President Donald Trump’s renewed crackdown on undocumented immigration may appease his base, but will it accomplish anything?
Donald Trump campaigned on a promise to secure the southern border and crackdown on undocumented immigration into the United States as he made his comeback run for the presidency. These very comments propelled the one-time presidential hopeful when, in 2015, he proclaimed that “The US has become a dumping ground for everybody else’s problems.” His infamous Presidential Announcement Speech noted that Mexico did not send “their best.” Instead, they sent people “that have lots of problems,” like drugs, crime, and “They’re rapists.”
The incoming administration’s decision to centre border control and undocumented immigration in his second administration came as no surprise. On day one, Trump signed a flurry of Executive Orders (EO) covering an array of campaign promises and setting the ground for the limits of presidential authority. EO 14165 promised to “marshal all available resources and authorities to stop this unprecedented flood of illegal aliens into the United States.” Aside from the continued calls for physical barriers along the US-Mexican border and increased efforts toward deterrence, the EO promised renewed cooperation between federal immigration officials and state and local law enforcement. EO 14159 emboldened the 287(g) agreements, which authorise State and local law enforcement officials “to perform the functions of immigration officers.”
In shock and awe, Trump 2.0 worked to publicly share the ongoing raids in metropolitan regions across the United States. Taking to X, the United States Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) shared single-day statistics and individual profiles of those arrested during the highly publicised raids. As The Washington Post reported, Trump demanded a quota of 1,200 to 1,500 a day to enact his campaign pledge to deport millions of undocumented individuals.
However, the impact that this highly public display of immigration enforcement may have could be detrimental to the Latino labour force. Latino labour has proven an instrumental component of the United States labour force and the labour movement. Between 2000 and 2022, nearly three-fourths of all growth in the labour force (between the ages of 25 and 42) stemmed from foreign-born individuals. Although Latino labourers do not just work, their presence fosters job growth through the consumption of goods and services, as well as offer an avenue for Latino urbanism and entrepreneurship. In 2023, Latinos comprised 19 percent of the US labour force, representing approximately 31.8 million workers. Undocumented or unauthorised immigrant workers entailed about 5 percent of the workforce or an estimated 8.3 million labourers. Regardless of documentation status, these workers contribute to local, state, and federal economies.
While essential workers, Latino labour has often borne the brunt of exploitation and precarious working conditions. The Pew Research Center reported that three-quarters of voters claimed that undocumented immigrants work in jobs that US citizens do not want. This view has changed little between 2024 and 2020, when the Pew Research Center last conducted the study.
Perhaps one of the most significant uncertainties is the role of workplace raids in Trump’s immigration agenda. In Trump’s first administration, ICE agents raided a meat processing facility in Bean Station, Tennessee, netting 104 arrests. A month later in Sandusky, Ohio, agents arrested 114 workers at a nursery. In August 2019, ICE raided several poultry plants across Central Mississippi, arresting 680 workers. Trump’s “border czar,” Tom Homan, definitively proclaimed that “worksite operations have to happen.”
Workplace raids have been the ironic staple of immigration enforcement for decades. These actions of immigration enforcement are not only flashy but disruptive to the social fabric of communities. Aside from serving as heavily localised examples of mass deportations, workplace raids leave lasting fractures in communities. Not only do they lead to the removal of essential workers in local economies, but they also leave families separated. The raids may also violate the civil rights of US citizens based on their appearance. A 2007 report from the National Council of La Raza (NCLR) found that children separated from their parents faced significant mental and physical trauma. In the aftermath of workplace raids, families were left financially vulnerable. Further studies in 2019 and 2022 supported these unfortunate consequences for immigrant families, often of mixed status.
If renewed, what fears will workplace raids raise for Latino labourers? In Bean Station, Tennessee, while 73 Latinos awaited the verdict on deportation, six workers sued ICE agents for civil rights abuses. The plaintiffs were awarded US$475,000 among them, with a further US$550,000 used to support a class settlement fund for nearly 100 Latino labourers detained that day.
These workplace raids have occurred at varying scales. In Newark, New Jersey, a raid led to a statement issued by the mayor, which accused ICE of detaining citizens including a veteran. In Kern County, California, the fear of workplace raids led to many field workers not showing up to work, potentially disrupting the nation’s food supply.
Perhaps the most obvious conclusion is that these workplace raids achieve relatively little. Workplace raids do not deter the employment practice of hiring undocumented labour. While the practice offers a highly public display of “law and order,” they often sweep up noncriminal immigrants and create both fleeting and permanent disruptions in communities. As one study argued, the raids do not stop employers from hiring undocumented individuals either. In the wake of Chicago’s recent raids, as a part of “Operation Safeguard,” residents responded accordingly, with fear and anxiety over the uncertainty in their lives. As the Chicago Tribune reported, the undocumented community retreated as “They don’t want to go out. They don’t even go to work much because they’re afraid of being caught or deported.”
Trump 2.0 has also targeted formerly deemed “sensitive areas.” The Department of Homeland Security released a statement that noted a directive to rescind the guidelines that limited actions near “sensitive” areas. As the statement proclaimed, “criminals will no longer be able to hide in America’s schools and churches to avoid arrest.” One poll found that these changes lacked support from a few US residents. As the Pew Research Center asserted, while supporters of Trump and Kamala Harris differed drastically on mass deportations (88 percent to 27 percent), they aligned relatively favourably in improving border security (96 percent to 80 percent).
As Trump 2.0 determines how it wants to enact immigration enforcement, the US will be left with uncertain consequences of these renewed, heavily public displays of immigration enforcement. To what end will Trump and his administration utilise immigration crackdowns to appease their base? And what impact will these hyper-localised actions have on local and regional economies?
Emiliano Aguilar is an Assistant Professor of History at the University of Notre Dame. He is also a Faculty Fellow with the Institute for Latino Studies, Kellogg Institute for International Studies, and a Faculty Affiliate with the Initiative for Race and Resilience.
This article is published under a Creative Commons License and may be republished with attribution.
