Admin
Democrats Gear Up to Block Trump’s Mass Deportation Plans
Democratic attorneys general are preparing a wave of legal actions to prevent Donald Trump from implementing mass deportations of undocumented immigrants, setting the stage for a series of high-profile legal battles over one of his key campaign promises.
In interviews with Politico, six prominent prosecutors from blue states outlined their plans to challenge Trump on multiple fronts. They are ready to litigate over his use of military forces on U.S. soil, any attempts to co-opt local or state law enforcement for federal immigration tasks, and potential violations of constitutional due process rights. They are also bracing to oppose efforts to federalize the National Guard, deploy active-duty troops from red states into blue states, and send immigration agents into sensitive areas like schools and hospitals.
Additionally, these attorneys are preparing to fight Trump if he tries to withhold federal funding from local law enforcement agencies to pressure them into assisting with deportations. Similar tactics from Trump’s first term were struck down in court, and prosecutors are confident they can challenge such moves again.
The attorneys’ preparations reflect deep concern among blue-state leaders about Trump’s immigration plans and highlight the significant role state prosecutors play in shaping national immigration policies. After years of legal challenges from red states targeting President Biden’s immigration agenda, blue-state attorneys are now gearing up to take the fight to Trump, aiming to stall his efforts on this signature issue.
Legal Moves Already Underway
While some critics have dismissed Trump’s promise of the largest deportation effort in U.S. history as unrealistic, Democratic attorneys general are treating it seriously. They are already drafting legal briefs, analyzing statutes, and identifying favorable courts to file lawsuits, preparing to challenge Trump’s plan to target the estimated 11 million undocumented immigrants living in the United States. This legal chess game pits an incoming president seeking new ways to expand executive power against a group of state prosecutors familiar with his tactics and ready to counter his moves.
Trump’s policy team is also preparing for the battles ahead, working on executive orders designed to withstand court challenges. Their goal is to avoid early defeats like the one suffered by the administration’s 2017 travel ban on majority-Muslim nations. However, each step Trump takes to implement his deportation plans—such as appointing immigration hardliners to his cabinet or outlining the use of military resources—provides clues for Democratic attorneys to formulate counter-strategies.
Controversial Plans in the Spotlight
Trump’s deportation promises include invoking the Alien Enemies Act of 1798 to accelerate the removal of immigrant gang members and ending parole programs for migrants from Cuba, Haiti, Nicaragua, and Venezuela. He also plans to deactivate CBP One, a mobile app that allows migrants to schedule asylum appointments. His proposed measures have raised alarms among legal experts and state prosecutors, who argue that many of these actions may not hold up under legal scrutiny.
Trump has also proposed ramping up workplace raids under the leadership of his proposed border czar, former acting ICE director Tom Homan. Stephen Miller, his incoming deputy chief of policy, has floated ideas like deputizing the National Guard as immigration officers and deploying troops across state lines to bypass resistance from blue states. Miller has even referenced a clause in the Insurrection Act that permits the president to use the military on domestic soil in times of unrest, a controversial legal workaround.
On social media, Trump recently confirmed his intention to declare a national emergency and use military resources to enforce deportations, a move that has already divided Republicans. Libertarian-leaning Senator Rand Paul (R-Ky.) publicly criticized the plan, calling it a “huge mistake”—a sign that Democrats may find unexpected allies in their opposition.
Shaky Legal Ground
State prosecutors argue that Trump’s plans, particularly the use of military forces for mass deportations, rest on tenuous legal foundations. New Mexico Attorney General Raúl Torrez emphasized that these proposals would face direct legal challenges, as they conflict with federal laws that limit military involvement in domestic law enforcement.
“There’s a broader context here,” Torrez said. “Most Americans are uncomfortable with, and do not support, the idea of using military assets in this way.” He added that public sentiment could play a significant role in shaping the outcome of these battles, alongside the legal arguments made in court.
Conclusion
Democratic attorneys general are mobilizing for a protracted fight against Trump’s mass deportation agenda, leveraging legal, political, and public pressure to block his efforts. With legal battles looming and even some Republicans voicing concerns, the fight over immigration enforcement is set to become one of the most contentious and consequential issues of Trump’s presidency.
Where Attorneys General Plan to Push Back — and Where They Won’t
Democratic attorneys general are not opposing lawful immigration enforcement. Many are willing to collaborate with federal authorities on addressing public safety threats and deporting individuals with criminal records, as they have done in the past. However, they are preparing for what they see as potential overreach from a second Trump administration. Their responses will largely depend on how the president-elect implements his plans, which remain uncertain.
Trump’s advisers have hinted at a more “targeted” approach to deportations, focusing on individuals who pose national security threats or have criminal histories. However, attorneys general are skeptical that the administration will adhere to this approach. They fear Trump may expand deportation efforts to include undocumented immigrants who have lived in the U.S. for years, built lives, and established roots, or even those who entered the country legally. Such scenarios, they warn, could result in widespread family separations and destabilize communities.
“If he’s going to want to achieve that type of scale—the largest deportation in U.S. history, as he says—by definition, he’s going to have to target people who are lawfully here and potentially go after American citizens,” said New Jersey Attorney General Matthew Platkin. “And we’re not going to stand for that.”
Key Concerns in Local Communities
Trump has pledged to kick off his deportation efforts in Aurora, Colorado, a Denver suburb he described during his campaign as a “war zone” overtaken by the Venezuelan gang Tren de Aragua—a claim that local leaders have disputed. Colorado Attorney General Phil Weiser has vowed to focus closely on whether Trump’s immigration officials deny due process to individuals, a move he called fundamentally “un-American.”
From Colorado to California, attorneys general are also bracing for renewed battles over federal funding. During his first term, Trump repeatedly threatened to withhold funding from states and cities with sanctuary policies limiting cooperation between local law enforcement and federal immigration authorities. His administration also attempted to impose immigration-related conditions on grants to local law enforcement, efforts that were ultimately struck down in court.
“We won’t take that lying down, just as we didn’t last time,” said California Attorney General Rob Bonta.
Resistance Beyond the Courts
Democratic prosecutors’ resistance will extend beyond legal challenges. Advocacy groups like the ACLU are already urging attorneys general to use additional tools, such as issuing guidelines to state and local agencies on how to handle federal immigration requests. Attorneys general are also launching public messaging campaigns to counter Trump’s depiction of migrants as “bloodthirsty” criminals and to highlight the contributions of immigrants to their communities.
They are further emphasizing the potential economic harm of Trump’s immigration plans, arguing that mass deportations could hurt industries reliant on immigrant labor, such as agriculture, and lead to higher prices for consumers. “Trump has created this narrative that every immigrant in Massachusetts, or anywhere in this country, is committing crimes,” said Massachusetts Attorney General Andrea Campbell. “It’s just not true.”
The Larger Battle Ahead
As Trump appoints officials with hardline stances on immigration to lead the Department of Justice, the stage is set for a contentious showdown between federal and state authorities. Steven Cheung, Trump’s communications director, defended the president-elect’s approach, stating that his nominees are “highly qualified and experienced” and committed to enforcing the rule of law.
Despite these assurances, Democratic attorneys general remain deeply concerned about the broader implications of Trump’s policies. Their efforts to counter his immigration agenda reflect a broader ideological and practical clash over how the U.S. manages its immigration system and treats its immigrant population. The outcome of these battles will have profound consequences for millions of lives and the future of immigration policy in the United States.
