President Donald J. Trump stands in front of a section of border fencing during his visit to the border area of Otay Mesa, Wednesday, September 18, 2019, a neighborhood along the Mexican border in San Diego, California | Official White House photo by Shealah Craighead via Flickr Public Domain
President-elect Donald Trump has reaffirmed that once he comes to power, he plans to declare a national emergency and use the military on America’s streets to fulfill his promises to round up millions of undocumented migrants and deport.
Many experts’ concerns about this program include the facts that immigrants contribute enormous value to the U.S. economy and that mass deportation would hurt food production, housing, and other crucial industries. Other scholars have analyzed how deportation traumatizes families.
I have an additional concern about a renewed focus on deportation as someone who has studied American domestic militias for more than fifteen years: Some militia units may see it as their duty to assist in such efforts. In fact, local police may even replace certain militias to help them deport immigrants.
Anti-government, but supportive of national defense
Militias are generally wary of the government. They have even been known to use violence against politicians and other government representatives, including police. From my research, I have found that the militias’ disdain for the federal government is especially strong because they believe it is too big, corrupt, and takes too much of their income through taxes.
But militia members’ negative views on immigration and their self-declared mission to protect the country could lead them to join a national mass deportation.
My research shows that militia members generally believe the falsehoods that undocumented immigrants pose a threat to public safety.
For some, my research shows, this perception is rooted in xenophobia and racism. Other militia members do not understand what it takes to obtain US citizenship: they believe that anyone who enters the country illegally is by definition a criminal and therefore has already proven that he intends to disobey the laws and generally be a to be a good American. This is not true, because migrants can apply for asylum up to a year after entering the country, regardless of their immigration status.
Members with both motives believe that undocumented immigrants take jobs away from more deserving citizens and generally receive unearned benefits while in the country. Trump’s promises to crack down on immigration are attractive to militia members of both types.
Michigan Home Guard militia members at the Second Amendment March on the Capitol, September 17, 2020 | Laina G. Stebbins
Militia members also believe that one of the few legitimate functions of the federal government, as outlined in the Constitution, is national defense. In this sense, those who believe that migrants pose an urgent threat might see the military’s involvement in a mass deportation operation as consistent with the duty to defend the nation.
Most scholars agree that even if it were technically legal, the domestic use of the military would be an alarming threat to democracy.
Active participation
Some militia units in border states have long engaged in deportation efforts. They typically patrol the border, sometimes detaining migrants and regularly calling U.S. Border Patrol to report their findings.
Border Patrol agents have historically expressed skepticism and concern about militia involvement in border security due to the unverifiable skills and motives of civilian support.
Some state, county, and local police departments also do immigration enforcement, and in recent years they appear to be more open to civilian assistance.
Some local police departments, especially sheriffs, are already asking for civilian assistance in addressing perceived migrant problems. Others have organized anti-immigration events with militias patrolling the border under an effective, if not formal, substitution for their actions.
Militias can also be called upon directly. In the past, Trump has addressed militias directly. The most cited example is his instruction in a presidential debate on September 29, 2020, in which he instructed the Proud Boys to “stand back and stand by.” Mensen hadden soortgelijke interpretaties van zijn opmerkingen voorafgaand aan de opstand van 6 januari 2021.
But I have long believed that these calls started much earlier. In 2018, Trump pardoned the men who inspired the Bundy family occupation and the standoff at the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge in Oregon. I believe this was an early attempt to gain support from people in militia circles.
A volatile combination
The military is already involved in immigration enforcement in unprecedented ways. In early 2024, Texas Governor Greg Abbott claimed that the US Border Patrol was not protecting his state from an “invasion” of potential immigrants. He sent his state’s National Guard to a section of the border, preventing the Border Patrol from working in that section. That blockage remains.
In a second term, Trump has little reason to rein in his rhetoric or his actions. The Supreme Court has ruled that presidents have broad immunity from criminal prosecution for actions taken while in office. Even if he doesn’t directly rely on private citizens to police the border or detain people they believe are undocumented migrants, his official presence and tough stance on immigration may be enough to lend legitimacy to vigilante actions .
In November 2024, two militia members were convicted of a variety of federal crimes, including conspiring to kill federal agents, for a plot to kill Border Patrol agents that the men believed could not adequately protect the border from migrant crossings.
Not all militia members support mass deportation, especially when it comes to the unconstitutional deployment of military forces to U.S. soil. This is evident from my research.
“The military is the military, and law enforcement is law enforcement,” one militia member responded when I asked some of my long-term contacts for their views on Trump’s declaration to deploy the military. “They were divorced for a reason.”
This man believes undocumented migrants are dangers, but thinks shifting the role of the military would be even more harmful. Not all militia members are so cautious.
Amy Cooter, director of research, academic development and innovation at the Center on Terrorism, Extremism and Counterterrorism, Middlebury
This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.
