The United States is increasing the military’s role in immigration enforcement, this time focusing on activities within the nation’s interior.
On Tuesday, the activation of National Guard troops occurred in Florida to support Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) officers in nine cities, including major urban areas like Miami and Orlando, as confirmed by a local official.
This deployment, previously witnessed during the pandemic and in border operations, specifically directs National Guard members to assist ICE with various tasks at immigration detention centers throughout the country.
Analysts describe this military involvement as a serious escalation, cautioning that it opens avenues for the potential use of troops in domestic law enforcement, a practice that has long been avoided in the United States.
While the scope and timing of this rollout remain somewhat unclear, it appears to be unprecedented. Historically, although armed services have been deployed along the southern border, experts note that there has been no prior instance of the National Guard working under Title 32 status to aid ICE within the U.S. interior.
Christopher Mirasola, an assistant professor at the University of Houston Law Center specializing in national security and international law, emphasized the serious implications of this military involvement in domestic affairs.
The initiative requires individual governors to approve the use of National Guard troops in their respective states.
By employing a specific set of regulations regarding service members’ duty status—namely Title 32—the government aims to position approximately 1,700 National Guard members to assist ICE across different states.
The types of support these service members will provide include case management, transportation, logistical support, and clerical aid for processing undocumented immigrants at ICE detention facilities.
According to Pentagon spokesperson Sean Parnell, as of now, the National Guard in 20 states, all led by Republican governors, has been authorized to assist ICE.
In Florida, the National Guard announced on Tuesday that it had activated the first 25 members of a unit that could eventually consist of around 200 troops assisting immigration officials.
Similarly, the Louisiana National Guard announced plans to mobilize about 70 troops by the end of the month, while South Carolina has received a request for 40 service members.
However, other states are still deliberating their options or have not yet received orders. For instance, Vermont Governor Phil Scott has denied the Defense Department’s request for assistance.
Under Title 32, governors have significant discretion when it comes to deploying their own National Guard forces for these missions.
The collaboration between the Departments of Homeland Security and Defense has been a hallmark of President Donald Trump’s second term, forming a comprehensive approach to immigration enforcement.
Within the administration’s first 100 days, the Pentagon highlighted its contributions to 34 deportation flights, in addition to transfers to Guantánamo Bay, Cuba.
The recent strategy to bolster administrative support for immigration authorities in the U.S. interior stands apart from the Pentagon’s ongoing campaigns at the U.S.-Mexico border, where President Trump declared a national emergency on his first day in office.
Since the previous spring, the military has been involved in detaining suspected border trespassers in designated ‘national defense areas,’ working closely with the U.S. Border Patrol.
This cooperation with the Border Patrol continues, even as the number of illegal border crossings has significantly decreased from the alarming highs observed during the Biden administration.
Typically, under both Republican and Democratic administrations, the National Guard has assisted the Border Patrol in supportive roles such as surveillance. But experts agree that the current pairing of the National Guard with ICE inside the U.S. is unprecedented.
The importance of Title 32 status cannot be overstated since troops operating under this designation are not subject to the Posse Comitatus Act of 1878, which sets legal boundaries for military engagement in domestic law enforcement.
Historically, invoking military forces for law enforcement tasks has been approached with wariness and is relatively rare, particularly during non-crisis times, according to Richard Kohn, professor emeritus of military history at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill.
He notes that there is a longstanding tradition of skepticism and opposition towards the military’s use for domestic purposes.
Professor Mirasola expressed concern about the implications of the government’s apparent strategy to navigate around the restrictions imposed by the Posse Comitatus Act, articulating that such tactics could become common, leading to increasingly controversial military missions.
Further inquiries made to the Defense Department and ICE regarding any plans to involve National Guard members in immigrants’ arrests were not answered.
Back in May, the Department of Homeland Security had requested approximately 20,000 National Guard members to support immigration enforcement, as reported by major news outlets.
The announcement of the Title 32 plan last month seems to address that demand effectively.
Additionally, ICE has recently received a historic funding increase of $74.9 billion to expand its operations, a substantial rise from its usual budget of around $8 billion, according to information on the agency’s website.
In a prior move, President Trump took the step of federalizing troops under a Title 10 status in California, which faced pushback from local Democratic officials.
In a separate announcement on July 25, the Pentagon clarified that federalized troops under Title 10 from the Marine Corps and Naval Reserve, who had been supporting ICE with logistical tasks, would now be replaced by National Guard personnel under Title 32.
The Defense Department provided reasoning that certain operational demands could require direct interaction with individuals in ICE custody.
This development incited discussions amongst military scholars and analysts about the implications of legality surrounding military operations, with some expressing discomfort regarding the current trajectory.
Ryan Burke, a professor of military and strategic studies at the U.S. Air Force Academy, commented on the legality of the military’s new role, stating that, at least in this preliminary phase, it seems compliant with the law.
Dr. Burke elaborated that the Trump administration is striving to leverage both federal and state government capabilities to advance its immigration agenda.
While others have pointed to negative conclusions regarding these shifts in policy.
Joseph Nunn, a counsel with the Brennan Center for Justice’s Liberty and National Security Program, described the situation as alarming, especially as it reflects the administration’s use of military resources as a force multiplier.
He noted that when operating under Title 32, the efficacy relies heavily on cooperation from state governors.
This collaboration has been fostered in recent months, with 26 GOP governors publicly affirming their readiness to utilize all available resources, including state law enforcement or the National Guard, to assist President Trump in the deportation of “criminal illegal immigrants.”
The Pentagon has now authorized 20 states to proceed with ICE assistance using National Guard troops under Title 32, all of which are led by Republican governors.
The list includes Alabama, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Idaho, Indiana, Iowa, Louisiana, Missouri, Nebraska, Nevada, Ohio, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Vermont, Virginia, and Wyoming.
For instance, the Louisiana National Guard expects to contribute about 70 members to support ICE by the end of the month, as stated by Lieutenant Colonel Noel Collins, a spokesperson for the Louisiana National Guard.
ICE previously established a different law enforcement agreement on May 20 with the Louisiana Military Department, which includes the National Guard.
This agreement, known as a 287(g) agreement, allows certain local and state officers to hold designated immigration enforcement powers.
It remains unclear, however, how this relationship will inform the specific tasks assigned to troops on the ground.
For the time being, Lieutenant Colonel Collins clarified that the plan focuses solely on administrative, clerical, and logistical duties rather than enforcing immigration policies directly.
In addition to Louisiana and Florida, South Dakota is also making preparations to assist, with plans to deploy six National Guard members to work under Title 32.
Governor Larry Rhoden indicated at a news conference that these soldiers will support ICE with processing and administrative tasks.
Initially, they will operate under state active duty with expectations of a change to Title 32 status in the fall.
It’s important to note that authorization from the Defense Department does not guarantee participation from all states.
Several states have indicated a cautionary approach, opting for a wait-and-see strategy. Utah is among them, where the National Guard has yet to receive a specific mission related to this initiative.
Lt. Colonel Chris Kroeber, a spokesperson for the Utah National Guard, stated that they are prepared to address any requirements presented but emphasized the necessity for clarity in the mission tasks.
There have also been discussions among Republican officials about potentially reallocating National Guard resources to aid the immigration court system, which is currently battling a substantial backlog complicating the administration’s deportation efforts.
Recently, President Trump mentioned the approval of a proposal that would enable members of the National Guard to serve as immigration judges, which Florida had suggested earlier this year.
The proposal intends to utilize National Guard Judge Advocate General’s Corps members as immigration judges under a federal Title 10 status.
Concerns have been raised regarding this plan, particularly in terms of due process implications.
The agency responsible for managing the nation’s immigration courts, the Executive Office for Immigration Review, has not provided any comment on this controversial proposal.
image source from：csmonitor
