Construction continues on new border wall system project near Yuma, AZ. Recently constructed border wall near Yuma, Arizona on June 3, 2020. CBP photo by Jerry Glaser.
In a disappointing turn for border security advocates, the Texas Legislature has officially canceled the state’s ambitious effort to build its own border wall — a project that Gov. Greg Abbott hailed in 2021 as a bold step toward protecting Texans in the absence of meaningful federal action. Despite allocating more than $3 billion to the initiative, only about 65 miles of wall — much of it scattered in rural areas — has been completed.
Gov. Abbott launched the state-funded wall project in December 2021 after Biden administration inaction left Texans on the front lines of an escalating border crisis. At the time, Texas was the first state to attempt such a massive undertaking — one born out of necessity as illegal crossings surged and federal authorities turned a blind eye.
Standing beside towering steel beams at the border, Abbott made it clear that Texas would do what President Biden refused to: secure the southern border. “It’s heavy and it’s wide,” he said. “People aren’t making it through those steel bars.” He was right — but it turns out they didn’t have to. Thanks to landowner restrictions, bureaucratic red tape, and court battles, the wall was never continuous. Instead, it became a patchwork of isolated segments that migrants — and cartels — could easily walk around.
According to The Texas Tribune, only 8% of the 805 miles identified for construction have been completed. Those segments — largely concentrated on privately owned ranches — often sit in remote areas with lower migrant traffic. In other words, the federal government’s refusal to act left the state with the toughest and most expensive terrain, forcing Texas to play defense on the hardest frontlines with both hands tied.
And while the total cost of the wall project now stands at more than $3 billion, legislators pulled the plug quietly, slipping the decision into the final state budget without debate or public notice.
The 2025-26 state budget, passed in early June, includes a substantial $3.4 billion allocation for border security — but none of that will fund further wall construction. Instead, those resources are being redirected to Operation Lone Star, Abbott’s ongoing border crackdown that mobilizes Texas Department of Public Safety officers and National Guard troops to deter illegal crossings and apprehend migrants.
Sen. Joan Huffman (R), who led budget negotiations, defended the shift, stating that wall construction “should have always been a function of the federal government.” Texas had stepped up, she said, because Washington had failed — and continued to fail.
Some GOP lawmakers have raised concerns not about the need for border security, but about the strategic wisdom of funding isolated wall segments. Sen. Bob Hall (R-Edgewood) questioned whether lawmakers were spending billions “to give the appearance of doing something rather than taking the problem on to actually solve it.” Sen. Charles Perry (R-Lubbock) was more blunt, calling it a “hamster wheel” strategy.
Sections of the U.S. border wall that had been auctioned off by the Biden administration will reportedly be returned to the Trump administration to support Trump’s “border protection plans.”
The Daily Wire previously reported that the Biden administration sold off portions of the border wall in Arizona for pennies on the dollar in December, just one month before Trump reentered office in a move that critics called an attempt to hamstring the new administration. Now, those materials will be handed back over to the federal government.
GovPlanet, the government supply auctioning site that listed the border wall materials, says that it will expedite the return of the materials to the federal government, citing its support for the Trump administration’s border security plans.
“GovPlanet has reached an agreement, working with the Office of the Border Czar, to return border wall materials that were previously deemed surplus and sourced by the federal government to GovPlanet via existing contracts,” the company explained. “We are expediting the transfer of these materials to support the administration’s border protection plans.”
Construction continues on new border wall system project near Yuma, AZ. Recently constructed border wall near Yuma, Arizona on June 3, 2020. CBP photo by Jerry Glaser.
The sale of the border wall materials, Rep. Eli Crane (R-AZ) told The Daily Wire, was an attempt by the Biden administration to hamstring the Trump administration.
“The Biden Administration is well aware they shouldn’t have reversed the construction of the border wall. If it’s true, they’re purposefully hamstringing an incoming president, it wouldn’t be shocking,” Crane charged. “Why would they want to see President Trump succeed with policies they aggressively sabotaged?”
The Republican Congressman from Arizona called the sale “a direct affront to the will of the people,” who had given President Trump a mandate to secure the border just a month before The Daily Wire broke the news of the auctions.
The materials will now be handed over to a firm that has been contracted by the government to build the wall, GovPlanet says. “We value our longstanding partnership with the U.S. government and look forward to continuing to support America’s federal agencies,” GovPlanet added. “A third-party firm that has been contracted for construction of the border wall will take receipt of the materials over the next 90 days.”
GovPlanet also said that the supplies will be returned to the federal government “at-cost” in order to “protect the millions of dollars that U.S. taxpayers had already invested in this initiative.”
The Trump administration suffered a significant legal setback on Wednesday after a federal judge dismissed the Department of Justice’s lawsuit challenging “sanctuary” immigration policies in four New Jersey cities, ruling the federal government lacks standing to bring the case.
U.S. District Judge Evelyn Padin threw out the DOJ’s lawsuit against Newark, Jersey City, Paterson, and Hoboken, concluding that even if the administration prevailed, New Jersey’s statewide immigration restrictions would remain in effect, meaning the court could not provide the relief the federal government was seeking. The case was dismissed without prejudice, leaving open the possibility that the DOJ could refile if it establishes standing.
The Justice Department filed the lawsuit in May 2025, arguing that the four cities’ policies unlawfully obstruct federal immigration enforcement and violate the Constitution’s Supremacy Clause.
The complaint described the municipal policies as “a frontal assault on the federal immigration laws and the federal authorities that administer them,” arguing they prevent willing local law enforcement agencies from assisting Immigration and Customs Enforcement.
According to Politico, Padin said the administration’s argument ignored a critical legal reality.
“The Federal Government’s case has a fundamental flaw—it treats the Challenged Policies as though they operate in isolation. They do not,” Padin wrote.
The judge noted that New Jersey’s statewide Immigrant Trust Directive independently limits how state and local law enforcement cooperate with federal civil immigration authorities. Because that directive would remain in force regardless of what happened to the four cities’ individual policies, striking down the local ordinances would not remedy the federal government’s alleged injury.
The Immigrant Trust Directive, originally issued in 2018 under then-Gov. Phil Murphy’s administration, was codified into state law earlier this year by Gov. Mikie Sherrill. It sharply limits voluntary cooperation between local police and federal immigration authorities except where required by law. The directive has already survived multiple legal challenges, including lawsuits brought by Republican-led counties that were rejected by both the U.S. District Court and the Third Circuit Court of Appeals.
The DOJ argued that portions of Newark’s, Jersey City’s, and Hoboken’s local policies went further than the statewide directive and therefore could be challenged independently. Padin disagreed, finding those differences either too minor or too speculative to justify continuing the case.
The ruling marks the latest courtroom setback for the Trump administration’s aggressive campaign against sanctuary jurisdictions. Earlier this week, another federal judge dismissed the DOJ’s lawsuit challenging Los Angeles’ sanctuary city ordinance, dealing another blow to the administration’s effort to compel greater local cooperation with federal immigration enforcement.
Neither President Donald Trump nor the White House has publicly commented on the ruling.
Republican senators are rallying behind senior White House aide Stephen Miller as some GOP lawmakers privately grumble that his blunt style and hardline immigration messaging could complicate the party’s midterm prospects.
Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) dismissed the idea that Miller is in trouble inside Trump’s inner circle, calling him a key architect of the administration’s aggressive border agenda.
“People can disagree with Stephen on rhetoric or policy,” Graham told The Hill, “but the question is, is he in jeopardy in Trump World? Absolutely not.”
Graham argued Republicans should stop hand-wringing over internal personality clashes and instead focus on going on offense against what he called the failures of the Biden years. He pointed to an upcoming Senate vote targeting sanctuary city policies, saying Miller played a central role in shaping the effort.
Miller’s defenders say he has been instrumental in delivering on the promises Trump made to voters — from tougher immigration enforcement to cracking down on fentanyl trafficking. Sen. Dave McCormick (R-Pa.), who represents a major battleground state, credited Miller with helping advance priorities that matter to working families.
Other prominent Republicans, including Senate GOP Conference Chair Tom Cotton (R-Ark.), also praised Miller’s long-standing role in border security and law enforcement policy.
Still, the controversy highlights growing tension inside the Republican conference as lawmakers head into an election cycle. Some senators, including Thom Tillis (R-N.C.), have criticized Miller’s demeanor and influence, arguing the White House should broaden its circle of advisers.
The debate comes as Washington faces a looming Homeland Security funding deadline, with Democrats threatening to block extensions unless the administration agrees to restrictions on ICE operations. Democrats have also escalated calls for investigations, impeachments, and removals of Trump officials tied to immigration enforcement — part of a broader effort to portray the administration as extreme.
Miller has also drawn attention for his unapologetic stance on Greenland and U.S. strategic power in the Arctic, which critics say risks alienating allies. Supporters counter that Trump’s tougher posture has strengthened America’s defensive position and forced long-overdue conversations about national security.
For many Trump allies, the bottom line is simple: Miller remains one of the president’s most trusted advisers — and Republicans who want to win should focus less on palace intrigue and more on policy fights Democrats are increasingly out of step on.
As Graham put it, Miller is “Karl Rove to MAGA,” and anyone betting on his downfall, he suggested, doesn’t understand how Trump’s White House works.
Speaking with reporters ahead of a flight to Florida on Tuesday, the president was asked about whether he would consider deporting the South African mogul.
“We’ll have to take a look,” Trump said. “We might have to put DOGE on Elon. You know what DOGE is? DOGE is the monster that might have to go back and eat Elon! Wouldn’t that be terrible?”
Watch:
Reporter: Are you going to deport Elon Musk?
Trump: We'll have to take a look. We might have to put DOGE on Elon. You know what DOGE is? The monster that might have to go back and eat Elon. Wouldn’t that be terrible? He gets a lot of subsidies. pic.twitter.com/6I0OAIv7Js
After a brief ceasefire between the president and his former DOGE lieutenant, the war of words has ratcheted up again over the past 24 hours — with Musk revving up his criticism of the Trump-backed “Big, Beautiful” budget bill. Musk, in a Monday post on X, denounced the legislation and floated the idea of forming a new political party. (RELATED: White House Responds After Elon Musk Calls Trump Megabill A ‘Disgusting Abomination’)
It is obvious with the insane spending of this bill, which increases the debt ceiling by a record FIVE TRILLION DOLLARS that we live in a one-party country – the PORKY PIG PARTY!!
Time for a new political party that actually cares about the people.
“It is obvious with the insane spending of this bill, which increases the debt ceiling by a record FIVE TRILLION DOLLARS that we live in a one-party country – the PORKY PIG PARTY!!” Musk wrote. “Time for a new political party that actually cares about the people.”
Musk followed his post up with another, targeting the House Freedom Caucus, whose members mostly voted for the House version of the bill. “How can you call yourself the Freedom Caucus if you vote for a DEBT SLAVERY bill with the biggest debt ceiling increase in history?” Musk asked, tagging Reps. Chip Roy (R-Texas) and Andy Harris (R-MD).
“Every member of Congress who campaigned on reducing government spending and then immediately voted for the biggest debt increase in history should hang their head in shame! And they will lose their primary next year if it is the last thing I do on this Earth,” Musk later added, making a clear threat to help primary challengers to incumbent Republicans.
“Elon Musk knew, long before he so strongly Endorsed me for President, that I was strongly against the EV Mandate. It is ridiculous, and was always a major part of my campaign. Electric cars are fine, but not everyone should be forced to own one,” Trump wrote. “Elon may get more subsidy than any human being in history, by far, and without subsidies, Elon would probably have to close up shop and head back home to South Africa. No more Rocket launches, Satellites, or Electric Car Production, and our Country would save a FORTUNE. Perhaps we should have DOGE take a good, hard, look at this? BIG MONEY TO BE SAVED!!!”
Trump renewed that threat Tuesday morning outside the White House.
“He’s upset that he’s losing his E.V. Mandate, and he’s very upset about things,” Trump said. “But you know, he could lose a lot more than that, I can tell you right now. Hey, Elon can lose a lot more than that!”
A federal court on Sunday issued a temporary restraining order blocking the Trump administration from sending three Venezuelan immigrants held in New Mexico to the Guantánamo Bay, Cuba, detention camp.
Lawyers for the trio said in a legal filing that the detainees “fit the profile of those the administration has prioritized for detention in Guantánamo, i.e. Venezuelan men detained in the El Paso area with (false) charges of connections with the Tren de Aragua gang.”
In the filing, the lawyers asked a U.S. District Court in New Mexico for a temporary restraining order to block the administration from flying them to the U.S. military base. The lawyers noted that “the mere uncertainty the government has created surrounding the availability of legal process and counsel access is sufficient to authorize the modest injunction.”
The filing came as part of a lawsuit on behalf of the three men filed by the Center for Constitutional Rights, the American Civil Liberties Union of New Mexico and Las Americas Immigrant Advisory Center.
Judge Kenneth J. Gonzales granted the temporary restraining order, according to attorney Jessica Vosburgh, who represents the three men.
“It’s short term. This will get revisited and further fleshed out in the weeks to come,” Vosburgh told The Associated Press.
Last week, Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem and White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt separately said that flights carrying detained illegal immigrants had been sent to Guantánamo.
Immigrant rights groups sent a letter on Friday demanding access to people who are now being held at the U.S. naval station, arguing that the base should not be used as a “legal black hole.” Guantánamo has been criticized around the world for its inhumane abuse and torture of detainees, including interrogation tactics.
The immigrants are being held in the Guantánamo detention camp that was set up for detainees in the aftermath of 9/11. The immigrants are separated from the 15 detainees who were already there, including planners in the 2001 terrorist attack.
Trump has promised to expand the detention camp to hold up to 30,000 “criminal illegal aliens.”
Governor Kathy Hochul and MTA Chair & CEO Janno Lieber make a subway safety announcement at the NYCT Rail Control Center (RCC) on Wednesday, Mar 6, 2024.
(Marc A. Hermann / MTA)
Attorney General Pam Bondi Trump filed a lawsuit Wednesday against the state of New York and its governor, Kathy Hochul, and Attorney General Letitia James, alleging a failure to comply with federal law by shielding illegal immigrants.
Bondi said Democratic Governor Kathy Hochul, New York Attorney General Letitia James, and state DMV head Mark Schroeder treated their state’s residents like second-class citizens.
“We’re here today because we have filed charges against the state of New York,” Bondi said at a 5 p.m. ET news conference. “We have filed charges against Kathy Hochul. We have filed charges against Letitia James and Mark Schroeder, who is with DMV. This is a new DOJ, and we are taking steps to protect Americans – American citizens.”
Bondi invoked a similar suit the DOJ filed against the state of Illinois a week ago and added, “New York didn’t listen. So now, you’re next.”
“If you are a state not complying with federal law, you’re next,” she said. “Get ready. And the great men and women of law enforcement are standing behind me today. We have FBI, DEF, DEA, ATF agents. They put their lives on the line every single day to protect us.”
Bondi alleged New York had given a “green light to any illegal alien in New York where law enforcement officers cannot check their identity if they pull them over.” She concluded:
Law enforcement officers do not have access to their background, and if these great men and women pull over someone and don’t have access to their background, they have no idea who they’re dealing with, and it puts their lives on the line every single day. Violent criminals, gang members, drug traffickers, human smugglers will no longer terrorize the American people, and that is why we are here today. You will be held accountable if you do not follow federal law. It’s over, it ends, and we’re coming after you.
Federal immigration authorities have detained the mother of White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt’s nephew, a woman who officials say overstayed a decades-old tourist visa. Bruna Caroline Ferreira was taken into custody in Revere, Massachusetts, after allegedly remaining in the United States illegally since her B2 visa expired in June 1999, according to a Department of Homeland Security spokesperson quoted by NBC News.
Ferreira, originally from Brazil, shares an 11-year-old son with Leavitt’s older brother, Michael Leavitt. In a statement to New Hampshire outlet WMUR, Michael emphasized his son’s welfare amid the situation. “The only concern has always been the safety, well-being, and privacy of my son,” he said.
Karoline Leavitt, 28, the youngest White House press secretary in U.S. history, declined to comment on the arrest. However, a source told WMUR that Ferreira and Leavitt have not been in contact “for many years,” adding that the child “has lived full-time in New Hampshire with his father since he was born. He has never resided with his mother.”
According to DHS, Ferreira entered the United States legally in 1998 but failed to depart when required. “She entered the US on a B2 tourist visa that required her to depart the US by June 6, 1999,” the agency said. “She is currently at the South Louisiana ICE Processing Center and is in removal proceedings. Under President Trump and [DHS] Secretary [Kristi] Noem, all individuals unlawfully present in the United States are subject to deportation.”
NBC News reported that Ferreira had previously been arrested on suspicion of battery, though the outcome of that case is unclear. No charges appear in Massachusetts’ online court records.
Ferreira’s attorney, Todd Pomerleau, strongly disputes DHS’s characterization of his client, arguing she should not be facing deportation. He said she has “maintained her legal status” through the Obama-era Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program and was actively working toward obtaining a green card before her arrest.
“She’s in the process of actually getting her green card and she was abruptly arrested and taken from her young child right before Thanksgiving,” Pomerleau told WCVB. “Bruna has no criminal record whatsoever. I don’t know where that is coming from. Show us the proof. There’s no charges out there. She’s not a criminal illegal alien.”
Pomerleau said the family has been struggling with the distance, noting that Ferreira’s son has not spoken to her since she was taken into custody. “I’m just trying to fight to get her out of jail,” he said. “She should not be sitting in a jail hours away from her family and from her child’s life. She’s a great mom, and from what I heard, I think he’s been a pretty good dad.”
He added, “His mother is locked up in Louisiana, where she should have never been in the first place.”
The case comes as the Trump administration carries out what it describes as a broad “mass deportation campaign,” emphasizing stricter enforcement of existing immigration laws. The initiative includes encouraging voluntary return for those in the country illegally and increasing operations by ICE, the Border Patrol, and state National Guard units.
A relative of Ferreira has launched a GoFundMe campaign, stating she was brought to the U.S. as a child and “followed all protocols.” The fundraiser says, “Since then, she has done everything in her power to build a stable, honest life here. She has maintained her legal status through DACA, followed every requirement, and has always strived to do the right thing.”
Ferreira remains in federal custody as her removal proceedings continue.
Incoming Trump administration border czar Tom Homan told NewsNation’s Ali Bradley there is no “price tag” for the mass deportations planned by the incoming administration
“What price do you put on national security? I don’t think it has a price tag,” Homan said. “What price do you put on the thousands of American moms and dads who buried their children? You want to talk about family separation; they buried their children because their children were murdered by illegal aliens that weren’t supposed to be here. I don’t put a price on that. I don’t put a price on national security. I don’t put a price on American lives.”
Homan further defended the mass deportations’ $86 billion price tag, saying it would save American taxpayers money in the future.
“This operation would be expensive,” he acknowledged. “However, it’s going to save taxpayers a lot of money in the long run. Right now, we’re spending billions of dollars on free airline tickets, free hotel rooms, free medical care, free meals, the education system.”
Homan, however, said they will also need help from Congress.
“We need more resources; we need funding. We obviously need to buy more detention beds because everybody we arrest, we have to detain to work on those removal efforts and get travel documents, get flight arrangements. So we need more detention beds,” said Homan.
Homan said the Trump administration doesn’t plan on separating families but rather deporting them together. He said the administration is looking into using halfway houses to hold U.S.-born children of undocumented immigrants.
“As far as U.S. children, that’s going to be a difficult situation because we’re not going to change your U.S. citizenship,” he said. “Which means they’re going to be put in a halfway house or they can stay at home and wait for the officers to get the travel arrangements and come back and get the family. You know the best thing to do for a family is to self-deport themselves.”
Illegal Immigration in the United State via Wikimedia Commons
According to new reports, White House Deputy Chief of Staff Stephen Miller delivered a blunt ultimatum to Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) leadership in mid-May: ramp up arrests to 3,000 per day or face personnel changes.
During a tense meeting at ICE headquarters in Washington, D.C., Miller reportedly warned that regional offices failing to meet the target would see their leadership replaced. Sources familiar with the meeting said Miller left no room for interpretation — improved numbers weren’t encouraged, they were mandatory. (RELATED: Legal Battle May Reveal Big Payouts Tied To Biden’s Border Policies)
Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem, also in attendance, struck a more measured tone. Still, the message was clear, according to NBC News: immigration enforcement efforts must intensify and take precedence:
Misdemeanor cases for border crossings are regularly appearing in federal court, a rarity in recent years. Justice Department teams focused on other issues are being disbanded, with members being dispersed to teams focused on immigration and other administration priorities.
And prosecutors say cases without immigration components have stalled or are moving more slowly, according to documents seen by NBC News and conversations with six current and former prosecutors and a senior FBI official, who described how immigration is now a central part of discussions around whether to pursue cases.
U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, Public domain, via Wikimedia Commons
“Immigration status is now question No. 1 in terms of charging decisions,” an assistant U.S. attorney said. “Is this person a documented immigrant? Is this person an undocumented immigrant? Is this person a citizen? Are they somehow deportable? What is their immigration status? And the answer to that question is now largely driving our charging decisions.”
At least one U.S. attorney’s office abandoned a potential federal prosecution of someone who prosecutors felt was dangerous because the case against the person lacked an immigration component, an email obtained by NBC News showed. The office instead left the case to state prosecutors.
Mobilizing National Resources
Following the confrontation, ICE launched “Operation At Large,” a coast-to-coast initiative designed to supercharge apprehensions. The scale is unprecedented. Over 21,000 National Guard troops and 250 IRS agents have been folded into the effort, alongside thousands of ICE and federal law enforcement personnel. (RELATED: Police Case That Fueled 2020 Protests Returns To Supreme Court)
The operation’s reach has required coordination across agencies, pulling FBI and DOJ resources away from their usual focus areas and toward immigration-related priorities.
The Daily Mailhas more on Miller’s dramatic call to action:
He then reportedly gave them an open challenge and asked: ‘Why aren’t you at Home Depot? Why aren’t you at 7-Eleven?’
Miller further pushed, getting into what an official called a ‘p***ing contest,’ saying: ‘What do you mean you’re going after criminals?’
Gage Skidmore from Surprise, AZ, United States of America, CC BY-SA 2.0 , via Wikimedia Commons
In a statement to the Examiner, ICE deputy assistant director of media affairs Laszlo Baksay said the descriptions were ‘inaccurate.’
However, the conservative-leaning outlet cited sources within ICE and DHS who claimed Miller’s remarks further eroded morale among rank-and-file agents, which was already low.
“He had nothing positive to say about anybody,” one official told the paper, describing the mood following Miller’s visit.
Another source painted a darker picture of the internal climate confronting ICE agents:
“They’ve been threatened, told they’re watching their emails and texts and Signals. That’s what is horrible about things right now. It’s a fearful environment. Everybody in leadership is afraid. There’s no morale. Everybody is demoralized.”
Despite the backlash, Miller defended the administration’s approach during an appearance with Sean Hannity, insisting the 3,000-arrest-per-day quota is only a temporary benchmark — and warning that agents should be prepared for that figure to rise.
Localized operations have revealed just how expansive the crackdown has become since Miller and Noem appeared at Potomac Center Plaza in Southwest D.C. Across the nation, agents have ramped up early-morning sweeps and workplace raids, often coordinated with minimal local notification. In Florida, a weeklong action labeled “Operation Tidal Wave” resulted in 1,120 arrests — the largest ICE enforcement action ever recorded in a single state.
Tennessee saw similar efforts, with 196 arrests in the Nashville area. The local response was sharply critical. Nashville’s mayor denounced the operation as out of step with the city’s values and implemented policies limiting cooperation with ICE. Republicans in Congress are now investigating whether the mayor’s office leaked information about ICE agents — a serious charge with national implications.
Focus on Career Criminals — But Collateral Arrests Are Rising
Officially, the crackdown targets individuals with criminal records or prior deportation orders. But internal ICE guidance reportedly encourages officers to make “collateral arrests” — detaining illegal immigrants encountered in the field, even if they weren’t the original target and have no criminal history.
U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, Flickr, https://www.flickr.com/photos/us_icegov/54295293536/in/photostream/, Creative Commons Attribution-Public Domain Mark 1.0 Universal (CC BY-NC-SA 1.0)
The broader approach has raised legal and logistical concerns, as well as fears of potential overreach, according to immigrant advocacy groups.
Leadership Purge Signals Internal Pressure
It also hasn’t come without fallout inside ICE. Two senior officials — Kenneth Genalo and Robert Hammer — have been removed from their posts in recent weeks. Sources say the firings reflect internal friction over how aggressively to pursue the administration’s ambitious targets. They also serve as a warning to others who might be perceived as resistant to the push.
White House: Fulfilling the Mandate, Critics Question the Cost
The administration stands by the operation. Officials say it delivers on President Trump’s second-term promise: to secure the border and remove criminal illegal aliens.
Still, questions remain. Legal scholars are raising red flags over the breadth of federal involvement, and local-federal cooperation is growing more strained. As the operation continues, so does the debate — over strategy, law, and the real-world impact on communities nationwide.
