Trump threat to deport US citizens will 'face significant legal challenges': experts
5h
President Donald Trump addressing the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) on March 14, 2025 (Official White House Photo by Joyce N. Boghosian/Flickr)
Although President Donald Trump has threatened to remove citizens and legal immigrants from the United States, Bloomberg reporter Erik Larson says he's likely to face significant legal challenges in court.
"The Trump administration has unveiled plans to remove legal immigrants from the US, including by canceling green cards and “denaturalizing” some US citizens, after an Afghan national who entered the country in 2021 was accused of shooting two members of the West Virginia National Guard," Larson explains.
Following the shooting, Trump took to Truth Social to say, "Only REVERSE MIGRATION can fully cure this situation."
And while presidents have "wide latitude over immigration," Larson writes, "experts say that at least some of Trump’s new initiatives are likely to face significant legal challenges in court."
The "reverse migration" Trump mentioned is a non-legal term to describe the "process by which immigrants in the US voluntarily leave the country," Larson explains.
But what Trump is proposing, he writes, "is different: steps to ramp up removals by stripping immigrants of their legal status or denying their applications to stay in the US, essentially forcing them to leave."
"In a pair of Nov. 27 Truth Social posts that disparaged immigrants, Trump said he would 'remove anyone who is not a net asset to the United States, or is incapable of loving our Country,' without providing detail," Larson notes.
Joseph Edlow, the head of US Citizenship and Immigration Services, said that under Trump's orders, his agency was conducting “a full scale, rigorous reexamination of every Green Card for every alien from every country of concern.”
"A June presidential proclamation lists 19 countries the US considers “deficient with regards to screening and vetting” of its citizens, including Afghanistan, Haiti and Somalia," Larson explains.
Trump also said on social media that he would terminate what he called “illegal admissions” into the US under President Joe Biden, end federal benefits for non-citizens, and “permanently pause migration from all Third World Countries,” which is, writes Larsen, "an outdated term for developing nations."
Without providing any details, Trump also posted that he would"denaturalize migrants who undermine domestic tranquility."
Although the president has "broad say over who gets admitted to the country" per the 1952 Immigration and Nationality Act, a power upheld repeatedly by the US Supreme Court, Larson says there are constitutional exceptions.
"Under the 5th and 14th amendments to the Constitution, virtually all people in the US, regardless of immigration status, are entitled to due process, which has been interpreted to mean that individuals have the right to a fair trial to challenge a deportation order," he notes.
"Significant policy changes also must meet the requirements of the federal Administrative Procedure Act, which mandates that the public have a chance to comment on major rule changes by the executive branch and that the changes can’t be implemented in an “arbitrary and capricious” manner. It isn’t clear how Trump’s new policies would be implemented or what legal challenges if any might arise," he adds.
Under Trump's dubious proposals, Larson notes, "all types of legal status for immigrants and non-citizens appear to be at risk to some extent."
Immigration lawyer Michael Jarecki says they will also discourage "some immigrants from continuing their green card applications or otherwise attempting to remain in the US lawfully."
Millions of immigrants in the United States will get the message “that no one is in a stable immigration position, including naturalized US citizens," Jarecki says.
Larsen writes that although "naturalized US citizens can be stripped of their citizenship under certain established circumstances," "in each case, the Department of Homeland Security is required by law to conduct an investigation and refer the matter to the Justice Department."
The Justice Department, however, has had some problems in the past, Larsen notes.
"The Justice Department has admitted authorities made mistakes in several deportation cases, which could hinder future removal attempts," he adds.