Donald Trump’s early Cabinet appointments signal that border security and immigration restrictions will be a central focus of his administration. What is the potential effect of some of his policies on legal immigrants and naturalized citizens?

At a November 15 Ethnic Media Services briefing, immigration experts broke down Trump’s immigration priorities and explored the potential consequences for immigrants and the nation. They also discussed the potential for increased detention and deportation costs, the impact on legal immigration, and the role of state policies.

What could mass deportations look like?

The panel highlighted the challenges of mass deportations, including logistical difficulties, financial implications, and the impact on communities. Speakers emphasized the economic and social repercussions, noting that mass deportations could cost $315 billion and negatively affect industries reliant on migrant labor.

Jeremy Robbins, Executive director of the American Immigration Council, pointed out the logistical challenges of mass deportations, including the lack of resources and capacity within the Department of Homeland Security to deport 13 million people when “The current detention capacity for immigrants in this country is about 50,000.”

With a backlog of more than a million cases and a 5-year assessment to decide individual asylum cases, it would take a whole new set of judges and travel arrangements to get people home, potentially costing about $315 billion.

Robbins explained that most deportations currently involve people already in detention, but mass deportations would require finding and detaining people in communities, which is expensive and resource-intensive.

“There are two branches of the Department of Homeland Security that specifically go into communities and find people, and they simply do not have the capacity. It is extremely expensive, and you need a lot of people that we do not currently have on staff to do that.

Greg Chen, Senior Director of Government Relations for the American Immigration Lawyers Association, added that the Biden administration has already maximally deployed existing resources, and any new enforcement activities will require more resources and personnel. There was potential for increased civil rights violations due to inadequate training of law enforcement personnel said Chen. The Trump administration is relying on the fear factor and lawlessness to intimidate communities. The new administration has been saying for example, that they are planning to mobilize National Guard who are not trained on immigration law, said Chen. “That’s going to result in more violations of existing federal legal requirements.”

Chen also highlighted the economic impact of mass deportations, particularly on industries reliant on migrant labor. For example, businesses in Yuma County in south Arizona which are incredibly dependent on migrant labor for agriculture are concerned about meeting labor needs “We are going to see devastation across the country of businesses and industries in just about every economic sector, and that is something that is not going to be good for the country,” said Chen.

Community Impact of Mass Deportations

What does deportation look like for immigrants and the families of immigrants, and their communities? Elizabeth Taufa, policy attorney and strategist at the Immigrant Legal Resource Center emphasized the emotional and psychological impact of mass deportations on communities, including children not attending school and shortages of teachers and healthcare workers.

“It’s the unraveling of the threads of our American communities. And this is going to hit rural communities a lot harder than it is going to hit urban communities.”

Julia Gillette, associate director of the US immigration of immigration policy program at the Migration Policy Institute, echoed Taufa’s analysis. She added that the noise around mass deportations could cause fear and uncertainty, even if the actual implementation is challenging. Gillette mentioned that local policies and cooperation with ICE could shape the level of deportations in a community, with red states potentially having higher levels of deportations.

“We may see red states having higher levels of people who are transferred to ice to federal agents and deported, then in blue states, where they have these non-cooperation policies.”

Legal and Economic Implications of Deportations

Robbins emphasized the financial implications of mass deportations, estimating the cost at $315 billion for a one-time mass deportation and $88 billion annually for a million deportations per year.

He noted that Congress would need to appropriate funds for such a large-scale operation, which could be challenging given the need for 60 votes in the Senate for most funding. Chen added that the new administration would likely look to state and local resources, including the National Guard, to assist with enforcement activities.

Chen highlighted the challenges in hiring and training new immigration enforcement officers and the potential for increased detention facilities and immigration court proceedings.

“The fact is that Customs and Border Protection has not been able to hire the number of border patrol officers agents that they are already authorized and appropriated to do because they can’t find adequate and qualified personnel.”

Border Policy and Asylum Seekers

The current policy of allowing people to make appointments for asylum at official crossing points, but those who come between these points face challenges in qualifying for asylum explained Gillette.

She predicts that the Trump administration will make it harder for asylum seekers to access protection and end the appointment system at ports of entry. Under President Trump, “it will be very hard for people to access asylum proceedings if they come to the border, …and the CBP one appointment process at ports of entry will be ended, meaning it will be very difficult for people coming to the border to be able to enter the country and start the process of asking for protection.”

Taufa added that the Biden administration’s policies on asylum seekers may remain in place, but the Trump administration could further decimate the asylum system. “We’re back to talking about border walls. We’re back to talking about people staying in Mexico. But that’s already kind of the reality.”

Chen pointed out that the potential for expanded bans on people entering based on categories, similar to the Muslim ban, could lead to race, ethnic, and religious profiling. He anticipates that “the new administration …. could identify people and block people based on a wide range of categories, including countries they are coming from, appearance,” and what languages they speak.

Impact on Legal Immigration and Business Visas

Potential changes by the Trump administration to immigration policy would impact legal immigration and temporary status, including the cancellation of DACA and TPS.

Robbins warned that immigrants of all types would face challenges, including direct bans choking off refugee numbers, that would make it harder to get asylum. He said the increase in requests for evidence and the significant backlogs at USCIS, would make it harder for people to navigate the system.

Chen added that the Trump administration’s systematic impact on the legal immigration system included retrogression, making it longer to process cases for family and employment-based visas. He emphasized the importance of legal immigration for the American economy and the potential for increased irregular migration if legal channels are blocked.

Economic and Social Impact of Immigration Policies

The economic impact of immigration policies said Gillette, included the potential for increased inflation and unemployment due to the loss of immigrant workers. She said it would disrupt employers who rely on work authorization for their employees and the potential for more people to churn in and out of employment due to shorter work authorization periods.

Due to a significant shortage of resources more legal immigration attorneys and nonprofit organizations were needed to assist the community said Chen.

Federal vs. State Policies and Sanctuary Cities

Significant differences exist in immigration policies depending on the states where people live. Robbins explained that states have been trying to take over part of the federal government’s responsibility to enforce immigration laws a Trump administration could support. For example, the administration could potentially withhold federal funds for states that have policies like in-state tuition for undocumented students.

States with resources to support immigrants would have a significant advantage over those without such resources said Taufa. She emphasized the importance of local policies and cooperation with ICE in shaping the level of deportations in a community.

Birthright Citizenship and Naturalization

Trump has signaled his desire to end birthright citizenship for children born in the US to undocumented immigrants. According to Robbins, the 14th Amendment guarantees citizenship to anyone born in the US, and changing this would require a constitutional amendment or a drastic change in Supreme Court jurisprudence. Potentially there could be challenges to the Plyler vs. Doe case, which requires schools to educate undocumented children, he added. “There is a very concerted effort to undermine that and to try and overturn that jurisprudence as well.”

Chen felt that the Biden administration could take steps to finalize regulations that improve the adjudication of adjustment applications and withdraw Trump-era policies that are not yet implemented. “There are a number of regulations that are already part of the federal regulatory process that would improve let’s say, adjudication of adjustment applications, the operation of programs such as the H-1B program.”

He added that public service announcements were needed to warn people about scams and provide accurate information on legal resources and rights.

He urged the media to have a line of sight on what’s happening. “I think that, in addition to the fear and the chaos that we hear about very consistently from this administration, from the campaign, I think there is a certain amount of deflection and distraction that they’re trying to engage in. Cutting through the distraction weeds to get to what’s actually happening, I think is going to be really important.”

(The article is published under a mutual content partnership arrangement between The Free Press Journal and India Currents).