Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

Is Increased Military Presence at the Border Effective for Public Safety?

News

Is Increased Military Presence at the Border Effective for Public Safety?

A military Stryker is parked along the Rio Grande River in Laredo, Texas, to support immigration enforcement at the southwest border.

Picture provided

LAREDO, Texas — The Trump administration has deployed military Strykers to the southwest border, ramping up immigration enforcement in ways unseen during the Biden administration and more visible to local communities.

In Laredo, Texas, one Army Stryker – an eight-wheeled armored vehicle used in military operations – is stationed in front of the Rio Grande River, a stone’s throw from Mexico and steps from a city park. It’s parked underneath the pedestrian bridge that connects Laredo to its sister city, Nuevo Laredo, Mexico.


President Donald Trump has increased military presence in non-border cities as well, deploying the National Guard to Los Angeles in response to anti-ICE protests and to Washington, D.C., to combat crime.

Trump has argued that tackling illegal immigration will also reduce crime committed by undocumented immigrants.

Changes at the border

Border enforcement in the Laredo sector looks different today than it did just a few years ago, according to Border Patrol Chief of the Laredo Sector Jesse Muñoz, who says stricter enforcement policies and advanced technology have reshaped operations.

Apprehension numbers are historically low, averaging just 20–25 per day, compared to thousands in past years.

Muñoz, who began his career as a Border Patrol agent in Laredo in 2006, described the changes as transformative. “It’s really kind of changed border enforcement, how we operate,” he said.

At any given moment, Border Patrol cars patrol city roads and station themselves along the river, where city parks are also located. Although Laredo residents are all too familiar with seeing Border Patrol vehicles, some say they’ve noticed an increased presence.

“You notice that there's a lot more Border Patrol in town,” said business owner Janet Zapata.

Border Patrol falls under the Department of Homeland Security, a federal agency, and is not a military branch. However, the all-hands-on-deck approach, coordinated among Border Patrol, the Laredo Police Department, the Webb County Sheriff’s Department, the military, and other local law enforcement agencies, has positioned the city to become one of the safest in the U.S.

“Their presence here is obvious, given an enforcement aspect that we've really haven't seen,” said Public Information Officer Joe Baeza with the Laredo Police Department.

The location of the military vehicle is steps from the Tres Laredos city park and near an outlet mall, uniquely reflecting a dichotomy between two worlds – residents living their daily lives as immigration agents circle around.

"It's normal to see Border Patrol to me. My mom lives about a block away from the river, by Laredo South, and we hear Border Patrol all the time, and it's just part of life," said local journalist Alex Cano. "That's what you see. You see a possible chase. You just make sure you move to the side. But you know that it has nothing to do with you."

LPD does not directly handle immigration enforcement, but officers may encounter a situation that requires collaboration with Border Patrol, like a traffic stop involving an undocumented immigrant ending in a high-speed chase or busting a stash house.

Stash houses are where human smugglers hold migrants, often in overcrowded and unsanitary conditions for days or weeks. LPD has received fewer reports of stash houses.

“It’s probably because of the substantial drop in the number of people coming here,” Baeza said.

Things have looked different at the border, but “safe” is how locals characterized Laredo; the city’s annual homicide rates often don’t surpass double digits. Overall, life in Laredo, as residents described, is community- and family-oriented, frequently misjudged by outsiders looking in.

“Every city does have danger, but just because we're living on the border doesn’t mean it’s actually dangerous,” Zapata said.

Immigration can be portrayed as a crisis and chaos, but Laredoans say life is more about community than conflict.

But does militarization improve public safety?

The arrival of military surveillance vehicles at the river raised concerns among some residents. Muñoz dismissed the idea of militarization, insisting the assets are strictly supportive.

“There is no militarization at the border. They’re here to help with border security,” he told The Fulcrum. “They don’t do any military operations. They’re 100% in a support role.”

The Center for Civilians in Conflict, an organization that advocates against governmental policies that it deems harmful to civilians, defines militarization as the influence of equipment, tactics, and mindset on domestic law enforcement. This includes the transfer of military equipment and the regular flow of personnel to local law enforcement agencies.

Police militarization “is where the police and military intersect in weaponry, funding, and tactics, according to another organization, War Resisters League.

The Laredo Police Department said it does not work directly with either the military or Border Patrol.

However, public interest and debate over what’s visible spark the question of whether the Trump administration’s policies and actions are effective for public safety.

The military has traditionally been called upon to respond to civil disorder, not crime, according to Ronald Spector, a George Washington University professor emeritus of history and international relations and a Marine veteran.

“I don’t think there are many instances where in the past where the National Guard was called up specifically to reduce crime,” Spector told The Fulcrum. “The National Guard and the militia before that were conceived as forces that would be called up in case of civil disorders, such as strikes or riots.”

On the border, one of the largest interventions occurred in 1916, when President Woodrow Wilson sent the U.S. Army into Mexico after Pancho Villa raided Columbus, New Mexico.

“It was a complete failure… they never captured Pancho,“ Spector said. “Very shortly after the Marines arrived [in Latin America], they realized that they needed police. They weren’t optimum for preventing crime and chasing bandits.”

Ashley N. Soriano is a graduate student at Northwestern University Medill School of Journalism in the Politics, Policy, and Foreign Affairs specialization.

The Fulcrum is committed to nurturing the next generation of journalists. To learn about the many NextGen initiatives we are leading, click HERE.

Please help the Fulcrum in its mission of nurturing the next generation of journalists by donating HERE!


Read More

Gerrymandering: The Maps Shaping Power Ahead of the 2026 Midterms
After Virginia Special Election, The Gerrymandering War Escalates Again

Gerrymandering: The Maps Shaping Power Ahead of the 2026 Midterms

Gerrymandering, the strategic manipulation of voting district boundaries to benefit certain political parties or candidates, has once again taken center stage as this year’s primary elections approach. Though redistricting is typically marked by the decennial census, mid-decade redistricting has become more common across the U.S. since the early 2000s.

The aim of redistricting is to ensure that representative assemblies within a state continue to accurately represent their constituents as population demographics shift over time; however, since the early 1800s, this system has been exploited by U.S. political parties seeking to manipulate voting outcomes in their favor. The same can be said about the current election cycle.

Keep ReadingShow less
Top of the U.S. Supreme Court House

Congress advances a reconciliation bill to fund the Department of Homeland Security while passing key rural legislation. As debates over ICE funding, wildfire policy, and broadband expansion unfold, lawmakers also face new questions about the use of AI in government.

Getty Images, Bloomberg Creative

Starting Up the Reconciliation Machine

This week the Senate began the long, procedure-heavy process of creating and passing a reconciliation bill in order to enact Republican priorities without requiring any votes from Democratic legislators: funding the parts of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) whose funding remains lapsed and additional funds for Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and Customs and Border Protection (CBP). Also this week, the House agreed to two bills that next go to the President and voted on a number of bills related to rural areas.

Two New Laws Soon

Both of these bills go to the President next for signing:

Keep ReadingShow less
ICE Director Requests Additional $5.4 Billion at Congressional Budget Hearing

CBP Chief Rodney Scott (left), Acting ICE Director Todd Lyons (middle) and USCIS Director Joseph Edlow (right) testify at budget hearing.

Jamie Gareh/Medill News Service)

ICE Director Requests Additional $5.4 Billion at Congressional Budget Hearing

WASHINGTON- The acting director of ICE on Thursday told Congress that while the Trump administration pumped $75 billion extra into ICE over four years, many activities remain cash starved and the agency needs about $5.4 billion in additional funding for 2027.

There’s misinformation with the Big Beautiful Bill that ICE is fully funded,” said Todd Lyons, acting director of ICE, whose resignation was announced later that day.

Keep ReadingShow less
Illinois House Passes Bill to Restrict Construction of Immigration Detention Centers in Communities

The Illinois State Capitol Building, in Springfield, Illinois on MAY 05, 2012.

(Photo By Raymond Boyd/Michael Ochs Archives/Getty Images)

Illinois House Passes Bill to Restrict Construction of Immigration Detention Centers in Communities

The Illinois House passed a legislative proposal in a 72-35 partisan vote that would restrict where immigration detention centers can be built, located or operated in the state.

House Bill 5024 would amend state code so that an immigration detention center cannot be located, constructed, or operated by the federal government within 1,500 feet of a home or apartment complex, as well as any school, day care center, public park, or house of worship. Current detention facilities in the state would not be affected by the legislation.

Keep ReadingShow less