On October 11, 2024, former President Donald Trump announced that if elected president for a second term he would invoke the Alien Enemies Act of 1798 to expedite the removal of criminal networks operating in the United States.
In response, during an October 15th Kamala Harris virtual town hall with radio host Charlamagne tha God, someone called in and asked:
“Hi, I’m Bobby from Georgia, and I have a question for Kamala Harris. Could you please respond to Trump’s claim that he’s going to use the Alien Enemies Act of 1798 to round up immigrants if he wins the election? This law was last used to put Asian Americans in internment camps during World War II, and I have a sneaking suspicion that if Trump wins, he’s going to use this law to put anyone that doesn’t look White in camps, and I’m scared.“
Vice President Kamala Harris showed deep understanding and empathy when she commended a voter for articulating “a really important point” with such clarity. The voter expressed concerns about former President Donald Trump potentially targeting individuals who don’t look White, and Harris’s response highlighted her compassion and attentiveness to these serious worries.
“Yeah, so you’ve hit on a really important point and expressed it, I think so well, which is he is achieving his intended effect, to make you scared,” Harris replied.
“He is running full-time on a campaign that is about instilling fear. Not about hope, not about optimism, not about the future, but about fear, and so this is yet another example.”
“Look what he did in saying that those legal immigrants in Springfield, Ohio were eating their pets.”
So, could Trump detain all non-Whites?
The short answer is: Not even close.
Implementing such a measure presents undeniable complexities that cannot be overlooked. Reflect on the historical context of World War II, when the United States government interned about 120,000 Japanese Americans. Now consider that today, around 130 million non-Anglo Americans constitute approximately 40 percent of our population. The economic impact of detaining such a significant demographic would be overwhelming and unmanageable for any leader, regardless of their cruelty. Businesses nationwide would suffer severe disruptions due to the loss of vital workforce members.
Additionally, executing such a plan would necessitate military involvement; however, nearly one-third of U.S. Military personnel are Black and Hispanic themselves.
And let’s not forget about the level of sanctions the U.S. would face from the United Nations These factors clearly demonstrate why pursuing this course would not only be impractical but also extraordinarily harmful.
Second, as it relates to the Alien Enemies Act, the president could authorize the arrest, relocation, or deportation of any male over the age of 14 who hailed from a foreign enemy country – but not U.S. citizens.
On December 7, 1941, in response to the bombing of Pearl Harbor, President Franklin D. Roosevelt used the authority of the revised Alien Enemies Act to issue presidential proclamations to apprehend, restrain, secure, and remove Japanese, German, and Italian “non-citizens.” However, Roosevelt later cited further wartime powers to issue Executive Order 9066, which interned Japanese Americans using powers unrelated to the Alien Enemies Act.
So, could Trump, via an Executive Order, detain large groups of Americans (such as Blacks)?
Realistically, no. And for similar reasons listed above.
Again, there were just 120,000 Japanese Americans detained during World War 2, and there are 40 million Black Americans today. There are far more Black Americans than there were Ukrainians before the start of the war with Russia. There would be catastrophic implications economically and militarily, in addition to widespread damage to American infrastructure. To say interring Blacks wouldn’t make sense would be a colossal understatement.
And without going into detail, the U.S. Congress and the Supreme Court have the power to override a presidential executive order. So, unless those branches vote for the detainment of many of their own, it’s not happening. There would be a second civil war before 14 percent of Americans were rounded up and detained.
How easily could Trump detain and deport ALL unauthorized immigrants?
It’s easier said than done, given all the legal, logistic, and financial constraints. But, with immigration emerging as a pivotal issue for voters this November, Donald Trump asserts that, if given the mandate once more, he is resolute in fulfilling his promise to address the situation by organizing the detainment and deportation of millions of migrants residing in the U.S. without legal authorization.
NBC News inquired of acting ICE Director Patrick J. Lechleitner about the necessary steps and resources needed to effectively deport millions of individuals.
“It’s not only putting them on planes and flying them, which is expensive, we got to have airplanes, said Lechleitner. We also have to deal with host nations. We have to get travel documents, we have to do all the logistics involved with that.”
Perhaps that’s why Trump, in 2016, also promised a mass deportation of undocumented migrants, yet it was never implemented. And consider this: Even in President Barack Obama’s least active year regarding deportations, he still deported more immigrants than President Trump did in his most effective year.
And by the way, whatever happened to “The Wall” Mexico was going to pay for?
According to the latest estimates from the Department of Homeland Security, approximately 11 million unauthorized migrants are residing in the U.S. Notably, a significant portion of this population—79%—has been living in the country since before 2010. These figures highlight a longstanding presence that predates recent increases in border crossings reported up to 2022.
And consider the financial implications of detaining millions of deportees before their removal. Presently, ICE oversees 41,500 beds across 200 facilities, with each bed costing $57,378 annually as per public budget documents. In the scenario of mass deportation, the government would face the significant burden of funding a substantially larger number of beds. This reality underscores the need for careful consideration and alternative solutions to manage such an immense challenge effectively.
The cost would be astronomical.
Moreover, even former Trump officials stated that buy-in and resources would be needed from agencies like the Pentagon for setting up detention camps or relocating migrants. The Interior Department might provide federal land for deportation sites. Cooperation from the Justice Department, Drug Enforcement Administration, and Department of Health and Human Services, which handles unaccompanied children, would also be required to facilitate removals.
Translated that means: Mass coordination and resources.
It’s a proposal immigration experts and advocates say is extreme, and would have major consequences if implemented. Beyond the legal obstacles, any large-scale removal initiative is fraught with significant logistical and finncial challenges. The limited detention space, the necessity for thousands of enforcement personnel, and the overwhelming case backlogs all present formidable barriers to effective implementation.
“The overall capacity is nowhere near what would be necessary to carry out the plans as they’ve been detailed today,” said Jorge Loweree, the managing director of programs and strategy at the American Immigration Council, per ABC News.
“I think people just do not understand how labor intensive this process is, especially in a country of our size and a country of our diversity,” said Muzaffar Chishti, a senior fellow at the nonpartisan Migration Policy Institute, via NBC News.”… It’s almost impossible to spot an unauthorized worker in the mixed communities that we have and that it takes a lot of personnel resources even to execute a warrant against a single person.”
To effectively address the issue of detaining American critics and illegal immigrants, it is likely that Trump would require an expansion of executive power. And leaders within the MAGA movement have been actively exploring strategies to achieve this goal.
Trump has promised to broaden executive power and appoint public servants who are loyal to him and his vision. Although the courts served as a crucial safeguard during his initial term, it’s worrisome that he significantly altered the federal judiciary by appointing hundreds of judges and several Supreme Court justices. This shift could have lasting implications for the balance of power and our system of checks and balances.
Project 2025
This proposal aims to grant Trump and his appointees increased control over the executive branch, reducing the influence of permanent nonpartisan civil service professionals, whom he often refers to as the “deep state.” While critics express concerns about potential power abuse and political manipulation, it’s important to recognize that Trump is committed to these ideas. Given his track record, there’s substantial evidence suggesting he would indeed put these plans into action.
“It’s going to be a mess and it’s going to be a nightmare,” David Leopold, a former president of the American Immigration Lawyers Association, told ABC News. “There is no economic or social rationale for it other than a hateful ideology.”
“I think they learned some hard lessons in the first term about the agencies and about the courts, and how some of their schemes can be slow walked,” Leopold said of Trump’s team. “So, I think they will be going into the second term with a lot more knowledge and how to actually run the government and implement their plans.”
If Trump manages to attain authoritarian power via Project 2025, detaining and subsequently deporting 11 million unauthorized migrants wouldn’t be outside the realm of possibility.
But, still, at what cost? A national headache?
.
