Border Regimes: Trump’s Immigration Policies and their Human Impact

Author: Giulia Gomes

Reviewed by Carolina Veloso

Sunday, the 20th of July 2025, was the six-month mark of Donald Trump’s second term as president of the United States (U.S.). His time in office has been marked with various new initiatives, policies, and backlash. Notably, his term so far has made profound changes in immigration policies. The focus has been on reducing the number of immigrants in the U.S. while instigating fear and uncertainty among those who live in the country. Written below is a list of the most impactful orders that have been signed on the subject of immigration:

“Executive Order Protecting the Meaning & Value of American Citizenship” – This order aims to change the long-established policy of birthright citizenship in the U.S. Constitution in the 14th Amendment. If it passes, it would renounce birthright citizenship to children of 1) undocumented parents; 2) mother unlawfully present & father who was not a U.S. citizen or permanent resident; and 3) mother with temporary legal status and father who was not a U.S. citizen or permanent resident.1

“Executive Order Protecting the American People Against Invasion” – this order overturns enforcement priorities established during former President Joe Biden’s administration. Under his administration, the focus was on removing “violent criminal noncitizens”; now, President Trump prioritizes the removal of all undocumented immigrants.2 Moreover, the order expands the expedited removal to include individuals who have been in the U.S. for up to two years. In addition, it mandates the detention of individuals with unresolved immigration cases. The order also penalizes sanctuary jurisdictions by withholding federal funding.

This order lays the foundation for a mass-deportation strategy by increasing the powers of federal immigration law enforcement. It introduces penalties against any organization or individual who aids or facilitates irregular migration.

“Executive Order Securing our Borders” – This directive resumes the construction of the border wall along the U.S.-Mexico border that began during President Trump’s first term. Moreover, it terminates humanitarian parole programs such as the Cubans, Haitians, Nicaraguans, and Venezuelans (CHNV) program. Lastly, it ends the “catch and release” programs that had allowed asylum-seekers to remain in the community whilst waiting for their immigration hearings.3

“Executive Order Protecting the United States from Foreign Terrorists and Other National Security and Public Safety Threats” – this order paves the way for stricter vetting procedures and the introduction of partial or total travel bans on certain countries.4

“Executive Order Guaranteeing the States Protections Against Invasion” – Stops entry to anyone who could be a "threat to public health”, and asylum-seekers.5

“Executive Order Realigning the United States Refugee Admissions Program.” – Stops temporarily the U.S. Refugee Program, which is a public-private partnership between the federal government, states, districts, and non-profit organizations.6 Under this order, admission or resettlement of refugees is halted, except in case-by-case exceptions. It further suspends decisions on pending refugee applications for the duration of the measure.7

A Closer Look into Executive Order: Protecting the Meaning & Value of American Citizenship

It is important to note that the legal battle over this order is ongoing and may have changed since this article was written.

What does it mean?

This order states that the U.S. government will not issue documents recognizing U.S. citizenship to children who do not have at least one parent with Lawful Permanent Resident (LPR) status and/or U.S. citizenship[8]. Right after this order, however, various organizations, states, and cities challenged the law constitutionally, citing that it violated the 14th Amendment.9

Important to note: when the 14th Amendment was passed, the concept of birthright citizenship was not novel. Under the English Common Law, any children born to white immigrants in England or its colonies were considered English citizens. Thus, before the 14th Amendment was passed, only children born in the U.S. to white immigrants were recognised as U.S. citizens.10

In depth…_________________________________________________

To better understand the context of the ongoing development of this order, here is a timeline with the main updates so far at the time of the writing of this article:
A month after the issuance of the order, three district court judges issued universal injunctions, which are court orders that block a policy or law from being enforced nationwide.
In March 2025, Trump’s administration decided to go to the Supreme Court to argue against the order granting universal injunctions. The argument was that lower courts should not have the authority to bar policies nationwide.11
On June 27, 2025, the Supreme Court rejected the idea of universal injunctions. There was no ruling on whether Trump's order was constitutional. Further, it states that lower courts seeking to issue blocks or injunctions should provide a narrower scope (i.e., not nationwide). This means that statewide injunctions and nationwide injunctions for class actions would still be allowed.
On July 10th, 2025, a U.S. district judge, Joseph Laplante, certified that babies would be affected by this order as a class and thus issued a class-based nationwide injunction. Due to this injunction, the order of birthright citizenship has not gone into effect and will not as long as this order stands.12

____________________________________________

What is the 14th Amendment?

The 14th Amendment was passed in a complex and violent period in American history – the years following the Civil War and the abolition of slavery through the 13th Amendment.13 Violence, particularly against formerly enslaved Black people, was common. In Southern states, “Black Codes” were enacted, which targeted the freedom, rights, and lives of Black African Americans.14 At the time, there was nothing in the U.S. Constitution that explicitly prevented States from implementing such types of discriminatory policies. Additionally, the newly emancipated African Americans had no clear constitutional guarantee of their basic rights and protections. To address this, Congress passed the Amendment in 1866 and ratified it in 1868, three years after the end of slavery. The 14th Amendment significantly increased the scope of civil liberties beyond what was outlined in the Bill of Rights. It was part of three “Reconstruction Amendments” passed after the Civil War to redefine the legal status of emancipated Black Americans.15

One of the most important features of the 14th Amendment was the establishment of birthright citizenship to African Americans (it notably excluded, however, Native Americans).16 Further, it introduced a legal standard under which no state could strip any person of life, liberty, or property without due process of law, nor could any person be treated unfairly or unequally under the law.17 This legal standard marked a shift in power between the state and federal governments for the first time. Additionally, it was the first time civil rights were guaranteed and enforced at the federal level.18

The ratification of this Amendment was complex, difficult, and filled with resistance. After its passage in 1966, it was sent to other states for ratification. Within a year, 22 states ratified it, but most Southern states refused. And opposition was not limited to the South. States such as Ohio, Oregon, and New Jersey, which initially ratified the amendment, later revoked their ratifications.

Why? Democrats, who ran on platforms opposing racial equality, won the elections and gained control of their state legislatures.19 In fact, Ohio did not re-ratify the 14th Amendment until 2003 – a stark reminder of the long and uneven struggle for civil rights in the United States.

Immigration Policy Strategy

On the fourth of July 2025, the House passed Trump’s ‘big beautiful bill’. This bill sets aside around $10 billion for the annual budget of Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE).20 With the passing of this bill, the immigration system of the U.S. could have a deep structural shift as it heavily increases law enforcement and the detention network.21

Role of Stephen Miller

Stephen Miller, a senior advisor in the White House and widely regarded as the chief architect of the current administration’s recent immigration policies, has played a central role in shaping its enforcement strategies. Raised in Santa Monica, California – a city where approximately a quarter of the residents are foreign-born – Miller has long expressed strong views on immigration.22 During his time at Duke University, Miller became involved with various far-right organizations. He worked with the David Horowitz Freedom Center, an organization classified by civil rights groups as promoting anti-Muslim rhetoric. Miller also collaborated with Richard Spencer, known for coining and promoting the term “alt-right”, a movement that roots itself in scientific racism and promotes a type of identity politics that favors white people and European Americans. What makes Miller’s trajectory paradoxical is that he himself is a descendant of immigrants. His family came to the U.S. at the turn of the 20th century, fleeing anti-Semitic pogroms in the Russian Empire.23

Stephen Miller started to work for Donald Trump’s presidential campaign in 2015, drawn in part by Trump’s hardline rhetoric about immigrants – for instance, in describing Mexican immigrants as “criminals, drug dealers, and rapists”.24 By 2017, Miller had assumed a key role in the administration as a senior policy advisor, where he was instrumental in shaping initiatives such as the 2017 “Muslim travel ban”.25 According to a report by the New Yorker, three years into Trump’s first term, the administration dismantled various immigration policies and used existing laws to expand enforcement.26 Many of these initiatives were developed and driven by Miller himself.27 In Trump’s second term, Miller has continued to push for aggressive immigration measures, including increasing immigration arrests, pushing legal limits of deportations, restricting birthright citizenship, and imposing travel bans on 19 countries. He also played a key role in supporting Republican efforts to pass legislation allocating $170 billion for immigration enforcement.28

Role of Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE)

ICE has been at the center of focus since President Trump’s term began, notably due to its aggressive approach in making arrests. In a meeting in May, Stephen Miller demanded that ICE agents increase their arrest numbers to 3,000 people a day.29 This is around triple the number of arrests they were making at the beginning of 2025. In this same meeting, Miller allegedly instructed agents to target places such as Home Depot, a place where migrant workers would typically gather.30 Depending on the state in which ICE officials are arresting people, the manner of arrest is different. In states that voted for Trump, ICE agents are more likely to arrest immigrants from prison. In states that lean Democratic, ICE is often arresting immigrants from worksites, in mass roundups, and many who are taken do not have a criminal background.31The Transactional Records Access Clearinghouse (TRAC) noted that border-area deportations are lower as fewer migrants are trying to cross into the U.S. On the other hand, ICE removals have increased. A Boston College Law professor who founded the immigration and asylum law clinic at the campus notes,

“We’ve never seen masked agents before. We’ve never seen students arrested for writing op-eds before. We’ve never seen people dragged out of immigration court before”32

Another individual, Balderas, who immigrated to the U.S. over three decades ago, said ICE agents were often patrolling her neighborhood,

“Since I’ve been here, I never have any experience like that – going into the neighborhoods and pulling people and doing what they’re doing”33

Many immigrants are staying at home due to fear of being arrested. “We’re seeing people not going to their doctor’s appointments, kids not going to school, folks not going grocery shopping,” stated Sarang Sekhavat, the chief of staff at the Massachusetts Immigrant & Refugee Advocacy Coalition.34 The impact of these raids is affecting various business sectors. In the agricultural business, many farms take seasonal workforces, but this year, many farms have seen a dramatic decrease in labor.35 A woman with permission to work under Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) did not return to her usual seasonal work on Oregon farms due to fear that it could hamper her DACA renewal. Her parents, who are seasonal workers, are undocumented migrants who have lived decades in the U.S. This year, they stayed home out of fear. DACA was originally founded in 2012 to provide temporary and renewable protection for undocumented migrants who were brought into the U.S. as children.36

Unrest has also been observed at a larger scale, most notably during protests in Los Angeles. The events began when ICE agents executed search warrants at various locations, including a clothing warehouse, Home Depot stores, and a doughnut shop.37 Many protesters then gathered outside a federal detention center where interactions with local officers ranged from peaceful demonstrations to violent confrontations. As tensions escalated, the National Guard, a state-based military force usually deployed during natural disasters, was called to manage the protests.38 The deployment of such troops received backlash, with it being deemed unconstitutional and a clear tactic to provoke fear and chaos.

Rhetoric of Refugees & Asylum Seekers

Beyond shaping border regimes, political narratives influence the portrayal of migrants in a society. These political narratives are not sudden; they develop gradually over time and provide justification for legal actions and reforms regarding border control measures.39 Their impact extends beyond law and policy, feeding into broader social processes of marginalization and exclusion. As a result, refugees and asylum seekers are often unfairly perceived as undeserving or suspicious, judged primarily by their manner of arrival in the country.40 This framework consequently becomes a tool for politicians who take that narrative to convey a sensation of fear for the public, further entrenching exclusionary practices.

Trump’s Rhetoric over the years

Stephen Miller has played a central role in shaping President Trump’s rhetoric on immigration. As a key advisor during Trump’s first term, Miller had the time and influence to craft long-term strategies and refine the discourse. His contributions helped shift the tone of the public debate, grounding it in what France 24 describes as a form of “cultural nativist discourse”.41 A type of worldview that places so-called “native” cultures as inherently superior and under threat from external and foreign influences, particularly immigrants and ethnic minorities.

One of Miller’s most prominent roles during the first term was leading the effort to end the DACA program, introduced by former president Barack Obama. The attempt to dismantle DACA was part of a broader strategy that capitalized on the ongoing legislative deadlock surrounding immigration reform. It gave Trump and Miller a political window of opportunity. Kathleen Joseph, a lawyer and policy analyst with Migration Policy’s Institute42, claims that the U.S. immigration system is known to be outdated, overwhelmed, and under-resourced. All these factors create the perfect groundwork for a political figure to take and exploit. The recent ICE raids, imprisoning people in El Salvador, in Guantanamo Bay, and using military planes for deportations are all part of this rhetoric.43 A calculated narrative that is fueling the story President Trump and Miller want to tell about immigration.

Analysis of Border Regimes

Categorization & Racialization of Migrants

The construction of the category of ‘migrant’ in Europe can be traced back to the 13th century in Britain.44 The end of the 13th century marked the emergence of legal distinctions between aliens and subjects. The United Kingdom (UK) provides an in-depth example of how policies and laws gradually created racial categories and distinctions between nationals and non-nationals. The Calvin’s Case of 1608, for example, declared that those born in Scotland when ruled by the English Crown were considered subjects. However, the Native Americans who were unconquered were not regarded as subjects. If one wanted to obtain land ownership rights, one would have to apply for subjecthood ,which would be authorized by local colonial leaders45. The colonial leaders, who carried their own biases towards the natives of the colonized land, were given the power to decide who deserved subjecthood.

Race is not a biological fact but a social category produced through political and legal practices.46 Modern European states increasingly drew on the fabricated idea of race to regulate mobility. In the British Empire, the forced transport of enslaved Africans was not classified as the movement of subjects or aliens. By the early 18th century, laws established that children born to enslaved people in British territory would not be recognized as subjects.47 Legislation regulating entry and membership during the British Empire increasingly distinguished who could belong on the basis of skin color. These legal frameworks were key in the institutionalization of racial categories, creating a sharp divide between those included and those excluded, and reinforcing the British Empire’s aim to maintain racial hegemony.

Border Regimes

Borders are considered both ideological and physical locations, as the system targets the body, mind, emotion, and spirit.48 They are ever evolving because they include processes, institutions, narratives, concepts, and categories of a state that are constantly shifting. All these factors are so connected that they constantly shift depending on how the phenomenon of migration is globally and nationally. In today’s world, political discourses and mechanisms are constantly changing and being introduced, which puts refugees and asylum seekers in a constant state of limbo as new legislations and laws are regularly being created. When cross-border movement increases, it is not uncommon to see politicians introduce tighter border controls to regulate the movement of bodies. Bordering practices also create social imaginaries which, in turn, support the rhetoric of categorization, marginalization, exclusion, and stigmatization of migrants.49

U.S. immigration policy – specifically under President Trump’s renewed agenda – reflects broader global trends in bordering practices that rely on dehumanization, silencing, and austerity as tools of control.50 Austerity – often understood in economic terms – is also a political strategy and a bordering practice used to enforce conformity and reinforce state power.51 In the context of immigration, austerity becomes a bordering mechanism that legitimizes exclusion through rhetoric rooted in xenophobia and narratives of scarcity and competition. By cutting access to basic services and support systems, the state restricts the ability of migrants to live with dignity, turning the immigration system into a tool of discipline and deterrence. Such types of bordering regimes effectively reduces individuals – especially refugees and asylum seekers – to constrained subjects within state institutions that theoretically claim to protect.52 Under austerity regimes, the state attempts to control the lives of individuals, to dominate by stripping people of their simple competencies.

In this context, it is important to center the voices and lived experiences of displaced individuals, as external observers often underestimate the level of control and domination a state is capable of imposing on a specific group of people. President Trump’s current policy proposals intensify enforcement, expand deportation efforts, and rely on the language of threat and invasion. This mirrors the logic of austerity-driven bordering regimes – there is an emphasis on control, signaling a commitment to policies that criminalize and disempower vulnerable migrant communities.

Conclusion

Trump’s second term in office in the U.S. has been marked by strict new immigration policies that foster fear and uncertainty. Understanding these developments requires looking not only at the history of U.S. immigration policy, but also at the political rhetoric driving them—and their effects on both communities and individuals. While it remains unclear how much the immigration system will structurally change in the coming months and years, what is clear is the profound and lasting impact these policies and narratives are already having on immigrants and their families. One of the most visible signs of this shift is the growing reliance on detention facilities to confine migrants. Though often framed as a domestic solution, this approach is part of a broader global pattern. Around the world, similar systems of containment and exclusion are redefining how nations respond to migration—a trend that demands closer examination beyond U.S. borders. The direction the U.S. takes next will depend on whether organizations, states, and individuals can sustain and strengthen their collective effort, and on whether the national conversation can shift away from fear-driven narratives and move toward human rights, justice, solidarity, and inclusion.

Key Summary

President Donald Trump’s second term in office has introduced sweeping executive orders that escalate immigration enforcement, expand detention, and restrict legal pathways.
Efforts to undermine birthright citizenship by President Donald Trump’s administration directly challenge the 14th Amendment and the historical foundations of U.S. civil rights.
Stephen Miller is a crucial figure behind the administration’s immigration policies and strategy. ICE plays a significant role in enforcing the immigration policy measures, using aggressive tactics that spread fear, disrupt daily life, and harm entire sectors.
Political rhetoric frames migrants, asylum seekers, and refugees as undeserving or threatening, fueling public fear and legitimizing exclusion.
The regulation of mobility is rooted in long histories of racial categorization and colonial laws.
Borders function not only as physical barriers but as ideological and institutional systems of exclusion, reinforced through austerity, deterrence, and dehumanization.
U.S. immigration policy – specifically under President Donald Trump’s renewed agenda – reflects broader global trends in bordering practices that rely on dehumanization, silencing, and austerity as tools of control

History of Impactful Border Policies in the U.S.

The U.S. immigration system has changed profoundly over time, and it is important to look back at past politics to understand current debates. The framework of the American immigration system was largely a result of the 1965 Immigration and Nationality Act. It restricted a lot of the discriminatory policies that were put in place in the early 20th century.53 The 20th century saw a turn towards more restrictive policies, including literacy tests, increased taxes on new immigrants, exclusion of immigrants from a designated geographic zone, national origins quotas, and nationality-based exclusions.54 It is interesting to note that in the early years of the U.S., immigration was largely unrestricted. The population was spread sparsely, and there was governmental encouragement for immigration to help in the settling of land and the building of the economy.

Let’s look at some of the most impactful border policies in the history of U.S. immigration.

1. Naturalization Act of 1790

This was the first proper act of U.S. immigration legislation. It introduced rules to obtain U.S. citizenship; however, it was only applicable to free white people who had lived in the U.S. for at least two years, children included.55

2. Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882

This act was the first to specifically target a nationality to exclude; there was a shift from race-based exclusions to nationality-based exclusions. Chinese immigrants were prohibited from immigrating to the U.S. for 10 years. Those who were already in the country were allowed to stay.56 Early in the 1800s, Western and Northern Europeans were the primary group of immigrants coming into the U.S. In the 1880s, immigration expanded, and individuals started to come from other countries such as Italy, Poland, and Russia. This shift led to concerns about different racial and religious backgrounds coming into the country. The Ku Klux Klan (KKK) is an example of a group that opposed immigration on a general scale. More specifically, however, Jews and Catholics. Another group, the American Federation of Labor, rallied for new restrictions because they wanted to protect the national workers. This law paved the way to subsequent laws that further restricted Chinese immigration flow until 1904.57

3. Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965

This act was heavily influenced by the Civil Rights Movement and Cold War politics. It ended the national origins quota system and replaced it with a preference system based on family reunification and skilled immigrants.58 The result of this act was an increase in immigration flow from Asia, Latin America, and Africa.

4.1996 Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigration Responsibility Act (IIRIRA)

This act introduced various new obstacles for asylum seekers coming to the U.S., including layers of technicalities, screening, and processing.59 It is a significant law because it pinned undocumented immigration as a crime and it blended immigration enforcement with crime control.60 It mandated the additional hiring of more Border Patrol and Immigration and Naturalization Service agents.61 It has legally solidified many of the punitive measures that are now characterizations of migration criminalization. Some of the things the act did were to impose a filing deadline on asylum applications, and it introduced summary deportation procedures that allowed the blockage of asylum seekers' applications or court hearings if they had not gone through a screening process. Finally, IIRIRA also introduced mandatory detention for certain immigrants and asylum seekers.

5. Operation Wetback (1954)

This was a governmental initiative that was created with the intent of addressing the rise of undocumented immigrants coming into the U.S., most of whom were Mexicans. This happened during a period of labor shortages and increased public concern about immigration. The name Wetback was used to mention the Mexican citizens who entered the U.S. by swimming across the Rio Grande River.62 During this period, Mexican immigrants were targeted in public debates and blamed for taking jobs of national citizens, affecting work conditions, spreading disease, and increasing the crime rate. The result? The deployment of agents to the Rio Grande Valley to locate and deport anyone who was suspected of being in the U.S. without a legal status. The tactics used by the border agents included demanding identification from individuals who were “Mexican-looking”, citizens in the street, and invading private and Mexican businesses.

____________________________________________

References

The Center for Migration Studies of New York (CMS). (2025, February 14). Summary of executive orders and other actions on immigration. The Center for Migration Studies of New York (CMS). https://cmsny.org/publications/essential-but-ignored-low-earning-immigrant-healthcare-workers-and-their-role-in-the-health-of-new-york-city/
see footnote 1
see footnote 1
see footnote 1
see footnote 1
Global Refuge. (2025). Executive Order on Refugee Resettlement. https://www.globalrefuge.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/01/Resettlement_EO_2.pdf
see footnote 6
Toy, Y., M. Kelley, C., & Urquijo, A. (2025, January 21). President Trump Issues Executive Order Limiting Birthright Citizenship. Ogletree Deakins. https://ogletree.com/insights-resources/blog-posts/president-trump-issues-executive-order-limiting-birthright-citizenship/
see footnote 8
A. Lee III, W. (2025, August 4). Is Trump’s executive order on birthright citizenship constitutional? | Opinion. Press Herald. https://www.pressherald.com/2025/08/04/is-trumps-executive-order-on-birthright-citizenship-constitutional-opinion/
Dallas, K. (2025, July 18). Where does Trump’s birthright citizenship order currently stand? SCOTUSblog. https://www.scotusblog.com/2025/07/where-does-birthright-citizenship-order-currently-stand/
see footnote 11
National Museum of African American History and Culture. (2021, June 29). Reconstructing Citizenship. National Museum of African American History and Culture. https://nmaahc.si.edu/explore/exhibitions/reconstruction/citizenship
Abdelfatah, R., & Arablouei, R. (2024, August 26). The Story of How the 14th Amendment Has Remade America – and How America Has Remade the 14th. NPR. https://www.npr.org/2024/08/26/nx-s1-5088040/the-story-of-how-the-14th-amendment-has-remade-america-and-how-america-has-remade-the-14th
see footnote 13
see footnote 13
National Archives. (2024, March 6). 14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution: Civil Rights (1868). National Archives. https://www.archives.gov/milestone-documents/14th-amendment
see footnote 13
see footnote 13
Pedroza, A. A., & Sanchez, G. R. (2025, March 31). How immigration policy shifts are affecting Latino families. Brookings. https://www.brookings.edu/articles/how-immigration-policy-shifts-are-affecting-latino-families/
PBS News. (2025, June 25). 4 ways Trump’s big bill could change the U.S. immigration system. PBS News. https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/4-ways-trumps-big-bill-could-change-the-u-s-immigration-system
Hesson, T., Mason, J., & Cooke, K. (2025, July 11). The White House aide driving Trump’s aggressive immigration agenda. Reuters. https://www.reuters.com/legal/government/white-house-aide-driving-trumps-aggressive-immigration-agenda-2025-07-11/
Tait, R. (2025, June 15). The rise of Stephen Miller, the architect of Trump’s hardline immigration policy. The Guardian; The Guardian. https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/jun/15/trump-immigration-stephen-miller-influence
see footnote 22
Orr, G., & Restuccia, A. (2021). How Stephen Miller made immigration personal. POLITICO; Politico. https://www.politico.com/story/2019/04/22/stephen-miller-immigration-trump-1284287
Blitzer, J. (2020, February 21). How Stephen Miller Manipulates Donald Trump to Further His Immigration Obsession. The New Yorker. https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2020/03/02/how-stephen-miller-manipulates-donald-trump-to-further-his-immigration-obsession?
see footnote 25
see footnote 25
Gibson, B., & Kight, S. W. (2025, May 28). Scoop: Stephen Miller, Noem tell ICE to supercharge immigrant arrests. Axios. https://www.axios.com/2025/05/28/immigration-ice-deportations-stephen-miller
Barría, C., & Fojo, W. (2025, June 25). The abandoned Florida airport being turned into “Alligator Alcatraz.” BBC. https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cwyrnrnxy7yo
Tolan, C., & Chapman, I. (2025, August 5). ICE uses starkly different tactics to arrest immigrants in red and blue states, data shows. CNN. https://edition.cnn.com/2025/08/05/us/immigration-arrests-community-ice-invs?iid=cnn_buildContentRecirc_end_recirc&recs_exp=up-next-article-end&tenant_id=related.en)
see footnote 31
see footnote 31
Culver, D., Galeana, N., Contreras, E., & Clarke, R. (2025, August 6). Deportation fallout: This farmer lost half his workforce. Now he’s losing his crop too. CNN. https://edition.cnn.com/2025/08/06/us/oregon-cherry-harvest-immigrant-worker-shortage?iid=cnn_buildContentRecirc_end_recirc&recs_exp=most-read-article-end&tenant_id=popular.en
News, A. (2025, June 8). Protests erupted in LA after immigration raids, then tensions escalated. Abc.net.au; ABC News. https://www.abc.net.au/news/2025-06-08/la-protests-ice-raids-explained/105391188
KFF. (2025, February 11). Key Facts on Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) | KFF. KFF. https://www.kff.org/racial-equity-and-health-policy/key-facts-on-deferred-action-for-childhood-arrivals-daca/
see footnote 35
see footnote 35
Tofighian, O., & Boochani, B. (2021). Pluralism in Emergen(i)es in the Middle East and North Africa. Review of Middle East Studies, 54(2), 174–195. https://doi.org/10.1017/rms.2021.35
Tazreiter, C., Tofighian, O., & Boochani, B. (2021). Spectres of subjugation/intersubjugation/resubjugation of people seeking asylum: The kyriarchal system in Australia’s necropoleis. In P. Billings (Ed.), Regulating refugee protection through social welfare law, policy and praxis. Routledge
France 24. (2025, June 11). Who Is Stephen Miller, key advisor behind Trump’s immigration agenda? France 24. https://www.france24.com/en/video/20250611-who-is-stephen-miller-key-advisor-behind-trump-s-immigration-agenda
Bush-Joseph , K. (2025, June 11). Executive Actions Cannot Fix the Nation’s Broken Immigration System–Congress Needs to Legislate - Perry World House. Perry World House. https://perryworldhouse.upenn.edu/news-and-insight/executive-actions-cannot-fix-the-nations-broken-immigration-system-congress-needs-to-legislate/
Cortellessa, E., & Bennett, B. (2025, June 10). Inside Donald Trump’s Mass-Deportation Operation. TIME; Time. https://time.com/7291757/trump-deportation-ice-el-salvador/
Anderson, B. (2013). Subjects, Aliens, Citizens, Migrants. Us and Them? The Dangerous Politics of Immigration Control. Oxford Scholarship Online. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199691593.001.0001
see footnote 44, p.30
see footnote 44, p.35
see footnote 44, p.32
see footnote 39, p.14
see footnote 39, p.19
see footnote 39, p.19
see footnote 39, p.7
see footnote 39, p.21
Dominguez, N. (2023). American Immigration Policy and the US-Mexico Border Crisis. Harvard Model Congress
Wachs, R. (2025, February 26). The History of U.S. Immigration Policy, Explained. Boundless. https://www.boundless.com/immigration-resources/the-history-of-us-immigration-policy-explained/
see footnote 53
Migration Policy Institute. (2013). Major US Immigration Laws, 1790 - Present. Migration Policy Institute.
Gelatt, J., & Chishti, M. (2024, May 13). A Century Later, Restrictive 1924 U.S. Immigration Law Has Reverberations in Immigration Debate. Migrationpolicy.org. https://www.migrationpolicy.org/article/1924-us-immigration-act-history
see footnote 53
Acer, E., & Byrne, O. (2017). How the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996 Has Undermined US Refugee Protection Obligations and Wasted Government Resources - The Center for Migration Studies of New York (CMS). The Center for Migration Studies of New York (CMS). https://cmsny.org/publications/illegal-immigration-reform-immigrant-responsibility-act-1996-undermined-us-refugee-protection-obligations-wasted-government-resources/
Macías-Rojas, P. (2018). Immigration and the War on Crime: Law and Order Politics and the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996. Journal on Migration and Human Security, 6(1), 1–25. https://doi.org/10.1177/233150241800600101
Center for Immigration Studies. (2017). Historical Overview of Immigration Policy. CIS.org; Center for Immigration Studies. https://cis.org/Historical-Overview-Immigration-Policy
Equal Justice Initiative. (n.d.). Jul. 15, 1954 | U.S. Government Stages Mass Deportations in the American Southwest. Calendar.eji.org. https://calendar.eji.org/racial-injustice/jul/15