In the complex and often contentious realm of American immigration policy, a familiar yet intensely ambitious agenda has emerged on the political forefront. President Donald J. Trump has consistently vowed to initiate what he terms “the largest deportation program in American history,” a declaration that echoes past endeavors while setting a dramatically different scale for future enforcement.
As the nation approaches a pivotal election, recent polling data, including CNN’s poll of polls, indicates that Donald J. Trump holds a significant lead, giving him a nearly 70 percent chance of winning the 2024 election. This projection, specifically 68.4% compared to Kamala Harris’s 30.9%, underscores a political climate in which Trump’s policy proposals, particularly on immigration, gain heightened relevance and undergo intense scrutiny.
While Joe Biden narrowly secured Pennsylvania by 80,000 votes in 2020, requiring only 46,000 votes for re-election that year, the current situation reveals Kamala Harris trailing Trump by a mere two to three points, a margin deemed insufficient given the 2020 precedent. Compounding the political dynamics is Vice President Harris’s notable underperformance among key Democratic constituencies.
She is reportedly “woefully underwater with union voters, projected to be the worst-performing Democrat in a generation.” Furthermore, her support is described as “grossly underperforming among black and Jewish voters,” suggesting a broader challenge in consolidating traditional Democratic support.
Against this backdrop, the scope of President Trump’s proposed deportation initiative is extensive and contentious. Although he frequently asserts that more than 20 million immigrants are residing in the U.S. illegally, the Pew Research Center, relying on the latest Census data, estimated the number at 11 million as of mid-2022.
This discrepancy in figures underscores a central tension in the debate surrounding immigration enforcement. While Trump has at times suggested that all unauthorized immigrants would be required to leave and reapply for legal entry, he has also identified initial targets for his large-scale program.
These primary targets include immigrants in the country illegally who have committed crimes and those whose asylum applications have been denied by the courts but who have not yet departed. At a rally in Pennsylvania the day before the election, Trump declared, “On Day 1, I will initiate the largest deportation program of criminals in American history.”
He continued, stating, “We’re going to get them out. We have to. Dwight Eisenhower holds the record. … But we’re going to unfortunately surpass the record.” This direct reference points to a significant historical benchmark: Eisenhower’s 1954 “Operation Wetback.”
This federally led effort, aimed at removing Mexican immigrants illegally residing in the U.S., was claimed by the federal government to have compelled as many as 1.3 million people to return to Mexico, a figure disputed by historians but nonetheless serving as Trump’s stated benchmark for his ambitions.
The stated Republican platform further clarifies the aggressive intent, asserting that Trump will “begin the largest deportation program in American History,” focusing on “the millions of illegal migrants whom Joe Biden has deliberately encouraged to invade our country” and commencing with the removal of “the most dangerous criminals and working with local police.”
Read more about: The Republican Resurgence: Inside the GOP’s Transformative Evolution and Its Powerful New Identity
At a campaign rally in Michigan in October, Trump reiterated this commitment: “All of the illegal migrants whom [Vice President] Kamala [Harris] has placed in your small towns will return home. You will have to return home. I’m sorry. Because it is not sustainable, and it will be very difficult to achieve. It is a very challenging task.”
The appointments of Tom Homan as border czar and Stephen Miller as deputy chief of staff, both of whom are recognized hardliners on immigration, further signal a firm commitment to an aggressive deportation strategy. Stephen Miller articulated the administration’s resolve to The New York Times in November 2023, stating, “Trump will unleash the vast arsenal of federal powers to implement the most extensive migration crackdown.”
Miller issued a warning to potential adversaries: “The immigration legal activists will be unaware of what is happening.” To increase the number of agents available for ICE sweeps, Miller outlined plans to temporarily reassign officials from other federal law enforcement agencies and deputize state National Guard troops and local police officers, at least from willing Republican-led states, for immigration control efforts.
Read more about: Federal Intervention Looms for D.C. as Trump Cites ‘Out of Control’ Crime and Assault on DOGE Member
Confirming the breadth of his strategy, Trump responded “True” to a November 18 post that speculated the administration was “prepared to declare a national emergency and would utilize military assets to reverse the Biden-era influx through a mass deportation program.” Tom Homan, who previously served as acting director of Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) from 2017 to 2018, amplified these intentions at the Heritage Policy Fest in July.
Homan reiterated comments from the previous week, declaring that if Trump is elected, “You have seen nothing yet [on immigration]. Wait until 2025.” He has since clarified that the Trump administration’s initial focus would be on immigrants who have committed or been accused of crimes, a number he estimated at 1.5 million, though this figure appears to be excessively high according to some assessments.
Homan also highlighted plans to target for deportation an estimated 1.3 million immigrants whose asylum applications were denied but who have not yet left the country. Despite the aggressive rhetoric, Homan refuted claims of widespread sweeps, stating, “People say Trump is threatening historic deportation operations. He’s going to build concentration camps. He’s going to sweep neighborhoods. Let me be clear. None of that will occur.”
However, he emphasized the necessity of a large-scale operation: “We are going to conduct a historic deportation operation, because you have a historic influx of illegal immigration crossing the southern border.” Homan underscored that nearly “9 out of 10 of these people won’t be granted asylum because they don’t qualify. So they’re going to be ordered removed.”
Read more about: Indiana Prepares for ‘Speedway Slammer’ Amidst Broad Federal Immigration Enforcement Expansion
He continued, “So when they receive due process at the cost of billions of dollars of taxpayers’ money and a federal judge rules, ‘You must return home,’ the Trump administration will ensure their return.” He warned that “no one is exempt. If you are in the country illegally, it is unacceptable. If you are in the country illegally, you had better be cautious.”
Beyond those explicitly targeted, there were an estimated 11 million immigrants living in the U.S. illegally as of mid – 2022. Jeffrey Passel, a senior demographer at Pew Research Center, noted that “it is safe to assume that the numbers have increased since mid – 2022 and there are substantially more immigrants in the ‘quasi – legal’ group.”
This “quasi – legal” group comprises individuals with temporary protection from deportation and potential work authorization, such as those granted Temporary Protected Status, DACA recipients, asylum applicants, and individuals from specific countries, including Ukraine, Cuba, Haiti, Nicaragua, and Venezuela, who have special “parole” protections.
Read more about: As Federal Funding Shifts, Vulnerable States Face Crippling Budget Cuts: A Comprehensive Analysis of Medicaid and SNAP’s Future
Passel clarified, “They are not immediately deportable given their current status, but their status could be revoked, and they would become deportable if policy changes.” The majority of immigrants in the U.S. illegally or with temporary legal status have resided in the country for years.
As of July 1, 2022, Pew’s estimates indicate a median duration of residence in the U.S. of 15 years, with over 61% having been in the country for a decade or more. For unauthorized Mexican immigrants, the largest group, the median duration was nearly 22 years, with over 84% residing for 10 years or more.
While some immigration experts express doubt that Trump can achieve the mass deportations he has promised, his running mate, Senator J.D. Vance, has described a “sequential” approach. Vance likened the problem to “a truly massive sandwich… you take the first bite, then the second, and then the third.”
Vance elaborated at an August campaign stop in Pennsylvania, “Let’s begin with the first million who are the most violent criminals, who are the most aggressive. Remove them from the country. Prioritize them first, and then assess the situation and continue addressing the problem until illegal immigration is brought to a manageable level.”
He further stated on ABC’s “This Week” that “you will have to deport some individuals. If you are unwilling to deport a significant number of people, you cannot maintain a secure border when there are 20 million illegal aliens in our country.” Critics note that both Trump and Vance appear to exaggerate the number of immigrants who have entered the country illegally during the Biden administration, as well as the number of immigrants in the country illegally who have been charged or convicted of crimes.
In September, ICE Deputy Director Patrick J. Lechleitner reported to Congress that as of July 21, 2024, there were 662,566 non – citizens with criminal records on ICE’s national docket. Of these, 435,719 were convicted criminals, and 226,847 had pending criminal charges. This total includes more than 125,000 convicted of or facing traffic offenses and 92,000 on the list for immigration offenses.
To facilitate his ambitious program, Trump has vowed to invoke the Alien Enemies Act of 1798, a wartime authority that allows the president to apprehend, detain, and deport citizens of a hostile nation during a declared war or invasion. However, experts question the constitutionality of invoking this law for his stated purposes.
Steven Camarota, director of research at the Center for Immigration Studies, which advocates for lower immigration levels, anticipates that the number of removals by the Trump administration will rise to fewer than 400,000 per year, which would be approximately one – third higher than the average during his first term.
Camarota believes that a stringent enforcement environment would encourage more immigrants residing in the country illegally to depart voluntarily and discourage others from attempting entry. He projects that if the Trump administration “puts its resources into action as it claims,” the immigrant population without permanent legal status, which he estimates has increased to about 14 million over the past two years, could decrease by roughly 1 million annually over the next four years.
Beyond the legal and logistical obstacles, immigration experts caution that Trump’s mass deportation plan would be exceedingly costly. The American Immigration Council (AIC), a non – partisan advocacy group, estimates that a one – time mass deportation of all immigrants in the U.S. without legal status would incur costs of $315 billion.
A multi – year deportation program, more in line with Trump and Vance’s descriptions, could amount to nearly $1 trillion, a figure that the AIC labels as a “conservative” estimate. Laura Collins, an immigration expert at the George W. Bush Institute, informed The New York Times that such an endeavor would cost billions of dollars and is likely to span 20 years.
John Sandweg, a former acting director of the Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) in the Obama administration, noted that Trump “would need to triple the size of the immigration court system to achieve numbers anywhere close to those he is discussing.” He added that this would require funding for new courthouses, support staff, and judge training.
Colleen Putzel – Kavanaugh, an associate policy analyst at the Migration Policy Institute, stated that at the current funding levels, “I do not believe it is possible to carry out deportations on the scale that Trump and his advisers are discussing.” She explained that the Biden administration has concentrated ICE resources on border – related deportations.
Trump’s focus on interior enforcement would necessitate redirecting existing ICE resources away from the border, demanding a significantly greater amount of staffing and more funding. While Republican control of both the House and the Senate makes increased ICE funding feasible, Putzel – Kavanaugh expressed uncertainty as to whether it would reach the necessary levels.
Adding to the financial burden is the changing demographic profile of immigrants, with more coming from outside Central America. Deporting migrants to countries in South America, Asia, Africa, and across the Caribbean is not only more costly but also complicated by “recalcitrant” nations such as Cuba and China that refuse to accept designated migrants.
These uncooperative nations thwarted Trump during his first term, with the Migration Policy Institute reporting that only 20% of migrants who received removal orders were actually deported in 2020. Putzel – Kavanaugh described removal operations as “a massive logistical and resource – intensive endeavor” from start to finish.
Despite these concerns about costs, Trump has dismissed them as inconsequential. In a post – election interview with NBC News, he asserted, “It is not a matter of a price tag. It is not — really, we have no choice. When people have committed murders, when drug lords have destroyed countries, and now they are going to return to those countries because they are not staying here. There is no price tag.”
Economists, however, largely refute Stephen Miller’s assertion that “Mass deportation will be a labor – market disruption celebrated by American workers, who will now be offered higher wages with better benefits to fill these jobs.” Robert Lynch and Michael Ettlinger, professors emeritus of economics, reviewed economic literature and found that past large – scale deportations have been “detrimental to the U.S. economy.”
Read more about: As Federal Funding Shifts, Vulnerable States Face Crippling Budget Cuts: A Comprehensive Analysis of Medicaid and SNAP’s Future
They project that future large – scale deportations will also lead to “negative impacts,” encompassing “a lower national Gross Domestic Product (GDP), reduced employment, and lower wages for citizens and authorized immigrants.” Their research reveals that “negative labor – market consequences are observed across income and pay levels,” and economists predict that “prices will rise and U.S. tax revenues will decline.”
Specifically, researchers estimate that mass deportations will reduce GDP by 2.6% to 6.2% and the number of hours worked by up to 3.6%. Studies on the economic impact of past mass deportations have “consistently demonstrated that deportation policies have not benefited U.S.-born residents.”
A September working paper from the Peterson Institute for International Economics (PIIE) modeled scenarios involving the deportation of 1.3 million and 8.3 million individuals. Both scenarios forecast a reduction in U.S. GDP, a decline in employment, and an increase in inflation, differing only “in the extent of damage inflicted on people, households, firms, and the overall economy.”
Read more about: Indiana Prepares for ‘Speedway Slammer’ Amidst Broad Federal Immigration Enforcement Expansion
The Peterson Institute for International Economics (PIIE) research indicates that the labor supply would decrease by 0.8% or 5.1% under these scenarios. The PIIE emphasized that Trump’s campaign assumes employers would simply substitute deported workers with native workers, but “the historical record demonstrates that employer behavior is far more complex than that.”
Past experience shows that employers do not readily replace such workers. Instead, they “respond by investing in less labor – intensive technologies to sustain their businesses, or they simply choose not to expand their operations.” This results in fewer people being employed in key sectors such as services, agriculture, and manufacturing.
Furthermore, unauthorized immigrants are also consumers, which means their deportation leads to “a lower demand for groceries, housing, services, and other household necessities.” This reduced expenditure, in turn, “decreases the demand for workers in those sectors,” an effect that outweighs any reduction in the supply of unauthorized workers.
Chloe East, an associate professor of economics at the University of Colorado and a non – resident fellow at the Brookings Institution, explained via email that “On balance, unauthorized immigrants serve as complements to US – born workers rather than substitutes for them.” Her research on a mass deportation episode from 2008 to 2014 involving approximately 400,000 individuals revealed that it “actually harmed the US labor market and job prospects for US – born workers.”
East elaborated that for every 100 individuals removed from the labor market due to deportations, “9 U.S.-born individuals permanently lose their jobs.” She clarified that “when unauthorized immigrants are removed from the labor market, U.S.-born individuals do not simply fill the vacated positions. Instead, those positions generally disappear, and this adversely affects job prospects for U.S.-born individuals.”
As examples, she cited how a decrease in the number of unauthorized construction laborers leads to a reduced demand for U.S.-born construction site managers, and a reduction in the number of unauthorized dishwashers decreases the demand for U.S.-born waiters and waitresses. Additionally, unauthorized immigrants stimulate consumer demand, which “contributes to job creation for everyone, including U.S.-born individuals.”
Despite Trump’s claims in Detroit on October 18 that the “migrant invasion” under Biden is “devastating our great African American community” by “taking their jobs” and similarly affecting “a significant number of Hispanic jobs,” East asserted, “We do not observe strong evidence that even U.S.-born individuals with the lowest levels of education benefit from mass deportations.”
Even policies intended to target only criminals, such as Secure Communities (which resulted in the removal of over 363,000 criminal aliens), demonstrated substantial negative impacts on the labor market. East noted that even with this policy objective, “17% of those deported had not been convicted of any crime, 7% had a traffic violation as their most serious criminal conviction, and another 6% had an immigration violation as their most serious criminal conviction.”
This policy, “even though it was supposed to be targeted, had significant, negative impacts on the labor market.” The American Immigration Council estimates that mass deportations would reduce the U.S. GDP by 4.2% to 6.8% and cause “substantial labor disruptions across multiple key industries, with particularly severe impacts on construction, agriculture, and the hospitality sector.”
With nearly 14 percent of individuals employed in the construction industry estimated to be undocumented, their removal “would disrupt all forms of construction across the nation, from residential to commercial to basic infrastructure,” potentially resulting in “hundreds of thousands of U.S.-born workers losing their jobs.”
Lawrence Summers, a former economic adviser to President Obama and Treasury Secretary under President Clinton, warned in a November 13 CNN interview that the sum total of Trump’s plans, including mass deportations, would cause “an inflation shock significantly greater than the one the country experienced in 2021.”
Summers commented, “I believe every sensible American thinks we need to do more to secure our border. However, if you are considering deporting millions of people, that is an invitation to labor shortages and bottlenecks.” In contrast, Steven Camarota of the Center for Immigration Studies dismisses these economic concerns.
Camarota argues, “It is difficult to make the case that removing 2% of the workforce will have a major impact on the overall economy,” especially since most immigrant workers are in low – wage jobs. He suggests that while there might be a notable short – term impact on heavily immigrant – reliant industries such as construction or yard maintenance, this could drive up wages and encourage some U.S. citizens to re – enter the workforce.
This is not President Trump’s first attempt at promising large – scale deportations. In 2015, he also spoke of deporting all 10 million – plus immigrants in the country illegally, with a subsequent plan to “expedite” the return of “good people.”
Read more about: India: A Rising Global Power and Its Complex Path Forward
At a 2016 campaign rally in Arizona, Trump declared, “In a Trump administration, all immigration laws will be enforced. As with any law enforcement activity, priorities will be set. However, unlike the current administration, no one will be immune or exempt from enforcement — and ICE and Border Patrol officers will be permitted to perform their duties.”
He continued, “Anyone who has entered the United States illegally is subject to deportation — that is what it means to have laws and to have a country.” In a November 2016 “60 Minutes” interview, Trump emphasized targeting criminals: “What we intend to do is identify individuals who are criminals and have criminal records, gang members, drug dealers. The number of such people may range from approximately 2 million to possibly 3 million, and we will either expel them from our country or incarcerate them.”
However, the average annual number of deportations, encompassing removals and enforcement returns, actually decreased under the Trump administration compared to the Obama administration. A report from the Migration Policy Institute (MPI) near the end of Trump’s presidency noted that “Immigration enforcement in the U.S. interior during the Trump administration has fallen far short of the president’s 2016 electoral promises as well as the achievements of his predecessor, Barack Obama.”
In fact, the Trump administration deported “only slightly more than one-third as many unauthorized immigrants from the interior during its first four fiscal years as the Obama administration did during the same period.” MPI attributed this shortfall largely to “resistance from state and local officials who have implemented ‘sanctuary’ policies that restrict cooperation with U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE).”
Under the Biden administration, deportation numbers initially declined significantly in the first two years, with interior removals dropping sharply while Title 42 expulsions surged. Trump initiated the use of Title 42, an emergency public health law, to turn away many immigrants at the border during the COVID-19 pandemic.
However, deportations under Biden increased dramatically after Title 42 ended in May 2023, and are currently on track to match Trump’s deportation figures.
Now, Trump has vowed to “cut federal funding to sanctuary jurisdictions,” which limit local police cooperation with federal immigration authorities. During his first term, Trump restricted access to some federal crime-fighting grants for cities and states with such policies, a move upheld by a federal appeals court but later overturned by the Justice Department after Biden’s election.
As President Trump embarks on what is described as his “second and current tenure” as president, his administration has actively pursued a deportation policy characterized as “hardline,” “maximalist,” and a “mass deportation campaign,” impacting hundreds of thousands of immigrants through detentions, confinements, and expulsions.
On January 23, 2025, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) reportedly commenced conducting raids on sanctuary cities, with hundreds of immigrants detained and deported. The Trump administration reversed the previous administration’s policy, granting ICE authorization to conduct raids in schools, hospitals, and places of worship.
The use of deportation flights has elicited pushback from some foreign governments, notably Colombia. Fears of ICE raids have reportedly had a negative impact on key sectors, including agriculture, construction, and the hospitality industry. The total unauthorized immigrant population in the U.S. was estimated at 11 million in 2022, with California continuing to have the largest share.
The administration has invoked the Alien Enemies Act to swiftly deport suspected illegal immigrants with limited or no due process, resulting in imprisonment in El Salvador, though federal judges and the Supreme Court have halted this practice.
Read more about: Donald J. Trump: A Transformative Figure in American Business and Politics
Discussions also encompassed the reopening of the Guantanamo Bay detention camp to accommodate potentially tens of thousands of immigrants, although this proposal has encountered logistical and legal challenges. A substantial majority of detentions have pertained to non-violent offenses, and several American citizens have reportedly been mistakenly detained and subsequently deported.
These administrative practices have given rise to considerable legal issues and controversies among lawyers, judges, and legal scholars. While Trump addressed the topic of deportations during his 2016 and 2024 campaigns, as well as throughout his first presidency, public sentiment regarding mass deportations has undergone shifts.
In the period leading up to his first presidential term in 2016, approximately one-third of Americans supported the deportation of all unauthorized immigrants. By the commencement of his second term in January 2025, public opinion had shifted to a majority in favor, according to a January 2025 review. However, as early as April 2025, multiple polls indicated that a majority of Americans believed the deportations had gone “too far.”
The Trump administration has asserted that it has deported approximately 140,000 individuals as of April 2025, although other estimates place the figure at roughly half that amount. The New York Times previously reported that Trump had planned “an extreme expansion of his first-term crackdown on immigration,” which included “preparing to round up undocumented individuals already residing in the United States on a large scale and detain them in extensive camps while they await expulsion.”
This ambition “constitutes an assault on immigration on a scale unprecedented in modern American history.” Trump’s advisors are reportedly formulating a “blitz” strategy aimed at overwhelming immigrant-rights lawyers, relying on existing statutes, although the possibility of introducing new legislation also exists.
Economic reports issued by the Brookings Institution and the Peterson Institute for International Economics have indicated that Trump’s plans could lead to a reduction in employment opportunities for American-born workers and “no economic growth throughout the second Trump administration solely attributable to this policy,” with other estimates projecting a contraction of the American gross domestic product by 4.2-6.8%.
Colleen Putzel-Kavanaugh cautions that Trump’s endeavors may encounter challenges akin to those faced by the Biden administration, pointing out that recent migration has evolved into a “hemispheric and global phenomenon.” She anticipates an initial decline in numbers upon Trump assuming office, followed by subsequent increases, a pattern that has been observed throughout the Biden administration.
Putzel-Kavanaugh also anticipates a multitude of legal challenges, including those targeting Trump’s pledge to reinstate Title 42, which he bases on allegations that migrants are carriers of infectious diseases, a claim disputed by health experts such as Dr. Paul Spiegel, who asserts, “There is no evidence to demonstrate that migrants are spreading disease.”
Read more about: President Trump Signals Future of MAGA: Vance and Rubio Emerge as Potential Successors
Trump has also deliberated on terminating the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program, which safeguards individuals who were brought to the U.S. as children, and has once again vowed to abolish birthright citizenship, although the majority of legal scholars are of the opinion that this would necessitate a constitutional amendment. Stephen Miller, in a 2023 interview with The New York Times, confirmed that Trump anticipates legal actions challenging his proposed modifications, but characterized the Trump team’s strategies as a “blitz” intended to overwhelm lawyers advocating for immigrant rights.
The historical reverberations of “Operation Wetback” resonate in President Trump’s declared aspiration to orchestrate the most extensive deportation program in American history. From the precision of his targets to the magnitude of his projected scale, his vision heralds a transformative, and for many, a profoundly unsettling, shift in the nation’s approach to immigration enforcement.
Yet, this ambition confronts a formidable array of logistical intricacies, legal challenges, and dire economic warnings from a multitude of experts who predict substantial disruptions to the national economy and labor market. The trajectory ahead for immigration policy is unmistakably fraught with intense debate and far-reaching implications.
As the details of this policy continue to emerge, the nation stands on the brink of a delicate precipice, grappling with profound questions concerning national identity, economic resilience, and human dignity that lie at the core of this enduring and fiercely debated issue. The historical trajectory bends not merely to the force of a single policy, but to the collective will and the intricate realities of a nation continually redefining its borders and its hospitality.
:max_bytes(150000):strip_icc()/16160-juicy-grilled-chicken-breasts-ddmfs-5594-hero-3x4-902673c819994c0191442304b40104af.jpg "Unlock the Secret to Perfectly Juicy Chicken Breasts: A Master Guide for Every Home Cook")
