Introduction

President-elect Trump, along with key advisors, have said that the second Trump administration will feature mass deportations aimed at removing the entire unauthorized population in the United States, currently estimated at 11 million people. Beyond targeting the current undocumented population, President-elect Trump has periodically suggested that groups with temporary legal status, including Temporary Protected Status (TPS) holders and humanitarian parolees, such as those processed through the CHNV program or CBP One at the border, may lose protections and be subject to removal.

Implementing a deportation effort of the magnitude President-elect Trump has promised will require unprecedented coordination among federal, state, and local law enforcement agencies, and it will undoubtedly encounter significant legal, logistical, and other hurdles. This resource outlines what local law enforcement agencies should anticipate in a mass deportation effort, focusing on operational demands, community impacts, and logistical challenges that are likely to arise.

Operational Demands on Local Law Enforcement

A nationwide mass deportation effort will necessitate increased coordination between local law enforcement and federal agencies engaged in immigration enforcement. Local law enforcement officials are likely to face challenges in this new operational environment, including being compelled to divert resources and personnel from addressing community threats and crime prevention to focus on identifying and arresting unauthorized individuals.

Although President-elect Trump and his advisors have said that deportation operations will initially focus on individuals with criminal records and those who have received final orders of removal in immigration court, those populations only represent a fraction of the overall unauthorized population and many of those individuals face additional hurdles to being deported. Beyond those groups, it is unclear what additional groups could be early targets for deportation. But past efforts suggest that the second Trump administration will cast a wide net, with the potential to create fear and uncertainty for the broader immigrant community.

Previously in 2017, the first Trump administration adopted expanded immigration enforcement priorities that effectively “prioritized” all undocumented immigrants for removal. A similar approach under a mass deportation regime would place a target on the broader immigrant community, with negative impacts on community trust.

President-elect Trump has suggested deputizing local law enforcement to assist Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) in identifying and apprehending unauthorized immigrants or other immigrants designated for deportation. To effectively participate in mass deportation operations, law enforcement agencies will require additional training in immigration law and procedures, placing a strain on already limited personnel and budgets. But adding immigration enforcement efforts to local law enforcement’s core functions could distract from core functions, negatively impact their ability to fulfill their primary public safety mission.

To obtain more local law enforcement cooperation in mass deportation efforts, the second Trump administration is expected to ramp up participation in the 287(g) program. The program was established under the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996 and permits local jurisdictions to enter into agreements with the Department of Homeland Security (DHS). These voluntary agreements authorize local officers to investigate, arrest, and detain noncitizens for immigration violations. Officers participating in this program undergo specialized training to ensure compliance with federal immigration laws.

Due to the program’s high fiscal costs and manpower requirements, only a relative handful of local law enforcement agencies participate in the 287(g) program –about 60 agreements exist across various states. To encourage further participation, the second Trump administration may seek to have Congress provide additional federal funding to participating jurisdictions, or relax training requirements as the first Trump administration did through the 287(g)-adjacent Warrant Service Officer (WSO) program.

While having trained corrections officers help with immigration enforcement inside jails might help free up other ICE agents to search for immigrants with more serious criminal records on the streets, the resources required to train officers can be significant. In the past, these types of programs have tended to focus on low-level offenders, with more than half of those identified in the 287(g) program arrested for minor traffic offenses or minor misdemeanors, making it less appealing to many law enforcement agencies.

If the second Trump administration moves forward with mass deportation efforts, as expected, there are multiple likely flashpoints for conflict between localities and federal authorities. Primarily, so-called sanctuary jurisdictions, which affirmatively limit cooperation with federal immigration authorities, are likely to face heightened attention from the Trump administration and could face threats of losing federal funding or other sanctions. Because the term lacks a formal definition, some jurisdictions who do not consider themselves to be sanctuary jurisdictions, but who otherwise have welcoming policies or place limits on honoring voluntary immigration detainers to avoid civil liability, could find themselves in conflict with the second Trump administration.

President-elect Trump advisors have suggested that Justice Department grants be withheld from local law enforcement agencies that are not cooperative with mass deportation efforts, or proposed conditioning federal emergency funding on local law enforcement agencies agreeing to engage in information sharing with federal authorities for immigration enforcement purposes. Because the U.S. Constitution limits the federal government from commandeering local law enforcement agencies to carry out federal directives, litigation over these efforts is likely, with local law enforcement agencies finding themselves stuck in the middle of a difficult political and legal fight.

Community Impacts

While local law enforcement agencies always have and will continue to coordinate with federal immigration authorities, a mass deportation effort involving state and local agencies will lead many unauthorized immigrants, as well as their families and friends, to avoid engaging with law enforcement. This reluctance could severely undermine public safety by deterring crime victims or witnesses from cooperating with investigations out of fear of deportation, resulting in negative effects on public safety that extend far beyond immigrant communities.

The blurring of lines between local policing and federal immigration enforcement risks damaging longstanding relationships between law enforcement agencies and immigrant communities. Fear of deportation may lead immigrant residents to avoid reporting crimes or assisting with investigations, resulting in underreported crimes that pose risks to all community members. Furthermore, any perceived reliance on racial or ethnic profiling during enforcement operations could exacerbate existing racial tensions and lead to accusations of discrimination against law enforcement agencies.

Mass deportations will inevitably disrupt communities by separating mixed-status families and removing many individuals with longstanding ties to the U.S. Local agencies may face increased demands for social services to support displaced families affected by these separations. To avoid separating families, some President-elect Trump advisors have suggested removing entire mixed families together, including U.S. citizen children, a move that would be highly disruptive to immigrant communities for different reasons.

President-elect Trump officials have also indicated they will be ending ICE’s existing limitations on engaging in immigration enforcement at sensitive locations such as schools, hospitals, or places of worship. This will is likely to engender a “climate of fear,” threatening to further undermine relations between immigrant communities and local law enforcement.

Conclusion

Mass deportation will impose significant operational, social, and logistical challenges on local law enforcement agencies. Officers may face expanded responsibilities that strain resources while potentially compromising their ability to address core public safety priorities. Furthermore, the erosion of trust within immigrant communities could hinder effective policing efforts across all populations. As these challenges unfold, law enforcement leaders must prepare their agencies for the complexities of balancing federal collaboration with maintaining community trust and public safety.