Trump Launches First Two Executive Actions Aimed at Immigration

Five days after taking office, President Trump released his first two executive actions on immigration:

• Enhancing Public Safety in the Interior of the United States
• Interior Enforcement Executive Order

These executive actions were anticipated and they certainly contain many disturbing provisions; however, it is important to remember that implementation requires several additional steps such as rule-making and funding (which is controlled by Congress). Congress has the power of the purse, which prevents Trump from ordering thousands of additional agents to the Southern Border and spending billions on a wall and other border measures. Additionally, some of the provisions of the executive actions I believe to simply be unconstitutional. Consequently, I anticipate lengthy court battles before these provisions even have a chance of being implemented.

For a break down of these executive actions and further commentary, read on.

Executive Action 1: Enhancing Public Safety in the Interior of the United States

The first executive action includes the following five directives that focus on border activity and criminals:

1. Begin construction of expanding the wall along our Southern border
2. Provide DHS will additional resources, including a greater number of border patrol agents and technology to stop unlawful crossings
3. Create more detention space along the Southern border
4. End “catch and release” policies
5. Prioritize deportation of certain criminal foreign nationals

What does it mean?

I think the wall is a waste of money and simply represents Trump’s attempt to follow through with his most infamous campaign promise. Increasing the number of border patrol agents and enhancing technology is much more effective, but at the same time you have to understand the realities of southern border crossings. Mexican immigration has decreased for the last 20 years. There has been a rise in Central American refugees from the Northern Triangle countries of Guatemala, Honduras and El Salvador, but this rise is much less than the decrease in numbers over the last several decades. Which raises the question, is this the best use of our resources right now in this country? It is imperative to remember that this idea that our Southern Border is more porous than ever is simply false; but this misinformation was central to the fear-mongering Trump used to get elected.

An increase in border detention facilities would be a boon for the private prisons who probably lobbied for this provision, but will this deter undocumented individuals from attempting to cross illegally? What it will do is perpetuate and strengthen the private prison industry, which in and of itself is a very flawed concept. These billion dollar companies have a perverse societal conflict of interest, where they lobby for tougher and tougher criminal and immigration laws simply for their bottom line. Further, their facilities often fail to meet basic standards for detention and medical care as they are incentivized to reduce costs as much as possible. This industry was so flawed that Obama’s Department of Justice had vowed to end the use of private prisons. Sadly, that was a short pendulum swing in the right direction, now the pendulum appears to be swinging violently back in the other direction.

The last directive targeting criminal foreign nationals is nothing new. Obama had already been prioritizing deportation of these individuals for the past 8 years.

Executive Action 2: Interior Enforcement Executive Order

The second executive action has a different flavor than the first as it focuses on larger communities of people—both on the local and international level:

1. Restore the “popular and successful” Secured Communities Program
2. Withhold visas from countries, and use other measures against them, if they refuse to accept their foreign nationals back when they are deported from the U.S.
3. Strip federal grant money from sanctuary cities that harbor “illegal immigrants”

What does it mean?

For starters, the Secured Communities Program coerced local law enforcement to help with immigration enforcement. It resulted in constitutional violations, large monetary awards against local jails for holding individuals beyond their sentencing dates, racial profiling, and insecure communities based on ostracizing and creating fear in whole communities, which resulted in less effective law enforcement. This program was so “popular and successful” that many cities refused to abide by it even before Obama ended the program.

Regarding the directive aimed at withholding visas, there is certainly more here than meets the eye. Let’s take two examples of countries that do not accept back their deported foreign nationals. We have had an immigration policy in place for Cubans for decades that effectively incentivizes Cuban nationals to immigrate to the U.S. in an effort to undermine the Castro regime. Now, after inviting Cubans to flee for half a century, we want to turn many back over to a Cuban regime we still oppose. Regarding Vietnam, the country refuses to accept deportees who came to the U.S. before 1995, when the U.S. reestablished diplomatic relations with Vietnam. After the war, we humanely accepted a large number of South Vietnamese as refugees after we lost the war. These families were victims of the war and many fought alongside U.S. forces before we withdrew. Now we want to deport back individuals who have lived in this country for decades—many of whom came as young children. While there are certainly some in this group who have a serious criminal history, many more are deportable for minor, non-violent crimes such as drug possession or shoplifting.

Lastly, sanctuary cities are cities that have pledged not to follow the mandates of the unconstitutional Secure Communities Program. Now Trump wants to penalize them by stripping them of federal money. Effectively, he is creating another massive constitutional problem by attempting to penalize cities for refusing to participate in unconstitutional programs.  For more insight on sanctuary cities, check out this post covering why local law enforcement should avoid being involved in immigration enforcement.

Keep up with the Latest in Immigration News

Unfortunately, there is much chatter among the immigration law community that several other executive actions are in the works that will have dramatic effects on immigration. Evidently, President Trump is still mulling over which orders to sign. But I encourage you to stay tuned to our Immigration News Blog for more developments, and feel free to reach out to our office with any questions.
 
 
Photo Credit: Gary Goodenough Flickr via Compfight cc