A change in leadership at the Department of Homeland Security is a good time to assess what should change and what shouldn’t when it comes to two of President Donald Trump’s top campaign promises: border security and mass deportations.
The Trump administration very quickly and successfully secured the border in its first year. Maintaining this is imperative to prevent additional national security, public safety and economic threats from entering the U.S.
With new DHS leadership, however, the administration can better pursue mass deportations. Limiting them to "the worst of the worst" results in only hundreds of thousands of deportations, when at least 20 million deportable aliens were residing in the U.S. at the start of Trump's second term. In this Phase 2, the administration should open the aperture to significantly increase deportation numbers.
Candidate Trump promised the largest mass deportation effort in American history, not just the worst criminal aliens. America needs the administration to carry out that promise to restore the rule of law, relieve American taxpayers from unsustainable welfare, education, healthcare and other costs, and open college and job opportunities for American students, graduates and employees shut out by foreign students, cheaper labor and fraud.
>>> Trump Has Sealed the Border. Now, Democrats Are Hell-Bent on Ending Immigration Enforcement
Following the bombings in Iran, Americans now wonder whether Iranian and other terrorist sleeper cells, who faced no obstacles entering the country during President Joe Biden’s four years of open borders, may activate and carry out terrorism in the U.S.
It is important to note that known and suspected terrorists often do not have a criminal history. In fact, they are often chosen because of their "clean" background. So, DHS will need to use other tools to identify and locate national security threats, including worksite enforcement, scrutinizing immigration and other government benefit applications, as well as financial accounts.
These and other tools should likewise be used with respect to all deportable aliens to achieve the promised and necessary mass deportations. While self-deportation is a valuable tool, deportable aliens without rap sheets will not opt to leave on their own if they do not see a risk of DHS deporting them. So long as remaining in the U.S. illegally is low risk, high reward, deportable aliens will continue to stay here.
As such, DHS under new leadership should change that risk calculus to make continued stays high-risk, low-reward. To do so requires removing work authorization from deportable aliens and enforcing the law against unauthorized workers and their employers, as well as preventing remittances from such ill-gotten work leaving the country.
Conducting mass deportations will draw more bogus claims from the left against ICE. During Trump’s second term, both DHS and the White House have consistently and effectively refuted the left’s false ICE allegations, which whither under scrutiny. It is important that DHS continue to shoot down such false claims with the critical facts the left intentionally omits.
>>> Randi Weingarten Turns Teachers Union Into Political Weapon Against ICE
But we also need much more transparency from DHS regarding ICE deportation numbers. ICE used to report such data monthly but has not done so since the Trump administration began in January 2025. Nor has DHS reported how many aliens have used the CBP Home app to self deport.
To give the American public confidence that DHS is indeed conducting mass deportations, the department should regularly report the number of removals from the interior of the U.S. versus border turnbacks and maritime interdictions, as well as self-departures, including timely and untimely departures, and use of the CBP Home app.
The government, over the course of several administrations, has used different components and definitions to calculate removal numbers. It is important to understand this administration’s methodology to determine how well it is pursuing President Trump’s signature campaign promise and legacy-defining policy.
This piece originally appeared in Fox News
Facts Only
The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) is undergoing a leadership change.
The Trump administration secured the U.S. border in its first year.
The article argues for expanding deportations beyond criminals to include a broader range of deportable aliens.
An estimated 20 million deportable aliens were residing in the U.S. at the start of Trump’s second term.
The article suggests using worksite enforcement, scrutiny of government benefit applications, and financial monitoring to identify deportable aliens.
It calls for removing work authorization from deportable aliens and enforcing laws against unauthorized workers and employers.
The article criticizes the left for making false claims about ICE and urges DHS to refute these claims with facts.
It demands greater transparency from DHS in reporting deportation numbers, including removals from the interior of the U.S. and self-departures.
The piece raises concerns about potential terrorist threats due to perceived open borders under President Joe Biden’s administration.
The article originally appeared in Fox News.
Executive Summary
The article discusses the transition in leadership at the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and its potential impact on border security and mass deportation policies under President Donald Trump’s administration. It highlights that the Trump administration successfully secured the border in its first year and argues that maintaining this security is crucial to prevent national security, public safety, and economic threats. The piece advocates for expanding deportation efforts beyond "the worst of the worst" to include a broader range of deportable aliens, estimated at 20 million at the start of Trump’s second term. It suggests using tools like worksite enforcement, scrutiny of government benefit applications, and financial monitoring to identify and deport individuals, including those without criminal records. The article also calls for greater transparency from DHS in reporting deportation numbers and criticizes the left for making false claims about ICE. Additionally, it raises concerns about potential terrorist threats due to perceived open borders under President Joe Biden’s administration.
The narrative presents a strong case for aggressive immigration enforcement, framing it as necessary for national security, economic stability, and upholding the rule of law. However, it lacks counterarguments or alternative perspectives on the ethical, logistical, and humanitarian implications of mass deportations. The focus on deportation numbers and enforcement mechanisms reflects a prioritization of policy outcomes over individual or community impacts.
Full Take
The strongest version of this narrative frames mass deportations as a necessary step to restore the rule of law, protect national security, and alleviate economic burdens on American taxpayers. It credits the Trump administration with successfully securing the border and argues that expanding deportation efforts is a logical next step to fulfill campaign promises. The piece also highlights the importance of transparency in reporting deportation numbers to build public confidence in DHS operations.
However, the narrative employs several patterns that warrant scrutiny. It uses fear appeals by linking immigration to potential terrorist threats, suggesting that open borders under Biden’s administration could allow sleeper cells to enter the U.S. This framing leans into emotional exploitation, particularly the weaponization of fear to justify aggressive enforcement policies. Additionally, the article engages in semantic manipulation by conflating all deportable aliens with national security threats, despite acknowledging that many may not have criminal records. The call for mass deportations without addressing the humanitarian or logistical challenges could be seen as an exaggeration to absurdity, framing the issue in binary terms (e.g., "rule of law" vs. "open borders").
The root cause of this narrative appears to be a paradigm that prioritizes national sovereignty and enforcement over humanitarian concerns. It assumes that mass deportations are both feasible and desirable, without engaging with the complexities of immigration policy or the potential second-order consequences, such as family separations or economic disruptions in industries reliant on immigrant labor. The narrative also echoes historical patterns of nativism and enforcement-first immigration policies, which have often been criticized for their human costs.
The implications of this narrative are significant for human agency and dignity. While it positions American citizens as beneficiaries of stricter enforcement, it largely ignores the costs borne by immigrant communities, including those with long-standing ties to the U.S. The focus on deportation numbers and enforcement mechanisms could also erode trust in government institutions, particularly among marginalized groups.
Bridge questions to consider: What are the ethical and logistical challenges of mass deportations, and how might they impact communities? How does the framing of immigration as a national security threat influence public perception and policy debates? What alternative policies could address concerns about border security and economic burdens without resorting to mass deportations?
Counterstrike scan: If this narrative were part of a coordinated influence campaign, the playbook would likely involve amplifying fear of terrorism and economic strain to justify aggressive enforcement policies, while dismissing counterarguments as "false claims" from the left. The actual content aligns with this pattern to some extent, particularly in its use of fear appeals and binary framing. However, it does not rise to the level of a full-scale influence operation, as it lacks the coordinated amplification and multi-platform dissemination typical of such campaigns.
Patterns detected: ARC-0024 Ambiguity, ARC-0043 Motte-and-Bailey, ARC-0019 Fear Appeals
Sentinel — Human
The article shows signs of human authorship with ideological passion and stylistic quirks, though some repetitive phrasing and unsourced claims warrant caution.