FILE: Vivek Ramaswamy with Donald Trump (Source: X/Vivek Ramaswamy)

Trump ally Vivek Ramaswamy has taken a closer look at Donald Trump’s plans for a sweeping deportation initiative, which he describes as the largest in US history. In a recent interview, Ramaswamy defended the feasibility of the proposal and outlined the first steps to bringing it to life.

Targeting recent migrants and criminal records

Ramaswamy said Trump’s plan would focus on deporting millions of undocumented people, estimated at 11 million to 20 million. Priority would be given to those who entered the country in the past two years, described by Ramaswamy as “illegal migrants who have no place in this country.” He also stressed the importance given to the expulsion of people with criminal records.

Reduce funding for sanctuary cities

Ramaswamy explained that the plan calls for eliminating all government funding that undocumented immigrants currently receive, including federal aid to sanctuary cities. By limiting financial support, he suggested, many undocumented people would choose “self-deportation” because access to welfare and other assistance is restricted, which could lead to a significant reduction in their number.

Linking immigration reform to the national debt

Trump’s proposal aligns with ongoing debates around government spending, with Ramaswamy placing it as part of a broader strategy to reduce the national debt, which now stands at $34 trillion. “Using taxpayer dollars to subsidize illegal immigration is offensive,” he said, adding that the policy respects “the dignity of Americans already here.”

A polarizing issue among voters

Trump’s commitment to large-scale evictions is reinforced by his running mate, JD Vance, who suggests the plan could result in the eviction of up to a million people a year. Trump’s immigration adviser, Stephen Miller, proposed that National Guard troops from supportive states could help with these efforts. Voters remain divided: Edison Research exit polls show that while 39% favor deporting most undocumented immigrants, 56% favor allowing them to apply for legal status.

Comparisons with previous administrations

The increase in evictions proved a challenge during Trump’s first term. Despite this, recent data indicates that President Biden deported more people in fiscal year 2023 than Trump did in a single year of his presidency. Experts estimate that deporting 13 million people would require a significant increase in the number of agents, detention centers and immigration judges and could cost as much as $968 billion over a decade.

Expected legal pushback

Organizations like the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) are preparing to challenge Trump’s plan if it is implemented. ACLU attorney Lee Gelernt, who has previously challenged Trump’s immigration policies, revealed that more than 15 immigration lawyers are preparing resources to fight the new policies in court.

Strengthen support from federal agencies

Trump’s second term could involve a tougher approach by the State Department, aimed at facilitating the repatriation of deportees. Supporters argue that appointees within the State Department will play a key role. Additionally, Homeland Security Investigations (HSI), a branch of ICE focused on transnational crime, may also be called upon to redirect its resources toward immigration enforcement.

Use the National Guard and increase resources

Miller suggested that states willing to cooperate could deploy National Guard troops to help with evictions, particularly in areas resistant to such policies. Trump’s team is also considering invoking the Extraterrestrial Enemies Act of 1798, allowing for the rapid expulsion of suspected gang members. The move could face legal challenges, but supporters say it is a powerful tool for speeding up evictions.

The Alien Enemies Act: An Old Law in a New Role

The Alien Enemies Act, a component of the Alien and Sedition Acts of 1798, gives the president the power to detain or expel nationals of hostile countries during times of war. Historically used in conflicts like the War of 1812, World War I and World War II, Trump’s plan to apply the law to illegal immigration has sparked debate over its constitutional and ethical implications.

Constitutional and ethical concerns

Legal experts warn that invoking the Enemy Alien Act for immigration purposes raises important constitutional questions. The law traditionally requires either a formal declaration of war or an imminent threat to U.S. territory. Expanding it to undocumented migration raises concerns about overreach, with critics advising against using wartime authority to enforce immigration.

Efforts to repeal the Foreign Enemies Act

Some members of Congress have introduced a repeal bill, the Neighbors Not Enemies Act, led by Rep. Ilhan Omar and Sen. Mazie Hirono. They argue that current immigration, intelligence, and criminal laws already address national security concerns, making the Foreign Enemies Act obsolete and potentially harmful to civil liberties.

Potential legal and ethical challenges ahead

With modern legal frameworks in place, critics say the Enemy Alien Act is unnecessary in the face of current immigration challenges. Deploying it for non-military purposes would change its role and risk discrimination claims. As Trump’s plan unfolds, it faces legal, financial and societal hurdles, with anticipated costs and consequences that could affect communities across the country.