Donald Trump, as President-elect, has made sweeping commitments regarding immigration and border policies, including promises of an unprecedented deportation campaign.
However, achieving these goals could prove difficult, similar to the hurdles faced during his first term. His prior administration encountered numerous legal challenges, with some policies being struck down due to procedural flaws, technicalities, or conflicts with existing laws.
RelatedPosts
One of the main obstacles is the lack of adequate personnel to enforce his proposed measures, particularly as Trump has indicated that all 13 million undocumented immigrants could be targeted for deportation.
Rep. Veronica Escobar (D-Texas), representing a border district, voiced concerns about the feasibility of such plans, noting that their implementation could inflict damage on the economy and workforce.
Although mass deportation proposals raise economic and logistical questions, Trump will inherit a robust immigration enforcement system capable of locating and removing individuals.
Yet, his pledge to surpass previous administrations in deportation efforts presents challenges. For example, the Biden administration reported a 10-year high of 271,484 deportations in 2024, per the latest Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) data. Expanding these operations would demand confronting political, legal, and economic barriers.
Executing large-scale deportations on this scale would require a monumental budget. Incoming border czar Tom Homan acknowledged that the extent of such efforts would hinge on congressional funding, confirming plans to target all undocumented individuals.
Homan stated on CNN that any individual without legal status could be subject to removal, emphasizing the illegality of unauthorized entry into the country.
Estimates from the American Immigration Council reveal that deporting 1 million people annually from the 13 million undocumented population could cost approximately $88 billion, exceeding the Department of Homeland Security’s current budget.
Rep. Escobar pointed out the uncertainty surrounding how Republicans might structure the program’s budget or whether Trump would follow through on his promises at the proposed scale.
Escobar also highlighted the political pressure Trump faces, particularly from agricultural and business leaders concerned about workforce shortages. Under this pressure, Trump has shifted his rhetoric at times to focus primarily on deporting individuals with criminal records, an approach already prioritized by the Biden administration.
Immigrants, who statistically commit fewer crimes than native-born individuals, often face heightened scrutiny and policing through ICE, Border Patrol, and other agencies.
Rep. Adriano Espaillat (D-N.Y.), incoming chair of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus, explained how even minor infractions, such as loitering or public disturbances, could render individuals deportable.
Advocates warn that while legal tools exist to carry out such policies, securing the funding required for widespread deportations remains a challenge. Programs like Temporary Protected Status (TPS) and DACA, which rely on executive authority, could be revoked, seriously impacting immigrant protections.
Rep. Zoe Lofgren (D-Calif.) noted that laws like the 1996 Immigration Reform Act allow expedited removal of individuals undocumented for less than two years within certain zones, but determining an individual’s duration of stay poses challenges.
Homan has indicated that achieving Trump’s goals would necessitate substantial increases in resources, including at least 100,000 detention beds and more border agents, which he estimates would cost $86 billion.
Some Republican lawmakers, led by Sen. Rick Scott (R-Fla.), have begun rallying for these resources, proposing additional agents, detention facilities, and financial penalties to encourage self-deportation.
Trump’s proposals also face potential legal challenges. His plan to end birthright citizenship, a right guaranteed under the 14th Amendment, would require a constitutional amendment, a process certain to ignite fierce political battles.
Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-Md.), a constitutional law expert, emphasized that any attempt to bypass this process would meet robust opposition. Using military forces to aid deportation efforts raises additional concerns.
Critics argue that such actions exceed legal authority, as even emergency powers do not permit the military to conduct arrests or detentions. While Trump faced court opposition to immigration policies during his first term, his administration managed to advance certain initiatives by revising and refining their execution, such as the controversial travel ban.
Several Trump policies were overturned not on substantive grounds but due to procedural missteps, including violations of the Administrative Procedure Act. Examples include efforts to alter asylum rules and redirect funds for the border wall.
Improper staffing within the Department of Homeland Security also led to policies being invalidated, as acting officials lacked the legal authority to implement major decisions.
Should Trump bypass Senate confirmations for key roles in his second term, similar issues could arise. However, Escobar expressed skepticism that procedural laws would effectively deter Trump, suggesting he may disregard legal norms and constitutional boundaries to pursue his agenda.
