Former President Donald Trump has pledged to enact the largest “mass deportation” effort in history, removing some 11 million immigrants without legal status. Vice President Kamala Harris has vowed to tighten border restrictions while offering pathways to citizenship.
But what would the two presidential nominees’ policies mean in practice for the estimated 676,000 immigrants without legal status in New York? And what would they mean for the recent influx of asylum-seekers in New York City, which has hosted more than 210,000 recently arrived migrants since spring 2022?
To answer these questions, Gothamist spoke with Mario Russell, executive director of the Center for Migration Studies of New York, a Manhattan-based think tank studying international migration.
The below conversation has been edited for length and clarity.
What would the “mass deportation” program promised by Trump, the Republican nominee, actually look like on the ground?
There are very few details and specifics that have been offered as to how this kind of a program would be implemented, which probably is not an accident, because it is in fact an almost impossible program to implement.
We know that to implement a program like this would cost somewhere in the order of a half-trillion dollars, based on a study and report we recently did — and [would require] the mobilization of federal, state and local, if not military, personnel.
It would probably involve the raids and arrests of families in their homes, of individuals at work. Probably the profiling of people, in one way or another, using federal Immigration and Customs Enforcement officers, or perhaps local police.
Mario Russell, executive director of the Center for Migration Studies of New York.
Courtesy of Center for Migration Studies of New York
It would involve the creation of massive detention and deportation camps who knows where, perhaps on the southern [United States] border.
It would involve the separation of families and, as a result, the care of either spouses who are left behind — but certainly children, 6 million to 8 million of whom in this population are in fact United States citizens, many of whom would become orphaned, potentially, if they’re in single-parent households, or if both parents are undocumented.
So, the costs practically and from a humanitarian point of view are just unimaginably enormous.
What would the impact be in New York, economically, socially and otherwise?
The effect on New York City, New York state, would be enormous.
The undocumented represent close to 5% of the workforce. The undocumented are providing services for us, for our communities, for their communities, in enormous numbers in the health care sector, in the delivery sector, in the hospitality sector, in construction, and landscaping.
So they’re really at the core of some of the essential functions, and in fact, were in the front lines, as we recall four years ago, among the essential worker core who were in place to respond and to fill in when most of us were retiring into our homes during a difficult period of COVID.
A long line forms outside the main immigration courthouse in Manhattan in this 2022 photo. Backlogs caused in part by an influx of asylum-seekers have made for long waits for migrants seeking legal help with sundry immigration issues.
Arya Sundaram / Gothamist
We’ve just done a study that shows that the undocumented are in significant numbers among those who fill jobs in developing aspects of the New York state’s economy.
Not only are they critical to what New York state needs in order to continue to run well but also are part of its promise and growth. In other words, they’re involved in parts of the tech industry, a continuing growing and increasing number in the health care industry — all of which are some of the fastest-growing industries in the U.S. and New York state economy.
What will the flow of asylum-seekers into New York City look like under a Trump presidency, versus a Harris presidency?
The data shows that the numbers are decreasing significantly, and I think that would be true under both administrations.
I think the idea and the thrust really behind some of the current Democratic policies and proposals really are moving toward a fairly comprehensive shutdown of the border. And what that means is significantly regulated flow.
The scene at City Harvest in Brooklyn, hosting the five-week course “Culinary Career Pathways for New New Yorkers,” launched in April by the nonprofit group Hot Bread Kitchen, which trains New Yorkers for jobs in the food industry.
Arun Venugopal / Gothamist
Nominee Harris, the Democrat, has suggested that she would want to sign into law the bipartisan proposal that was put forward about a half a year ago, which really contemplated a fairly dramatic realignment of border policies — including a control of the admission of people, depending on how many were presenting themselves daily to the border.
I think these proposals at some level are good and are important and are necessary. But they are temporary measures, in my opinion, because what they simply do is on the back-end address the movement of people, pathways and solutions for people, in a very temporary sense. But it doesn’t address fundamentally the needs of those who are looking for protection and reunification and opportunities, nor the needs of the United States.
Again, comprehensive reform is what really is the ultimate solution to all of this.
How does Harris’ immigration policies compare to Trump’s?
The Harris administration is not proposing a mass deportation, so that’s a significant difference.
And she would leave intact, of course, those who have been here for five, 10, 15, 20 and even up to 30 years. And I think it’s expressly said they would be seeking some kind of way forward for Dreamers and others as well, which has also proved to be an elusive goal for many over the years.
Under either candidate, would New York City be getting more help in resettling asylum-seekers, as Mayor Eric Adams has requested?
The question of processing and resettlement ultimately probably would be about the same, because I think these are sort of interior questions.
I don’t think that the city is going to receive any much greater or more assistance to do that job under the Trump administration as they would necessarily under a Harris administration.
The resettlement of asylum-seekers in the interior has never been seen, perceived or handled as a federal initiative or policy. That’s really only a matter that has affected refugees who come with status.
Where people live and what kind of care they receive while they’re waiting for their asylum case to be processed has in fact, in some sense, never been at the fore of any local, state or municipal government, and certainly not among the concerns of the federal government.
So whether or not the Harris administration would choose to provide some resources, I tend to think at this point that’s unlikely, but it’s possible. Certainly it would be encouraged. I think ultimately that’s in the interest across the board to do so.