border protection

WASHINGTON — The Trump administration is initiating a leadership shakeup at a dozen or so offices of Immigration and Customs Enforcement to bring more aggressive enforcement operations across the U.S.

Some of the outgoing field office directors at ICE are anticipated to be replaced with leaders from Customs and Border Protection, according to news reports. Among the leaders targeted for replacement are Los Angeles Field Office Director Ernesto Santacruz and San Diego Field Office Director Patrick Divver, the Washington Examiner reported Monday.

The stepped up role of Border Patrol leaders in interior enforcement — which has historically been ICE territory — marks an evolution of tactics that originated in California.

In early January, Gregory Bovino, who heads the Border Patrol’s El Centro region, led a three-day raid in rural Kern County, nabbing day laborers more than 300 miles from his typical territory. Former Biden administration officials said Bovino had gone “rogue” and that no agency leaders knew about the operation beforehand.

Bovino leveraged the spectacle to become the on-the-ground point person for the Trump Administration’s signature issue.

The three-decade veteran of Border Patrol, who has used slick social media videos to promote the agency’s heavy-handed tactics, brought militarized operations once primarily used at the border into America’s largest cities.

In Los Angeles this summer, contingents of heavily armed, masked agents began chasing down and arresting day laborers, street vendors and car wash workers. Tensions grew as the administration ordered in the National Guard.

The efforts seem to have become more aggressive after a Supreme Court order allowed authorities to stop people based on factors such as race or ethnicity, employment and speaking Spanish.

Bovino moved operations to Chicago and escalated his approach. Immigration agents launched an overnight raid in a crowded apartment, shot gas into crowds of protesters and fatally shot one man.

Now Bovino is expected to hand-pick some of the replacements at ICE field offices, according to Fox News.

Tom Wong, who directs the U.S. Immigration Policy Center at UC San Diego, said the leadership changes are unsurprising, given Bovino’s strategies in Los Angeles and Chicago.

“The Trump administration is blurring the distinction between Border Patrol and ICE,” he said. “The border is no longer just the external boundaries of the United States, but the border is everywhere.”

Former Homeland Security officials said the large-scale replacement of executives from one agency with those from another agency is unprecedented.

The two agencies have similar authorities but very different approaches, said Daniel Altman, former head of internal oversight investigations at U.S. Customs and Border Protection.

ICE officers operate largely inside the country, lean heavily on investigations and typically know when they set out for the day who they are targeting.

Border Patrol, on the other hand, patrols the borderlands for anyone they encounter and suspect of entering illegally. Amid the rugged terrain and isolation, Border Patrol built a do-it-yourself ethos within the century-old organization, Altman said.

“Culturally, the Border Patrol prides itself on solving problems, and that means that whatever the current administration needs or wants with respect to immigration enforcement, they’re usually very willing and able to do that,” said Altman.

White House leadership has not been happy with arrest numbers. Stephen Miller, President Trump’s deputy chief of staff who is heading his immigration initiatives, set a goal of 3,000 immigration arrests per day, which the agency has not been able to meet.

DHS says it expects to deport 600,000 people by January, a figure that includes people who were turned back at the border or at airports.

Tricia McLaughlin, assistant public affairs secretary for the Homeland Security department, didn’t confirm or deny the changes but described immigration officials as united.

“Talk about sensationalism,” she said. “Only the media would describe standard agency personnel changes as a ‘massive shakeup.’ If and when we have specific personnel moves to announce, we’ll do that.”

White House spokeswoman Abigail Jackson said, “The President’s entire team is working in lockstep to implement the President’s policy agenda, and the tremendous results from securing the border to deporting criminal illegal aliens speak for themselves.”

On Fox News on Tuesday, Trump’s border czar Tom Homan said the administration is dedicated to achieving record deportations of primarily immigrants with criminal records.

“As far as personnel changes, that’s under the purview of the Secretary of Homeland Security,” he said. “I’m at the White House working with people like Stephen Miller, one of the most brilliant people I’ve ever met, to come up with strategic policies and plans — how to get success, how to maintain success, and how to get the numbers ever higher.”

Deborah Fleischaker, a former ICE and DHS official under the Biden administration, said the personnel moves appear to be an “attempt to migrate a Border Patrol ethos over to ICE.”

“ICE’s job has historically focused on targeting and enforcing against public safety threats,” she said. “Border Patrol has a much more highly militarized job of securing the border, protecting against transnational crime and drug trafficking and smuggling. That sort of approach doesn’t belong in our cities and is quite dangerous.”

Fleischaker said it would be difficult to increase deportations, even with Border Patrol leaders at the helm, because of the complexities around securing travel documents and negotiating with countries that are reticent to accept deportees.

In the meantime, she said, shunting well-liked leaders will sink morale.

“For the folks who are still there, everybody knows you comply or you risk losing your job,” she said. “Dissent, failure to meet targets or even ask questions aren’t really tolerated.”

On Tuesday, DHS posted a video montage of Bovino on its Instagram page set to Coldplay’s song “Viva la vida.” The caption read, “WE WILL NOT BE STOPPED.”

Times staff writer Brittny Mejia contributed to this report.

McALLEN, Texas — A federal judge ruled Friday to deny the Trump administration’s request to end a policy in place for nearly three decades that is meant to protect immigrant children in federal custody.

U.S. District Judge Dolly Gee in Los Angeles issued her ruling a week after holding a hearing with the federal government and legal advocates representing immigrant children in custody.

Gee called last week’s hearing “deja vu” after reminding the court of the federal government’s attempt to terminate the Flores settlement agreement in 2019 under the first Trump administration. She repeated the sentiment in Friday’s order.

“There is nothing new under the sun regarding the facts or the law. The Court therefore could deny Defendants’ motion on that basis alone,” Gee wrote, referring to the government’s appeal to a law it argued kept the court from enforcing the agreement.

In the most recent attempt, the government argued it had made substantial changes since the agreement was formalized in 1997, creating standards and policies governing the custody of immigrant children that conform to legislation and the agreement.

Gee acknowledged that the government made some improved conditions of confinement, but wrote, “These improvements are direct evidence that the FSA is serving its intended purpose, but to suggest that the agreement should be abandoned because some progress has been made is nonsensical.”

Attorneys representing the federal government told the court the agreement gets in the way of their efforts to expand detention space for families, even though President Trump’s tax and spending bill provided billions to build new immigration facilities.

Tiberius Davis, one of the government attorneys, said the bill gives the government authority to hold families in detention indefinitely. “But currently under the Flores settlement agreement, that’s essentially void,” he said last week.

The Flores agreement, named for a teenage plaintiff, was the result of more than a decade of litigation between attorneys representing the rights of migrant children and the U.S. government over widespread allegations of mistreatment in the 1980s.

The agreement set standards for how licensed shelters must provide food, water, adult supervision, emergency medical services, toilets, sinks, temperature control and ventilation. It also limited how long U.S. Customs and Border Protection could detain child immigrants to 72 hours. The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services then takes custody of the children.

The Biden administration successfully pushed to partially end the agreement last year. Gee ruled that special court supervision may end when Health and Human Services takes custody, but she carved out exceptions for certain types of facilities for children with more acute needs.

In arguing against the Trump administration’s effort to completely end the agreement, advocates said the government was holding children beyond the time limits. In May, CBP held 46 children for more than a week, including six children held for over two weeks and four children held for 19 days, according to data revealed in a court filing. In March and April, CPB reported that it had 213 children in custody for more than 72 hours. That included 14 children, including toddlers, who were held for over 20 days in April.

The federal government is looking to expand its immigration detention space, including by building more centers like one in Florida dubbed “Alligator Alcatraz,” where a lawsuit alleges detainees’ constitutional rights are being violated.

Gee still has not ruled on the request by legal advocates for the immigrant children to expand independent monitoring of the treatment of children held in U.S. Customs and Border Protection facilities. Currently, the agreement allows for third-party inspections at facilities in the El Paso and Rio Grande Valley regions, but plaintiffs submitted evidence showing long detention times at border facilities that violate the agreement’s terms.

Gonzalez writes for the Associated Press.

Early this month, the U.S. military and masked federal agents from Immigration and Customs Enforcement and from Customs and Border Protection invaded a park near downtown Los Angeles — ironically, a park named after Gen. Douglas MacArthur. They came ready for battle, dressed in tactical gear and camouflage, with some arriving on horseback, while others rolled in on armored vehicles or patrolled above in Black Hawk helicopters. Although the invasion force failed to capture anyone, it did succeed in liberating the park from a group of children participating in a summer camp.

The MacArthur Park operation sounds like a scene from “South Park,” but it really did happen — and its implications are terrifying. As Gregory Bovino, the Border Patrol agent in charge, said to Fox News: “Better get used to us now, ’cause this is going to be normal very soon. We will go anywhere, anytime we want in Los Angeles.” And President Trump is sending the same message to every Democratic governor and mayor in America who dares oppose him. He will send heavily armed federal forces wherever he wants, whenever he wants and for any reason.

The United States stands at the threshold of an authoritarian breakthrough, and Congress and the courts have given Trump a lot of tools. He’s learned from Jan. 6, 2021, that he needs tight control over the “guys with the guns,” as retired Joint Chiefs Chairman Mark Milley put it. And that’s what he got when Congress dutifully confirmed Trump loyalists to lead all of the “power ministries” — the military, the FBI and the Department of Justice, the rest of the intelligence community and the Department of Homeland Security.

As commander in chief, the president can deploy troops and, under Title 10, he can also put National Guard troops under his command — even against the wishes of local officials. Gov. Gavin Newsom challenged the legality of Trump’s exercise of this authority in Los Angeles last month, and we will see what the courts say — but based on its initial rulings, the Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit appears likely to defer to the president. Under the Posse Comitatus Act, the troops cannot currently enforce laws, but Trump could change that by invoking the Insurrection Act, and we have to assume that the current Supreme Court would defer to him on that as well, following long-standing precedents saying the president’s power under the act is “conclusive.”

Trump could send the military into other cities, but the most dangerous weapon in his authoritarian arsenal might be the newly empowered Department of Homeland Security, which has been given $170 billion by Congress to triple the size of ICE and double its detention capacity.

No doubt, this will put Trump’s “mass deportation” into overdrive, but this is not just about immigration. Remember Portland in 2020, when Trump sent Border Patrol agents into the city? Against the wishes of the Oregon governor and the Portland mayor, the president deployed agents to protect federal buildings and suppress unrest after the killing of George Floyd. Under the Homeland Security Act, the secretary can designate any employee of the department to assist the Federal Protective Service in safeguarding government property and carrying out “such other activities for the promotion of homeland security as the Secretary may prescribe.”

Under that law, DHS officers can also make arrests, on and off of federal property, for “any offense against the United States.” This is why, in 2020, Border Patrol agents — dressed like soldiers and equipped with M-4 semi-automatic rifles — were able to rove around Portland in unmarked black SUVs and arrest people off the streets anywhere in the city. Trump could do this again anywhere in the country, and with the billions Congress has given to immigration and border agencies, DHS could assemble and deploy a formidable federal paramilitary force wherever and whenever Trump wishes.

Of course, under the 4th Amendment, officers need to have at least reasonable suspicion based on specific, articulable facts before they can stop and question someone, and probable cause before they arrest. And on Friday, U.S. District Judge Maame Ewusi-Mensah Frimpong issued a temporary restraining order blocking ICE and Customs and Border Protection from making such stops without reasonable suspicion, and further holding that this could not be based on apparent race or ethnicity; speaking Spanish or speaking English with an accent; presence at a particular location, such as a Home Depot parking lot; or the type of work a person does. This ruling could end up providing an important constitutional restraint on these agencies, but we shall see. The Trump administration has appealed the ruling.

However, this litigation proceeds, it is important to note that the DHS agencies are not like the FBI, with its buttoned-down, by-the-book culture drilled into it historically and in response to the revelations of J. Edgar Hoover’s abuses of power. DHS and its agencies have no such baggage, and they clearly have been pushing the envelope in Los Angeles — sometimes brutally — over the last month. And even if Frimpong’s ruling stands up on appeal, ICE and Customs and Border Protection will no doubt adapt by training their officers to articulate other justifications for stopping people on the street or in workplaces. Ultimately, these agencies are used to operating near the border, where, in the late Chief Justice William Rehnquist’s words, the federal government’s power is “at its zenith,” and where there are far fewer constitutional constraints on their actions.

These are the tools at Trump’s disposal — and as DHS rushes to hire thousands of agents and build the detention facilities Congress just paid for, these tools will only become more formidable. And one should anticipate that Trump will want to deploy the DHS paramilitary forces to “protect” the 2026 or 2028 elections, alongside federal troops, in the same way they worked together to capture MacArthur Park.

A fanciful, dystopian scenario? Maybe, but who or what would stop it from happening? Congress does not seem willing to stand up to the president — and while individual federal judges might, the Supreme Court seems more likely to defer to him, especially on issues concerning national security or immigration. So, in the words of Bruce Springsteen, “the last check on power, after the checks and balances of government have failed, are the people, you and me.” Suit up.

Seth Stodder served in the Obama administration as assistant secretary of Homeland Security for borders, immigration and trade and previously as assistant secretary for threat prevention and security. He teaches national security and counterterrorism law at USC Law School.