We Need Broken Windows Immigration Policy

To fulfill President Trump’s mandate for “the largest deportation operation in American history” and to “seal the border and stop the migrant invasion,” we must radically rethink and resource our approach to policing illegal presence in the United States. The Trump administration should look to the successful “Broken Windows Policing” strategy of the 1980s for both operational and policy guidance. It’s time for broken windows immigration policy.

In their landmark 1982 article on the subject, social scientists James Q. Wilson and George L. Kelling argued that addressing minor crimes and disorder prevents more severe criminal activities. They explained:

That link is similar to the process whereby one broken window becomes many. The citizen who fears the ill-smelling drunk, the rowdy teenager, or the importuning beggar is not merely expressing his distaste for unseemly behavior; he is also giving voice to a bit of folk wisdom that happens to be a correct generalization—namely, that serious street crime flourishes in areas in which disorderly behavior goes unchecked. The unchecked panhandler is, in effect, the first broken window. Muggers and robbers, whether opportunistic or professional, believe they reduce their chances of being caught or even identified if they operate on streets where potential victims are already intimidated by prevailing conditions. If the neighborhood cannot keep a bothersome panhandler from annoying passersby, the thief may reason, it is even less likely to call the police to identify a potential mugger or to interfere if the mugging actually takes place.

When implemented, these policies led to significant crime reductions, particularly in New York City with its increased transit police presence. The approach has been criticized by left-wing groups and racial justice advocates because arrest demographics often align with crime demographics, fueling movements like Black Lives Matter, Soros-funded pro-crime “prosecutors,” and Defund the Police.

The debate around immigration enforcement parallels the fight over policing. Political leaders often exhibit more liberal views on immigration enforcement than the general public. This is influenced by powerful lobbying from business interests and immigrant advocacy groups, alongside the racial framing of the debate, which has scared many feckless political leaders who shudder at the accusation that immigration enforcement is somehow racist.

The public’s stance, however, is clear. There is strong support for mass deportations to ensure safety and manage public funds. The common sentiment is straightforward: illegal immigrants should return home. Americans do not wish to wait for crimes like rape or murder to occur before prioritizing deportation. Instead, they advocate for preemptive action to prevent these crimes by deporting individuals who have entered the country illegally before they can commit more serious offenses. The focus on criminal illegal immigrants is often a political distraction from the broader public sentiment that all illegal immigrants should be deported.

This sentiment helped launch President Trump back to the White House, but immigration enforcement, despite its popularity,  still faces the same decades-old political resistance from entrenched powers in Washington. But we aren’t dealing with 1990s illegal immigration anymore. Mass illegal immigration has been weaponized against this country, and it has reached a crisis level. It is time politicians recognize that crisis, reverse it, and prevent it from repeating.

Currently, Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) lacks the budget and manpower to undertake the unprecedented deportation effort that present circumstances require. The Republican Congress must provide accordingly,  so that ICE and the rest of Trump’s executive branch can carry out what Americans have demanded: enforcing our laws. 

To surpass the efficiency of the Eisenhower era — thus far the gold standard for large-scale deportation operations — the Trump administration would probably need to deport nearly 2.5 to 4 million individuals annually. That will entail far more than just the murderers and the rapists. Under broken windows immigration policy, every illegal alien is subject to removal. The smaller crimes of illegal presence, illegal work, using false documents, and other matters must be fully enforced before big crimes happen.

Border Czar Tom Homan and DHS Secretary Kristi Noem are undoubtedly committed, but they need substantial congressional support. Homan has been explicit about this need, stating in an interview with CNN’s Kaitlan Collins that success would require at least 100,000 detention beds and a significant increase in the number of ICE agents. Both points, and the broader operation, depend on congressional funding. With the clear mandate of November’s election and the severity of the crisis in mind, however, this may be thinking too small. I see no reason why Congress, with both chambers under Republican control, should not aim to provide Homan and Noem with 500,00 detention beds, along with every creative operational authority and addition possible.

We must move beyond the limited focus on deporting only “criminal” illegal immigrants. When Rep. Dan Crenshaw attempted to scale back deportation expectations at the Lockheed Martin– and Axios–sponsored Future of Defense Summit, he highlighted the political and resource constraints of serious enforcement, distancing himself from the administration’s aggressive stance.  Crenshaw said:

I think a lot of people… they want it to mean this to scare folks politically – and I think this was the case during the election — was this sort of door-to-door type of mass deportation. … We don’t have the resources for that. I don’t see that happening. There’s plenty of deportation to do prior to getting to that point, so I just don’t think anyone should fear this idea.

There are more miles of distance between that statement and the mandate the American people gave to the Trump administration than there are Lockheed Martin lobbyists in Washington, D.C. For the mandate to be fulfilled, exactly what Dan Crenshaw said won’t happen needs to happen.

Congress needs to align with public will by shifting beyond the current political narrative. The focus on aggravated criminals is misleading; only about 600,000 illegal aliens have been convicted of crimes beyond illegal entry. An additional 1.4 million have final orders of removal. Together, this accounts for a very small percentage of the estimated total illegal population, which ranges anywhere from the “magic number” of 11 million to well over 20 to 30 million.  Homan’s goal is comprehensive enforcement, and it’s time for Congress to match this vision. 

Faced with the prospect of real immigration enforcement, many Democrats who gladly voted for trillions more in discretionary spending under Biden are suddenly rediscovering themselves as fiscal conservatives. Some liberal Republicans will join them for a conveniently pretextual reason to oppose the mandate. But the argument against mass deportation due to cost is both politically motivated and factually incorrect. In fact, funding mass deportation will likely cost less than the billions handed out to open borders “nonprofits” and contractors to help get illegals in the country and dispersed around it. It is far cheaper to deport than it is to import.  And most Americans agree with what former ICE leader John Fabbricatore told Capitol Hill last month when asked about the costs: “I don’t put a cost on United States citizens’ lives, sir.”

A broad enforcement strategy will also be cost-effective by encouraging self-deportation. It should be supported by policies that remove incentives for illegal residency, such as eliminating free healthcare, housing, and stipends, restricting access to public schools, taxing remittances, enforcing E-Verify, and empowering federal and state agencies in immigration enforcement — all policies likewise rooted in good fiscal sense. Only through such a holistic approach can we fulfill the mandate of this election.