Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

Are Trump’s Mass Deportations Leading to State‑Sanctioned Persecution?

Evidence of unlawful arrests, child detentions, and judicial rebukes raises alarms that Trump’s deportation surge is eroding core American rights.

Opinion

A plane flying above.

Analysis of Donald Trump’s second-term immigration crackdown, mass deportation plan, and ICE policies, examining human rights concerns, due process, and historical parallels.

Getty Images, SCM Jeans

For the past 14 months, Americans of all political persuasions have witnessed how Trump’s ICE-related actions have involved aggressive detention and demonization of immigrants and minorities. Historians have not observed this large-scale scope of discrimination behavior since 1953-1955, when President Dwight Eisenhower (R) deported ~1.3 million Mexicans from America, including U.S. citizens of Mexican descent and, in some cases, anyone of Mexican appearance, because agents assumed they were undocumented.

Actions by Mr. Trump and personnel within the Department of Homeland Security, Customs and Border Protection, ICE, and the FBI have been widely criticized as violating the core American values of equal protection for all families and respect for basic rights. Across the political spectrum, many see these actions as targeting immigrants and minorities in ways that undermine our nation’s shared commitment to fairness, justice, and constitutional equality. Knowing Americans have witnessed two citizens being killed in Minneapolis and one person in Texas by ICE agents, we may be on the verge of systemic persecution and state‑sanctioned violence on a scale not seen in modern American life.


Mr. Trump’s second-term mass-deportation agenda is projected by major human rights and immigration groups to cause large-scale constitutionally protected violations that affect liberty, family unity, due process, and our democracy. For example, the ACLU warned in a 2025 policy analysis that, “Rushed and sweeping mass deportation efforts will unavoidably ensnare families, long-term residents, and even U.S. citizens, resulting in unlawful detentions and breakdowns of due process.” These projections are based on case reviews, government data, and legal precedent.

Let’s take a closer look at this issue.

Human rights impacts of Trump’s 2.0 mass deportation plan

After Trump’s 2.0 inauguration (Jan. 20, 2025), he shut down the asylum process at America’s borders. Over 30,000 pending asylum cases were cancelled, disproportionately impacting people of color. This also means people who have strong human rights protection claims are being summarily refused to even apply for asylum, which is in violation of U.S. and refugee law.

Mr. Trump has stripped Temporary Protected Status (TPS) from well over a million people, instantly turning away people who have peacefully lived in and contributed to the U.S. economy. The U.S. Department of Justice acknowledges that immigrants, including those with TPS, have lower crime rates and lower incarceration rates than native-born U.S. citizens.

Mr. Trump’s executive order to end birthright citizenship for children of undocumented parents – mostly people of color -- could leave about 222,000 U.S.-born children, born every year, vulnerable to expulsion from the only country they know. Trump’s order is in direct violation of the 14th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, which clearly states that "all persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States."

During Mr. Trump’s 2024 presidential campaign, he called migrants “animals, not human,” “stone-cold killers,” “savages,” people who are “eating cats,” “bad genes,” and that they were “poisoning the blood of our country.” These dehumanizing phrases echo language associated with the far-right and Nazi-accepting “Great Replacement” theory that historically supports ethnic cleansing campaigns. An October 2024 national poll found two-thirds of Republicans endorse some form of the Great Replacement conspiracy theory (The Bulletin).

The "Big Beautiful Bill Act" increased ICE detention funding by over 300 percent. Many allege this permitted a dramatic expansion of an already abusive detention system. Since Trump’s 2.0 inauguration, here’s the data: 212 detention centers, 393,000 arrests, 68,289 in detention centers (as of Feb. 7), 32 people died in ICE custody in 2025 and six in 2026, ~50,000 people in detention centers have no criminal convictions, and the majority of those arrested are of Mexican and Central America descent (USAFacts).

Additionally, at least 3,800 children under age 18 have been booked into ICE detention centers, with over 500 of them under the age of five, and at least 20 were infants. The vast majority of the children are Latino. At least 1,000 of these children were held longer than 30 days, which violates a court-ordered limit on child detention (The Marshall Project).

Violation of rights

Analysts argue that Trump’s mass-deportation policy bypasses citizens’ right to due process and legal representation (guaranteed in the 5th and 14th Amendments to the Constitution). Trump’s deportation procedures greatly weaken America’s 250-year checks and balances posture, with immigration being used as the wedge.

On Jan. 14, Judge William Young – appointed by President Ronald Reagan – called Donald Trump an “authoritarian” and said his administration “conspired to infringe” on the First Amendment rights of activists whom the government has targeted for deportation (USA Today, Feb. 22).

On Jan. 23, Judge Patrick Schiltz – appointed by President George W. Bush – wrote in an opinion, “attached to this order is an appendix that identifies 96 court orders that ICE has violated in 74 cases. This list should give pause to anyone – no matter his or her political beliefs – who cares about the rule of law. ICE is not a law unto itself.” (ibid.)

In total, 373 judges – 44 appointed by Trump – have rejected Trump’s mass detention strategy in at least 3,500 cases (Politico, Feb. 12).

Hitler-Trump resemblance

The mother of a close friend – raised in Austria during Hitler’s Nazi regime and an eventual Illinois resident – shared with her daughter that what she experienced in Austria during 1938-1945 is very similar to what Americans are experiencing under Trump’s regime. The mother and other Austrian girls went to the forest during the daytime to hide and not be captured by the Nazi. Likewise, thousands of American parents are hiding their children from ICE.

Resolve

As of Feb. 2026, nearly two-thirds of Americans say ICE and Mr. Trump have gone too far in the immigration crackdown. "We the People" should demand our 535 Congressional delegates to bring Trump’s ethnic cleansing campaign to an abrupt halt; enough is enough.

To turn this outrage into action, call your House member’s district office this week and urge them to publicly oppose Trump’s mass-deportation plan. Ask them to introduce or co-sponsor legislation that restores legal protections for all families and reaffirms America’s commitment to fairness and equal rights. Your single call can help shift the conversation from fear to justice.


Steve Corbin is a professor emeritus of marketing at the University of Northern Iowa.


Read More

​Christa Pike

Christa Pike in an undated photo.

(Tennessee Department of Correction/ZUMA Press/TNS)

How death penalty opponents share the blame for botched executions

“Botched” is a perfectly fine word for golf, cooking, or home repair. It seems inadequate for the taking of a life, even the life of Christa Pike, a heinous murderer.

In 1996, a jury found Pike guilty of the torture and murder of her Jobs Corps classmate, Colleen Slemmer. Pike was sentenced to death. In the 30 years since, her case has gone through at least seven major rounds of appeal and judicial review, including four petitions to the Supreme Court. All were rejected. This doesn’t even include the many more attempts to reopen or reverse her sentence that went nowhere. She is guilty, lawfully and rightly convicted.

Keep ReadingShow less
Donald Trump

President Donald Trump speaks before signing the Secure America Act in the Oval Office of the White House on June 10, 2026 in Washington, DC.

(Photo by Alex Wong/Getty Images)

Federal Court Blocks Trump’s ‘Loyalty Question’ on Civil Service Job Applications

A court’s decision to block the Trump administration from including a “loyalty question” on federal job applications was a win not only for the nonpartisan civil service, but also for the communities public employees serve, said one labor leader whose union was among the plaintiffs in the case against the Office of Personnel Management.

Patrick Moran, president of the American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees (AFSCME) union, said Friday that the loyalty questions the OPM placed on job applications for public servants were a “blatantly illegal attempt to hire partisan cronies who would endanger our communities by putting politics before people, rather than dedicated, qualified public service workers.”

Keep ReadingShow less
​U.S. standard certificate of live birth application form next to flag of USA.

U.S. standard certificate of live birth application form next to flag of USA.

Getty Images

Birthright Citizenship Explained: History, SCOTUS Rulings & Executive Orders

Birthright citizenship has been part of American law for more than 150 years. As the American public continues to see challenges against its constitutionality, brought on by the Trump administration, it is important to remember why.

After the Civil War, Congress adopted the 14th Amendment in 1868 to overturn Dred Scott v. Sandford (1857), which had denied citizenship to Black Americans, dampening their federal protections. While the 13th amendment had abolished slavery a few years earlier, Free Black Americans were considered noncitizens by many, and thus had to work around a separate set of laws, meaning they could never be fully integrated as members of American society. In response to this issue, the 14th Amendment declares that all persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to its jurisdiction, are citizens of the United States.

Keep ReadingShow less
Scales of justice
a golden scale with an eagle on top of it

A Real Test for “Lawfare” Must Protect Allies and Enemies Alike

“Lawfare” is becoming a word that ends arguments instead of clarifying them. When Donald Trump or his allies are prosecuted, many on the right call the case political. When the Trump administration investigates critics, many on the left call it retaliation or “score-settling.” Sometimes those accusations are justified. Sometimes they are partisan reflexes. A label that changes with the identity of the defendant is not a rule of law.

The hard cases are not the ones with a public order to punish an enemy. They are cases with mixed facts: a real investigative predicate, a politically active target, disputed timing, later changes in treatment, and no contemporaneous record the public can inspect. Those cases require something better than “trust the prosecutors” or “trust the accused.” They require an auditable standard.

Keep ReadingShow less