The failure of mass deportation policies for immigrants

According to the ICPS annual survey, 52.4% of Catalans are in favor of immigration, but Two-thirds want to limit their accessPerhaps due to the "agenda" effect caused by the poisoned political debate. The hardening of domestic opinion coincides with the trend toward favoring deportations in other countries, a policy that has proven unsuccessful. During his first term, Donald Trump pledged to deport 1 million undocumented immigrants to the United States each year to eliminate a third of the estimated 11 million in the country. The final tally was 1.2 million formal deportations (removals(with a deportation order). A failure, considering that it was surpassed by Obama (2,749,706 in eight years). This can be explained by several reasons: first, because immigration policy depends on cooperation between federal, state, and local authorities, who, in many cases—in sanctuary cities and states—refused to cooperate with Immigration and Customs Enforcement, known by the terrifying acronym ICE, and also ran into trouble with the issuing authorities. The system's collapse was significant: there were not enough immigration judges or administrative resources to prevent the enormous delays in processing.

Perhaps that's why the current Trump administration exhibits a terrifying policy: it has decided to confront states and cities that are not aligned with it (like Minneapolis or Los Angeles), has increased the ICE budget to $75 billion (Spain's defense budget was around $24 billion, like the Florida mangroves), and has made deals with countries like Nayib Bukele's El Salvador to imprison hundreds of immigrants under the pretext that they belong to drug cartels. However, the result of all this effort is that, by the end of 2025, more than 600,000 people had been deported and 1.9 million had voluntarily left the country, according to the U.S. Department of Homeland Security. In other words, Trump has not managed to reduce irregular immigration because it doesn't simply disappear under a rug and because the causes that provoke it are very deep-seated: poverty, physical and institutional violence, climate change, global inequalities, etc.

Harsh policies only serve to shift migration routes, making them more dangerous and increasing the risk of extortion, as we have seen in the Maghreb and sub-Saharan Africa. Mass deportations also entail a heavy cost in terms of policing, courts, detention centers, and repatriation flights, outweighing any potential benefits for local populations in terms of employment or reduced strain on public services. From a human rights perspective, they have a devastating impact, resulting in arbitrary arrests and the separation of families, as seen in the tragic case of Liam, the 5-year-old boy detained with his father in Minneapolis. If all of this conflicts with the democratic values ​​that Western states claim to uphold under the rule of law, then from the standpoint of social cohesion, these raids are a serious threat.Indiscriminate deportations increase fear and marginalization, leading people to live in the shadows and avoid public institutions such as hospitals, schools, and courts, which worsens public safety and health. Economically, deportations create labor shortages in key sectors such as agriculture, construction, care work, distribution, and hospitality, resulting in a larger informal economy and inflation.

The European Union, currently experiencing a restrictive drift, has also suffered setbacks. The new Pact on Migration and Asylum, which will enter into force on June 12, stems from the fiasco of the 2008 Return Directive, which attempted to establish a common and orderly system, although it assumed that policy implementation was the responsibility of individual member states. It advocated voluntary return and efficient administrative processes, but has failed to guarantee effective return due to a lack of cooperation among member states and the absence of repatriation agreements with countries of origin. NGOs and the courts have frequently denounced prolonged detentions and summary expulsions without due process, as in the case of Spain. Resources have also been insufficient: Frontex patrolling with ships or chartering return flights. The new pact reforms asylum policies and advocates for more selective returns: not deporting more people, but doing it better, with faster procedures to prioritize cases without the right to asylum and an equitable distribution of the burden among states, which are obligated to contribute to a solidarity pool in favor of Italy, Spain and Greece.

We'll see. But regulating the entry of immigrants, protecting human rights, and sharing responsibilities equitably between the north and the south will be complicated. It seems like a new invitation to continue with hybrid migration policies that combine a hardline approach and openness: extraordinary mass regularizations—like the one Pedro Sánchez boasted about on Thursday in theNew York Times– and, at the same time,Outsourcing of migration control to countries like Turkey, Morocco, Tunisia, and Libya. Because—whether we like it or not—it is necessary to accept the reality of migration in our globalized and unequal world. This is not incompatible with hiring workers from their countries of origin or with development cooperation, despite the ethical dilemmas that relationships with some countries may raise, such as human rights violations or dependence on autocratic regimes.