When former President George W. Bush's administration saw a spike in arrests at America's southern border, he spearheaded Operation Streamline and opened a handful of fast-paced courts to clear a backlog of immigration trials.

The program still exists today, and can crank out eight deportation verdicts in as little as four minutes. That's about one verdict every 30 seconds — a rapid-fire pace that lawyers, and even one judge, say is probably too fast for defendants to understand, BuzzFeed News reports.

Operation Streamline kicked off in 2005 with a few courts in Texas. It's since expanded to New Mexico, Arizona, and, just this week, California. Under the program, migrants are given public attorneys who are often juggling multiple cases in a day, BuzzFeed News says. The defendants get 20 to 40 minutes with a lawyer before they're shuffled into a courtroom with a handful of other migrants, where they're given headsets that translate English proceedings to Spanish — even if that's not their native language.

Attorneys and activists say the system results in most migrants pleading guilty and being deported, likely without a clue what's happening. Lawyers who spoke to BuzzFeed News acknowledge how problematic this can seem — and so did one immigration judge. "I am aware that a person could probably make it through the proceedings without a thorough understanding of their rights and the court proceedings," U.S. District Court Judge Leslie Bowman said during one case.

But some defense attorneys say the quick pace is actually better than proceedings before Operation Streamline. Under the previous process, migrants often waited in detention for weeks or months before getting a trial; now, they're detained for less than 72 hours and sent on the first bus home. Read more at BuzzFeed News. Kathryn Krawczyk

Sen. Kamala Harris (D-Calif.) wants to shake up the current state of U.S. labor law, which often overlooks a crucial part of the country's workforce.

The 2020 Democratic presidential candidate announced on Monday that she is introducing the National Domestic Workers Bill of Rights, a first-of-its-kind piece of legislation that, if passed, would provide legal protections and benefits to millions of people who work as nannies, house cleaners, and home care workers, who are often immigrants and women of color. Currently, these professions have few federal protections and benefit guarantees.

"The courageous working-class women, women of color, and immigrant women who are demanding their rights today are unwilling to be excluded any longer," Rep. Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.), who is co-sponsoring the bill, said. "When domestic workers win everyone wins."

The protections and benefits — such as sick days and fair scheduling — would reportedly be enforced through grants to organizations that represent domestic workers. Additionally, the bill would address issues like health care, retirement, and workplace sexual harassment and discrimination.

However, the bill's ultimate fate might be to serve as method of changing the debate around labor laws. The National Domestic Workers Alliance reportedly does not expect it to pass on the first try because of the majority-Republican Senate.

The bill reportedly received input from domestic workers for the last two years. Read more at Fast Company. Tim O'Donnell

Joe Biden's anti-busing stance was a lot harsher than he's previously been willing to admit.

The former vice president's opposition to federally mandated busing to integrate schools during his early senatorial career hit the mainstream in last month's Democratic primary debates, when Sen. Kamala Harris (D-Calif.) revealed how she'd benefited from busing as a child. That sparked the The New York Times' deep dive into "how Joe Biden became the Democrats' anti-busing crusader," which, published Monday, digs up a slew of anti-busing quotes from Biden's long political record.

Biden has tied his long civil rights record into his presidential campaign, and some black leaders in Wilmington, Delaware praised Biden for it. Yet he also "promoted nearly a dozen pieces of legislation" aimed at limiting federal busing programs, and despite his claims otherwise, outright said "I oppose busing" in 1975, the Times reports. And in 1977, Biden made a particularly questionable argument against using busing to achieve integration.

The quote comes from a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing on the "busing of schoolchildren," during which Biden vehemently argued for a bill that would remove a U.S. court's power to "issue school transportation orders based on race, color, or national origin," per a congressional summary. Biden said part of the bill's goal was to ensure "orderly integration" with agreement between Congress and federal courts.

Biden at the June Democratic debate forcefully said he opposed federal busing but supported its use in individual school districts. That contradicts Biden's June assurance that he has "always been in favor of using federal authority to overcome state-initiated segregation." Read more about Biden's anti-busing record at The New York Times. Kathryn Krawczyk

President Trump on Monday continued to defend his tweets telling four minority congresswomen to "go back" to where they came from as the House of Representatives planned to vote on a resolution condemning the remarks.

Trump during an event on Monday said that the congresswomen he targeted in the tweet, including Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.), "in my opinion hate our country" and that "if they're not happy here, they can leave." Trump also said that the congresswomen "have to love our country." Asked if he's concerned about his tweets being seen as racist, including by white supremacists, Trump said he's not.

"It doesn't concern me because many people agree with me," Trump said.

Trump spoke shortly after House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) announced that the House will consider a resolution condemning Trump's tweets, encouraging Republicans to join with Democrats in voting for it.

"The House cannot allow the president's characterization of immigrants to our country to stand," Pelosi said, The Hill reports. "Our Republican colleagues must join us in condemning the President's xenophobic tweets." Some GOP lawmakers have begun to push back on Trump's remarks, the latest being Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine), who in a statement on Monday afternoon said Trump's comments were "way out of line" and "he should take that down." Brendan Morrow

After President Trump over the weekend tweeted that several minority congresswomen should "go back" to where they came from, some Republican lawmakers are beginning to criticize his remarks.

Rep. Chip Roy (R-Texas) on Twitter late on Sunday said that Trump's comments were "wrong," while Rep. Fred Upton (R-Mich.) on Monday called them "really uncalled for" and "very disappointing," also speculating that "a good number of my Republican colleagues don't appreciate the comments as well," The Washington Post reports.

Roy and Upton were soon joined by their Republican colleague Rep. Paul Mitchell (D-Mich.), who tweeted that "we must be better than comments" like Trump's, which are "beneath leaders."

Rep. Will Hurd (R-Texas) also blasted Trump's tweets as "racist" and "xenophobic" on Monday while adding that the president's behavior is "unbecoming of the leader of the free world," CNN reports. Rep. Pete Olson (R-Texas) said the tweet is "not reflective" of his district's values and called on Trump to "immediately disavow his comments." And Sen. Pat Toomey (R-Pa.) said Trump "was wrong" to say what he did because "three of the four were born in America," encouraging the president to critique the congresswomen for their ideas, CNN reports.

Sen. Rob Portman (R-Ohio) is the latest Republican to speak out, saying that Trump's comments were "divisive, unnecessary and wrong," reports NBC News' Frank Thorp.

Outside of Congress, former Ohio Gov. John Kasich also condemned Trump's tweets as "deplorable and beneath the dignity of the office," reports NBC News' Kelly O'Donnell, while former Republican Sen. Jeff Flake called the remarks "vile and offensive."

These comments come after earlier silence from most Republicans and after Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) on Fox & Friends recommended that Trump "aim higher" but did not condemn the tweets, suggesting the spirit of Trump's remarks was correct because the lawmakers he was attacking "hate our own country." Trump on Monday denied that his tweets were racist. Brendan Morrow

Immigrants across the U.S. buckled down in preparation for promised deportation raids over the weekend. They never came.

Several news reports had indicated Immigration and Customs Enforcement officers were headed to at least 10 major cities this weekend for deportation raids, with President Trump later confirming they were supposed to be a deterrent for prospective migrants. Instead, immigrant-heavy neighborhoods turned "eerily quiet" and pro-immigrant protesters took to the streets, but very few ICE agents actually came knocking, NPR reports.

ICE agents were reportedly set to single out about 2,000 migrants with deportation orders on Sunday, and Mexican officials said they were ready for the influx, per The Associated Press. Yet ICE agents were only reported at three residences in New York City, and the people there didn't open their doors, The New York Times reports. Democrats and advocates had warned immigrants not to open their doors to law enforcement without signed judicial warrants ahead of the reported operations — though the Times notes that agents sometimes devise tricky tactics to lure people outside.

Promised raids in Miami similarly "never got underway" even though some families hid in "secret shelters," the Miami Herald reports. That's because, as the Times reports, "plans for the operation were changed at the last minute" after news reports "tipped off immigrant communities about what to expect." Current and former Homeland Security officials now say that instead of one large-scale sweep, ICE will conduct smaller raids over the span of a week. That week of crackdowns reportedly started Sunday, though "individual ICE field offices were given the discretion to decide when to begin," the Times continues. Kathryn Krawczyk

The Jeffrey Epstein case just keeps getting stranger.

During Epstein's bail hearing on Monday, federal prosecutors disclosed the contents of Epstein's safe after the FBI raided his Manhattan residences last week. Sure, they found "piles of cash." And some diamonds, too. That's to be expected.

But Alex Rossmiller, one of the prosecutors, reportedly revealed a more startling discovery.

One can only speculate about why Epstein has the passport and if he ever used it, but the enigma grows. No one can pinpoint how Epstein accrued his wealth, there are reports of a steel safe in a secretive room on his private island, and there are longstanding rumors, which may have been substantiated, that he has compiled blackmail to use against his powerful associates. Add the passport to the list.

Of course, these mysteries should not overshadow the actual reason Epstein is in the news — he has been charged with sex trafficking minors for years and accused of sexual abuse. But perhaps as investigators been to unravel this sprawling tale, some of the weirder components will begin to shed light on Epstein's alleged criminal history. Tim O'Donnell