How Trump Admin Increases Pressure for Illegal Immigrants to Self-Deport

Self-deportation might begin to look more attractive to those in the country illegally as the Trump administration intensifies the pressure for them to leave.

On his first day in office, Jan. 20, President Donald Trump signed 10 border-related executive actions to secure the border and deter illegal immigration while planning for mass deportations.

One executive order titled “Protecting the American People Against Invasion” set into motion a federal rule change that will help the administration account for an estimated 11 million illegal immigrants who entered the country under the Biden administration.

Related Stories

The Alien Registration Act of 1940, also known as the Smith Act, generally requires all foreign nationals staying in the country beyond 30 days to apply to register and get fingerprinted, but it hasn’t always been enforced.

DHS’s registration requirement must be completed by those 14 or older if they didn’t do so in the past. Once registered and fingerprinted, DHS will issue evidence of registration, which foreign nationals “over the age of 18 must carry and keep in their personal possession at all times.”

Parents will need to register their children younger than 14, then re-register them when they turn 14.

A federal judge on April 10 ruled the Trump administration could move forward with a requirement that everyone in the United States illegally must register with the federal government and carry documentation.

Judge Trevor Neil McFadden, appointed by Trump, ruled in favor of the administration, whose attorneys argued they were enforcing a requirement that already existed for everyone in the country who isn’t an American citizen. McFadden’s ruling didn’t address the substance of the issue. Instead, the judge ruled that immigrant rights groups pushing to stop the requirement didn’t have standing to pursue their claims.

Lora Ries, director of the Border Security and Immigration Center at The Heritage Foundation, said the new rule will help the government document the unknown millions of immigrants who entered the country unlawfully over the past four years.

“If you think about it, we have no idea who’s here,” she told The Epoch Times. “So it was a perfect time to say, ‘Oh, by the way, I’m reminding you of this registry requirement, and if you don’t comply, that makes you deportable.’”

“So they’re on notice,” Ries said. “If they continue to stay, then they’re going to rack up fines.”

From early on, the administration has used a carrot-and-stick approach to self-deportation because of limited government resources.

“If you are here illegally, we will find you and deport you. You will never return. But if you leave now, you may have an opportunity to return and enjoy our freedom and live the American dream,” she says during the video.

Another example is the makeover of the CBP One app, which during the Biden administration allowed migrants to make an appointment to seek asylum.

Under Trump, DHS flipped the script. The app has been rebranded as CBP Home and now encourages illegal immigrants to self-deport.

“The app thing is quite clever,” said Joshua Treviño, a senior fellow for the Western Hemisphere Initiative at the America First Policy Institute and policy analyst for the Texas Public Policy Foundation.

Treviño told The Epoch Times the Trump administration is using a whole-of-government approach to secure the border and deport illegal immigrants.

“The Trump administration understands that the crisis and illegal migration and illegal presence in the United States really required an entire ecosystem of permissiveness to create it,” he said.

Treviño, who frequently travels to Latin America, said countries seem to be getting the message on Trump’s border policy. They appear to be making efforts to curtail illegal immigration and human trafficking, he said.

“I can tell you firsthand, having been across Central and South America in the past two weeks, that there is a real understanding and a real sense that it’s a new day with the government of the United States,” he said.

Old Laws Revived

The 1996 law and Immigration and Nationality Act aren’t the only laws being revived by the Trump administration.

On the campaign trail, Trump pledged to “invoke the Alien Enemies Act of 1798 to target and dismantle every migrant criminal network operating on American soil.”

The Alien Enemies Act can be used to stop “any qualifying invasion or predatory incursion against the territory of the United States by a qualifying actor.”

Last month, the Trump administration cited the law as the basis for removing about half of the 238 alleged Tren de Aragua gang members and 21 MS-13 gang members to El Salvador’s Center for Terrorism Confinement, known as CECOT.

The deportation was documented by El Salvador, which released a video showing the prisoners being led off planes by the military, loaded onto buses and military-style vehicles, and whisked away to the prison.

U.S. District Judge James E. Boasberg ordered the two planes carrying the alleged illegal immigrant gang members to El Salvador and Honduras to return to the United States.

Boasberg verbally ordered the planes to be turned around but did not include the directive in his written order.

Meanwhile, the Supreme Court ruled on April 7 that for now, the Trump administration could continue deporting gang members using the Act, overturning a lower court ruling.

Birthright Citizenship

One of the most controversial executive orders Trump issued involves birthright citizenship, a legal concept that hasn’t seen a significant court challenge in 200 years.

According to the 14th Amendment: “All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside.”

Trump hinges his argument on the qualifying part of the amendment, “subject to the jurisdiction thereof.”

Many countries rely on “jus sanguinis,” or the “right of blood.” In contrast, countries like the United States, Mexico, and Canada have moved to a “jus soli” model, the right of the soil or country of birth, according to King, a lawyer and fellow at Rice University’s Baker Institute in Houston.

The right of soil has roots in the feudal concept of loyalty to the lord of the land where one is born. Right of blood bases citizenship on the nationality of the child’s parents and traces its origins to Roman law, King wrote.

King said “subject to the jurisdiction thereof” was clearly intended to limit granting citizenship based on birthplace in some way.

However, the phrase was imprecise.

During the debates surrounding the adoption of the 14th Amendment, the framers mentioned the exclusion of Indian tribes, children born to foreign diplomats or foreign soldiers temporarily residing in the country, he wrote.