ICE, Immigration, and GOP

image by Wix.com

Immigration policies of the Trump administration have generated intense debate regarding the role of the Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agency in immigration. The Trump administration maintains ongoing immigration and due process policies through 2025, which significantly affect people and their communities. As concerned citizens within a tenuous democracy, we must analyze how ICE functions under Trump’s administration through the lens of immigration and due process, focusing specifically on how Trump’s decisions affect vulnerable communities.

The administration strengthened ICE authority by implementing the 287(g) program, which remains one of the major concerns. Local law enforcement agencies partner with ICE to enforce federal immigration law through the 287(g) program, creating joint efforts between regional and federal authorities (ICE, 2025). Proponents of the program support its ability to boost public security, but critics contend it enables racial discrimination against immigrants, weakens community trust in law enforcement, and reduces transparency (Kerwin, 2020).

Significant changes to immigration procedures and due process rules resulted from the administration’s implementation of the “zero-tolerance” policy in 2018. The policy resulted in border family separations that placed many children in facilities for food, water, access, or medical care (American Immigration Council, 2020). The policy received intense criticism because it failed to respect human rights or adhere to legal procedures during its implementation. After the policy’s rescission, its adverse effects continue to affect separated families as they reconnect.

The administration’s immigration policies include several programs that block people from obtaining asylum, as well as other forms of immigration benefits. For example, implementing the Migrant Protection Protocols (MPP), also known as the “Remain in Mexico” policy, forced asylum seekers to wait in Mexico for their U.S. immigration court hearings, often facing dangerous conditions and limited access to legal representation (Vera Institute, 2020). This significantly hampered their ability to get asylum successfully. Multiple experts have criticized this policy due to its opaque operational methods and failure to safeguard vulnerable populations, which violates international non-refoulement principles, as highlighted by the Migration Policy Institute in 2020. The lack of transparency in the policy’s implementation makes it difficult to assess its effectiveness and potential adverse effects on vulnerable groups. The disregard for non-refoulement—the principle prohibiting the return of refugees to places where they face danger—raises serious human rights concerns.

Trump, Feb. 26, Cabinet meeting: “We’re not going to touch it [Medicaid, Medicare, or Social Security]. Now, we are going to look for fraud. I’m sure you’re OK with that, like people that shouldn’t be on, people that are illegal aliens and others, criminals in many cases.”

However, proponents argue that the policy’s streamlined approach is necessary for efficient processing and that it incorporates sufficient safeguards to protect vulnerable individuals, aligning with national security interests and domestic laws. The comparison to national security interests reminds me of the Republican Party’s race based attack on social welfare, medicaid, and food stamps by hoisting examples of “the black welfare queen” as the thesis for “fraud” and subsequent need to cut medicaid under the cowardly auspice of reducing deficit and preventing future fraud by black people who as Sen. Tubberville of Alabama (who may run for governor of his state, so dramatically pronounced black people as criminals.

However, in contrast, the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), now run by a Trump loyalist, stated, “By race, more than half (50.8%) of known offenders were white; 29.6% were Black or African American; and 2.2% were of other races. The race was unknown for 17.4% of reported known offenders.”

House Speaker Johnson of the renegade MAGA coalition and another Trump loyalist will emphatically remind that the Republican/MAGA bill does not call out specifically Medicaid cuts, but in the next breath, states fraud in the program must be eliminated, along with nearly $800 billion in cuts.

House Speaker Mike Johnson, Feb. 27, CNN: “We’re going to take care of those who are rightful beneficiaries of the programs. We’re going to cut the fraud, waste, and abuse out of Medicaid, and that’s where we’re going to get part of the savings to accomplish this mission. … There’s about $50 billion estimated that are lost every year in Medicaid, just in fraud alone.”

So far, in 2025, the Trump administration has created significant obstacles for individuals to exercise their due process rights during immigration proceedings. Expedited removal procedures enable the rapid deportation of individuals without hearings, according to BBC News (2025). This practice creates three key problems: restricting access to legal counsel, limiting presentation opportunities, and causing incorrect deportations, according to JW.com (2020).

In addition, treating people this way is, in my opinion, mistaken based on personal observations. Living in South Florida, you get to witness all matters of immigration crackdown within diverse populations from the Caribbean, South America, Eastern Europe, and Asia. Expedited removal procedures enable the rapid deportation of individuals deemed inadmissible to a country, bypassing the usual immigration court process and hearings. This often applies to those apprehended within a specific timeframe (e.g., within 100 miles of a border) or who cannot show legal entry. The lack of a hearing significantly reduces due process protections for the affected individuals.

The racist tropes expressed by Trump, Marjorie Taylor Greene, and Tuberville lean heavily into immigrants causing crime, and Black Americans are cast as criminals. Notably, the FBI reported, “Most victims (66.9%) were white; 24% were Black or African American.”

However, some argue that these statements reflect the concerns of a population segment linking immigration and crime rates, and that policymakers should address these concerns through policy discussions rather than dismissing them as solely racist.

 However, I see these statements as overtly racist, given FBI statistics, police crime reports, and the experiences of marginalized communities facing excessive policing, no-knock warrants, stop-and-frisk, and biased police communication. Social media messaging apps argue that policy discussions are being overshadowed by racist prejudice perpetuated by white-controlled police unions and fraternal orders. This is to prevent any actual progress and perpetuate hidden yet widespread racist behavior that leads to physical harm and, many times, loss of life for non-white individuals compared to white individuals who are arrested.

The Trump administration’s immigration policies, combined with due process regulations, created significant challenges for foreign-born American citizens and individuals affected by these policies in 2025. The immigration policies of ICE and asylum restrictions, alongside “zero-tolerance” protocols and access restrictions to asylum, create an environment of fear, which leads to confusion. Policymakers and the judicial branch, together with advocates, should establish protections for due process alongside efforts to develop immigration systems based on human rights principles. Since 2016 this American experiment and democracy has taken a beating to the delight of many white Americans who prefer to cling to white superiority and supremacy knowing that blacks and non-whites will remain at the bottom of the racial hierarchy and see the sins of slavery burned into ashes and wiped away along with any empathy or accountability. It is the same righteous fervor that views the Confederate flag and monuments to dead southern aristocratic generals to glorify white separatists in the name of slavery. A white supremacist would rather eliminate or subjugate a black person than work with one. Such people would refuse to vote for a Black woman to lead the country. Kamala Harris’s policy platform supports all citizens, with a focus on lower and middle-income families; however, she is unfortunately subject to discrimination as a Black woman.

More on Medium.com

Castillo, K. (2016). Bridging the divide between start-up and corporate communication: Conceptualizing growth communication with a focus on Finnish companies. https://core.ac.uk/download/80720341.pdf