The Trump administration has pushed to reshape the nation’s approach to immigration — right down to how to read the words engraved on a bronze plaque at the Statue of Liberty.
“Give me your tired and your poor who can stand on their own two feet and who will not become a public charge,” Ken Cuccinelli, acting director of U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, said in an interview with NPR’s Morning Edition.
The administration has tried every tool at its disposal to tighten the nation’s immigration policies — including the so-called “public charge” rule that makes it harder for immigrants to get green cards or visas if they use a wide range of public assistance. It also has pushed to ramp up enforcement, carrying out the biggest workplace raids in at least a decade.
At the same time, many of the administration’s efforts have been stalled or blocked by Congress, the courts, or state and local officials. Below is a look at what the White House has accomplished on immigration — and what it hasn’t.
The White House says Guatemala has signed a so-called “safe third country asylum agreement.” The deal would require migrants traveling through Guatemala from countries such as Honduras and El Salvador to claim asylum in Guatemala before trying in the U.S. Though it’s not clear whether the agreement is legal, as the Guatemalan Congress is supposed to ratify such treaties, or how it will be implemented.
The agreement is the latest effort by the administration to discourage migrants from seeking asylum in the U.S. The White House argues that many migrants are abusing generous asylum laws to live and work in the country until their cases are heard in immigration court, which can take years because of extensive backlogs.
Before inking the agreement with Guatemala, the Trump administration moved to deny asylum to most migrants unless they first apply for protections in an least one country they pass through on their way. But the new policy has been put on hold in part by a federal judge in California, who found it “inconsistent with the existing asylum laws.”
Courts have previously rejected other policies that would limit asylum, including the administration’s attempt to deny refuge to any migrant who crossed the border illegally. But the Justice Department has succeeded in making it harder to get asylum based on gang or domestic violence, as well as family ties.
The DOJ also pushed to get rid of bond hearings for detained asylum-seekers, but has been blocked from doing so. And the administration wants to hold migrant families with children in detention until their day in immigration court to discourage them from coming.
So far, none of these changes have stopped migrant families from crossing the southern border in large numbers to escape from poverty and violence in Central America.
Federal immigration officials raided seven food-processing plants in Mississippi in August, arresting about 680 people believed to be working in the U.S. without authorization, and also seizing company business records.
More than 600 agents from U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement were involved in the operation. They were by far the largest workplace raids of the Trump administration, and the biggest since 2006.
ICE later released hundreds of those who were arrested with orders to appear in immigration court. But the raids left many of their family members scrambling for support.
The owners of the poultry-processing plants have yet to be charged with any wrongdoing.
The Trump administration is moving to end a long-standing legal agreement known as the Flores settlement that limits how long migrant families with children can be detained.
Under Flores, the government has to release migrant kids from detention centers as quickly as possible, generally within 20 days. New regulations proposed by the Department of Homeland Security would lift that limit and make other major changes as well.
This has been a longtime goal of immigration hardliners in the Trump administration, who argue that Flores has acted as a lure to families in Central America.
President Trump has threatened to deport “millions” of immigrants living in the country illegally. Arrests and deportations of undocumented immigrants living in the U.S. spiked during the first two years of the Trump administration — for immigrants with and without criminal records.
But the numbers remain well below the highest figures of President Obama’s first term. And the acting director of Immigration and Customs Enforcement says arrests and deportations declined in early 2019 because the agency is devoting more resources to the southern border.
Also, the administration’s plan to undertake nationwide ICE raids to round up undocumented families failed to materialize.
The administration is expanding the use of so-called expedited removal to fast-track deportations of immigrants without a hearing before an immigration judge, unless they can prove they’ve been in the U.S. continuously for more than two years.
And immigrant advocates say aggressive enforcement by ICE continues to create a climate of fear among unauthorized migrants.
The White House warned that the U.S. would impose a tariff of 5% on all products from Mexico and escalate it — unless Mexico agreed to “substantially” curtail the flow of Central American migrants
Under pressure from Washington, Mexico agreed to step up enforcement and to take in more migrants waiting for their U.S. asylum hearings. Mexico also deployed thousands of troops to its northern and southern borders.
And the number of migrants apprehended after crossing the U.S.-Mexico border began to decline. In July, the monthly total fell below 100,000 for the first time all year — though it still remains far higher than the same period a year ago.
President Trump has threatened several times over the past year to close the southern border unless the Mexican government does more to combat illegal immigration. But the White House backed down under pressure from business groups. Those groups — and their allies in Congress — pushed back on the proposed tariffs, as well.
The Department of Homeland Security has sent more than 30,000 migrants back to Mexico to wait for months until a U.S. immigration court decides their asylum cases.
Immigrant advocates, lawyers and former U.S. officials say the country is turning its back on asylum-seekers — vulnerable people who are allowed under U.S. law to seek sanctuary here.
A federal court initially blocked the administration from sending asylum-seekers back to crime-ridden Mexican border towns where many are staying in shelters.
But the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals overturned the lower court’s injunction, allowing the “Remain in Mexico” policy to continue while the case plays out.
Meanwhile, immigrant advocates say conditions are worsening for migrants in border towns, targeted by gangs and cartels.
President Trump has laid out sweeping changes he’d like to make to the legal immigration system. The White House proposal would favor immigrants with higher skills and more education, and it would shift the immigration system away from family reunification, which has been its guiding principle since 1965.
But the latest proposal is getting little traction on Capitol Hill — particularly among Democrats, whose support would be necessary for the proposal to become law.
Federal courts have widely rejected the Justice Department’s attempts to withhold law enforcement grants from so-called sanctuary cities that limit their cooperation with immigration authorities. In April, President Trump threatened to bus migrants from the border and then release them in sanctuary cities. But so far, his administration has not acted on those threats.
The administration’s “zero tolerance” policy was intended to deter illegal border crossings by separating migrant parents and children at the border — until President Trump ended the policy under pressure last June.
A federal judge has ordered the administration to reunite nearly 3,000 children with their parents. The same judge has since ordered the administration to identify hundreds of additional families that were separated before the “zero tolerance” policy took effect.
The ACLU, which challenged the family separation policy, went back to court in July. In court filings, the ACLU argues that the administration has separated more than 900 parents and children and infants since the judge’s ruling, many on flimsy legal grounds.
The administration concedes that a small number of migrant children are still being separated from their parents at the border — but only if the parent has a criminal record, or there’s another reason that separation is in the best interest of the child.
Immigrant advocates say migrant children are also being routinely separated from caregivers at the border — with older family members being placed in the Remain in Mexico program, while the children they’ve brought are taken into U.S. custody.
The Supreme Court handed the White House a victory in July when it allowed the Trump administration to use military construction funds to build some sections of the president’s border wall while litigation is ongoing.
A lower court had initially frozen the $2.5 billion in funds, and an appeals court agreed. But the high court ruled that the Pentagon funds can be tapped for now.
The dispute began earlier this year when President Trump declared a national emergency in order to secure funding for his signature immigration policy: the border wall. The Trump administration wants to spend a total of $6 billion from military and counter-drug accounts.
That emergency declaration is still being challenged in court by critics who say there is no emergency, and that the president is flouting the will of Congress in order to deliver on a key campaign promise.
Lawmakers also have authorized more than $1.3 billion for 55 miles of steel fencing on the U.S.-Mexico border.
The Supreme Court will hear arguments next term about the Trump administration’s efforts to end Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals, or DACA.
In the meantime, nearly 700,000 young immigrants who were brought to the country illegally as children are still protected from deportation and allowed to work legally under the program created by President Obama in 2012. The Trump administration tried to end DACA, but has been blocked from doing so by several federal courts.
Democrats and moderate Republicans are likely to insist on some relief for DACA recipients as part of any comprehensive immigration overhaul, while immigration hardliners are wary of granting “amnesty” or a path to citizenship.
The Trump administration’s effort to restrict immigration and travel from several majority-Muslim countries was blocked by lower courts. But a modified version — including the majority-Muslim countries of Libya, Iran, Somalia, Syria and Yemen, plus North Korea and Venezuela — was upheld by the Supreme Court in a major victory for the White House.
Another legal challenge remains after a federal judge in Maryland ruled that lawsuit can go forward. But that could take years, so it may be a long time before people who are affected by the policy see a change, if any.
The administration has moved to wind down Temporary Protected Status, or TPS, for more than 400,000 immigrants from countries wracked by civil conflict or natural disasters.The immigrants are protected from deportation and allowed to work in the U.S.
A number of legal challenges have been filed. For instance, the Department of Homeland Security has been blocked from ending TPS for immigrants from Haiti, El Salvador, Nicaragua and Sudan by a judge in California.
Shortly before the 2018 midterm elections, President Trump threatened to do away with automatic citizenship for anyone born in the United States. He brought up the idea again in August 2019, saying the White House was “looking very, very seriously” at abolishing birthright citizenship — even though the vast majority of legal scholars believe it is guaranteed by the 14th Amendment to the Constitution.
So far, the president has not followed through on his threats.
The administration has been criticized for ending automatic citizenship for the children of some U.S. military members and government workers overseas. When that policy was first announced, critics of the administration speculated it might be the first step toward ending birthright citizenship — a charge the administration quickly denied.
Homeland Security has released the final version of regulations that would make it easier to deny legal immigrants green cards or visas if they use a wide range of public benefits, such as food stamps and subsidized health insurance.
The Trump administration argues the so-called “public charge” rule merely enforces a century-old provision in U.S. immigration law that says immigrants should be self-sufficient.
But critics say the regulations could dramatically reshape the U.S. immigration system by turning away thousands of immigrants from poorer countries. Multiple lawsuits have been filed to block the regulations, including cases brought by state attorneys general and by advocacy groups.
Thousands of families that include undocumented members could be forced out of public housing by a rule proposed by the Department of Housing and Urban Development. These families include an estimated 55,000 children who are U.S. citizens or legal residents.
The rule is intended to prevent undocumented immigrants or mixed-status families from living in public housing. It’s still in the public comment stage, and critics are pressuring HUD Secretary Ben Carson to reconsider.
The Trump administration has slashed the number of refugees the U.S. will accept. The official cap is set at 30,000 for the year, the lowest figure since the current refugee resettlement program began in 1980.
But the administration is on pace to admit far less than the current cap. Halfway through the fiscal year, the U.S. had admitted fewer than 13,000 refugees.Share