Deploying Troops on the U.S.-Mexico Border: A Legal and Political Analysis
President Donald Trump claims that deploying military personnel along the U.S.-Mexico border is an action aimed at preserving law and order. However, the issue lies in the fact that existing laws do not allow a president to use military forces as border patrol agents without congressional approval, especially since the immigration crisis ended three months ago.
Historical Context and Precedent
No previous president has used the armed forces as pawns for personal whims, but on April 11, 2023, this changed when the Trump administration declared a “Roosevelt Reservation,” an 18-meter wide strip of land along the western border of Texas, as a “National Defense Area.”
This military maneuver is essentially a trap for migrants, as crossing the border in these areas now constitutes trespassing on U.S. military property rather than unauthorized immigration.
Immigrants apprehended in New Mexico now face serious criminal charges for unauthorized entry onto U.S. military property.
By April 28, the federal government had charged 28 individuals with the minor offense of “security standard violations,” which can result in fines up to $100,000 or one year in prison. These charges were filed in the U.S. District Court in Las Cruces, New Mexico.
Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth visited the New Mexico area on April 25 and intentionally brought media to examine new signs in English and Spanish indicating that several borderline lands are now under U.S. military jurisdiction.
There’s a significant difference between being detained by Border Patrol and being detained by military personnel.
Furthermore, placing soldiers at strategic border locations compels undocumented workers to traverse Native American lands belonging to the Tohono O’odham Nation.
Arizona media, understanding Trump’s actions well, criticized this move because it forces migrants to cross remote desert lands where death is almost certain due to extreme daytime heat, freezing nighttime temperatures, and dehydration.
In Texas, there’s another National Defense Zone within Western borderlands managed by Fort Bliss’ portion since early May under the U.S. Northern Command’s Defense National.
Most of the West Texas border is privately owned, not federal. Establishing a containment zone implicitly allows Trump to use troops and arrest migrants without invoking the Insurrection Act of 1807, which permits a president to deploy U.S. military forces only in cases of armed defense of U.S. territory or “extreme civil disturbances.”
As of now, there are 10,281 active-duty soldiers and 2,500 Texas National Guard members on the border.
Trump Seeks to Deny U.S. Citizenship to Children of Undocumented Immigrants
Starting May 12, the U.S. Supreme Court will decide whether President Donald Trump’s claims that children of undocumented immigrants do not have the right to U.S. citizenship upon birth in the United States hold water.
Trump aims to radically alter the conventional interpretation that all those born in U.S. territory automatically acquire U.S. citizenship by that simple fact alone.
The president believes such stances are what secured his second presidency, but this topic is so contentious that the nine justices won’t dive into a storm without a life raft ensuring they’ll emerge unscathed from the debate.
Trump drastically changed things from day one of his second term by issuing an executive order blocking automatic acquisition of citizenship for children of individuals residing in the U.S. without visas or legal migrant status.
This order reinterprets the Citizenship Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, asserting that birthright citizenship should not automatically extend to children born in the U.S. if neither parent is a U.S. citizen or legal permanent resident.
The order specifically outlines categories of individuals born in the U.S. who would not be recognized as citizens, including:
- Children born to a mother illegally present in the U.S., whose father is not a U.S. citizen or legal permanent resident;
- Children born to a mother with “legal but temporary” presence in the U.S., including students, temporary work visa holders, and tourists;
- Children born to parents who are not U.S. citizens or legal permanent residents.
Legal Principle or Political Whim?
Much like everything Trump has done as president during his second term, these executive orders appear more based on his personal ideas and whims rather than legal grounds. The U.S. president gambles on luck and public confusion to ensure his success.
The nine justices, six of whom are conservative and consistently issue conservative-leaning rulings, will have to address the constitutionality of Trump’s order.
Trump’s Three Appointees to the Supreme Court
Three of the nine justices who make up the highest court in Washington D.C. were nominated by Trump during his first presidency. Boldly, Trump sought young conservatives who would represent conservative viewpoints on issues like abortion, immigration, gun rights, capital punishment, and more.
Trump fought for each nomination in the Senate and ultimately secured three unwaveringly conservative justices, whom he frequently calls upon to rule in his favor.
This is why Trump expects these three justices to support him in every legal challenge.
Trump’s Executive Order Faces 10 Federal Lawsuits
These legal challenges forced the Supreme Court to accept the case. The court’s emergency filing consisted of appeals for immediate action.
First, the justices must rule on whether lower courts can halt the activation of Trump’s executive orders.
U.S. Citizenship Denied to Tourists
On January 20, 2025, the U.S. Department of State instructed consular officers worldwide to deny visas to temporary visitors (Type B – tourist) to individuals deemed to travel to the U.S. primarily for childbirth, with the sole purpose of acquiring U.S. citizenship for their offspring.
Since January, applicants suspected of “birth tourism” for acquiring a U.S. visa must now demonstrate other legitimate medical reasons for traveling to the U.S., not just to give birth and secure citizenship for their child.
This executive order has already faced significant legal challenges, with two federal judges blocking its implementation, deeming it an overreach of executive authority and likely unconstitutional.
Once again, Trump uses border security and illegal immigration as pretexts to position himself above the law.
