Federal law enforcement officials arrested an illegal alien terror suspect from Africa late last month after he was apprehended and released into the U.S. after being caught unlawfully entering the country.

Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents in New York City arrested the 29-year-old illegal alien on October 10, just seven days after he “unlawfully” entered the U.S. near Lukeville, Arizona — more than 2,000 miles away.

“Officials processed him and served him a notice to appear as a noncitizen present without admission or parole,” ICE said in a statement. “The noncitizen was released on his own recognizance and provided with documentation to report to ERO New York City.”

ICE was not even sure where the suspect was from, referring to him in their statement as an “unlawfully present Mauritanian or Senegalese citizen.”

The suspect, who was not named, was wanted by Senegalese authorities for criminal conspiracy in relation to a terrorist organization; destruction, degradation and damages in relation to a terrorist organization; acts or preparatory acts aimed at compromising public safety or causing serious political troubles; direct provocation of an armed crowd; and holding arms without prior administrative authorization, according to the press release.

“Noncitizens who are engaged in or suspected of supporting terrorism are a direct threat to our country’s national security and will be expeditiously removed from the United States,” said ERO New York City Field Office Director Kenneth Genalo. “ERO New York City will use every tool at our disposal to keep American citizens and residents safe from those who erroneously believe they can exploit our immigration laws to escape justice in other countries. We remain committed to working with our law enforcement partners to ensure individuals who commit unspeakable acts of violence are held accountable.”

The terrorist suspect will remain in U.S. custody without bond until he is deported, officials said.

A Border Patrol source explained to Fox News correspondent Bill Melugin how a situation like this unfolds.

“If BP checks come up negative then they assume he’s clear, if derogatory info is developed through another source like an attaché or biometrics info, that shows up later, then it gets loaded into a shared database,” the source said. “BP doesn’t have the luxury of sitting on these folks for weeks.”

I asked a trusted Border Patrol source how something like this can happen?

Reaponse: “If BP checks come up negative then they assume he’s clear, if derogatory info is developed through another source like an attaché or biometrics info, that shows up later, then it gets loaded…

— Bill Melugin (@BillMelugin_) November 3, 2023

The news comes after U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) revealed late last month that for the month of September, there were 269,735 illegal alien encounters — the highest single-month total ever recorded.

September’s numbers close out Fiscal Year 2023 with a total of 2,475,669 illegal alien encounters. President Joe Biden’s illegal immigration crisis on the southern border has worsened every year that he has been in office, with Fiscal Year 2022 having 2,378,944 encounters and Fiscal Year 2021 having 1,734,686 encounters.

The 2,475,669 illegal alien encounters for Fiscal Year 2023 is the highest level recorded in U.S. history.

CLICK HERE TO GET THE DAILY WIRE APP

Additionally, 169 illegal aliens on the terrorist watchlist were arrested in Fiscal Year 2023, bringing the total number arrested under Biden to 282.

During the Biden era, federal agents have also encountered 72,823 “special interest aliens” attempting to enter the country illegally. “Special interest aliens” are illegal aliens that come from countries that are considered breeding grounds for terrorism.

Related: Palestinian In U.S. Illegally Arrested On Gun Charge In Texas, Was Planning Terror Attack On Jews: Report

Over the summer, the U.S. Supreme Court delivered a landmark victory for free speech in 303 Creative v. Elenis. The court reaffirmed the bedrock First Amendment principle that the government may not compel Americans to speak a message that violates their beliefs. That freedom protects everyone, and all views — those that we like and those that we loathe.

But it’s one thing to acknowledge these truisms, it’s another thing to apply them. That is now the responsibility of lower courts across the country. And it’s our responsibility, as citizens, to safeguard this cherished freedom.

In 303 Creative, the Supreme Court held that Colorado could not misuse a law to compel graphic designer Lorie Smith to design custom websites that celebrate a view of marriage that violates her beliefs. That decision rightly resolved a critical legal question that had been percolating in lower courts for years.

But many artists before Lorie endured a different outcome. And other artists are still waiting for courts to apply 303 Creative to prevent state or local governments from compelling their speech.

Ten years ago, the New Mexico Supreme Court decided that a state law required photographer Elaine Huguenin to create photographs that contradicted her religious beliefs. That decision forced Elaine to close her business to avoid betraying her faith. Adding insult to injury, one New Mexico Supreme Court justice infamously told Elaine that sacrificing her beliefs was “the price of citizenship” in America.

Around that same time, cake artist Jack Phillips first drew the ire of Colorado officials. He was asked to create a custom wedding cake celebrating a same-sex wedding. Jack declined because that would have forced him to express a message about marriage he does not believe. Colorado sued him, and his case went to the U.S. Supreme Court, where justices criticized state officials for demonstrating “a clear and impermissible hostility towards” Jack’s faith.

Undeterred, just a few days later, Colorado took legal action against Jack again. But the state quickly settled after evidence revealed Colorado’s ongoing hostility against Jack. Now, he’s in the midst of his third related lawsuit, which the Colorado Supreme Court will hear next year .

Throughout the country, artists whose businesses and creations are inextricably connected to and guided by their faith found themselves bearing the weight of government coercion.

Barronelle Stutzman, a great-grandmother and custom floral artist from Washington, spent nearly 10 years standing for her constitutional rights. She eventually settled her case, which allowed her to retire with her conscience intact. Blaine Adamson, a promotional print shop owner, had to defend his freedom to design custom t-shirts consistent with his beliefs up to Kentucky’s Supreme Court. Along the way, he received vitriolic emails and calls. Large customers pulled their business, too. 

Many other artists — including calligraphers, videographers, and photographers — also took a stand to defend their freedom to create art reflecting their deeply held beliefs.

These artists have three things in common. First, they serve all people, including those who identify as LGBT. Their decisions to accept or decline a project always depend on the message they’re being asked to express, not on the identity of the person making the request.

Second, each artist has faced severe penalties for violating the law — devastating financial costs, mandatory educational programs, and jail time for declining to say something they don’t believe.

And third, each of them simply wants the freedom to create art that is consistent with their faith. Put differently, they desire the freedom to decide for themselves what messages to express through their art.

The 303 Creative decision assures them — and all Americans — of this right. But the implications of this ruling now come front and center in two separate cases that are currently on appeal.

These cases involve Chelsey Nelson and Emilee Carpenter who create photographs and write blogs that celebrate their belief that marriage is the union of one man and one woman. Chelsey and Emilee are challenging local laws that would compel them to promote different views of marriage.

Both have asked their respective appellate courts to apply the same First Amendment protections affirmed in 303 Creative to their cases.

Their arguments go like this. Photographs and blogs are speech; they communicate ides. Chelsey and Emilee gladly serve people of all backgrounds, including those who identify as LGBT. Like most artists, there are some messages they can’t create, regardless of who asks. And 303 Creative held that the government cannot compel an artist to say something that contradicts their beliefs. That’s a right that runs to the soul of what it means to be an American.

It’s a right so many have sacrificed so much to preserve for their fellow citizens. May our nation’s best judges recognize the worth of that sacrifice – not as “the price of citizenship,” but as its highest privilege.

Bryan Neihart is legal counsel with Alliance Defending Freedom (@ADFLegal).

The views expressed in this piece are those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of The Daily Wire.