Trump’s Immigration Enforcement Spurs Public Pushback and Legal Showdowns

21 June 2025

Donald Trump / Getty Images

President Trump has escalated immigration enforcement efforts, directing Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) to intensify raids and raise daily arrest targets from 650 to 3,000 in Democratic-led cities. This directive is part of a sweeping strategy, dubbed by some as the "largest deportation campaign in U.S. history" aimed at pushing sanctuary cities to comply with federal demands.

The strategy rapidly materialized on June 21, as ICE conducted high-profile raids across Los Angeles in daylight hours sweeping through restaurants, gyms, and workplaces. Witnesses in San Diego captured masked agents detaining workers mid-shift, while in Spokane, Washington, raids led to protests and a sit-in outside an ICE facility by over 30 people, including a former city councilor. These visible, aggressive enforcement actions are taking a toll on community trust, especially among those previously untouched by immigration policy debates.

Harsh enforcement has met determined resistance. The politically charged “No Kings Day of Defiance” protests drew hundreds across cities like Laredo, Texas, and Alton, Illinois, with chants and signs decrying authoritarian overreach. Demonstrators denounced federal use of public funds, the undermining of local institutions, and the disruption of immigrant communities' economic and social life

Meanwhile, an appellate court ruling has bolstered federal authority: with two Trump-appointed judges overturning a lower court decision, the administration now legally controls the deployment of 4,700 active-duty troops, National Guard and Marines across Los Angeles to support these operations. Vice President JD Vance defended the continued military presence, accusing local officials like Governor Gavin Newsom of obstructing enforcement and stirring unrest.

These military deployments are new territory, prompting constitutional and civil liberty concerns. Analysts warn that using active-duty troops for domestic immigration enforcement may surpass legal boundaries and complicate community relations especially when local law enforcement is sidelined.

The integration of immigration enforcement, military involvement, and a presidential push targeting sanctuary jurisdictions reveals a coordinated strategy: escalate raids to pressure localities, justify military intervention under the guise of public safety, and rebrand the effort as a battle against political obstruction .

Yet public backlash is fierce. Nationwide protests, including an estimated 5 million participants in over 2,100 cities, have spotlighted growing unease even among traditionally disengaged residents. In many places, community anger has translated into spontaneous backlash and calls for legal action, including from city leaders who question federal authority and claim civil liabilities .

Civil liberties experts argue that the militarization of domestic immigration enforcement could erode public trust in government and curtail local cooperation with law enforcement especially in immigrant neighborhoods. They warn that aggressive federal tactics risk transforming immigration policy into a flashpoint of national division.

From a political standpoint, Trump is betting that hardline action will energize his base and showcase executive resolve. Still, analysts caution that such tactics may also solidify opposition, as U.S. cities prepare for more “No Kings”-style protests in July and beyond.

As federal control over domestic security grows, multiple legal challenges are already in progress. State attorneys general and municipal officials plan to sue on grounds of federal overreach and violation of civil rights. Lawsuits over troop deployment and ICE conduct are mounting as federal courts, including the Ninth Circuit, evaluate them .

In summary, Trump’s combined use of ICE, military force, and media framing marks a significant intensification of immigration strategy. While it asserts federal dominance, the approach is triggering a grassroots counter-movement and prompting legal scrutiny setting the stage for a summer of mounting tensions and courtroom battles.