Even with the Trump administration’s goal to deport or arrest 3,000 people daily. This initiative is the most recent effort to advance their accelerated, national anti-immigration agenda. At a recent White House–hosted meeting, White House Deputy Chief of Staff Stephen Miller and Department of Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem discussed the key objectives. They communicated these goals to high-level officials at Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE). The new quota will likely triple the number of arrests as compared to just earlier this year.
Tuesday morning, ICE joined the IRS, FBI and other federal law enforcement agencies to target operations. Thanks to their advocacy, about 40 arrests never came to fruition on the Massachusetts islands of Nantucket and Martha’s Vineyard. This program deeply militarizes enforcement strategies. ICE officers are specifically tasked with arresting people at courthouses immediately following their deportation orders or upon dismissals of their criminal cases.
Miller confirmed the administration’s goals in an interview with Fox News, stating, “The White House is setting a goal for ICE to arrest at least 3,000 migrants per day.” This misguided goal leads to more than one million arrests each year. Immigration advocates and legal experts are concerned about whether detention centers are equipped to deal with this influx.
Austin Kocher, an assistant research professor at Syracuse University, voiced skepticism about where ICE would house the individuals if the 3,000 daily arrest target is reached. He remarked, “The big question for me is: where are they going to put people?”
The crackdown features the implementation of new measures requiring federal law enforcement agents to help pick up and transport. According to reports, ICE has begun to target people appearing in immigration courts. This includes, for example, two different Health Courts that exist in New York City. On top of that, the administration is said to be ordering immigration judges to hurry cases along by not giving asylum seekers access to hearings.
Advocacy organizations and legal scholars have raised concerns about this tactic. They claim that it violates the rights of people who want to claim asylum. Shayna Kessler stated, “It has nothing to do with efficiency – it’s about slamming shut the courthouse door on people who have the right to seek asylum and a fair day in court.”
Moreover, Nayna Gupta from HSIN emphasized the impact of these policies on non-citizens following the rule of law. Gupta expressed, “We’re seeing the administration take the unprecedented step of arresting non-citizens who are following the government’s rules and procedures, and showing up for their court hearings.” She went on, “They are trying to get to x number of arrests, they’re trying to get to x number of arrests a day. Tackling these issues first. They are very easy to find because they can be found just go to the courthouses. This is where immigrants are disproportionally doing their part, and that’s precisely the problem.
Since Trump came into office, the population in ICE detention facilities has drastically increased. By May 18, it was up to 49,000, an increase of more than 10,000. As these operations surge, ICE is currently and increasingly utilizing local jails and federal prisons to lock up new detainees. At the same time, the move has raised alarms about massive overcrowding and the abhorrent conditions within these facilities.
Tricia McLaughlin, the homeland security assistant secretary, defended the administration’s approach by stating, “Under Secretary Noem, we are delivering on President Trump’s and the American people’s mandate to arrest and deport criminal illegal aliens and make America safe.” Yet critics say that without proper oversight and accountability, this approach will do more harm than good to the communities in need.
Jesse Franzblau, our immigration policy fellow, strongly condemned the expansion of ICE’s enforcement policies. He called them all “families’ beyond cruel” and pointed out the dangerous precedent set when ignoring constitutional protections. This kind of escalation of the intensity and scope of these operations is part of a now-familiar pattern seen in U.S. immigration policy under the current administration.
Meanwhile, public opinion appears to be shifting. Gupta noted that “public polling is showing decreasing support for Trump’s immigration agenda,” as citizens begin to recognize that mass deportation tactics could lead to arrests of neighbors and friends. This increasing understanding of the issue is hopeful, and hopefully will be reflected in future political conversations about immigration enforcement.