Donald Trump campaigned on a promise to wage war on illegal immigration the likes of which the United States has never seen. His first big campaign — launched against Los Angeles and its surrounding communities, of course — has proceeded with predictably disastrous results.
Parts of Southern California are under occupation by the National Guard and Marines, as Trump and his allies try to paint the protests against deportations as an insurrection fueled by Mexican “invaders”. The 9th Circuit Court of Appeal will listen today to administration lawyers argue that deploying the National Guard over the objections of a sitting governor is constitutional.
On social media Sunday, Trump cawed that he has “directed my entire Administration” to concentrate on identifying and removing as many illegal immigrants as possible as quickly as possible. He vowed especially to crack down on sanctuary cities across the country to supposedly “reverse the tide of Mass Destruction Migration that has turned once Idyllic Towns into scenes of Third World Dystopia.” (His Restoration-era capitalization, not mine).
Yet in the president’s social media blathering last week came something shocking: an admission that deportations don’t really work.
On June 12, Trump wrote that farmers, hoteliers and people in the leisure industry “have been stating that our very aggressive policy on immigration is taking very good, long time workers away from them, with those jobs being almost impossible to replace.”
Ya think?
For decades, study after study across the political spectrum have shown that illegal immigrants not only don’t take jobs away from native-born U.S. citizens or depress their wages, but that removing them usually makes the economy worse.
There’s the liberal-leaning American Immigration Council, which predicted last year that a decadelong campaign to achieve Trump’s goal of booting 1 million illegal immigrants a year would shave off at least 4.2% from the U.S. gross domestic product. That number is on par with the Great Recession of 2008.
There’s the 618-page tome released in 2017 by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering and Medicine and overseen by 14 professors. It concluded that “immigration has an overall positive impact on long-run economic growth in the U.S.” and also noted that “the rate of unemployment for native workers decline” with “larger immigration flows.”
The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office projected last year that the surge in migration during the Biden administration would at first depress wages of native-born workers and legal immigrants but eventually help them increase over a decade.
Center for Immigration Studies director of research Steven Camarota — a man whose whole public persona is arguing that too much immigration of any kind is detrimental to the U.S. — claimed in prepared remarks before Congress last year that his group had “good evidence that immigration reduces wages and employment for some U.S.-born workers.” But he also admitted that parsing out how illegal immigration impacts the job market “is difficult.”
A 2024 survey by the Carsey School of Public Policy at the University of New Hampshire examined previous research into three infamous removals of legal and illegal immigrants from the U.S. workforce: the repatriation during the Great Depression of at least half a million people of Mexican descent, the 1964 end of the bracero program, and the removal of nearly half a million illegal immigrants during the Obama administration. The survey concluded that “deportation policies have not benefited U.S.- born residents.”
Meanwhile, a 2024 Brookings Institute paper found that three of the five professions with the highest number of illegal immigrants were in the hospitality, agricultural and restaurant industry and that U.S. citizens don’t work in those fields at the rate undocumented people do.
No wonder that later in the day after Trump’s social media about-face, the New York Times reported that a memo went out to ICE regional leaders urging them to “hold on all work site enforcement investigations/operations on agriculture (including aquaculture and meat packing plants), restaurants and operating hotels.”
So why pursue mass deportations at all if there’s mucho evidence that they negatively effect American-born workers, a group Trump claims he wants to restore to greatness?
There’s really only one explanation: terror.
White House Deputy Chief of Staff Stephen Miller speaks with the media outside the White House.
(Saul Loeb / AFP via Getty Images)
Trump’s main adviser on all things immigration is Deputy Chief of Staff Stephen Miller, who has long advocated for a scorched-earth campaign and dressed down ICE agents just last month for not nabbing and deporting people faster, damn the cost.
The Santa Monica native absorbed this apocalyptic vision from conservative activists in California, who cast the fight against illegal immigration while he was growing up in the 1990s and 2000s not just in economic terms but cultural ones. Xenophobia has always colored this nation’s past crackdowns on immigration legal and not, but the Golden State became a noxious cauldron whose anti-immigrant fumes have infested Americans in a way not seen in a century.
That’s what makes Trump’s campaign so dangerous. His seeming softening against farmers, restaurateurs and hoteliers shows that he knows the country can’t weather the disruptions that deportations cause to important sectors of our economy. If he just took a dollars-and-cents approach to illegal immigration and stopped the language about “Migrant Invasion” destroying big cities, Trump wouldn’t get such righteous pushback from so many.
But that’s not who he is. He inveighs the way he does because he wants undocumented people and the people who care for them to live in fear, to see him as a potentate who can deport people or leave them alone at his mercy and whim.
The historical precedent that Trump wants la migra to follow is Operation Wetback, an Eisenhower administration program the immigration authorities claimed back then deported 1.3 million illegal immigrants in 1954 alone and improved the economic conditions of Americans. Then and now, authorities said people without papers were ruining it for citizens, were causing too much crime and that our southern border was out of control.
The only book-length study of the campaign remains Juan Ramón García’s 1980 “Operation Wetback: The Mass Deportation of Mexican Undocumented Workers in 1954.” The professor went through newspaper clippings, congressional testimony and government reports to paint a picture of a government hell-bent on splashy headlines to scare Mexican migrants into returning to their homeland and deterring others from making the trek to el Norte.
Garcia found that government officials had exaggerated their claims because “they realized that the more impressive the figures, the better congressional response might be to requests for increased budgetary support.”
A 1954 photograph of undocumented Mexican workers (identified as “wetbacks” in a handwritten notation on the negative) awaiting deportation by U.S. authorities to Mexico.
(Los Angeles Times)
Operation Wetback didn’t usher in a new era of American worker prosperity but rather emboldened employers to exploit legal immigrants and citizens who filled in the jobs that illegal immigrants once occupied, Garcia found. It also “helped to strengthen feelings of alienation from U.S. society and to cause further mistrust of the government” for Mexican Americans. You’re seeing that play out right now, as young Latinos wave the flags of Mexico and other Latin American countries and U.S. citizens are being detained by la migra.
Most damningly, the book concluded that Operation Wetback didn’t stop illegal immigration at all — a fact borne out by the fact that here we are arguing about the subject 71 years later. The mass deportations were just a “stopgap measure, doomed to go the way of most stopgap measures,” Garcia wrote, because this country can never quit “the seemingly insatiable appetite for cheap labor” that it’s always had.
Someone tell that to Trump so he stops this madness once and for all.
