Illegal border crossings at record lows as crackdown spreads

SUNLAND PARK, New Mexico ‒ The U.S.-Mexico border used to buzz with illegal migration at a scale President Donald Trump called an "invasion."
Now soldiers surveil the desert from military vehicles, Border Patrol radios are silent and illegal crossings have fallen to record lows.
Reaching far beyond the border, deep into the country's heartland, Trump insists America is under "invasion" and has continued to invoke wartime powers to stop it. He has transformed the borderland into a military base, made arrests by masked agents a common sight in America and packed detention centers with immigrants, the vast majority without criminal records.
Trump's aggressive actions – and protestors' increasingly violent opposition – have touched off a furious national debate about civil rights, the rule of law and what the word "invasion" really means.
Trump is known for his verbal flourishes, but declaring an "invasion" in numerous executive actions is one way to unlock extraordinary federal authorities, often reserved for wartime, said Jessica Vaughan, of the right-leaning Center for Immigration Studies.
"It was not just meant to rile people up, or to just be used as a melodramatic description, but it was meant to trigger a certain response under certain authorities," she said.
The word "invasion" appears in at least 12 of Trump's executive orders, proclamations and memoranda since he took office Jan. 20, according to a USA TODAY review. He has ramped up military rhetoric in official orders, even as his administration touts its success in stopping border crossings.
In a May 9 proclamation, after months of increased border security, Trump declared that he wants to "end this invasion, remove the illegal-alien invaders from the United States, and protect the American people."
The mass arrival of migrants under President Joe Biden pushed the United States to its highest percentage of foreign-born people in a century. Trump's moves to reverse it by deporting millions is transforming the country again, redefining what it means for the United States to be a nation of immigrants.
From immigration raids at construction sites in Florida, dairy farms in Vermont and restaurants in California; to the detentions of college students in Massachusetts and targeting of alleged gang members in Colorado apartment complexes, the Trump administration is sending a firm message to millions of immigrants: You aren't welcome here.
The president's most vocal supporters see a chief executive delivering rapid results.
Craig Johnson, 67, rallied for Trump at a campaign stop in Las Vegas last year. The Navy vet supports the ramp-up in deportations – especially after the VA recently cut back his benefits, he said. He is appealing the cutback, but he also believes immigrants have drained resources.
"There are so many people that were here illegally that were getting food stamps or medical," he said. "The impact it's had on citizens is just horrendous."
But other Americans are growing increasingly concerned as the president's agents adopt aggressive, fear-inducing arrest tactics and widen their net to target otherwise law-abiding immigrants alongside murderers, rapists, and drug dealers.
"They've created a war zone in our community for a war that's imagined," said Laura Lunn, director of advocacy and litigation for the Rocky Mountain Immigrant Advocacy Network. "It's making us all feel less safe. People are losing trust in law enforcement."
Some migrant advocates are becoming militant in their opposition to Trump's agenda, in some cases adopting tactics commonly associated with resistance fighters, mapping the movement of ICE agents and increasingly engaging in physical confrontations.
On June 6 and 7, hundreds of protestors clashed violently with federal agents in Los Angeles, after dozens of immigrant arrests were carried out by masked agents riding in armored vehicles. The Trump administration dispatched U.S. Border Patrol tactical agents to the city in response and deployed 2,000 members of the National Guard.
L.A. Mayor Karen Bass condemned how agents carried out the detentions.
"These tactics sow terror in our communities and disrupt basic principles of public safety in our city," she said in a statement. "We will not stand for this."
Some former immigration agents and military personnel also have concerns about the new enforcement tactics.
In California, retired Homeland Security Investigations special agent Patrick Comey dedicated three decades of his life to enforcing U.S. immigration laws. But the Trump administration's tactics – splashy arrests by agents in heavy tactical gear – are "becoming more and more distressing every day."
"This is not the America that I was trained to serve," he told USA TODAY.
Army veteran Jose Diaz was outside the Buona Forchetta Italian restaurant in San Diego on May 30, when immigration agents tried to drive their vehicles through an angry crowd and deployed two flash-bang grenades, one of which went off by his foot.
Diaz said he had never seen soldiers overseas use such tactics on a crowd of unarmed civilians. 'We had much stricter rules of engagement than these agents had,' he said.
On a morning in mid-May, near the rusted steel U.S.-Mexico border fence in southern New Mexico, soldiers surveilled the desert from inside an eight-wheeled Stryker vehicle.
Hours went by without a single illegal crossing.
Trump's aggressive new policies helped drive down illegal migration at the Mexican border, accelerating a sharp decline that began in the last year of the Biden administration.
Citing the "invasion," Trump deployed troops to Texas, New Mexico, Arizona and California and declared a strip of land along the border a "National Defense Area." Migrants who enter that territory can be charged with illegal entry and trespassing on a military installation.
The administration is already shifting its focus from the border to the country's interior.
"The prior administration allowed unchecked millions of aliens to illegally enter the United States," Trump said in an April 28 executive order. "This invasion at the southern border requires the federal government to take measures to fulfill its obligation to the states."
Stephen Miller, Trump's top immigration advisor, has long argued that vast government powers and the military should be deployed to combat the migrant "invasion."
Miller, who as White House deputy chief of staff has helped shape Trump's muscular new approach to immigration enforcement, argues liberal Americans are more interested in sob stories about law-breaking immigrants than they are about protecting their country.
On social media, he called the protests in Los Angeles "an insurrection against the laws and sovereignty of the United States," adding in a comment directed to Bass, the mayor: "You have no say in this at all. Federal law is supreme and federal law will be enforced."
But Trump's reliance on the military to combat the "invasion" has some critics worried that a president who grows accustomed to using the military in one arena may be increasingly willing to deploy soldiers elsewhere inside the country.
The border military build-up "is part of an effort to take on internal missions," said Adam Isacson, director of defense oversight for the left-leaning Washington Office on Latin America.
"The authoritarian needs an enemy to start, to galvanize the population," he said. "You use the word invasion; it's immigrants for now."
Courts around the country have put the brakes on some of Trump's efforts to reverse or combat the "invasion."
Federal judges have been quick to thwart his more controversial efforts, from his invocation of the 1798 Alien Enemies Act to deport certain immigrants without due process; to his targeting of pro-Palestinian protesters because the White House didn't like what they said.
Prof. Michael Kagan, who runs the Immigration Clinic at the University of Nevada-Las Vegas law school, said Trump's use of wartime language reflects the administration's deliberate effort to sway both the courts and public opinion by invoking national security.
During war, he said, the courts and the general public have given the president broad deference to exercise powers that could never be justified during peacetime. Kagan cited the preemptive incarceration of Japanese-Americans during World War II as an example of a presidential action that was at the time endorsed by the courts but later widely deemed both unconstitutional and morally wrong.
"They're hoping to tap into a broader norm in America, where the courts allow the executive to get away with a lot more during a war," he said.
Kagan said current efforts targeting immigrants are akin to to the military testing new weapons systems: a small number of agents trying different tactics against a relatively small number of people to find the most effective path forward to meeting Trump's 1-million-per-year deportation goal.
"They're seeing what can we get away with," said Kagan, adding the courts should block any effort to curb due process before the practice becomes widespread.
Congress appears poised to pour $150 billion in new funding to back Trump's efforts, according to an analysis of a reconciliation budget bill by the American Immigration Council. That's more than double the current Department of Homeland Security budget and would represent a dramatic expansion of the department's reach.
"If you think bad things are happening now, wait till they get tons more money," said Matthew Soerens, vice president of advocacy and policy for World Relief, a Christian humanitarian organization.
The organization has argued against deporting people who benefitted from Biden-era immigration programs and followed the rules at the time. Soerens says what happened wasn't an "invasion."
"We want DHS to have enough money to deport violent criminals and ensure secure borders," Soerens said. "We don't want them to have enough money to deport people who came here under the rules we gave them."
Contributed: Eduardo Cuevas
This article originally appeared on USA TODAY: Trump claims new wartime powers to step up immigration crackdown

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Learn with AIFact CheckingText to SpeechAI Summary

Related Articles

Fox News

14 minutes ago

• Fox News

Gabbard was in Situation Room on Iran, still key player despite Trump saying she was 'wrong' on intel

Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard was inside the Situation Room Saturday when the U.S. military launched successful strikes on Iranian nuclear facilities, a White House official confirmed to Fox News Digital Sunday morning. A White House official confirmed Gabbard was in the room Saturday and that she is a "key player" on President Donald Trump's national security team. Speculation had mounted there was a rift between Gabbard and Trump after the president told the media Gabbard was "wrong" about intelligence on Iran back in March when she testified before the Senate that the nation was not actively building a nuclear weapon. Photos of the Situation Room released Saturday evening did not show Gabbard present alongside Trump, Vice President JD Vance, Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth and other administration officials. The photos, however, did not include wide shots showing the entire room or each individual present, with the White House confirming the intelligence chief was present. Trump and Gabbard appeared at odds earlier in June, when the president was asked about Gabbard's testimony before the Senate in March, when she reported intelligence showed Iran was not actively building a nuclear weapon. Trump told the media June 16 he did not "care" what Gabbard had to say in previous testimony, arguing he believed Iran was close to building a nuke. "You've always said that you don't believe Iran should be able to have a nuclear weapon," a reporter asked Trump while aboard Air Force One on June 16. "But how close do you personally think that they were to getting one?" "Very close," Trump responded. Then again Friday, Trump said Gabbard was "wrong" after she reported that Iran was not actively building a nuclear weapon. "My intelligence community is wrong," Trump said when asked about the intelligence community previously reporting that Iran was not actively building a nuclear weapon. When Gabbard appeared before the Senate Intelligence Committee in March, she delivered a statement on behalf of the intelligence community that included testimony that Iran was not actively building a nuclear weapon. "Iran's cyber operations and capabilities also present a serious threat to U.S. networks and data," Gabbard told the committee March 26. The intelligence community "continues to assess that Iran is not building a nuclear weapon, and Supreme Leader Khamenei has not authorized the nuclear weapons program that he suspended in 2003," she said. She did add that "Iran's enriched uranium stockpile is at its highest levels and is unprecedented for a state without nuclear weapons." "Iran will likely continue efforts to counter Israel and press for U.S. military withdrawal from the region by aiding, arming and helping to reconstitute its loose consortium of like-minded terrorist actors, which it refers to as its axis of resistance," she warned. However, as critics picked apart Gabbard's past comments, the White House stressed to Fox Digital that Gabbard and Trump were closely aligned on Iran. A White House official told Fox News Digital on Tuesday afternoon that Trump and Gabbard are closely aligned and that the distinction being raised between Gabbard's March testimony and Trump's remarks that Iran is "very close" to getting a nuclear weapon is one without a difference. The official noted that Gabbard had underscored in her March testimony that Iran had the resources to potentially build a nuclear weapon. Her March testimony reflected intelligence she had received that Iran was not building a weapon at the time but that the country could do so based on the resources it amassed for such an endeavor. Gabbard took to social media and blasted the media for "intentionally" taking her March testimony to the Senate Intelligence Committee "out of context." "The dishonest media is intentionally taking my testimony out of context and spreading fake news as a way to manufacture division," Gabbard said in a Friday post on X, accompanied by a video clip of her March testimony to Congress. "America has intelligence that Iran is at the point that it can produce a nuclear weapon within weeks to months, if they decide to finalize the assembly," she wrote. "President Trump has been clear that can't happen, and I agree." Trump announced in a Saturday evening Truth Social post that the U.S. military had carried out strikes on three nuclear facilities in Iran, obliterating them. Trump held an address to the nation later Saturday night, describing the strikes as wildly successful and backing Iran into a corner to make a peace deal. "A short time ago, the U.S. military carried out massive precision strikes on the three key nuclear facilities in the Iranian regime: Fordow, Natanz and Isfahan," Trump said from the White House on Saturday evening. "Everybody heard those names for years as they built this horribly destructive enterprise. Our objective was the destruction of Iran's nuclear enrichment capacity, and a stop to the nuclear threat posed by the world's number-one state sponsor of terror. Tonight, I can report to the world that the strikes were a spectacular military success." "For 40 years, Iran has been saying, 'Death to America. Death to Israel.' They have been killing our people, blowing off their arms, blowing off their legs with roadside bombs," Trump continued. "That was their specialty. We lost over a thousand people, and hundreds of thousands throughout the Middle East and around the world have died as a direct result of their hate in particular." Fox News Digital reached out to the Office of the Director of National Intelligence for any additional comment on the Sunday strikes, but did not immediately receive a reply.

Fox News

15 minutes ago

• Fox News

Tom Homan reveals the 'biggest national security vulnerability' after US strikes Iran

Border czar Tom Homan voiced concern over the presence of Iranian nationalists and other unaccounted illegal immigrants after the United States launched an attack on Iran's nuclear facilities on Saturday night. Homan revealed what he feels is the 'biggest national security' vulnerability the U.S. currently has amid the conflict in the Middle East during an appearance on "Sunday Morning Futures" with anchor Maria Bartiromo. TOM HOMAN: I've said in the last four years, my biggest concern was this open border. It was the biggest national security vulnerability this country has ever seen. So, I pulled numbers this morning, just from a CBP under Joe Biden — there were 1,272 nationalists from Iran released in the country between OFO and the border patrol. You compare that the Trump administration is zero, right? Zero releases. And right now, because of President Trump's leadership, we have the most secure border in my lifetime, the most secure border in the history of this nation. So we have a secure border, so that was President Trump's big win in securing this nation. We're not releasing people in this country, especially when there are aliens that aren't crossing the border undetected. But under Joe Biden, we had over 10 million people cross that border. But my biggest concern from day one, beyond the fentanyl, beyond the sex trafficking women and children, were the two million known 'gotaways' — over two million people crossed that border. We don't know who they are, where they came from, because they got away because border patrol is so overwhelmed with the humanitarian crisis that Biden created. Over two million people crossed the border and got away. That is my biggest concern. And that's what created the biggest national security vulnerability this country's ever seen. The U.S. Department of State raised warning levels for U.S. citizens traveling to countries across the Middle East on Sunday. The changes come after President Donald Trump ordered strikes on three Iranian nuclear facilities on Saturday. Affected countries include Lebanon, Turkey, Saudi Arabia and Jordan. The measures are most severe in Lebanon, where the state department has ordered the departure of family members and all non-emergency government personnel from the nation due to the heightened security situation. The state department increased its warning levels for Americans in both Turkey and Saudi Arabia, but there is no departure order. Meanwhile, Jordan remains at a level two advisory, calling for Americans in the country to exercise special caution. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth said President Trump was "fully committed" to engaging in peace talks with Iran before ordering strikes on the country's nuclear facilities on Sunday. Hegseth made the statement while speaking to reporters on Sunday morning, asked if there was a "particular moment" when Trump decided the airstrikes were necessary. "I would just say having the opportunity to witness his leadership, he was fully committed to the peace process, wanted a negotiated outcome, gave Iran every single opportunity and, unfortunately, was met by stonewalling, which is why he gave them plenty of time to continue to come to the table and give up enrichment, give up the nuclear program," Hegseth said. "But there was... I won't say the particular moment... there was certainly a moment in time where he realized that it had to be a certain action taken in order to minimize the threat to us in our troops," he added.

Axios

19 minutes ago

• Axios

U.S. has "no interest" in putting troops on the ground in Iran, Vance says

Vice President Vance said Sunday that the United States doesn't plan to send ground troops into Iran and there is "no interest" in engaging in a "protracted conflict" with the nation. The big picture: Vance and other Trump administration officials appeared on Sunday shows to praise President Trump 's decision to carry out a series of airstrikes against three Iranian nuclear sites, while reassuring Americans that the mission — dubbed Operation Midnight Hammer — isn't the launching point for a wider conflict. Speaking on NBC's "Meet the Press," Vance called the mission a "precise, a very surgical strike tailored to an American national interest" — preventing Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon — and that he had "no fear" of a drawn-out conflict. Secretary of State Marco Rubio echoed the sentiment on CBS' "Face the Nation," saying that there are no plans from the U.S. to engage in further attacks on Iran unless they "mess around" and attack Americans or U.S. military sites. What they're saying: Rubio said Sunday that the U.S. carried out the attack after efforts to negotiate with Iran stalled, but that Trump administration officials are "prepared to talk to them tomorrow." Both men also dismissed the notion that the U.S. is at war with Iran, with Vance stating that the war is with Iran's nuclear program. "We destroyed the Iranian nuclear program. I think we set that program back substantially," Vance told NBC News' Kristen Welker. Zoom out: Vance and Rubio were unable to confirm the extent of the damage done to the nuclear sites, but Iran Foreign Ministry spokesperson Esmail Baghaei told CNN that the strike was a "betrayal of diplomacy." "No one knows what will happen next, but what is sure is that the responsibility of the consequences of this war must be borne by the United States and Israel," he said. Bagahei refused to say how Iran might respond to the U.S. strike, but said the nation is entitled to "exercise its right of self-defense."