Trump’s Strategy: Aiming for DACA Recipients and Immigrant Communities

Former President Donald Trump has made clear his intentions regarding immigration policies if he returns to office, emphasizing plans to deport millions of undocumented immigrants with potential assistance from the National Guard or military. These proposals lack congressional oversight; however, their large-scale execution poses significant logistical and financial challenges.

According to estimates, carrying out mass deportations could cost between $88 billion to over $300 billion annually. Trump would face substantial hurdles as the federal government relies on state and local jurisdictions for cooperation in these efforts. Legal precedent prohibits the president from compelling states to enforce federal immigration laws, which creates a significant barrier.

Several states, including New York, California, and Massachusetts, have enacted laws limiting their participation in federal immigration enforcement, particularly against low-level offenders. For instance, California employers cannot allow Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) to access certain areas of their workplaces without a warrant. States can further establish mechanisms to restrict compliance through local laws.

While the federal government could incentivize state cooperation with funding, legal rulings suggest that withholding federal funds to coerce states would be unconstitutional. Consequently, states like Texas and Arizona have recently passed legislation mandating local law enforcement cooperation with federal immigration authorities.

Even though federal immigration officers may legally operate within those states, local law enforcement can choose not to assist. Some areas resist cooperation altogether, limiting the federal government’s ability to disseminate information and implement border enforcement effectively.

The uncertainty surrounding the future of the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program also looms large. DACA beneficiaries number around 580,000, and Trump could choose to end the program without further legal actions by directing the Justice Department to withdraw appeals currently defending it. This would expose the recipients, who initially revealed their undocumented status to apply for DACA, to potential deportation.

Moreover, Trump has indicated plans to eliminate various humanitarian parole programs that permit individuals from conflict-affected nations temporary legal residency. This could impact many individuals from countries like Afghanistan and Ukraine, alongside those protected under Temporary Protected Status, which Biden has expanded.

Another controversial proposal involves birthright citizenship. Trump could theoretically halt officials from issuing Social Security numbers or passports to individuals unable to verify their parents’ citizenship. However, challenges based on the Fourteenth Amendment may arise, invoking legal disputes over interpretations of citizenship rights.

Lastly, Trump has discussed utilizing the Alien Enemies Act to facilitate deportations, particularly aimed at specific ethnic groups. This approach faces legal limitations, as it necessitates a state of war or invasion for the president to act under this statute, making its application improbable.

As Trump navigates these complex issues, a palpable tension persists between his ambitions and the legal frameworks governing immigration enforcement, a landscape likely to see continued debate and litigation.