drew advocates as well as state lawmakers. Last week, a state official sued Polis to try to stop his office from responding to the subpoena from an arm of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement.

“We are outraged as state employees that our governor wanted us to actively support that assault on our community and (make) us, as state workers, accomplices in an illegal and morally reprehensible act,” Colorado WINS president Diane Byrne said during the news conference outside Denver city hall.

The frustration with Polis comes amid deepening division around federal immigration enforcement nationally. Marines and National Guard troops have been deployed in Los Angeles in response to protests against immigration enforcement. Speakers in Denver on Monday called for the release of a California labor leader who was injured and arrested by immigration authorities over the weekend.

Colorado WINS, along with the state’s AFL-CIO chapter, is set to join the lawsuit filed by Scott Moss, a director within the state Department of Labor and Employment, accusing Polis of violating state law that regulates how information can be shared with immigration authorities.

The suit accuses Polis of personally deciding to turn over personal information about the sponsors of unaccompanied, undocumented children to Immigration and Customs Enforcement, despite Moss’ protests in internal discussions that it was illegal and would violate the trust of immigrants.

Polis’ office has maintained that it can legally turn over the information because the subpoena is part of a “specific” criminal investigation regarding child abuse.

But his office has not provided evidence supporting that claim, beyond pointing to the subpoena itself. A copy of the subpoena obtained by The Denver Post does not describe a specific criminal investigation. It cites a civil statute related to deportations and describes “investigative activities” intended to proactively check on children and ensure their safety, rather than a response to allegations of abuse.

On Monday, Polis spokeswoman Shelby Wieman pointed to a recent statement from the U.S. Department of Homeland Security about its efforts to check on children. The agency said it had found cases of child exploitation and abuse elsewhere among unaccompanied minors.

“These welfare checks are not primarily immigration enforcement focused,” DHS wrote of its efforts to find and contact undocumented children, “but if ICE agents or officers encounter individuals who are in the United States illegally, they take them into custody and process them for removal in accordance with federal immigration law.”

Several Democratic lawmakers attended Monday’s press conference, which came shortly after an initial court hearing in Moss’ lawsuit. One legislator — Sen. Julie Gonzales of Denver — questioned how Polis “can continue to think that he can lead our state.”

She later deflected when asked if she was calling on Polis to resign.

Questions about investigation

Moss’ first hearing in Denver District Court was a largely administrative affair, with a more determinative hearing set for June 23.

Moss alleges that Polis initially declined to comply with a subpoena sent in late April by ICE, which sought employment and personal information about the sponsors of unaccompanied and undocumented children.

But, Moss wrote, the governor later “personally” decided to fulfill the request and ordered Moss and other state employees to comply. The subpoena, which is not signed by a judge, seeks personal information about the sponsors, who are typically relatives caring for the kids while they await deportation proceedings.

Polis’ reversal came shortly after he signed Senate Bill 276, which expands restrictions in the law limiting how state employees can share data with immigration authorities.

Polis’ decision violates state law, Moss alleges. He’s asking a judge to rule that Polis’ request is illegal. Through his lawyer, Polis has agreed not to fulfill the subpoena until a judge rules on the legality of the governor’s directive.

Wieman said the state — after allegedly resolving not to respond to the subpoena for roughly a month — now regretted the delay caused by Moss’ lawsuit.

Polis’ office repeatedly maintained that it could fulfill the subpoena because it was related to a “specific … investigation regarding child exploitation, abuse, and trafficking,” spokesman Eric Maruyama said Thursday. State law allows information-sharing with ICE if the information is part of a criminal investigation or if the subpoena is signed by a judge.

The subpoena refers to “investigative activities” and states that ICE is seeking employment information of sponsors “to ensure that these children are appropriately located, properly cared for, and are not subjected to crimes of human trafficking or other forms of exploitation.” The subpoena does not provide any indication that ICE has received allegations that misconduct is taking place. It does not reference a specific criminal investigation.

Above that description is a box that ICE officials could check if the subpoena was “in regard to an investigation involving child exploitation and/or transmission of child pornography via the internet.” The box is not checked. The statute cited in the subpoena relates to civil immigration enforcement and the “expedited removal of inadmissible arriving aliens.”

A spokesman for ICE did not return a message seeking comment last week.

“There is nothing on the face of the subpoena that suggests that this is related to a criminal investigation,” David Seligman, whose nonprofit law firm Towards Justice also joined Moss’ suit, said Monday.

Lawmakers also asked for details

Polis spokeswoman Wieman said Monday that officials carefully considered the state’s response “in accordance with Colorado law.”

When repeatedly asked if Polis’ office had received any evidence or indication of a specific ICE investigation into child abuse, Wieman pointed to the subpoena’s reference to “investigative activities.” She said that “specifics of the investigation are not typically shared while the investigation is ongoing.”

“If there are people criminally exploiting the children, the Governor wants to ensure they are held fully accountable to the law, which could include prosecution and deportation if they are here illegally,” Wieman wrote.

Rep. Lorena Garcia, an Adams County Democrat who co-sponsored the bill expanding the state’s rules around sharing information with ICE, said she asked Polis’ chief of staff and one of his attorneys about the subpoena last week.

She was told, she said, that Polis’ office “believed” there was an investigation. When Garcia and other lawmakers asked for evidence of such an investigation, they didn’t receive any, she said.

“What I took from that conversation was that they were making an assumption because (ICE) is making a request,” Garcia said.

The question may become central to Polis’ defense against Moss’ lawsuit. On Monday, Moss’ lawyer, Laura Wolf, asked Denver District Judge A. Bruce Jones to compel Polis’ office to provide evidence of the criminal investigation that Polis has said he is eager to support.

Jones declined to do so. But if Polis or his office testifies about an investigation without evidence supporting its existence, Jones said, he would exclude that testimony.

Polis is being represented in Moss’ lawsuit by a private attorney, not by the office of Attorney General Phil Weiser. Polis spokesman Maruyama said last week that Weiser’s office had provided unspecified legal advice about the subpoena and was thus conflicted out of representing Polis.

A spokesman for Weiser, who is currently defending the state’s immigration laws against a Trump administration lawsuit, declined to say what legal counsel the AG’s office had provided.

Stay up-to-date with Colorado Politics by signing up for our weekly newsletter, The Spot.

Lindell also continued his attacks against Eric Coomer, the former Dominion Voting Systems executive, even as he sought to distance himself from claims that he specifically coordinated attacks against Coomer at a 2021 convention Lindell organized about the conspiracy theory.

Lindell attacked Coomer as merely seeking money and grinding a political ax.

“(I) cost Dr. Coomer what?” Lindell said in response to a question from one of Coomer’s attorneys. “He’s out there suing people for money.”

Coomer filed suit against Lindell in April 2022. He accused Lindell of defaming him in a series of statements and media appearances, causing emotional and physical distress and costing him his career in election security.

Lindell has accused Coomer of treason and said he belongs in jail for being “part of the biggest crime this world has ever seen.” Lindell doubled down on his attacks against Coomer from the witness stand — but argued many of the more salacious statements were because Coomer sued him and Lindell was angry about the “lawfare.”

However, Coomer notes in his lawsuit that Lindell tied him to wider conspiracies about Denver-based Dominion Voting Systems and called him “treasonous” as early as May 2021.

An attorney for Lindell, upon cross-examination, asked if Lindell was perhaps being hyperbolic with some of his rhetoric. Lindell responded that, “In my mind, it’s pretty big. Now, if that’s hyperbole, that’s subjective, I suppose.”

Coomer accuses Lindell of parroting remarks that started with Colorado-based podcaster Joe Oltmann and broadcasting them to a wider audience. Oltmann accused “Eric, the Dominion guy” of coordinating with forces opposed to President Donald Trump to deny his reelection in 2020.

Oltmann repeated the statements during a panel at Lindell’s “Cyber Syposium” that was held in South Dakota in August 2021. On the stand Monday, Lindell sought to distance himself from Oltmann’s statements then. Lindell said he had lost his voice, and left the organizing of the Oltmann’s panel to other people.

“Who put them up there, to this day, I could not tell you,” Lindell said.

“So that’s another thing you’re not taking responsibility for,” Coomer’s attorney, Charles J. Cain, said. “You’re not taking responsibility for what you’ve done to Dr. Coomer, and you’re not taking responsibility for who got up on your stage.”

Coomer’s lawsuit is being heard by a jury in U.S. District Court in Denver. Coomer is asking for a retraction of all defamatory remarks made by Lindell and monetary damages.

Dominion has filed its own series of lawsuits over allegations it rigged the 2020 election against Trump. The company settled one lawsuit with Fox News for nearly $800 million.

Coomer has accused Lindell of seeking to profit from his alleged defamation. His legal team cited examples of him offering promo codes associated with election fraud claims, including this case.

Lindell said his pillow company is on “the razor’s edge” in the fallout of him becoming the face of election fraud and that he now has to borrow money to make payroll.

Testimony resumes Tuesday, and the trial is expected to continue through this week.

Stay up-to-date with Colorado Politics by signing up for our weekly newsletter, The Spot.

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Pentagon was scrambling Monday to establish rules to guide U.S. Marines who could be faced with the rare and difficult prospect of using force against citizens on American soil, now that the Trump administration is deploying active duty troops to the immigration raid protests in Los Angeles.

U.S. Northern Command said it is sending 700 Marines into the Los Angeles area to protect federal property and personnel, including federal immigration agents. The 2nd Battalion, 7th Marines are coming from Twentynine Palms, California, and will augment about 2,100 National Guard soldiers in LA responding to the protests.

The forces have been trained in deescalation, crowd control and standing rules for the use of force, Northern Command said.

But the use of the active duty forces still raises difficult questions.

The Marines are highly trained in combat and crisis response, with time in conflict zones like Syria and Afghanistan. But that is starkly different from the role they will face now: They could potentially be hit by protesters carrying gas canisters and have to quickly decide how to respond or face decisions about protecting an immigration enforcement agent from crowds.

According to a U.S. official, troops will be armed with their normal service weapons but will not be carrying tear gas. They also will have protective equipment such as helmets, shields and gas masks.

When troops are overseas, how they can respond to threats is outlined by the rules of engagement. At home, they are guided by standing rules for the use of force, which have to be set and agreed to by Northern Command, and then each Marine should receive a card explaining what they can and cannot do, another U.S. official said.

For example, warning shots would be prohibited, according to use-of-force draft documents viewed by The Associated Press. Marines are directed to deescalate a situation whenever possible but also are authorized to act in self-defense, the documents say.

The AP reviewed documents and interviewed nine U.S. officials, who spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss details not yet public, about the guidance being determined for the Marines.

The Pentagon also is working on a memo with clarifying language for the Marines that will lay out the steps they can take to protect federal personnel and property. Those guidelines also will include specifics on the possibility that they could temporarily detain civilians if troops are under assault or to prevent harm, the first U.S. official said.

Those measures could involve detaining civilians until they can be turned over to law enforcement.

Having the Marines deploy to protect federal buildings allows them to be used without invoking the Insurrection Act, one U.S. official said.

The Insurrection Act allows the president to direct federal troops to conduct law enforcement functions in national emergencies. But the use of that act is extremely rare. Officials said that has not yet been done in this case and that it’s not clear it will be done.

President George H.W. Bush used the Insurrection Act to respond to riots in Los Angeles in 1992 after the acquittal of white police officers who were videotaped beating Black motorist Rodney King.

If their role expands if the violence escalates, it is not clear under what legal authority they would be able to engage, said Elizabeth Goitein, a senior director of the Liberty and National Security Program at the Brennan Center for Justice at NYU Law.

“If in fact those Marines are laying hands on civilians, doing searches, then you have pretty powerful legal concerns,” Goitein said. “No statutory authority Trump has invoked so far permits this.”

Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth tweeted late Saturday that he was considering deploying the Marines to respond to the unrest after getting advice earlier in the day from Gen. Dan Caine, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, according to one of the U.S. officials.

Still, the tweet, which was posted to Hegseth’s personal X account and not to his official government account, caught many inside the Pentagon by surprise. As late as Monday, the military’s highest offices were still considering the potential ramifications.

But the Marine Corps were asking broader questions, too: Do they send more senior, experienced personnel so as not to put newer, less experienced troops at risk of potentially making a judgment call on whether to use force against a civilian?

What’s lawful under a domestic deployment — where troops may end up in a policing role — is governed by the Fourth Amendment in the U.S. Constitution, which forbids seizure of persons, including temporarily restraining them, unless it could be considered reasonable under the circumstances.

Troops under federal authorities are in general prohibited from conducting law enforcement on U.S. soil under the Posse Comitatus Act.

WASHINGTON (AP) — As the nation’s capital cleans up from the culmination of World Pride this past weekend, focus now shifts to a very different massive event — Saturday’s military parade to honor the 250th birthday of the Army and the 79th birthday of President Donald Trump.

“We’re preparing for an enormous turnout,” said Matt McCool of the Secret Service’s Washington Field office, who said more than 18 miles of “anti-scale fencing” would be erected and “multiple drones” would be in the air. The entire District of Columbia is normally a no-fly zone for drones.

Army officials have estimated around 200,000 attendees for the evening military parade, and McCool said he was prepared for “hundreds of thousands” of people.

“We have a ton of magnetometers,” he said. “If a million people show up, then we’re going to have some lines.”

A total of 175 magnetometers would be used at security checkpoints controlling access to the daytime birthday festival and the nighttime parade. Metropolitan Police Department chief Pamela Smith predicted “major impacts to traffic” and advised attendees to arrive early and consider forgoing cars for the Metro.

“This is a significant event with a large footprint,” she said. “We’re relying on the public to be an extra set of ears and eyes for us.”

The military parade has been designated a National Special Security Event — similar to a presidential inauguration or state funeral. That status is reserved for events that draw large crowds and potential mass protests. It calls for an enhanced degree of high-level coordination among D.C. officials, the FBI, Capitol Police and Washington’s National Guard contingent — with the Secret Service taking the lead.

The Army birthday celebration had already been planned for months. But earlier this spring, Trump announced his intention to transform the event — which coincides with his 79th birthday — into a massive military parade complete with 60-ton M1 Abrams battle tanks and Paladin self-propelled howitzers rolling through the city streets.

Multiple counter-protests of varying sizes are planned for Saturday, with the largest being a mass march to the White House dubbed the No Kings rally. Officials say they are also on alert for signs that the immigration-related clashes between law enforcement and protesters currently roiling Los Angeles would spread.

“We’re paying attention, obviously, to what is happening there. We’ll be ready,” McCool said. “We have a robust plan for civil disobedience.”

Agent Phillip Bates of the FBI’s Washington Field office, which is tasked with counterterrorism and crisis management, said there were “no credible threats” to the event at the moment.

Lindsey Appiah, the deputy mayor for public safety, told The Associated Press last week that the city had longstanding plans for the Army birthday celebration. But those plans “got a lot bigger on short notice” when Trump got involved.

Still, Appiah said the city has grown “very flexible, very nimble” at rolling with these sort of changes.

For more details, including road closures and security restrictions, go to: www.nsse.dc.gov.

The concert venue’s proximity to multiple bus stops and rail stations “makes public transit a safe and ideal way to access the stadium,” the agency said in a press release Monday.

Concertgoers heading to watch one of the world’s biggest bands are encouraged to use the agency’s Next Ride trip planning tool and type “Coldplay” in the destination field. The trip planner will show all available transit options — along with departure times from the user’s current location — in real time to the concert.

The Auraria West Station will be closed from 3:30 p.m. to midnight because of the crowds. Riders should use the nearby Empower Field station.

Following Coldplay’s concert, Post Malone plays in the home of the Denver Broncos on June 15, followed by Metallica at the end of the month.

Transit riders are asked to plan ahead and prepare for large crowds, including on platforms, trains and buses.

Get more Colorado news by signing up for our daily Your Morning Dozen email newsletter.

Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. on Monday removed every member of a scientific committee that advises the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention on how to use vaccines and pledged to replace them with his own picks.

Major physicians groups criticized the move to oust all 17 members of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices.

Kennedy, who was one of the nation’s leading anti-vaccine activists before becoming the nation’s top health official, has not said who he would appoint to the panel, but said it would convene in just two weeks in Atlanta.

Although it’s typically not viewed as a partisan board, the Biden administration had installed the entire committee.

“Without removing the current members, the current Trump administration would not have been able to appoint a majority of new members until 2028,” Kennedy wrote. “A clean sweep is needed to re-establish public confidence in vaccine science. ”

Kennedy, in a Wall Street Journal opinion piece, said the committee members had too many conflicts of interest. Committee members routinely disclose any possible conflicts at the start of public meetings.

Dr. Georges Benjamin, executive director of the American Public Health Association, called Kennedy’s mass ouster “a coup.”

“It’s not how democracies work. It’s not good for the health of the nation,” Benjamin told The Associated Press.

Benjamin said the move raises real concerns about whether future committee members will be viewed as impartial. He added that Kennedy is going against what he told lawmakers and the public, and the public health association plans to watch Kennedy “like a hawk.”

“He is breaking a promise,” Benjamin said. “He said he wasn’t going to do this.”

Dr. Bruce A. Scott, president of the American Medical Association, called the committee a trusted source of science- and data-driven advice and said Kennedy’s move, coupled with declining vaccination rates across the country, will help drive an increase in vaccine-preventable diseases.

“Today’s action to remove the 17 sitting members of ACIP undermines that trust and upends a transparent process that has saved countless lives,” Scott said in a statement.

The committee had been in a state of flux since Kennedy took over. Its first meeting this year had been delayed when the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services abruptly postponed its February meeting.

Kennedy recently took the unusual step of changing COVID-19 recommendations without first consulting the panel.

The webpage that featured the committee’s members was deleted Monday evening, shortly after Kennedy’s announcement.

The Associated Press Health and Science Department receives support from the Howard Hughes Medical Institute’s Science and Educational Media Group and the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation. The AP is solely responsible for all content.

The office’s mandate is to speed up the entitlement process and improve customer service for applicants — those getting permits to build new structures or build out existing spaces around the city. At an April news conference, Johnston touted a 180-day “shot clock,” saying plans and permits would be approved within that time, and pledged refunds of up to $10,000 on fees if the city failed to do so.

Johnston didn’t provide specifics at the time on how the 180 days would be calculated or when refunds would be made. But last week, DPO Director Jill Jennings Golich shared documents with BusinessDen — the full text can be found here and here — on each of those points.

“The 180 days is purely city time,” she said.

But that can be somewhat complicated, especially since many projects require multiple permits issued by different city agencies. Jennings Golich encouraged applicants to submit plans simultaneously for each of the permits they’re applying for, for simplicity’s sake.

Inevitably, there will be some overlap in the building permit process. An applicant may be redoing its plumbing plans while the city is reviewing a separate electrical permit, for example.

In instances such as those, as long as the city is still reviewing a component of the overall building plans, the 180-day clock will be ticking, even if the applicant is working on other permits related to the project, according to the city.

“Any time that [application] is with a city discipline, we’re counting it as a city day,” said Robert Peek, a DPO official.

The 180-day pledge doesn’t apply to subdivision plats, concept plans, large development reviews or infrastructure master plans.

In terms of refunds, when the 180-day deadline is missed, Jennings Golich will initially review the application, checking its quality and the responses given by the city. Her report will be completed within 14 days.

DPO’s Executive Permitting Committee will then review the report and determine whether “the delay was attributable to the city due to things such as internal city processes or city review time,” according to the DPO documents. If the city is at fault, the applicant is eligible for a refund.

Denver says if it can’t process construction permits in roughly 180 days, the city will refund developers’ fees

But refunds will vary. Site development plans for a project smaller than an acre — a sizable category — will be eligible for a refund only of up to $500. For larger developments, the fee refunded can total up to $5,000, depending on the size of the property and how much the applicant paid in city fees.

For pure building permit reviews that exceed 180 days of city time, up to 5% of the permit plan review fee can be refunded, with a limit of $5,000 in total.

The maximum $10,000 refund could be reached if an applicant gets both a $5,000 site development plan refund and a $5,000 building permit fee refund.

The new DPO is responsible for more than just reviews and refunds. It is tasked with improving customer service by having a fully staffed, in-person permit counter where people can visit to ask questions. That will be up and running by Aug. 11, Jennings Golich said.

Currently, the Department of Excise and Licenses has a counter. A separate permitting one is staffed by a generalist, who likely couldn’t answer specific questions, Jennings Golich added.

The DPO doesn’t replace, but rather streamlines, the work of seven city agencies to expedite the permitting process. Denver Water and Xcel Energy are not subject to the department and its rules since they’re not city agencies.

One other key institution in the DPO that’s new will be the “project champions.” These individuals will be assigned to projects to provide one-on-one support to applicants throughout the process, advocating for applicants if they hit a snag.

“They’re getting those comments, reviewing them, ensuring there aren’t any conflicts, working through any issues,” Jennings Golich said.

Read more at our partner, BusinessDen.

Her release was confirmed by Medina’s husband, Pablo Acosta.

“To tell the truth, I feel very nervous, happy,” Acosta said in Spanish through a translator. “I can’t believe it, still, that this has happened.”

Medina won her asylum case in May. But because the federal government reserved the right to appeal on a single issue, she remained in the custody of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement through Monday.

She and her family first sought asylum in the United States in 2023, with Medina specifically saying that she feared domestic violence and threats made by her ex-partner in Honduras.

During the asylum process, Medina was picked up on Oct. 23 by ICE agents who arrived at Buckley’s entrance after she had approached to drop off a food delivery order. Medina said she had her work permit at the time.

A crowd of about two dozen people gathered at the ICE facility in May to call for her release.

Immigration-focused organizations that worked with both Medina and Acosta throughout the process are celebrating her release.

“It is a community win to have Carla free,” said Andrea Loya, the executive director of Casa de Paz. “She should not have missed all that time away from her kids. We are so happy to know that she will get to hug them tonight and put them to sleep.”

Jennifer Piper, the program director at the American Friends Service Committee, said, “The dedication of her husband, Pablo, and the support of community made a huge difference in her case.”

To her, “it vindicates what we’ve been saying all along,” Piper said. “So many do have life-threatening reasons why they (fled) their country of origin and that they trust us as a country to respect their human rights.”