GEOFF BENNETT: Good evening.

I'm Geoff Bennett.

AMNA NAWAZ: And I'm Amna Nawaz.

On the "News Hour" tonight: In his first Cabinet meeting of this administration, President Trump previews further slashes to the federal work force.

GEOFF BENNETT: The House narrowly passes a major budget plan, including large cuts to taxes and spending.

We speak with the House Budget Committee chairman.

AMNA NAWAZ: And the Trump administration deports migrants to a Latin American stopover, regardless of their country of origin.

MUZAFFAR CHISHTI, Migration Policy Institute: They may be violations of U.S. law, especially with respect to people who have expressed fear of being returned.

(BREAK) AMNA NAWAZ: Welcome to the "News Hour."

At the White House today, President Donald Trump convened the very first Cabinet meeting of his second administration.

GEOFF BENNETT: In an hour-plus Q&A with reporters, Mr. Trump did most of the talking, and there was one figure there who didn't have a physical seat at the table, but whose influence was undeniable.

Lisa Desjardins starts our coverage.

LISA DESJARDINS: At the table, some two dozen members of President Trump's Cabinet meeting for the first time.

DONALD TRUMP, President of the United States: OK, thank you very much.

We appreciate you being here.

LISA DESJARDINS: And on the side, a special government employee whose work impacts them all, billionaire Elon Musk.

DONALD TRUMP: So I'm going to ask, if it's possible, to have Elon get up first and talk about DOGE.

LISA DESJARDINS: Musk was effusive about Trump.

ELON MUSK, Department of Government Efficiency: And President Trump has put together, I think, the best Cabinet ever.

LISA DESJARDINS: And pointed about government employees, defending e-mail directing them to list their actions on the job.

ELON MUSK: I think that e-mail perhaps was misinterpreted as a performance review, but actually it was a pulse check review.

Do you have a pulse?

(LAUGHTER) ELON MUSK: Do you have a pulse and two neurons?

ELON MUSK: So, if you have a pulse at two neurons, you can reply to an e-mail.

LISA DESJARDINS: In a chaotic rollout, some agencies told workers not to respond.

But even so, Trump gave this warning: DONALD TRUMP: I would like to add that those million people that haven't responded though, Elon, they are on the bubble.

I wouldn't say that we're thrilled about it.

They haven't responded.

LISA DESJARDINS: This as a new memo indicates the Trump administration is getting ready to greatly rev up layoffs.

It directs federal agencies to develop large-scale reductions in force by mid-March.

Trump turned to Lee Zeldin, who runs the Environmental Protection Agency, and put the scope into perspective.

DONALD TRUMP: He thinks he's going to be cutting 65 or so percent of the people from Environmental, and we're going to speed up the process too at the same time.

LISA DESJARDINS: As he slices government, Trump, who ran on fighting inflation, addressed a spike.

DONALD TRUMP: We have to get the prices down, not the inflation down, the prices of eggs and various other things.

Eggs are a disaster.

The secretary of agriculture is going to be showing you a chart that's actually mind-boggling, what's happened, how low they were with us and how high they are now.

But I think we can do something about it.

LISA DESJARDINS: From there, a grab bag of questions from reporters.

QUESTION: Mr. President, part of your mission -- sir.

LISA DESJARDINS: Asked about immigration policy, Trump pitched his so-called gold card idea.

DONALD TRUMP: It's sort of a green card-plus.

LISA DESJARDINS: A path to citizenship with a $5 million investment price tag per person.

It would replace the current EB-5 immigrant investor visa.

DONALD TRUMP: If we sell a million, right, a million, that's $5 trillion, $5 trillion.

LISA DESJARDINS: The current program sees 100 times fewer visas than that per year, and this offer to sell a million potential citizenships comes as Trump has virtually shut down other legal paths, including asylum, as broken and corrupt.

On Ukraine, Trump said President Volodymyr Zelenskyy is headed to Washington this Friday to sign an agreement over Ukraine's natural resources.

And, on the war, he pushed the idea of tough concessions for the country.

DONALD TRUMP: NATO, you can forget about.

LISA DESJARDINS: But said a peace deal between Kyiv and Moscow is still on the table, while Trump also said he thinks Putin's goal is to take over Ukraine.

DONALD TRUMP: He had no intention, in my opinion, of settling this war.

I think he wanted the whole thing.

LISA DESJARDINS: Another hot topic, House Republicans' sweeping budget outline passed last night on a dramatic vote by the thinnest of margins.

Trump said the $2 million in cuts won't affect Medicaid or Social Security, with a caveat.

DONALD TRUMP: We're not going to touch it.

Now, we are going to look for fraud.

LISA DESJARDINS: Trump has set up his Cabinet relatively quickly, with just three members out of two dozen left to confirm.

For the "PBS News Hour," I'm Lisa Desjardins.

GEOFF BENNETT: Billionaire Elon Musk says his campaign to fire tens of thousands of federal workers and cancel government contracts is in the name of rooting out fraud and waste.

His DOGE group has posted what it calls a wall of receipts on its Web site that claims it has saved billions by cutting certain federal contracts.

But reports and government documents prove that many of these so-called savings are either misleading or incorrect.

Our White House correspondent, Laura Barron-Lopez, has been looking into this and joins us now.

So, Laura, what kinds of savings are Musk and his team claiming, and does the math add up?

LAURA BARRON-LOPEZ: So, Elon Musk and his team on that wall of receipts say that their total cuts equal $65 billion in savings.

They base that on contract cancellations, firing workers and -- quote -- "fraud detection."

But as The New York Times first reported, five of DOGE's biggest contracts that they say have resulted in savings ended up being deleted from that wall of receipts after outlets pointed out that there were errors.

And some of the biggest errors in savings are, as CBS first reported, a USAID contract for $650 million that was listed three times, as The Intercept first reported, a Social Security contract listed as $232 million, instead of $560,000, and an ICE contract that DOGE listed as $8 billion, when, in reality, it was $8 million.

And it's important to note that $8 million ICE contract was a credit line.

That means that ICE may have never ended up paying out that total $8 million.

And some of these contracts were -- on the wall of receipts were either already paid or canceled under the Biden administration.

So DOGE is essentially taking a lot of credit for some of these contracts that don't appear to be actually the savings that they say they are.

GEOFF BENNETT: I know you were working the phones and talking to vendors who appear on this so-called wall of receipts.

What did they tell you?

LAURA BARRON-LOPEZ: So our colleague, Kyle Midura, spoke to one of these federal vendors, a Taylor Jones.

His company, CulturePoint, does leadership in management training.

And his company was listed on DOGE's wall of receipts as having a contract for almost $10 million.

But Taylor Jones told "News Hour" that not only was the amount of money wrong -- it was actually $100,000 - - but it was not a guaranteed payment.

It was a credit line and the agreement with the government was never signed.

TAYLOR JONES, CulturePoint: We never had a contract.

And we have actually never had a contract with the government that was a $10 million contract or even a $1 million contract, so not that we're opposed to it, but we just -- it's never happened.

So we were a little surprised to start getting calls from reporters about a non-contract that was never executed.

LAURA BARRON-LOPEZ: So, essentially, there wasn't even a contract to delete, Geoff.

And when you look at all of this across the board, the math is really not adding up to $65 billion.

GEOFF BENNETT: There will be people who will say, well, what Musk is trying to do is still a worthy effort, trying to clean up government waste.

How much money has the team actually saved so far?

LAURA BARRON-LOPEZ: So the actual savings is around $2 billion, according to budget experts that we spoke to.

And, again, as you noted, Musk says that this is about -- that these cuts are meant to help reduce the deficit and pay for Republicans' tax cuts.

We spoke to Jessica Riedl.

She's a senior fellow at The Manhattan Institute.

She was also the chief economist for former Senator Rob Portman, a Republican.

And she put those so-called savings in context and corrected the record.

JESSICA RIEDL, Manhattan Institute: At this point, the $2 billion in savings identified by Elon Musk would pay for 1/75th of 1 percent of the entire national debt.

I have not found any legitimate evidence of fraud in the spending that Elon Musk has highlighted.

I have found expenditures that a lot of people wish the government wouldn't engage in, such as DEI contracts and Politico subscriptions.

But that doesn't make them fraudulent.

It just makes them policies that certain people would not like us to be spending money on.

LAURA BARRON-LOPEZ: So, as Jessica noted there, so far, there appears to be no evidence of fraud, despite Elon Musk claims of it.

And she also added that, if you did distribute some of the -- that $2 billion or so in savings across taxpayers in America, which is what Elon Musk has said he would like to do, it would basically come to $2.42 per person, so potentially not enough for a cup of coffee in some cities.

GEOFF BENNETT: Meantime, there are new concerns at Veterans Affairs because DOGE has set to cancel a number of contracts there.

Who stands to be affected?

LAURA BARRON-LOPEZ: So VA Secretary Doug Collins boasted this week of $2 billion worth of cuts.

That would be across about 875 contracts that would be canceled.

And multiple sources told me and Dan Sagalyn that two of those canceled contracts are with organizations that help implement the PACT Act.

The PACT Act, what it did was expanded health care and disability benefits for veterans that had illnesses caused by toxic exposures.

And so cutting that, those contracts could put the onus back on veterans to have to deal with their benefits, trying to essentially communicate between the health care side and the benefits side.

So it could be incredibly detrimental to them.

We don't know the status of many of these 875 contracts.

We haven't gotten clear answers from Veterans Affairs, and it appears as though the ones that affect the PACT Act could very well still be canceled.

GEOFF BENNETT: Laura Barron-Lopez, our thanks to you and the team for working through all this.

We appreciate it.

LAURA BARRON-LOPEZ: Thank you.

AMNA NAWAZ: We start the day's other headlines in Texas, where officials announced the first death from a recent measles outbreak.

They say the victim was an unvaccinated school-aged child who was hospitalized in West Texas last week.

There are at least 124 confirmed cases of the highly contagious respiratory illness across nine Texas counties.

They have been mostly reported among children, many of them unvaccinated.

There are also nine cases in Eastern New Mexico.

Today's fatality is the nation's first reported death from measles since 2015.

At today's Cabinet meeting, HHS Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. said there were actually two deaths from the recent outbreak, though the second fatality has not been confirmed.

At the Supreme Court today, justices seem to side with an Ohio woman who brought a lawsuit claiming workplace discrimination because she is straight.

Marlean Ames says she was passed over for a promotion at the Ohio Department of Youth Services in favor of a gay woman and then demoted in favor of a gay man.

Justice Brett Kavanaugh said today that workplace discrimination -- quote -- "whether you are gay or straight is prohibited.

The rules are the same whichever way it goes."

If the High Court rules in her favor, it could make it easier for people to pursue such so-called reverse discrimination claims.

A Baltimore judge is considering whether to reduce the life sentence for Adnan Syed to time served.

It's just the latest twist in a case that rose to national prominence as the subject of the "Serial" podcast more than a decade ago.

Syed was released from prison in 2022 after prosecutors found problems with the case.

They asked the judge to overturn his murder conviction for the death of his high school ex-girlfriend back in 1999.

Today, both prosecutors and his attorney said the 43-year-old doesn't pose a risk to public safety.

Last night, prosecutors withdrew an attempt to vacate his murder conviction outright, meaning that it remains on the books.

In the Middle East, an Israeli security official says that Hamas handed over the bodies of four Israeli hostages tonight.

It's the last scheduled handover under the cease-fire's first phase, which is due to expire in just days.

The men Hamas named range in age between 50 and 85.

They're being swapped for roughly 600 Palestinian prisoners.

Israel had delayed the prisoner release since Saturday, citing Hamas' treatment of hostages during previous exchanges.

In the meantime, thousands of Israelis lined the streets during the funeral procession for deceased hostages Shiri, Ariel, and Kfir Bibas.

The bodies of the mother and her two young sons were handed over by Hamas last week.

At the funeral, Yarden Bibas, who survived Hamas' captivity, said goodbye to his wife and children.

YARDEN BIBAS, Husband and Father of Deceased Israeli Hostages (through translator): Shiri, I'm sorry I couldn't protect you all.

I think about everything we went through together.

There are so many beautiful memories.

I can't kiss or hug you, and it's breaking me and killing me.

Shiri, please watch over me.

AMNA NAWAZ: Hamas says Shiri and her children were killed in an Israeli airstrike.

Israeli forensic teams say there's evidence that they were killed by Hamas.

New data suggests that a yearslong decline in the nation's Christian population has leveled off.

Results of a Pew Research Center survey out today found that 62 percent of U.S. adults identify as Christian.

That number has held steady since 2019, after falling from 78 percent in 2007.

And whether Christian or not, a vast majority of Americans considered themselves spiritual, with 83 percent saying they believe in God or some kind of universal spirit.

Washington Post owner Jeff Bezos announced today that the paper's opinion pages will focus on defending -- quote -- "personal liberties and free markets."

In a social media post, Bezos says he told employees that -- quote -- "Viewpoints opposing those pillars will be left to be published by others."

Critics say it's the latest rightward shift at The Post under Bezos, aimed at pleasing President Trump.

Bezos insists that newspapers these days should not offer a broad-based opinion section, saying that the Internet does that job.

Following today's announcement, The Post's opinion editor, David Shipley, announced he is stepping down.

On Wall Street today, stocks ended mixed after a recent run of losses.

The Dow Jones industrial average slipped nearly 200 points on the day.

The Nasdaq added nearly 50 points, or about a quarter of a percent.

The S&P 500 ended virtually flat.

And actor Michelle Trachtenberg has died.

She got her start as a child actor, most notably on Nickelodeon's "The Adventures of Pete & Pete."

Trachtenberg was just 10 years old when she shot to fame in the 1996 film "Harriet the Spy."

She later co-starred on hit TV shows like "Buffy the Vampire Slayer and "Gossip Girl."

New York City police say they responded to a 911 call early today and found Trachtenberg unconscious and unresponsive.

No criminal involvement is suspected and investigation is ongoing.

Michelle Trachtenberg was just 39 years old.

Still to come on the "News Hour": advocacy groups react to a court order blocking President Trump's ban on refugees; Panama's deputy foreign minister discusses his country's role in the U.S. immigration crackdown; and the upcoming Met Gala shines a spotlight on the cultural impact of Black men's fashion.

When the House passed the Republican budget framework last night, it was an important step towards implementing President Trump's agenda.

The House budget plan includes $4.5 trillion in tax cuts, spending cuts totaling $1.5 trillion to $2 trillion, and will add an estimated $3 trillion to the national debt over the next 10 years.

Congressman Jodey Arrington of Texas chairs the Budget Committee, and he joins me now.

Chairman Arrington, welcome to the "News Hour."

Thanks for joining us.

REP. JODEY ARRINGTON (R-TX): Thank you, Amna.

Good to be with you.

AMNA NAWAZ: So, as you know, the bill passed on a 217-to-215 vote.

You had one Republican joining Democrats to vote against it.

Is it fair to say now that the real work begins of trying to figure out exactly where you're going to get those $2 trillion in cuts?

REP. JODEY ARRINGTON: Yes, I think you're right.

I mean, we had to lay out a framework that I think was fiscally responsible, pro-growth.

It makes adjustments for supporting the tax cuts, while reining in the wasteful spending to offset along -- offset those cuts along with growth -- or revenue, rather, from growth, which is a conservative 2.6 percent annual average growth rate, which is lower than we had in the Trump and Biden administrations.

But that will bring another $2.6 trillion in.

And so, all together, it's a balanced budget resolution, but, as you mentioned, the real work happens as the policies are developed at the committee level, and it's designed that way to be kind of a bottom-up approach, and then we will, of course, have to conference with the Senate.

AMNA NAWAZ: As you know, there's been a lot of concern about cuts to Medicaid.

The mandate that you have set for the Energy and Commerce Committee that oversees Medicaid is for them to cut $880 billion.

The largest pot of money that they oversee is Medicare, which you have said you will not touch.

So, how do you see hitting that $880 billion figure without touching Medicaid?

REP. JODEY ARRINGTON: Well, we're going to make sure we actually eliminate the waste that exists in the federal government, not just in the Medicaid program, but across the federal government.

The Government Accountability Office estimates just within 70 programs in the federal government a $2.7 trillion in waste, fraud, and abuse.

And then fraud, government-wide, they say on the higher end is $5 trillion.

So we have to put the program integrity measures in place to make sure those who are legally eligible are those receiving the benefits that the taxpayers and lawmakers intended.

But, for example, if you just review for eligibility not once but twice a year, going back to the Trump administration policies, you will actually not only prevent the fraudulent spending of tax dollars, but you will save $160 billion that you can put towards reducing the deficit and making not just Medicaid, but all of these programs sustainable today that are not sustainable.

So, program integrity, state accountability, personal responsibility.

SNAP has requirements for able-bodied adults who are able to work to work to receive the benefit.

And we think that it's responsible to do that across the government.

Medicaid doesn't have that.

For example, these are some of the things that will be meted out at the committee level.

AMNA NAWAZ: Chairman, if I may, just to double-check the math here, that $3 trillion you cited there, that is the cumulative of estimated overpayments in fraud from GAO dating back to 2003.

So that's not quite apples to apples here.

You mentioned the $160 billion that would come from reversing some Biden era policies.

But the national improper pay rate that I saw, HHS estimates on fraud only totals about $31 billion.

I'm just pointing these out to show nowhere are you near $880 billion.

So, again, where are you seeing math that says you can get to that number without touching Medicaid?

REP. JODEY ARRINGTON: Yes, actually, let me correct that statement.

The Government Accountability Office, $2.7 trillion in improper payments, that's a 10-year number.

That is a 10-year number, not since 2003.

That's going forward.

In fact, there's $50 billion in Medicaid.

It's over $500 billion over the 10-year window.

So when we say we want to save $1.5 trillion to $2 trillion in reducing wasteful spending, that's over the 10-year budget window.

So it is apples to apples.

I would also suggest -- and there are outside groups that have measured this -- one that comes to mind is NumbersUSA.

They say that we're spending $150 billion for social services for people who are in this country illegally, about $9,000 per illegal immigrant.

That's more than we spend on U.S. citizens who are the most vulnerable among us and eligible for Medicaid.

It's also more than we spend for our veterans on military benefits.

So there's a lot of cleaning up, a lot of waste and fraud.

And there's just a lot of inefficiencies.

AMNA NAWAZ: So, if I may, Chairman... REP. JODEY ARRINGTON: Yes.

Sure.

AMNA NAWAZ: And I apologize.

I know our time is limited.

Is it possible for you to guarantee that none of the 70 million people who rely on Medicaid are going to have their benefits cut?

Can you make that guarantee?

REP. JODEY ARRINGTON: I can tell you this.

These programs are not sustainable for the most vulnerable people.

I can also tell you that the Obamacare expansion population, they get a 90 percent federal match.

And the blind disabled, the sickest and poorest among us, they get 65 percent on average.

So, the entire health system is oriented around giving better care and better access to able-bodied Obamacare expansion populations.

So there's a lot of ways to make it work better and make it more efficiently.

AMNA NAWAZ: Chairman, I will just point out, I'm not hearing a guarantee in there, but I think our conversation on this will continue.

REP. JODEY ARRINGTON: Sure.

AMNA NAWAZ: I do want to ask you about some of the federal worker firings that we have seen from Elon Musk's DOGE team.

The latest figures that I saw show some 130,000 federal employees who live in the state of Texas, in your district about 8,000 or so.

Do you know if any of those federal workers have lost their jobs as a result of this team's cuts?

REP. JODEY ARRINGTON: I don't know any personally who have, but I can tell you... AMNA NAWAZ: Do you know of any in your district?

REP. JODEY ARRINGTON: Do I know of any who've been cut?

AMNA NAWAZ: Yes, sir, anyone who's lost -- any federal employees in your district who have lost their jobs as a result of the DOGE team's cuts?

(CROSSTALK) REP. JODEY ARRINGTON: I don't know of any, but there may be people who have had their jobs terminated.

And I can tell you, after having worked in the administration of President Bush, being in the administration, there's a lot of unnecessary jobs.

There's a lot of waste.

We had about half the work force not even going to work the last four or five years.

So, look, where there is value added, where there are people who are being productive and advancing the federal government's mission and serving the American people, I don't think there's a problem there, but I think we have a lot of bloat and a lot of waste.

So I support the efforts that are being taken under President Trump by Elon Musk and by his Cabinet officials.

AMNA NAWAZ: If I may, among the DOGE team's listings of cuts, they do list a DHS office closure in Abilene, Texas, which is in your district, for an estimated savings of $340,000.

I'm unsure how many people were cut there.

But are you concerned that if hundreds of people in your district lose their jobs, it will impact your community?

REP. JODEY ARRINGTON: I'm concerned that our federal budget went from $4.5 trillion before COVID to $7 trillion.

I'm concerned that, during the Biden administration, $8 trillion was added to the national debt, that we're borrowing $2 trillion.

AMNA NAWAZ: But are you concerned about people losing their jobs in your district?

REP. JODEY ARRINGTON: I'm concerned about bankrupting the country, and I'm also trusting this president to make sure that where we need the human resources, where they are productive and can justify the value added to advancing the federal government's mission, that will happen.

But we're long overdue for an audit from top to bottom, and we need to make sure that the taxpayers are getting a return on their investment and that we're securing their money.

And that doesn't happen in this town enough, so I support what the president and Elon Musk are doing 100 percent.

AMNA NAWAZ: That is the House Budget chairman, Jodey Arrington, joining us tonight.

Mr. Chairman, thank you for your time.

We appreciate it.

REP. JODEY ARRINGTON: Thank you, Amna.

Appreciate -- you too.

Bye-bye.

GEOFF BENNETT: A federal judge in Seattle has blocked President Trump's executive order halting the admission of refugees into the U.S.

The judge said the administration had likely exceeded its authority by freezing the U.S.

Refugee Admissions Program, which was established by Congress back in 1980.

It remains to be seen whether the administration will comply, while a lawsuit challenging the ban filed by some of the country's largest resettlement organizations works its way through the courts.

We're joined now by Mark Hetfield.

He's the president of HIAS.

That's the country's oldest refugee resettlement agency.

And the organization is also a plaintiff in that lawsuit.

Thanks for being with us.

MARK HETFIELD, President, HIAS: Thank you, Geoff.

GEOFF BENNETT: So, first, help us understand what the U.S.

Refugee Admissions Program is,how does the program work, and who does it aim to assist?

MARK HETFIELD: Sure.

So the program was started in 1980 by the Refugee Act of 1980 to provide a safe and legal pathway for people fleeing persecution or war or conflict to come to the United States to either join with family or to meet foreign policy, humanitarian policy priorities of the United States government.

GEOFF BENNETT: So what was the material impact of this suspension?

How were the refugees affected and your employees as well?

MARK HETFIELD: It was devastating.

And this was not just a mere suspension, like it was in the first Trump term.

This was a complete dismantlement of the Refugee Program, because not only did all refugees -- not only were all refugees stopped from arriving, but also all the processing offices were shut down, everything was defunded.

So it's going to be almost impossible to start it back up.

And in terms of the actual impact, for example, my agency had 621 refugees who were vetted by Homeland Security, approved by Homeland Security, had plane tickets in hand, were supposed to arrive in February, but they're not coming.

The plane tickets were literally snatched out of their hands.

GEOFF BENNETT: So when you say it's nearly impossible to restart this work, tell me more about that.

MARK HETFIELD: Well, to resettle refugees, you're going to have to have people that prepare their applications, that assist them overseas, that give them cultural orientation, that book their plane tickets, that then receive them here in the United States, which is what my agency, HIAS, does, along with the other non-resettlement agencies.

All of those things were completely defunded.

GEOFF BENNETT: Your organization is a Jewish organization.

Many of the resettlement organizations are faith organizations.

How does faith inform the work that you do?

MARK HETFIELD: Well, in the Torah, 36 times it's repeated to welcome the stranger, to love the stranger as ourselves, for we were once strangers ourselves.

And so it's really a fundamental part of our history and of our values, and not just going back to the holy books, but also our more recent experience in the 20th century, 21st century.

The Jewish people are a people who know displacement.

And so we are naturally empathetic.

GEOFF BENNETT: I'm sure, as you know, Vice President J.D.

Vance recently accused the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops of profiting off its work resettling refugees.

Do you or any of the organizations profit off this work?

Is that even a motive of yours?

MARK HETFIELD: No.

This is a labor of love.

This is something we have to raise money for because we can't possibly do it on the funding that the federal government gives us.

It is a public-private partnership.

And so now we have raised lots of funding to welcome refugees to the United States, and now none of them are coming, including refugees who themselves are fleeing religious persecution.

Like, Iranian religious minorities is one group that HIAS helps.

They can't come.

Afghan -- people who supported us in Afghanistan, people who supported U.S. veterans and risked their lives or who worked for the U.S. Embassy in Kabul, they can't come.

People whose families were separated by conflict or war, those parents and children will remain separated indefinitely.

Those kids are essentially being orphaned by this Trump administration policy.

GEOFF BENNETT: The administration, in its executive order, argued that the United States lacks the ability to absorb large numbers of migrants and in particular refugees into its communities in a manner that does not compromise the availability of resources for Americans.

This is an argument the administration makes fairly often, that resources are finite.

What's your reaction to that?

MARK HETFIELD: My reaction is that that's an argument that the Trump administration made in 2017, and that they themselves proved was fallacious.

In 2017, in the Muslim and refugee ban, President Trump commissioned a study to demonstrate how much resettled refugees cost the American taxpayer.

But they looked at both sides of the ledger when they did that study and they found that, over a 10-year period, resettled refugees contributed 63 billion, with a B, dollars more in federal, state and local taxes than they took in services and assistance.

So, fortunately, for us, while we welcome refugees because it's the right thing to do, it just also happens to be to the benefit of the economy, to the benefit of the country.

Refugees are a blessing.

They're not a burden.

GEOFF BENNETT: I understand you were in Seattle yesterday when the judge issued that ruling.

What comes next?

MARK HETFIELD: It's a good question because, on my way to the studio tonight, I got 10 termination notices that the State Department was terminating a number of our programs, including refugee resettlement, in spite of the fact that yesterday the judge issued a preliminary injunction saying that refugee resettlement was authorized by Congress and could not be dismantled.

GEOFF BENNETT: Mark Hetfield of HIAS, thanks again for coming in.

We appreciate it.

MARK HETFIELD: Thank you, Geoff.

AMNA NAWAZ: President Trump made carrying out the largest mass deportation in U.S. history a cornerstone of his 2024 campaign.

But there are reports he's unhappy with the pace of that effort so far.

GEOFF BENNETT: William Brangham reports now on a new controversial tactic to carry out the administration's crackdown on illegal migration.

WILLIAM BRANGHAM: This plane landed in San Jose, Costa Rica, last week, descending through a cloud of uncertainty.

On board were 135 people deported from the U.S. on a journey back to their home countries.

Or somewhere else.

None are Costa Rican citizens.

OMER BADILLA, Costa Rican Deputy Minister of Interior and Police (through translator): There are 65 children and 70 adults.

They are families.

Costa Rica is committed to voluntarily returning deportees to their country of origin in up to 30 days.

WILLIAM BRANGHAM: The group, hailing from as far away as China, Vietnam, and Ghana, were then bused to a rural holding facility paid for by the U.S. Costa Rica became the second Central American country after Panama to serve as a stopover for unauthorized migrants being removed from the U.S. by the Trump administration.

Panama accepted almost 300 deportees who were initially held under armed guard in this Panama City hotel.

Images of that group stuck inside, unable to leave, made headlines last week.

FRANK ABREGO, Minister of Security, Panama (through translator): We are providing them with all the necessary medical, food and comfort services, and we will continue to do so until the last one has left our country, which is what was agreed with the United States government.

WILLIAM BRANGHAM: More than half agreed to be returned to their home countries; 97 were sent to a facility in the Darien Gap, a treacherous point of passage at Panama's southern border with Colombia which is used by many migrants.

Susana Sabalza is a Panamanian migration lawyer representing a Taiwanese family, including a child under 5, who were sent to the Darien facility.

Do you have any understanding as to what the conditions are like in that facility?

SUSANA SABALZA, Panamanian Migration Lawyer (through translator): I haven't seen the conditions with my own eyes, but I have spoken to reporters who have, and they said the conditions weren't pleasant.

We have to keep in mind the children, who are the future of humanity.

If they're experiencing this type of trauma in a tropical refugee camp, I want to know that they are doing well and that they have good care.

DONALD TRUMP, President of the United States: If we could get them out of our country, we have other countries that would take them.

WILLIAM BRANGHAM: This new process, using Latin American countries as a temporary bridge for deportees, partly helps the administration because the U.S. doesn't always have diplomatic relationships with some of these migrants' countries of origin.

So by transferring them to other nations, it transfers the diplomatic labor of repatriation to them as well.

MUZAFFAR CHISHTI, Migration Policy Institute: This is a significant or even a mammoth departure from the practices of the past.

WILLIAM BRANGHAM: Muzaffar Chishti is a senior fellow at the Migration Policy Institute.

MUZAFFAR CHISHTI: The president has made no secret of the fact that he believes that he won this election using immigration as a calling card.

And that message has not been lost on every single agency head and Cabinet member of this administration.

They have decided that deportation machinery is now the number one paragraph of your job description.

What we have now seen is that we are enlisting nation-states in that enterprise.

WILLIAM BRANGHAM: Earlier this month, on his first international trip, Secretary of State Marco Rubio visited Central America, including stops in both Panama and Costa Rica.

Amid threats of U.S. tariffs, sanctions, and even retaking control of the Panama Canal, the countries agreed to serve as a stopover for deportees.

MARCO RUBIO, U.S. Secretary of State: We do a lot of other things with Panama that go beyond just the canal.

I mean, they have been a great partner on slowing down the rate of migration on the Darien -- coming across the Darien Gap and the like.

So, I think it was a good visit.

WILLIAM BRANGHAM: The Department of Homeland Security, which is central to the administration's deportation policy, did not respond to "News Hour"'s request for comment.

But Muzaffar Chishti says the process raises many questions, as does the administration's overall approach to migrants so far.

MUZAFFAR CHISHTI: There may be violations of U.S. law, especially with respect to people who have expressed fear of being returned.

The fact that they were not given access to counsel, the fact that they were not provided due process.

The second most important consideration is that this is being done with militaristic imagery.

I mean, it's not just optics.

It's optics with sound.

It is sort of an orchestra of military machinery at work that I think is deeply un-American.

WILLIAM BRANGHAM: In the meantime, lawyer Susana Sabalza is trying to figure out what comes next.

And she has a plea.

SUSANA SABALZA (through translator): We are asking our president of Panama and his counterpart in the United States to have a little compassion and that they give each case the opportunity to be reviewed before sending these families to the brink of death, because, at some point, this is going to be scrutinized by some international body.

And that's where we're going to see the consequences.

WILLIAM BRANGHAM: For the "PBS News Hour," I'm William Brangham.

AMNA NAWAZ: For more on Panama's role in receiving hundreds of migrants the Trump administration has deported, we now turn to Carlos Ruiz-Hernandez.

He's Panama's vice minister for foreign affairs.

Mr. Minister, welcome to the "News Hour."

CARLOS RUIZ-HERNANDEZ, Vice Minister for Foreign Affairs, Panama: Thank you, Amna, for having me.

AMNA NAWAZ: Thank you so much for being here.

I just want to ask you to respond to the report there from my colleague William Brangham, and specifically the conditions under which some of those deported migrants say they were being held in Panama, reportedly in hotel rooms, but they say they had their cell phones and passports taken away.

There were armed guards at the doors.

Explain to us why that was necessary.

CARLOS RUIZ-HERNANDEZ: I mean, it's -- thank you so much.

I think it's a right question to ask, but I think the mischaracterization of how these migrants are being treated is very unfortunate.

The reporting that these migrants are not being treated with the best conditions and with respect to human rights or due process is absolutely inaccurate, because they have access to absolutely everything they need.

IOM is there.

UNHCR is there.

We are there.

They have been provided with absolutely food, water.

This is a four-star hotel in which they have been not detained.

They are being just protected, in which we're processing, helping them go into this transition to head back home.

We are absolutely giving them absolutely everything they need in terms of getting back home.

AMNA NAWAZ: I hear you saying that they're free to leave, but they don't seem to be saying that at all.

We saw those images of people holding up signs in the windows saying, "Please help us."

And they say they had their passports and cell phones taken away.

So where's the mischaracterization here?

CARLOS RUIZ-HERNANDEZ: The mischaracterization is that they're being held.

I mean, we are -- they are being... (CROSSTALK) AMNA NAWAZ: Are they free to leave?

CARLOS RUIZ-HERNANDEZ: They are irregular migrants, illegal migrants that are going through a process of repatriation, which is something that we have been working with the United States government in the previous administration.

And we're -- we have done it for years.

And we're -- the name of the policy is deterrence.

So repatriation works for us.

Our government -- this is a policy that our government is pursuing in terms of deterring migrants and bad nonstate actors in other countries who are facilitating migration in any condition.

So we're trying to protect them and we're receiving them and we're facilitating.

We're providing them with all the assistance that they need to just go back home, because they're not in Panama because they want to be in Panama.

CARLOS RUIZ-HERNANDEZ: They want to be somewhere else, and that somewhere else, it's a close ally of Panama.

And everything migration -- Secretary Rubio was mentioning this.

The previous secretary would have said the same.

AMNA NAWAZ: So, you had a few of them.

They were held there in hotel rooms.

There's also this camp, we understand, in the jungle, in the Darien Gap.

Why is that necessary and how many migrants are held there right now?

CARLOS RUIZ-HERNANDEZ: It's not that it is necessary.

This is exactly how we handle irregular migrants and illegal migrants that come through our country.

Right now, we had -- last year, we had half-a-million migrants, irregular migrants, coming through this treacherous jungle... CARLOS RUIZ-HERNANDEZ: ... going through Panama.

And what we have done, we have set up shelters.

We have set up facilities to help them, to give them water, to provide them for -- access to information, biometrics.

We help them just to continue their voyage.

We give them... AMNA NAWAZ: Continue their voyage, meaning not to the U.S. from these camps.

You are working to deport them back to their countries of origin, correct?

CARLOS RUIZ-HERNANDEZ: Well, the -- that is a very important question.

So, right now, the south-to-north migration is exactly what we have been receiving for all these years.

Now we're seeing a different pattern, and it's brand-new, which is this reverse migration, because of the new policies here in the United States, I'm assuming.

And there's... AMNA NAWAZ: To be clear, this isn't reverse migration.

These are people who are forcibly deported from the U.S. to Panama, correct?

CARLOS RUIZ-HERNANDEZ: Well, I mean, what's going on here in the U.S., if -- I have heard the word due process.

That due process, it's not my position to opine on what's happening here in the United States.

CARLOS RUIZ-HERNANDEZ: What we are providing is precisely that, due process; 299 migrants is exactly what we -- the operation we just did; 200 of them, they're voluntary, wanting to go home.

There are a number of migrants that are actually paying for their own costs to go back home.

AMNA NAWAZ: And, otherwise, is the U.S. covering the additional costs, hotels and repatriation flights?

CARLOS RUIZ-HERNANDEZ: Absolutely.

The United States, through IOM and through our international organizations... CARLOS RUIZ-HERNANDEZ: ... which are set up, and we have been working with them for years, are covering all the costs and everything they need, including if they want refuge or asylum in our country.

They have to go through our due process.

And that's exactly what we have been doing.

AMNA NAWAZ: Can I ask, big picture, why is this something Panama would agree to?

Why is this beneficial for Panama to do this, to accept people deported from the U.S. as essentially a layover and then work to repatriate them to their countries of origin?

CARLOS RUIZ-HERNANDEZ: Thank you.

I mean, because it's deterrence, because we are - - our president, we came into power about six, seven months ago.

The first day our president came, his migration policy is centered around deterrence.

We were getting 1,000 migrants an hour at some point at the height of the crisis.

Now we have reduced that 93 percent of those migrants coming in.

It's reducing.

And we attribute that to the cooperation we have with the United States and other partners to let the migrants know and the nonstate actors who are helping them to start that voyage, don't come because it's dangerous.

CARLOS RUIZ-HERNANDEZ: You want to -- you want to -- some of -- we have young girls being sexually abused in this jungle.

We have people that have died.

Don't come here.

AMNA NAWAZ: You're saying it sends a message.

That's the deterrence.

CARLOS RUIZ-HERNANDEZ: It sends a message.

That is the deterrence that we're trying to protect.

So repatriation is something that it has a lot of benefits for us because we're seeing the numbers going down.

Therefore, the numbers of catastrophe and human disasters is being reduced.

AMNA NAWAZ: What about the people who can't be repatriated?

I mean, are you deporting people to Iran, for example, back to China, if you're worried about human rights abuses back their countries.. (CROSSTALK) CARLOS RUIZ-HERNANDEZ: We are very -- we are very much worried, and -- exactly, which is -- that's why... AMNA NAWAZ: So what happens to them?

CARLOS RUIZ-HERNANDEZ: That's why we're talking to them.

We're talking to their families.

We're talking to the diplomatic channels.

We're providing everything they need.

The international standards are being very, very clear.

IOM is there.

The United Nations is there working hand in hand with us.

And that's something we have done for a long time.

AMNA NAWAZ: But there's no answer for them right now?

And you're talking to them, but that... CARLOS RUIZ-HERNANDEZ: They have to go through a process.

I mean, this happened, I think it was February the 12th or 13th.

CARLOS RUIZ-HERNANDEZ: We received three flights with a specific number.

It's not meant to be institutionalized at this point in terms of receiving migrants, because we have been receiving irregular illegal migrants for a long time.

CARLOS RUIZ-HERNANDEZ: So, at this stage, we want to keep -- continue working with the United States.

There has been no pressure from the U.S. government to receive them or process them.

This is just something that we have been trying to do.

And, again, the mischaracterization is very unfortunate that this picture when with the sign of "Help us," because the help is the - - I think that they want, and I haven't interviewed them myself, is the one thing that we cannot give them, which is a green card.

AMNA NAWAZ: Right.

CARLOS RUIZ-HERNANDEZ: That's the one thing, that's the help that we cannot give.

But we're there to... (CROSSTALK) AMNA NAWAZ: Yes, if I may, because I know our time here is limited, you mentioned there's no pressure.

I'm sure, as you're well aware, we heard from President Trump many times... AMNA NAWAZ: ... before he even came back into office about this plan to retake control of the Panama Canal.

He's posted about it, and he's spoken about it.

He mentioned it in his inauguration speech.

I know you have said, your president has said there was no quid pro quo here, but he has stopped talking about it since Panama began accepting deported migrants.

So you can see how it looks like there was a deal cut here, right?

CARLOS RUIZ-HERNANDEZ: There was no deal.

I mean, in fact, I think the -- two days ago, three days ago, on Friday, he mentioned it again in terms of -- I think he said something at the Republican governors dinner.

AMNA NAWAZ: Reclaiming the Panama Canal.

CARLOS RUIZ-HERNANDEZ: He said -- oh, he was -- he mentioned a few things.

But the point is, there was no deal.

This is a policy that we have been pursuing way before the new president here in the United States was even elected.

We have been collaborating with the United States... CARLOS RUIZ-HERNANDEZ: ... in absolutely everything we can, because, again, this is about deterrence.

This is about treating these poor people humanitarianly, reducing the risk of death in a lot of cases.

We are providing them with psychological help, with medical help, absolutely everything they need.

This is a four-star hotel, for example, in which they have everything they need in terms of assistance.

If they -- again, our government is providing them the opportunity to get asylum, refugee, but they -- I mean, 99.99 percent of the people that come to Panama illegally or irregularly, they don't stay in Panama.

They don't want to stay in my country.

AMNA NAWAZ: They're on their way somewhere else.

CARLOS RUIZ-HERNANDEZ: But there are - - they're always somewhere else, and that's why my president's determined to reduce the number of risks for them.

AMNA NAWAZ: Panama's Vice Minister for Foreign Affairs Carlos Ruiz-Hernandez.

Mr. Minister, thank you for being here.

CARLOS RUIZ-HERNANDEZ: Thank you very much.

AMNA NAWAZ: Appreciate your time.

CARLOS RUIZ-HERNANDEZ: Appreciate it.

Thank you so much.

GEOFF BENNETT: This spring, the annual Met Gala in New York City, one of the bigger fashion events of the year, will highlight the indelible style of Black men.

The Met's 2025 exhibition, titled Superfine: Tailoring Black Style, opens in May and explores the emergence and significance of the Black dandy.

We looked into the rich and complicated historical style and its relevance today.

It's part of our ongoing series, Race Matters.

DANDY WELLINGTON, Style Activist: Now, as you may have noticed, I always have not one, but two wardrobe setups in this office.

GEOFF BENNETT: Growing up in New York City, Dandy Wellington says he started paying special attention to his appearance at an early age, his style inspired by the Harlem Renaissance.

And the name fits his persona.

He's a dandy, closed-tailored, hats-pristine, and attitude-refined.

DANDY WELLINGTON: It's a worldwide community.

So I will be inspired by people who are in Paris, who are in L.A., people who are in the Congo.

There is such a connection to style and also a connection to culture.

The history of Black dandyism and Black sartorial style is complicated.

It's wrapped up in migration and civil rights.

GEOFF BENNETT: Dandyism was first introduced to Black culture during the transatlantic slave trade.

Well-dressed enslaved men were seen as fixtures of wealth for their enslavers.

But tailored attire and wit also offered a path for Black men to imagine possibility and power, from 18th century England to today.

It's a way of being that has evolved with The Times.

ROBIN GIVHAN, The Washington Post: The Black dandy is a complicated figure throughout history.

GEOFF BENNETT: We spoke recently with Washington Post senior critic at large Robin Givhan, who has long covered the fashion industry.

ROBIN GIVHAN: There was this sort of early idea of enslaved Black men who were often sort of dressed in fine clothing in order to reflect the status of the enslaver.

And you also have Black dandies who sort of played with the idea of gender and really sort of tapped into sort of feminine tropes, taking ownership of their body and their presence, but embellishing it in a way that signifies its value and its strength.

GEOFF BENNETT: Tell me more about that, the idea that the Black dandy aesthetic is in some way a form of resistance, in that it challenges stereotypes about Black identity and Black masculinity.

ROBIN GIVHAN: For a lot of dandies, part of their way of dressing is quite emotive and sensual, and that breaks definitely some of the cultural expectations of Black men.

And, at the same time, during the civil rights movement, the way that activists dressed was to reflect the degree of sort of respect that they not only had for themselves, but also the respect that they were demanding from society at large.

GEOFF BENNETT: For some leaders in the fight for civil rights, how they dressed was a critical part of achieving their agenda.

SHANTRELLE P. LEWIS, Author and Curator: Frederick Douglass was the most photographed man amongst his contemporaries in the 19th century, and he dressed up.

Any time you saw Frederick Douglass, he was dressed up.

GEOFF BENNETT: Curator Shantrelle P. Lewis is the author of "Dandy Lion: The Black Dandy and Street Style."

SHANTRELLE P. LEWIS: In the 20th century, W.E.B.

Du Bois was very fixated on fighting racism, fighting oppression through aesthetics.

In the time post-Trayvon Martin, post many different incidents of police violence in the U.S., there was, like, a large mass movement of young Black people in urban areas, whether in the U.S. and the U.K. and South Africa, that began really dressing up for themselves and for their own sense of cultural pride and dignity.

GEOFF BENNETT: Throughout history, Black style movements have been closely linked to individual identity.

And with a style that's moved across the globe, every dandy is unique, each with a swagger of his own.

DANDY WELLINGTON: You could have someone like me who's very much connected to the jazz age and the swing era, vintage as the inspiration, but then, of course, there's also Black dandies that wear on Ankara prints and Black dandies that use streetwear as their mode of expression.

GEOFF BENNETT: There is a generation of Black men, as you well know, who take such pride in dressing to the nines, a perfectly coordinated suit with gleaming alligator shoes.

They would probably describe themselves as having swagger.

They probably wouldn't describe themselves as being a dandy.

How do you draw that line between sort of exuding old-school cool and being a Black dandy?

ROBIN GIVHAN: I grew up in Detroit.

And I think about some of the men who firmly believe that if your shoes were not matching your suit, then you were just sort of not properly dressed.

And for some Black men, just being seen in sort of full technicolor is an incredible victory.

GEOFF BENNETT: In the U.S., the bold fashion is seen coast to coast from Hollywood red carpets to the NBA and the Metropolitan Museum of Art.

This year's Met Gala's theme, Superfine: Tailoring Black Style, will explore the history of the Black dandy.

And while historically a dandy traditionally referred to men, the movement has grown.

SHANTRELLE P. LEWIS: One of the first contemporary Black dandies to get a lot of attention was Janelle Monae.

And she was known for wearing her black and white suits.

And, of course, it was a nod to her grandmother, who cleaned for a living.

LAKYN CARLTON, The Ethical Stylist: Secondhand thrifting.

GEOFF BENNETT: For younger generations coming into their own, Lakyn Carlton, known as The Ethical Stylist, advises her clients not to break the bank.

LAKYN CARLTON: So you go to the thrift store, you see in the menswear section, there's always so many suits and blazers and slacks and things like that.

That's where you start.

GEOFF BENNETT: And every outing brings a new opportunity to add to the wardrobe.

DANDY WELLINGTON: This is a straw boater that I found in England.

Vintage shopping is a big part of how I find some of the things.

Of course, there are modern designers who make incredible things, but there's something about the craftsmanship of these items.

GEOFF BENNETT: A style now center stage at the Super Bowl of the fashion industry.

How does it strike you that The Met has taken this on as their theme for this year's gala?

ROBIN GIVHAN: There's a little bit of courageousness in it.

This one has the benefit of really coming at a time when questions about diversity and identity and gender are very much at the center of cultural and political conversations.

And so I think it's quite timely.

GEOFF BENNETT: And for Dandy Wellington: DANDY WELLINGTON: At the end of the day, it is just me.

It's what brings me joy, you know?

Whether I'm going to the supermarket or I'm going to the Metropolitan Museum of Art, the style is always with me.

GEOFF BENNETT: And that is the "News Hour" for tonight.

I'm Geoff Bennett.

AMNA NAWAZ: And I'm Amna Nawaz.

On behalf of the entire "News Hour" team, thank you for joining us.