Amid the rapid developments in the initial days of Donald Trump’s second presidency, one significant issue has emerged: the plans to fulfill his campaign commitment to undertake the largest deportation effort in US history.
In a series of announcements, Trump has declared a national emergency at the US-Mexico border, which facilitates increased military deployment in border areas, and has suspended the refugee resettlement program indefinitely, thereby limiting access to asylum.
“We will begin the process of returning millions and millions of criminal aliens back to the places from which they came,” Trump proclaimed during his inauguration speech. He later identified the border as his “number-one issue.”
With about 11 million individuals residing in the US without permanent legal status, a truly extensive deportation initiative would profoundly affect American society, its economy, and the national identity.
Such a deportation strategy would confront significant financial, legal, and logistical challenges at every phase: identification, apprehension, detention, and removal. The federal government currently lacks the necessary systems, facilities, and, at times, the legal powers to execute the operations envisioned by Trump.
According to pro-immigration advocacy group American Immigration Council, managing a mass deportation effort could take over a decade and cost near $1 trillion.
Former Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) acting director John Torres emphasized the complexity of such a task, noting that “it’s not like you just flip a switch and just immediately start rounding people up and sending them to the border.” ICE manages deportations from the interior of the US, while Customs and Border Protection (CBP) handles border-related removals.
Currently, ICE’s resources are already stretched. In fiscal year 2024, under President Biden, ICE deported 271,484 unauthorized immigrants, marking a ten-year high. This figure nearly mirrors the peak of 267,000 deportations during Trump’s first term in fiscal year 2019.
Doris Meissner, a former commissioner of the Immigration and Naturalization Service, now at the Migration Policy Institute, described the idea of achieving 1 to 2 million deportations annually as “aspirational” and likely unrealistic given available resources.
The Trump administration has shown the willingness to pursue aggressive measures to realize its aims, including the potential use of an obscure wartime law that could allow for the detention and deportation of citizens from enemy nations, and plans to increase capacity through private prison contractors.
However, many experts and former immigration officials have expressed skepticism about the feasibility of these ambitions. David Bier from the Cato Institute remarked on the impossibility of eliminating all undocumented immigrants from the US.
One of the first challenges for Trump’s team is detaining the individuals they wish to deport. The Trump administration, alongside Tom Homan, its immigration chief, has indicated a focus on expelling undocumented individuals with criminal records, which might present a more favorable public image for increased deportations.
According to ICE, there were about 662,566 non-citizens with criminal convictions or pending charges as of July last year; approximately 15,000 were already detained by the agency, with about 148,000 charged with serious offenses such as assault or murder.
Yet, the definition of “criminal” is broad, encompassing many individuals cited for lesser offenses like traffic violations. John Sandweg, a former acting director of ICE, stated that while agents may have leads on individuals who have committed serious crimes, locating and apprehending them requires significant traditional policing effort, including community relations.
The focus on deporting undocumented migrants with criminal histories is consistent but the Trump administration claims it is enhancing coordination across various governmental departments for more effective action. The Pentagon, for instance, announced the deployment of around 1,500 active-duty troops along the border, a 60% increase in ground forces.
Homan also indicated a planned rise in “collateral arrests,” in which individuals not initially targeted are apprehended during enforcement operations.
Lucas Guttentag, a law professor at Stanford, noted that mass deportation could inevitably lead to many individuals who do not meet the criminal profile being caught up in the sweep, despite an effort to manage public perception by targeting specific offenders.
Any increase in arrests will also hinge on cooperation from local law enforcement agencies. The federal government lacks control over state and local authorities and thus relies on 287(g) agreements, voluntary partnerships that grant ICE enforcement powers in local jurisdictions.
In a recent executive order, Trump instructed the government to pursue such agreements wherever legally possible. His administration appears poised to confront “sanctuary” jurisdictions that provide limited cooperation with federal immigration enforcement.
During his initial term, Trump attempted to withhold federal funding from localities with “sanctuary” laws, actions that were blocked by US courts. He has revived this approach, directing relevant authorities to ensure that jurisdictions interfering with federal law enforcement do not receive federal funds.
The Department of Justice has initiated investigations into local officials who do not comply with immigration-related directives, interpreted by many as a thinly-veiled threat.
Recently, Congress passed the Laken Riley Act, mandating detention until deportation for undocumented immigrants charged with additional offenses. Trump is expected to sign this bill, marking a legislative win in his second term.
Additionally, Trump is expanding the authority of arrest by revoking prior guidelines that limited ICE from making arrests near sensitive locations, which may have negative ramifications for community access to essential services.
Elora Mukherjee from Columbia Law School noted that the fear instilled by such policies could discourage immigrant communities from engaging in everyday activities.
The political implications of a substantial uptick in arrests remain uncertain. Trump faced significant backlash regarding family separations during his first term, and distressing images of mass detentions could provoke similar condemnation.
Former ICE officials have noted that calls often come from Republican Congress members questioning certain deportations, indicating the potential political ramifications of community reactions.
Should the administration succeed in detaining a greater number of undocumented immigrants, housing them poses another issue. With ICE currently able to detain a capacity of 41,500 individuals, meeting the projected need for “at least 100,000 beds” will be challenging.
The American Immigration Council suggests that to deport all 11 million undocumented residents, ICE would have to establish 216 new detention facilities annually, each holding 500 individuals.
Private prisons will likely play a significant role in housing detained individuals, with a substantial percentage of detentions in 2023 attributable to private facilities. Stock prices for leading private prison companies have soared following Trump’s re-election, driven by his promise to reverse previous shifts in federal contracts.
While private prison operators express readiness to rapidly expand capacity, the cost implications of such expansions are considerable. An estimate suggests that if the administration pursues deportation for all undocumented residents, an expenditure of $66 billion annually would be necessary just for constructing and maintaining detention sites.
Even with promises of substantial funding for border enforcement from Republican leadership, the resources necessary for implementation pose significant challenges, particularly in the short term.
The ultimate logistical hurdle is carrying out the deportations of detained individuals. While individuals with existing deportation orders may be swiftly removed, the majority facing deportation will enter lengthy immigration court processes, which are already under strain.
The backlog in immigration courts has escalated dramatically, from 656,000 pending cases in 2017 to 3.6 million at the end of fiscal year 2024.
Trump is attempting to bypass these courts by enhancing the “expedited removal” process, which enables quicker deportation for undocumented immigrants unable to demonstrate two years of residence, now applicable throughout the US rather than just near the borders.
This change aims to improve national security and reduce costs associated with the immigration process, according to the Department of Homeland Security.
Moreover, opposition from some nations to which deportees are meant to be sent can complicate matters. For instance, Colombia recently refused entry to military flights carrying migrants, stipulating that they should be transported on civilian aircraft with dignity.
Trump’s immigration policies are anticipated to undergo significant legal scrutiny, with multiple lawsuits already filed against his administration’s measures, including a challenge to the expanded “expedited removal” process.
Civil rights groups have contended that these policies are targeted at advancing a mass deportation initiative and undermine constitutional rights. The administration has indicated that it will contest these legal challenges.
Tom Homan acknowledged that achieving full deportation of all unauthorized immigrants may not be realistic, stating, “We can do what we can with the money we have.” However, he maintains that the administration will proceed with increased detentions and will apply pressure on local officials resisting these actions.
“Sanctuary cities are going to get exactly what they don’t want — more agents in the communities, more people arrested, more collateral arrests,” Homan remarked.
photo credit: www.ft.com
