Trump's Immigration Law Violations: What Are The Consequences?

On the first day of his second term in office, President Trump issued ten executive orders and proclamations that touched nearly every aspect of the complex and exacting US immigration system. The orders and proclamations aimed to redefine America to exclude everyone from border-crossers seeking refuge to children born to parents on temporary visas. They also contained novel legal arguments that task the US military with repelling asylum seekers, threaten aggressive use of criminal penalties to ensure compliance, and open the door to invoking the centuries-old Insurrection Act and Alien Enemies Act. While the Trump administration has complied with some court rulings on immigration, there are concerns that the president is intent on pushing the limits of the law. This, coupled with Trump's view of himself as being above the law, has led to questions about what would happen if he simply failed to abide by court rulings on immigration.

Trump's use of the military to enforce immigration law

On his first day in office, President Donald Trump signed a series of executive orders aimed at curbing immigration, with at least five specifically pertaining to the utilisation of the military to enforce immigration laws. These orders set out Trump's intentions to deploy the military to the southern border and potentially for immigration enforcement within the United States.

Trump declared a national emergency at the southern border, allowing the Secretary of Defence to expedite the activation of reservists, including National Guard personnel, for deployment to the border. This declaration also enables the Secretary of Defence to authorise emergency military construction projects, such as building "a physical wall and other barriers". The National Guard has previously been deployed to the border by Presidents Obama and Bush to assist with security.

Trump's administration plans to use the military in a support role for immigration enforcement, providing transportation, infrastructure, intelligence, and targeting assistance. However, the Posse Comitatus Act prohibits the use of active-duty military personnel for domestic law enforcement functions. Thus, the military's role will likely be limited to supporting immigration officials and other law enforcement entities with advice, training, and equipment.

Trump's executive orders also direct a significant reorganisation of USNORTHCOM, a geographic combatant command responsible for homeland defence and civil support missions. USNORTHCOM has been assigned a new mission: "to seal the borders and maintain the sovereignty, territorial integrity, and security of the United States by repelling forms of invasion including unlawful mass migration, narcotics trafficking, human smuggling and trafficking, and other criminal activities."

The utilisation of the military to enforce immigration laws is expected to face legal, constitutional, and practical challenges. The deployment of the military for mass deportations could cost nearly a trillion dollars over a decade and disrupt the US economy, particularly in sectors like construction and agriculture that rely on undocumented workers. Additionally, there are concerns about protecting the civil rights of immigrants and preventing the wrongful deportation of US citizens.

The impact on the US economy of Trump's immigration policies

During his first term, Trump tried to limit access to visas for a wide range of people, both legal and illegal. He also restricted H-1B visas, which allow companies to employ foreign-born scientists and engineers. These restrictions led to companies sending more jobs, resources and innovations outside the United States.

Trump's immigration policies during his second term are predicted to reduce 2025 GDP growth by between 0.1 (“high” scenario) and 0.4 percentage points (“low” scenario), or by $30 to $110 billion. The "low" scenario assumes that Trump's second term will see a modest increase in immigration restrictions compared to his first term. The "high" scenario assumes a more dramatic increase in restrictions.

Under the "low" scenario, the US would see net outmigration in 2025, with 650,000 more people leaving the country than entering it. Under the "high" scenario, there would be positive net migration of 1.3 million.

The reduction in the labour force resulting from Trump's immigration policies will result in reduced growth in earnings, consumption and output. This will have a negative impact on the US economy.

Trump's second term immigration policies may also affect the markets and economy, though not as much as monetary policy.

Trump's attempts to end birthright citizenship

On the first day of his second term in office, President Trump issued several executive orders and proclamations that sought to redefine America by excluding everyone from border-crossers to children born to parents on temporary visas. One of these executive orders aimed to end birthright citizenship for children born to parents not legally in the country or those on temporary visas.

The executive order was swiftly met with legal challenges, with 22 states and several organisations suing to try to stop the executive action. The states involved included Arizona, Illinois, Oregon, Washington, New Jersey, and 18 other states. The Northwest Immigrant Rights Project also consolidated a lawsuit with the four states.

U.S. District Judge John Coughenour in Seattle, a Ronald Reagan appointee, called the order "blatantly unconstitutional" and issued a 14-day temporary restraining order blocking its implementation. Following this, U.S. District Judge Deborah Boardman issued an injunction to keep the order on hold long-term, until the merits of the case are resolved. The Justice Department is expected to appeal the injunctions.

At the heart of the lawsuits is the 14th Amendment to the Constitution, ratified in 1868 after the Civil War and the Dred Scott Supreme Court decision, which held that an enslaved man living in a state where slavery was outlawed was not a citizen. The plaintiffs argue that the amendment, which holds that "all persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside", are indisputably citizens.

The Trump administration has asserted that children of noncitizens are not "subject to the jurisdiction" of the United States and therefore not entitled to citizenship. They argue that the Constitution does not grant citizenship to "the children of those who have circumvented (or outright defied) federal immigration laws".

Attorneys for the states have argued that this has been recognised since the amendment's adoption, notably in the 1898 U.S. Supreme Court decision, United States v. Wong Kim Ark. This decision held that the only children who did not automatically receive U.S. citizenship upon being born on U.S. soil were children of diplomats, enemies present during hostile occupation, those born on foreign ships, and those born to members of sovereign Native American tribes.

Trump's administration's treatment of asylum seekers

On the first day of his second term, President Trump issued a flurry of executive orders, memoranda, and proclamations, signalling to immigrant communities that they are under attack. One of his first actions was to issue an executive order on "Protecting the American People Against Invasion", which radically expands the legal authorities used to enforce immigration law against immigrants already in the U.S. and calls for a vast expansion of the infrastructure that would be needed to carry out the "mass deportations" he has promised.

Trump's executive orders also weave in novel legal arguments that fully task the U.S. military with repelling asylum seekers, threaten aggressive use of criminal penalties to ensure compliance, and open the door to future invocations of the centuries-old Insurrection Act and Alien Enemies Act.

One of the most significant actions taken by the Trump administration is the expansion of "expedited removal", which allows the U.S. to deport someone without a court hearing. Under this expansion, U.S. officials are authorized to arrest someone accused of entering the country illegally anywhere inside the U.S. and subject them to expedited removal if they believe that person has been there for less than two years, with the burden of proof on the immigrant to demonstrate otherwise. This measure has never been used to this extent before and could subject millions of recent arrivals, as well as others swept up by error, to potential deportation without a court hearing.

Another measure that targets asylum seekers specifically is the reinstatement of the Migrant Protection Protocols, also known as "Remain in Mexico". This policy forces non-Mexican asylum seekers to wait on the Mexican side of the U.S. southern border while their case is resolved. This places asylum seekers at risk of violence and instability and violates domestic and international law, as reported by Human Rights Watch.

The Trump administration has also taken steps to restrict access to legal representation for immigrants. On January 22, 2025, the Department of Justice ordered legal service providers to "stop work immediately" on four federally funded programs assisting detained immigrants: the Legal Orientation Program, the Immigration Court Helpdesk, the Counsel for Children Initiative, and the Family Group Legal Orientation Program. These programs provide legal support to migrants who are detained or in the process of being detained, helping them understand what to expect during their court proceedings, navigate the necessary paperwork, and find legal counsel. The abrupt halt to these services sparked immediate backlash from immigrant rights advocates, and the Amica Center for Immigrant Rights, along with other nonprofit immigrant rights organizations, sued the Trump administration, arguing that the DOJ's stop-work order was illegal.

In addition to restricting access to legal representation, the Trump administration has also targeted asylum seekers by eliminating the use of the CBP One app, which was the only legal means for someone to seek asylum in the U.S. from the U.S.-Mexico border. As a result, potential asylum seekers now face indefinite, extended stays in Mexico, where they are at risk of violence and other threats to their safety.

Trump's administration's treatment of undocumented immigrants brought to the US as children

On the first day of his second term in office, President Trump issued ten executive orders and proclamations, touching nearly every aspect of the US immigration system. These orders aimed to redefine America to exclude everyone from border-crossers seeking refuge to children born to parents on temporary visas.

One of the most notable orders, "Protecting the Meaning and Value of American Citizenship", ended birthright citizenship for children of undocumented immigrants. This order, which is likely to face legal challenges, will affect more than 150,000 children born in the US each year, creating a new class of undocumented children. It will also impact hospitals, which will have to absorb the costs of providing treatment to newborns who no longer qualify for Medicaid.

The Trump administration also took steps to restrict access to legal aid for undocumented immigrants, including those brought to the US as children. In January 2025, the Department of Justice (DOJ) issued a memo instructing legal service providers to "stop work immediately" on four federally funded programs assisting detained immigrants: the Legal Orientation Program, the Immigration Court Helpdesk, the Counsel for Children Initiative, and the Family Group Legal Orientation Program. These programs provide legal support to migrants who are detained or in the process of being detained, helping them understand their court proceedings, navigate paperwork, and find counsel. The halt to these services sparked immediate backlash from immigrant rights advocates, who argued that the DOJ's order was illegal.

The Trump administration's treatment of undocumented immigrants, including those brought to the US as children, has been characterised by efforts to increase deportations, restrict access to legal aid and social services, and create a climate of fear and uncertainty.

Frequently asked questions