Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

Five Significant Changes to Immigration Policies Under Trump (so far)

News

Five Significant Changes to Immigration Policies Under Trump (so far)

President Donald Trump signs a series of executive orders at the White House on January 20, 2025, in Washington, DC.

(Photo by Jabin Botsford /The Washington Post via Getty Images)

Less than a week after assuming office, President Donald Trump launched a comprehensive initiative aimed at addressing undocumented migration in the United States.

Key officials from the Trump administration, including "border czar" Tom Homan and the acting deputy attorney general, visited Chicago on Sunday to oversee the commencement of intensified immigration enforcement in the city. Specific details regarding the operation, such as the number of arrests made, were not disclosed at that time.


“U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, along with federal partners, including the FBI, ATF, DEA, CBP and the U.S. Marshals Service, began conducting enhanced targeted operations today in Chicago to enforce U.S. immigration law and preserve public safety and national security by keeping potentially dangerous criminal aliens out of our communities,” the statement reads.

On the same day, Trump imposed tariffs and visa restrictions on Colombia after President Gustavo Petro declined to allow two U.S. military aircraft to land while transporting migrants being deported under the new immigration policies.

President Petro criticized this approach, arguing that it unfairly criminalizes migrants. He stated on social media platform X that Colombia would facilitate the return of deported migrants via civilian flights.

"The U.S. cannot treat Colombian migrants as criminals," Petro wrote.

Additionally, Mexico also declined a request last week for a U.S. military aircraft to land with migrants. However, Trump did not impose similar measures against Mexico, the U.S.'s largest trading partner.

Below is a summary of five other notable immigration-related actions taken by Trump during his first week back in office.

The Chihuahua State Police, in cooperation with the U.S. Border Patrol, conduct a joint operation to prevent illegal border crossings in Ciudad Juarez, Chihuahua, Mexico on January 24, 2025. (Photo by David Peinado/Anadolu via Getty Images)

  1. Fortifying the US-Mexico border

Last week, the Pentagon announced the deployment of 1,500 active-duty troops at the southern US border. This is in addition to 2,500 active-duty personnel already there, officials said - marking a 60% increase in Army troops in the area.

The troops will fly helicopters to help Border Patrol agents with monitoring, said acting Defense Secretary Robert Salesses. They will also help construct barriers to stop migrants from coming in.

January 2025, Mexico, Tijuana: Silvia Martinez and her daughter, both Salvadoran migrants, hug after learning that their appointment to apply for asylum in the US has been canceled. (Photo by Felix Marquez/picture alliance via Getty Images)

2. Halting the Processing of Migrants and Asylum Seekers

In an executive order, President Trump suspended the entry of all undocumented migrants into the United States, directing border patrol agents to deny entry without providing asylum hearings. Before this order, migrants arriving at the US border had the legal right to seek asylum.

hands using mobile phone apps Getty Images//Guido Maieth

3 . Canceling Existing Migrants' Appointments

A significant change that occurred shortly after Trump took office was the discontinuation of the CBP One smartphone app, which allowed migrants to schedule appointments with US border patrol agents.

The app had been introduced by the Biden administration to help organize and streamline the entry process for migrants fleeing persecution. Following the app's removal, reports indicated that approximately 30,000 individuals were left stranded in Mexico, all of whom had previously scheduled appointments that were subsequently canceled.

Posters plastered in Little Village, a predominantly Mexican neighborhood, warn residents of ICE raids, emphasizing 'DON'T OPEN ICE! ICE OUT OF OUR COMMUNITIES!' on January 22, 2025. (Photo by Jacek Boczarski/Anadolu via Getty Images)

4. Expanding ICE Powers and Conducting Raids

Several of President Trump's executive orders aimed to enhance the authority of Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) in apprehending and detaining undocumented migrants within the United States. One order rescinded a long-standing guideline that restricted immigration raids in "sensitive" locations, such as schools, hospitals, and places of worship. Another directive sought to broaden a program that permits ICE to delegate its immigration enforcement responsibilities to state and local law enforcement agencies.

U.S. standard certificate of live birth application form next to flag of USA. Birthright citizenship concept. Getty Images//Stock Photo

5. Ending Birthright Citizenship

Through an executive order, the Trump administration has sought to challenge the citizenship status of certain U.S.-born children of immigrants, a right protected by the 14th Amendment of the Constitution. More than 20 states have initiated legal action to contest the order and defend this constitutional right. Additionally, a federal judge temporarily blocked the executive order, labeling it “blatantly unconstitutional.”

These actions reflect a shift in the language and practices surrounding the United States ‘immigration system. The ultimate impact will likely depend on the ensuing political and legal developments. Experts suggest that immigration flows may decrease, and enforcement measures could become significantly stricter, potentially affecting the economy and other areas.

. Hugo Balta is the executive editor of the Fulcrum and a board member of the Bridge Alliance Education Fund, the parent organization of The Fulcrum. He is also the publisher of the Latino News Network and the only person to serve twice as president of the National Association of Hispanic Journalists (NAHJ).


Read More

Shadow on a wall of Judge hitting gavel in court, concept of justice, law, and legal protection

The Rule of Law depends on action, not blind optimism. Explore how critical hope, civic engagement, and accountability can strengthen democracy.

Aitor Diago / Getty Images

Only Collective Action Can Turn Outrage Into Accountability and Protect the Rule of Law

The past year has shaken our faith in institutions and, perhaps, in each other. If not already eviscerated, the Rule of Law is under attack. In this atmosphere of constant chaos, we have become numbed by the events of each day and the scope of unprecedented executive action. Yet, even in the face of growing autocracy and oligarchy, the Rule of Law can prevail.

“There is a crack, a crack in everything. That’s how the light gets in.” In the current moment, it is tempting to reach for hope as comfort, or to repeat familiar lines about resilience, unity, or the promise of American ideals—such as this one from Leonard Cohen. But as educator Jeffrey Duncan-Andrade warns, not all hope is created equal. The kind of hope that ignores suffering, that insists the Rule of Law will revive itself without action, is not hope at all. It is what he calls “hokey or “mythical hope,” a passive optimism that ultimately deepens despair. What this moment demands instead is “critical hope”: a form of hope grounded in struggle and action.

Keep ReadingShow less

Are State Courts More Protective of Transgender People than Federal Courts?

The U.S. Supreme Court ruled on Tuesday that state laws prohibiting trans women and girls from participating on female sports teams do not violate the Equal Protection Clause — the seventh Supreme Court ruling curbing the rights of trans people in just the past 14 months. Since May 2025, the Supreme Court has allowed the Trump administration to ban trans people from serving in the military, upheld a Tennessee law banning gender-affirming care for trans minors, given anti-LGBTQ+ parents a veto over LGBTQ+-inclusive content in their children’s classrooms, endorsed Trump’s policy requiring trans people to list their sex assigned at birth on their passports, reinstated an injunction against policies barring schools from outing trans students to their parents against students’ wishes, and determined that Colorado’s ban on anti-LGBTQ+ conversion therapy must be subjected to strict scrutiny, a form of judicial review that almost no law survives.

However, there may be some cause for optimism. In an article published in The Virginia Journal of Social Policy & the Law, I conducted a comprehensive survey of state court cases that impacted the rights and lives of trans people between 2022 and 2024. The survey showed state courts have an essential role to play in protecting trans people in an increasingly hostile political environment. Amongst some ominous signs for trans rights, there were important signals of hope in the survey.

Keep ReadingShow less
A gavel.

The rule of law, American democracy, constitutional rights, and judicial independence.

Getty Images, David Talukdar

In Texas, People Don’t Kill People, Guns Kill People

It has been said that a good prosecutor can get a grand jury to indict a ham sandwich. Apparently, that’s not the case in very red Collin County, Texas, where a self-described recovering alcoholic fatally shot his daughter in the chest, only to be let off the hook by a sympathetic grand jury. As a retired justice of the New York State Supreme Court, the case intrigued me and I tried to understand why the prosecutor, upon failing to obtain an indictment, did not try again.

In January 2025, the victim and her boyfriend traveled from England to visit her father at his home in Collin County where the shooting occurred. Although evidence presented to a grand jury cannot be disclosed, it is reasonably assumed that the grand jury was provided with the statement made by the father to the police at the scene immediately following the shooting. In that statement, the father related how he had taken his daughter, at her request, to see his gun, and that when he brought her to his bedroom and removed the gun from a cabinet in which he kept it, “it went off.” He could not recall if his finger had been on the trigger.

Keep ReadingShow less
Citizens in Name Only: What the Supreme Court Can’t Fix
beige concrete building under blue sky during daytime

Citizens in Name Only: What the Supreme Court Can’t Fix

This month, the Supreme Court will rule on Trump v. Barbara, the case that could upend birthright citizenship as we have known it for over a century.

But the current debate over birthright citizenship overlooks the fact that legal citizenship — by birthright or naturalization — has never fully protected marginalized Americans. People of color, women, LGBTQ, and lower-income Americans have long been CINOs: Citizens in Name Only. Throughout our 250-year history, they have lacked full social citizenship - access to social/welfare entitlements, political citizenship – access to voting rights, and cultural citizenship – recognition as members of the American family. So, while a court ruling can determine who gets a U.S. birth certificate, it cannot guarantee societal inclusion.

Keep ReadingShow less