TRUMP 2.0

The series of Executive Orders that President Trump signed following his January 20, 2025, inauguration have the potential to change not only U.S. immigration but also the definition of who is an American — in contradiction to the Fourteenth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution and long-standing Supreme Court precedent. Here, RAICES provides some initial insights, recognizing that the scale of impact will be determined by practical application and pending litigation outcomes. 

  • Securing Our Borders

    KEY POINTS

    • Ends release of people from immigration detention while they await their court hearing

    • Directs the U.S. to build wall along southern border

    • Reinstates the Migrant Protection Protocols (MPP), or "Remain in Mexico” policy

    • Ends use of the CBP One app for port of entry asylum appointments, including cancellation of all future-scheduled appointments

    • Ends all “categorical parole” programs including but not limited to a program for Cubans, Haitians, Nicaraguans, and Venezuelans (CHNV), which is explicitly referenced; curtails parole authority 

    • Restores DNA requirements to establish family ties

    POTENTIAL IMPACT

    • Affects population that RAICES sees in detention and our bandwidth to assist in proceedings

    • Poses prospective changes to Expedited Removal in Customs and Border Protection (CBP) custody 

    • Raises questions around changes to U.S. immigration policy for unaccompanied children, as well as humanitarian parolees from Afghanistan and Ukraine

    • Poses risk of family separations with restored DNA requirements (e.g. father may not know child is the product of rape until DNA testing – resulting in parent-child separation by U.S. officials)

    • Strengthens RAICES’ ongoing access to asylum litigation with the ACLU et al, as the U.S. has further obstructed any viable pathways to seeking asylum

  • Declaring a National Emergency at the Southern Border of the U.S.

    KEY POINTS

    • Deploys U.S. armed forces and National Guard to the southern border

    • Instructs armed forces to build southern border wall

    • Calls for review and revision of “use of force” policy at the border

    POTENTIAL IMPACT

    • Poses border-specific and internal enforcement considerations 

    • Signals militaristic rather than humanitarian approach

    • "Use of force" harkens back to CBP mistreatment of Haitian immigrants at the border

    • Emboldens Texas state government to glorify its role as a “protector” and as a model for other jurisdictions (e.g. prospective expansion of razor wire barriers)

  • Guaranteeing the States Protection Against Invasion

    KEY POINTS

    • Leverages Section 212(f) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) of 1952, previously invoked by the first Trump administration as grounds for the "Muslim Ban"

    • Expands deportation efforts and further obstructs legal access

    • Suspends the entry of immigrants involved in an “invasion” across the southern border

    • Frames "migrants as disease-spreaders," justifying Title 42-like policy enforcement

    • Does not include exceptions for people being trafficked, unaccompanied children, and/or those with other viable asylum claims

    • Lasts indefinitely, until the President determines the “invasion” has concluded

    POTENTIAL IMPACT

    • Establishes “public charge” financial hardship arguments for the states

    • Impacts refugee resettlement-eligible populations in a manner previous restrictions did not

    • Expels asylum seekers without providing access to legal proceedings enshrined in federal and international law

  • Clarifying the Military’s Role in Protecting the Territorial Integrity of the U.S.

    KEY POINTS

    • Deploys U.S. North Command forces to the southern border (NORTHCOM)

    • Cites "unchecked" mass immigration and the opioid crisis as justification for the military's role

    POTENTIAL IMPACT

    • Reinforces militaristic versus humanitarian approach

    • Raises practical application questions with aggressive language, including “repelling forms of invasion”

  • Designating Cartels and Other Organizations as Foreign Terrorist Organizations and Specially Designated Global Terrorists

    KEY POINTS

    • Designates cartels et al as foreign terrorist organizations and specifically designated global terrorists – two separate legal definitions

    • Indicates potential use of Alien Enemies Act of 1798

    POTENTIAL IMPACT

    • Poses high risk of manipulation given broad scope

    • Seems to undercut any rationale for the reinstatement of Remain in Mexico, as the U.S. is indicating that there are known terrorist organizations operating in Mexico

    • Puts onus on the individual to prove that they are not affiliated with a terrorist organization, rather than innocent until proven guilty, by virtue of definitions

    • Creates untenable circumstances for trafficking victims, as paying ransom would be funding terrorism

    • Adds extra burden on general immigration applications

  • Protecting the U.S. From Foreign Terrorists and Other National Security and Public Safety Threats

    KEY POINTS

    • Instructs agencies to identify countries from which people should be denied entry to the U.S. and to identify people from said countries who have been granted entry and/or lawful status in the U.S. since President Biden's inauguration

    • Establishes record to justify new travel bans

    • Promotes a "unified" American identity

    POTENTIAL IMPACT

    • Describes the existing job of the U.S. Refugee Admissions Program (USRAP), as refugees already go through 10+ background check and vetting processes

    • Influences nationalities potentially served

    • Poses risks for recently-resettled refugees given retroactive scope; U.S. set a record for most refugees resettled in a week immediately before the inauguration

    • Raises additional questions around the impact of new policy on humanitarian parolees, including people and families from Ukraine and Afghanistan 

    • Creates justification for detention camps

  • Protecting the American People Against Invasion

    KEY POINTS

    • Increases Department of Homeland Security (DHS) capacity and establishes federal Homeland Security Task Forces to expand the 287(g) program, enabling state and local law enforcement to support the deportation of undocumented immigrants

    • Expands DHS enforcement priorities

    • Targets "sanctuary cities," directing U.S. Attorney General and DHS to take civil or criminal legal action – and potentially stripping federal funding

    • Requires Expedited Removal to fullest extent

    • Expands capacity to detain individuals during cases

    • Reestablishes visa bonds payable at entry and refunded at departure and directs DHS to collect all fines authorized for unlawfully present immigrants

    • Tightens humanitarian parole, Temporary Protected Status (TPS), and work authorization restrictions

    • Directs agencies to identify and halt public benefits provided to undocumented immigrants

    • Directs U.S. Attorney General and DHS to review and audit federal grants and contracts with organizations that provide services to undocumented immigrants

    POTENTIAL IMPACT

    • Redefines Expedited Removal deportation processes, eliminating geographic and time limitations

    • Interferes with federal contracts and threatens the solvency of service-based organizations

    • Eliminates funding agreements as part of appropriations

    • Expands immigration detention, creating health and access to counsel concerns 

    • Makes it more difficult for service providers to meet contractual obligations

    • Limits options available to clients seeking work authorization during pending cases

  • Restoring the Death Penalty and Protecting Public Safety

    KEY POINTS

    • Instructs the U.S. Attorney General to seek death penalty for undocumented immigrants accused of murdering law enforcement and other capital crimes

    POTENTIAL IMPACT

    • Reinforces false immigration and criminality link

    • Complicates plea deals in crimmigration cases

    • Reinforces risks posed by foreign terrorist organization and specifically designated global terrorist designations, providing grounds for death penalty

  • Realigning the U.S. Refugee Admissions Program

    KEY POINTS

    • Suspends U.S. Refugee Resettlement program beginning January 27, 2025

    • Lasts indefinitely, until which time entry of refugees aligns with U.S. interests – defined as likelihood of assimilation and potential for self-sufficiency

    • Includes state and local governments in placement decisions

    POTENTIAL IMPACT

    • Raises questions around Texas’ role in the Refugee Resettlement process, given the state’s abdication of coordination responsibilities beginning in 2017

    • Establishes city council and mayoral authority for programming and placement derailment

    • Indicates a bar for cultural conformity that will not be met by populations currently supported

  • Protecting the Meaning and Value of American Citizenship

    KEY POINTS

    • Attempts to circumvent birthright citizenship as protected under the Fourteenth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution by denying citizenship to a child when their mother is undocumented or on a temporary visa – and the father is not a U.S. citizen or green card holder at the time of the child's birth

    • Prohibits U.S. agencies from issuing citizenship documents recognizing to individuals who do not meet newly-placed criteria limitations

    • Effective as of February 20, 2025

    POTENTIAL IMPACT

    • Strikes at the heart of the U.S. Constitution

    • Creates a public health risk, raising the question of whether or not pregnant individuals will induce labor in advance of the February 20, 2025, deadline 

    • Poses risk of retroactive application, recognizing the administration’s commitment to expand the Office of Denaturalization

    • Creates stateless populations who may not have citizenship eligibility in the U.S. or parents’ home country 

    • Puts into question citizenship of people born in U.S. territories, including but not limited to Puerto Rico

    • Complicates understanding and interpretation of birth certificates in family immigration cases