Connect with us

Politics

Trump says he'll undertake the 'largest deportation' in U.S. history. Can he do that?

Published

on

Trump says he'll undertake the 'largest deportation' in U.S. history. Can he do that?

Former President Trump has promised that, if reelected, he will kick out millions of immigrants living in the U.S. illegally.

Trump and his surrogates have offered sparse details for how he would carry out the “largest deportation operation in American history,” but have cemented the goal as a top priority. What is known: The strategy would rely on military troops, friendly state and local law enforcement, and wartime powers.

“No one’s off the table,” Tom Homan, Trump’s former head of Immigration and Customs Enforcement, said in July. “If you’re in the country illegally, you better be looking over your shoulder.”

Republican vice presidential nominee JD Vance said the administration would start by deporting immigrants who have committed crimes.

Advertisement

At a campaign rally earlier this month in Aurora, Colo., Trump said he would invoke the Alien Enemies Act of 1798 “to target and dismantle every migrant criminal network operating on American soil.”

The ex-president went on to say that he would send “elite squads” of federal law enforcement officers to “hunt down, arrest and deport” every migrant gang member. Those who attempt to return to the U.S. would be served with 10-year prison sentences without parole, he said, adding that any migrant who kills a U.S. citizen or law enforcement officer would face the death penalty.

How many people would Trump go after?

It’s unclear.

In May, Trump told Time magazine he would target 15 million to 20 million people who he said are living illegally in the U.S. The nonpartisan Pew Research Center estimates the actual number to be about 11 million as of 2022. More than 2 million people have entered the country illegally since then.

“Let’s start with 1 million,” Vance told ABC News in August.

Advertisement

During his entire presidency, from January 2017 to January 2021, Trump deported about 1.5 million immigrants, according to a Migration Policy Institute analysis of federal figures — far fewer than the 2 million to 3 million he speculated about deporting in a 2016 interview as president-elect. The Biden administration is on pace to match Trump’s deportation numbers.

What powers would Trump invoke to justify deportations?

The Alien Enemies Act of 1798 allows the president to arrest, imprison or deport immigrants from a country considered an enemy of the U.S. during wartime. Congress passed the law as part of the Alien and Sedition Acts — four laws that tightened restrictions on foreign-born Americans and limited criticism of the government, when the country was on the brink of war with France.

The law has been used three times in American history: during the War of 1812 and World War I and after the attack on Pearl Harbor during World War II.

During WWI, federal authorities placed 6,300 “enemy aliens” — many from Germany — into internment camps.

By the end of WWII, more than 31,000 people from Japan, Germany and Italy, as well as some Jewish refugees from Nazi Germany, had been interned at camps and military facilities — in addition to the more than 100,000 Japanese Americans who were forcibly relocated to the same camps and detained under different legal grounds, said Gabriel “Jack” Chin, a UC Davis professor who studies criminal and immigration law.

Advertisement

Chin said he isn’t convinced that Trump would make the Alien Enemies Act the cornerstone of his immigration policy because the U.S. is not in a declared war with another nation.

“It would have to rest on an argument that random immigration — that is to say immigration based on individual decisions of individual people — is the equivalent of an invasion from a nation-state,” he said. “And that would have to be based on an idea that foreigners as a group are a nation.”

Trump has also said he would deploy National Guard troops under the orders of sympathetic governors.

“If I thought things were getting out of control, I would have no problem using the military,” he told Time.

Federal law limits the involvement of military troops in civilian law enforcement.

Advertisement

In 2018, Trump sent 5,800 active-duty troops to the southwestern border amid the arrival of a caravan of thousands of migrants from Central America. Initially the troops performed support work such as laying razor wire as a deterrent to crossing, but later the White House expanded their authority to allow them to use force and provide crowd control to protect border agents.

Last year, President Biden sent 1,500 Army and Marine Corps troops to fill critical “capability gaps” at the border as the administration lifted the Title 42 border expulsions policy that Trump had invoked to turn away asylum seekers and other would-be immigrants as the COVID-19 pandemic raged.

Trump has promised to go further during a second term by recalling thousands of troops from overseas to be stationed at the U.S.-Mexico border. He has also explored using troops to assist with deportations and confronting civil unrest.

Using the Alien Enemies Act, Trump could conduct rapid deportations without the typically required legal processes. He could also circumvent federal law to use military troops in a broader law enforcement capacity to carry out arrests and removals.

But speeding up the deportation process could come with catastrophic consequences, Chin said. Scores of U.S. citizens are already mistakenly deported.

Advertisement

“If the point of this was a roundup, U.S. citizens would be rounded up,” he said.

Katherine Yon Ebright, an attorney at the Brennan Center for Justice, argued in an analysis of the law that courts would likely avoid opining on the presence or absence of an invasion, or whether the perpetrator of the alleged invasion is a foreign nation or government.

“The courts’ hesitance to weigh in on these questions heightens the risk that Trump will invoke the Alien Enemies Act despite its clear inapplicability,” she wrote. But she added that “courts may strike down an invocation of the Alien Enemies Act under modern due process and equal protection law, justiciable grounds for checking abusive presidential action.”

Tom Jawetz, deputy general counsel at the Department of Homeland Security from 2021 to 2022, said courts tend to give deference to the president for executive determinations. But he said this one could be difficult to uphold.

“There could be opportunities for legal attack,” he said. “It sounds like they would be stretching it beyond its capacity, beyond what the text [of the law] would allow.”

Advertisement

Is it feasible?

Deporting millions of people would be expensive and logistically complex.

Former President Obama, who in 2013 oversaw the most deportations in a year when his administration kicked out 438,000 immigrants, relied on local police turning people over to federal immigration agents. Trump has said he would similarly rely on state and local law enforcement. But many state and local governments, including California, have since limited their cooperation with immigration agents.

Immigration courts are already overwhelmed, and more deportation cases would add to the backlog of 3.7 million cases. Lengthy delays in immigration court proceedings mean immigrants often wait years before their case is completed.

Among the rights afforded to immigrants is a 2001 Supreme Court ruling that prohibits them from being indefinitely detained if their country won’t accept them back. Countries including Venezuela and China have previously refused to cooperate with U.S. authorities on deportations.

How much would it cost?

It would cost at least $315 billion to deport the roughly 13 million people in the country illegally, according to an analysis by the American Immigration Council, a group that advocates for policies that welcome migrants. The deportation effort would require building hundreds of new detention facilities, as well as hiring hundreds of thousands of new immigration agents, judges and other staff.

Advertisement

Immigration and Customs Enforcement’s budget last year was about $9 billion. Significantly increasing its funding would require the backing of Congress — an uphill battle given current political divisions.

Jawetz said Trump could redirect funds from the Federal Emergency Management Agency and the Department of Defense, like he did for construction of the border wall, and could also reassign personnel from other agencies to perform immigration enforcement tasks.

An analysis by CBS News found that it cost an estimated average of $19,599 to deport one person over the last five fiscal years after apprehension, detention, immigration court processes and transport out of the U.S. were taken into account. The average cost of repatriation only increases as more migrants arrive from distant countries such as Cameroon and China.

How are people preparing?

Mass deportation could rip apart deeply rooted families that include citizens and noncitizens, worsen labor shortages and lead to economic upset. Discussion of mass deportation alone would also sow fear in immigrant communities, as happened during Trump’s first term.

Jawetz said advocates for migrants are beginning to consider potential legal action. During Trump’s presidency, informal Signal and WhatsApp networks emerged across the country in which advocates and community members communicated real-time responses to policy changes they were seeing on the ground.

Advertisement

“We would hope and expect to see much of the same this time around” if Trump wins, the former Homeland Security counsel said. “If you think about it, just the level of anxiety people [would be] living under on a day-to-day basis over a period of years is pretty extraordinary.”

Politics

Trump Reposts Anti-Immigrant Tirade Calling China and India ‘Hellhole’ Places

Published

on

Trump Reposts Anti-Immigrant Tirade Calling China and India ‘Hellhole’ Places

President Trump provoked a broad backlash this week when he posted a transcript from a right-wing podcast in which the host referred to China and India as “hellhole” places and said recent immigrants from those countries had not “integrated” into America as “European Americans” had.

The transcript, which Mr. Trump posted on his Truth Social account on Wednesday night, came from a recent episode of “The Savage Nation,” hosted by Michael Savage, a popular conservative talk radio host. Mr. Trump also posted the original video clip of Mr. Savage’s podcast.

The president did not add any commentary to his posts, but across Asia and the United States, many people saw an unwelcome message that demanded a response.

In a rare public rebuke of the White House, the Indian government took to X to criticize the comments, calling them “obviously uninformed, inappropriate and in poor taste” without explicitly naming Mr. Trump.

Asian American advocacy groups and some Democratic lawmakers faulted Mr. Trump for amplifying xenophobic rhetoric at a time when the administration’s efforts to restrict even legal immigration have left many Indian Americans and Chinese Americans worried about their place in American society.

Advertisement

“We are deeply disturbed by @POTUS sharing this hateful, racist screed targeting Indian and Chinese Americans,” said the Hindu American Foundation, a group that has been critical of both Democrats and Republicans, in a statement on X. “Endorsing such rants as the president of the United States will further stoke hatred and endanger our communities, at a time when xenophobia and racism are already at an all time high.”

The Chinese embassy in Washington did not immediately respond to a request for comment. Mr. Trump and China’s leader, Xi Jinping, are scheduled to meet for a summit in Beijing in mid-May.

The podcast excerpt shared by Mr. Trump was recorded shortly after the Supreme Court hearing on Mr. Trump’s executive order seeking to ban birthright citizenship, which confers citizenship on nearly all children born on U.S. soil and has long been seen as a fundamental tenet of American identity and law.

In the clip, Mr. Savage claimed, without evidence, that recent immigrants had “almost no loyalty” to America; that the nation was being “overrun with Chinese coming here just to drop a baby on our shores to then bring in the entire family”; and that Indians and Chinese had set up “internal mechanisms” so that only people from their countries could get tech jobs in California.

“A baby here becomes an instant citizen, and then they bring the entire family in from China or India or some other hellhole on the planet,” Mr. Savage said.

Advertisement

“They’re not like the European Americans of today and their ancestors,” he added.

Mr. Trump’s post comes as the Supreme Court weighs the constitutionality of his executive order seeking to end birthright citizenship for babies born to undocumented people and to some temporary foreign visitors. Mr. Trump has made rolling back birthright citizenship central to his campaign to expel millions of immigrants from the United States. He even attended the oral arguments at the Supreme Court where, to his dismay, some of the conservative justices appeared skeptical of the president’s position.

Earlier on Wednesday, before he posted the podcast transcript, Mr. Trump had said in a separate Truth Social post that “certain” conservative justices on the Supreme Court had “gone weak, stupid, and bad.” He mentioned the birthright citizenship case, which the court is expected to decide this summer.

On Thursday, a spokesman for the White House, Kush Desai, defended Mr. Trump’s post of the transcript, saying that the president was “calling out the scam of unfettered birthright citizenship.”

In recent years, Asians have been the fastest-growing group in the country, and people from India and China have accounted for the bulk of that increase. In 2023, Asians made up about 7 percent of the national population. By some measures, immigrants from India and China and their descendants have been among the most successful groups in the United States, with high levels of education and income.

Advertisement

But as the Trump administration has sought to limit most immigration pathways, both groups have also come under increasing scrutiny. The administration’s changes to the H-1B program, a skilled worker visa that is especially popular among Indians, have fueled racist rhetoric targeting the Indian community across the country.

The president’s push to end birthright citizenship has also spurred more debate over birth tourism, a term that refers to pregnant women who travel to the United States to give birth so that their baby can have American citizenship. It is most commonly associated with a cottage industry of “maternity hotels” that has emerged over the past two decades and caters to wealthy families from countries like China.

The phenomenon of birth tourism is not believed to be widespread. In its most recent estimate in 2020, the Center for Immigration Studies, a group that supports restricting immigration, put the number at around 20,000 to 26,000 babies a year — less than 1 percent of the number of babies born in the country. Nonetheless, birth tourism has become a frequent talking point for conservatives seeking to eliminate birthright citizenship for all.

Some Democratic lawmakers also criticized Mr. Trump for sharing the podcast transcript.

Representative Grace Meng, a Taiwanese American Democrat from New York and chair of the Congressional Asian Pacific American Caucus, said in a statement that she was “disgusted” by the post.

Advertisement

“At a time when hate incidents against South Asian communities are surging, and one in four Americans view Chinese Americans as a threat,” she said, “amplifying this kind of bigotry pours fuel on an already dangerous fire and must be unequivocally condemned.”

Representative Ami Bera, an Indian American Democrat from California, described Mr. Trump’s comments in a post on X as “offensive, ignorant, and beneath the dignity of the office he holds.”

Mr. Desai, the White House spokesman, is Indian American. He said the president’s relationship with the Indian prime minister, Narendra Modi, was evidence of his support for people from India. “Everyone besides the failing legacy media knows that President Trump has a strong friendship with Prime Minister Modi and loves patriotic Indian Americans who were an important bloc in the historic coalition that fueled his landslide 2024 election victory,” he said.

Other prominent figures in the Trump administration of Indian or Chinese descent include Harmeet K. Dhillon, the Justice Department’s assistant attorney general for civil rights; Kash Patel, the F.B.I. director; Steven Cheung, the White House communications director; and Usha Vance, the wife of Vice President JD Vance.

Asked at a Turning Point USA event in Georgia last week about the H-1B visa program, Mr. Vance referred to his own in-laws to argue that while naturalized citizens should prioritize American interests over those of their ancestral country, many immigrants had also brought value to America.

Advertisement

“Look, I am married to the daughter of immigrants from India,” Mr. Vance said. “And I love my in-laws, and they’re great people and they’ve been great contributors to the United States of America.”

Continue Reading

Politics

Trump Cabinet member scraps Obama-era gender identity housing rule, cites ‘biological reality’

Published

on

Trump Cabinet member scraps Obama-era gender identity housing rule, cites ‘biological reality’

NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!

Housing and Urban Development (HUD) Secretary Scott Turner has ordered an immediate halt to enforcement of a key Obama-era housing rule tied to gender identity, directing the agency to operate programs based on biological sex.

The directive stops any pending or future enforcement of HUD’s 2016 Equal Access Rule, which expanded gender identity as formally recognized in federally-funded housing programs and shelters.

The move marks a significant shift in how shelters and HUD-funded providers operate, particularly those serving women fleeing domestic violence, and implements President Donald Trump’s executive order to restore what the administration calls “biological truth” across the federal government.

“I am directing HUD staff to halt any pending or future enforcement actions related to HUD’s 2016 Equal Access Rule, which, in essence, tied housing programs, shelters and other facilities funded by HUD to far-left gender ideology,” Turner said.

Advertisement

TRUMP STOPPED BIDEN’S PLAN TO FORCE DEI ON LOCAL COMMUNITIES

President Donald Trump stands with HUD Secretary Scott Turner at an event. (Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images)

“We, at this agency, are carrying out the mission laid out by President Trump on Jan. 20 … to restore biological truth to the federal government,” he added. 

“This means recognizing there are only two sexes: male and female. It means getting government out of the way of what the Lord established from the beginning when he created man in His own image.”

The 2016 rule allowed people to self-identify for gender when accessing certain housing services, limiting the ability of shelters to challenge that identification.

Advertisement

Critics of the rule argued it restricted the rights of shelters, particularly those serving women impacted by trauma, domestic abuse and violence, by requiring them to admit individuals based on gender identity rather than biological sex.

JUDGE FORCES CA HOSPITAL TO KEEP TRANS TREATMENTS FOR MINORS DESPITE TRUMP FUNDING THREAT

Secretary of Housing and Urban Development nominee Scott Turner testifies during his confirmation hearing before the Senate Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs Committee Jan. 16, 2025. (Bill Clark/CQ-Roll Call, Inc)

Turner framed the move as part of a broader overhaul of HUD policy and spending.

“Moreover, this is just the first of many examples of how, starting on day one, HUD is going back to work for the American people and being a good steward of taxpayer dollars,” he said. “There will be more where this came from.”

Advertisement

The Equal Access Rule was first introduced in 2012, prohibiting discrimination in HUD-funded programs based on sexual orientation, gender identity and marital status. A 2016 update expanded those protections by requiring programs to recognize gender identity as well.

President Donald Trump and HUD Secretary Scott Turner attend a reception with Republican members of Congress in the East Room of the White House in Washington, D.C., on July 22, 2025. (Yuri Gripas/Abaca/Bloomberg)

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

Turner’s order does not repeal the rule but halts enforcement tied to the 2016 expansion.

“As I have said before, we are going to take inventory of HUD’s programs and ensure every dollar that goes out the door is advancing HUD’s mission, which is to provide quality, affordable homes for communities across the country — urban, rural and tribal — and promote economic investment to build stronger communities and a brighter future for all Americans,” Turner said.

Advertisement

Continue Reading

Politics

House Oversight chair says some members support a Ghislaine Maxwell pardon

Published

on

House Oversight chair says some members support a Ghislaine Maxwell pardon

The Republican chair of the House Oversight Committee said some members would support a presidential pardon for convicted sex trafficker Ghislaine Maxwell in exchange for her assistance in the committee’s investigation into Jeffrey Epstein.

But good luck getting any of them to admit it.

Rep. James Comer (R-Ky.) told Politico on Wednesday that “a lot of people” support the idea of Maxwell receiving a pardon from President Trump in exchange for her cooperation in the committee’s investigation.

Although Comer said he opposed a pardon himself — “other than Epstein, the worst person in this whole investigation is Maxwell” — he offered that his committee was “split” on the issue.

Rep. Robert Garcia of Long Beach, the top Democrat on his committee, condemned the idea of a Maxwell pardon and said Democrats on the committee uniformly oppose it.

Advertisement

“It’s outrageous that Republicans on the Oversight Committee are considering a pardon for Ghislaine Maxwell,” Garcia said in a statement. “She is a sexual abuser who facilitated the rape of women and children.”

The Times reached out to all 26 Republicans on the committee to see who, if anyone, supported the idea of a pardon.

Although most didn’t respond, the few who did expressed outrage at the idea.

“I am absolutely not supporting a pardon for her nor have I heard that from anyone else,” Rep. Anna Paulina Luna (R-Fla.) said.

“Never in a thousand years,” Rep. Clay Higgins (R-La.) said.

Advertisement

Maxwell declined to answer the committee’s questions during a video deposition in February from the Texas federal prison where she is serving her 20-year sentence.

She still is challenging her 2021 conviction on five counts related to the sex trafficking of minors for her role in recruiting and grooming girls for Epstein to abuse. She was accused at trial of also participating in the abuse of one victim.

At the time of her February deposition, Maxwell’s attorney David Oscar Markus said she would offer the “unfiltered truth” if granted clemency by Trump.

Attorneys who have represented victims abused by Epstein and Maxwell strongly opposed the idea of a pardon.

“This is a woman who belongs behind bars for the rest of her life for what she did to women,” said Spencer Kuvin, who has represented numerous Epstein victims.

Advertisement

Sigrid McCawley, a managing partner at Boies Schiller Flexner, questioned the value of information Maxwell could provide.

“Ghislaine Maxwell is a proven self-serving liar,” McCawley said in a statement. “There is nothing credible that she will offer the government, and the assertion that she would provide information is simply a smoke screen.”

Trump has not said he is considering a pardon, but when asked by reporters he has declined to rule it out.

Epstein abused more than 1,000 girls and young women over the span of decades. He negotiated a lenient deal nearly two decades ago with federal prosecutors in south Florida that allowed him to serve 13 months in a Palm Beach County jail, where he was allowed to come and go freely, to settle claims that he had abused dozens of high school girls.

Following investigative reporting on that deal by the Miami Herald, federal prosecutors in the Southern District of New York brought new sex charges against Epstein in July 2019. He died in federal custody one month later.

Advertisement

Epstein and Maxwell counted members of the British royal family, multiple presidents and business titans among their friends. They have been accused of forcing victims to have sex with some of those men. Maxwell is the only other person who has been charged in connection with Epstein’s crimes.

The committee has deposed numerous people who knew Epstein, including Ohio billionaire Les Wexner, who hired Epstein to manage his finances, and former President Clinton and former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.

The committee has not, however, deposed Trump, who once famously called Epstein a “terrific guy” and said “I just wish her well” when told of Maxwell’s arrest in 2020.

The Department of Justice has released millions of pages of documents from its investigations in response to the bipartisan Epstein Files Transparency Act, which was signed into law last year.

The release led to criminal inquiries in the United Kingdom into Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor, the former prince, and Peter Mandelson, the former British ambassador to the United States, over allegations that they provided secret government information to Epstein.

Advertisement

So far, the files have not led to any publicly known criminal investigations in the United States.

Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending