Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
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

A person in a military uniform hugging a child, who is hugging them back with a small U.S. flag in her hand.

Veterans from past wars and those returning from ongoing wars will need the country’s continued support.

Special Courts Helps Veterans Stay out of Jail – but Staffing Losses at VA and Cuts to Government Programs Are Threatening Their Work

Memorial Day is an apt time to reflect on the long-term consequences of war. Among them are substance use, mental health problems, homelessness and jail time for those who served in the military.

About 8% of all Americans in prisons or jails are veterans, according to the Council on Criminal Justice, a nonpartisan think tank. Veterans end up incarcerated largely because of substance use and mental health disorders, both of which also contribute to homelessness.

Keep ReadingShow less
Activists march across Edmund Pettus Bridge.

Activists march across Edmund Pettus Bridge on May 16, 2026 in Selma, Alabama.

Jason Davis / Getty Images

Racism & MAGA-Gerrymandering—Combating the Noxious Mix

There is an old saying: If anyone insists something definitely is not about money; it is definitely about money. The Supreme Court’s right-wing majority claims that its recent election districting rulings are not about abetting racism or siding with MAGA politics, but they are definitely about both.

The Court’s recent Louisiana v. Callais decision cynically demands that anyone challenging election districts as violating the Voting Rights Act must “disentangle race from politics” and show that intentional racial discrimination, rather than politics, was the motivator when minority communities are divided and segments are placed into majority white districts.

Keep ReadingShow less
Judicial Courage?
a wooden judge's hammer sitting on top of a table
Photo by Wesley Tingey on Unsplash

Judicial Courage?

While some believe that being a judge is an easy gig that requires only a dartboard, it is a challenging position that takes courage, especially when a judge must render an unpopular decision. There are many examples of judicial courage throughout history, such as the biblical King Solomon, whose decision to cut a baby in half must have caused quite a commotion, at least until the true mother’s selfless concern for her baby rendered his judgment unnecessary.

In recent years, many judges have been criticized for issuing decisions that don’t sit well with the present administration in Washington, DC. Many are plagued by death threats and bomb scares. (See Jaffe, “Judges Face Rising Threats but Are Barred from Responding,” Our Town, Oct. 18, 2025, https://www.ourtownny.com/voices/judges-face-rising-threats-but-are-barred-from-responding-EN5179240) (providing statistics on judicial threats). Consequently, courage is an essential judicial trait.

Keep ReadingShow less
Supreme Court
The Supreme Court building.
Casey He

The Supreme Court’s Voting Rights Act Decision Will Fuel the “Disuniting” of the United States and the Unraveling of American Democracy

On April 29, the Supreme Court delivered a devastating blow to the 1965 Voting Rights Act (VRA). As bad as it was, the decision fit with a long line of cases in which the conservative- dominated Court has turned a blind eye to the lived realities of racism in the United States.

By insisting that people seeking relief under the VRA must prove intentional discrimination in the drawing of legislative districts, the Court erected a burden of proof so substantial as to effectively allow states to get away with anything during the reapportionment process. Add that to the Court’s 2019 decision allowing partisan gerrymandering, and we have turned back the clock to a time when drawing districts was used by the party in power to keep Black people from getting their fair share of representation.

Keep ReadingShow less