Plans by state and local officials to stand in the way of President-elect Donald Trump’s mass deportation program were dealt a blow by an appeals court, as businesses remain skeptical immigration officials are coming for their workers.
A three-judge panel at the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that the federal government does have the authority to deport illegal immigrants, even if local officials oppose it, as Democratic-run sanctuary cities and states have promised to do come January.
The 27-page opinion focused on an issue in Washington State. King County had prohibited Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) from using an airfield for removal flights in 2019 when Trump was last in office.
The court’s ruling against the county could set a precedent allowing the federal government to move past local objections, something Trump’s border czar, Tom Homan, had pledged to do anyway.
While the incoming administration has promised large-scale deportations, experts have been wary of the federal government’s ability to deport any more people than it already does—just over 1 million each year since 2021.
A new report from Goldman Sachs showed that Wall Street is also in that camp, with less than 10 percent of investors believing net migration will slip into the negative during Trump’s next term.
What does the ruling mean for mass deportations?
The opinion from Judges Daniel Bress, Michael Hawkins and Richard Clinton focused on the King County International Airport, known as Boeing Field, which ICE had used for some time.
In 2019, at the height of Trump’s strict immigration policies, which county officials disagreed with, an executive order was issued banning future operators from servicing ICE removal flights. The main argument was that these operations could lead to human rights violations.
The U.S. government sued King County, arguing that local officials were going against a World War II-era contract to use the airfield and were violating rules that should keep federal and local business separate.
The Trump administration also said that the executive order didn’t stop removal flights; they just had to be moved elsewhere, increasing costs and making the process inefficient.
In ruling in favor of the federal government, the panel reinforced its supremacy over local officials when it comes to immigration enforcement, potentially leading to fewer local challenges down the road.
Democrat governors and mayors have vowed to stand in the way of mass deportations once Trump returns to office, including California’s Gavin Newsom and Massachusetts’ Maura Healey. Homan has vowed to prosecute them if they try.
Republican leaders, meanwhile, have promised to help where they can. Utah Governor Spencer Cox, Florida’s Ron DeSantis, and Texas’ Greg Abbott have all shown their support, with the latter offering up land as an ICE detention site.
Wall Street skeptical of mass deportation
While lawmakers square off over the plan to deport at least 11 million undocumented migrants, a survey by Goldman Sachs appeared to show little worry from U.S. business leaders.
The bank’s outlook for the U.S. economy in 2025 predicted that Trump’s tariff and immigration proposals could drag on GDP, but it added that it did not expect net migration to slip into the negative—something that could adversely affect the economy.
The investor survey showed that most felt more people would enter the country than leave it despite tougher immigration policies.
Net migration was around 3 million in 2023 but fell to around 1.75 million recently. Goldman Sachs predicted it would end up at around 750,000 in 2025, with only 6 percent of those surveyed believing it could slip into the negative.
“Our forecast is only moderately below the pre-pandemic trend because there are legal and logistical limits to executive action,” the report said.
“These policy changes are significant, but we do not expect them to substantially alter the trajectory of the economy or monetary policy because their effects are likely to be moderate and, in some cases, offsetting.”
While deportations could more heavily impact industries such as construction or food production, the survey said that impacts on wages and prices “should be modest.”
If there is a large-scale removal of illegal immigrant workers, a continuing fall in the unemployment rate generally could offset some of that loss, the report said.
Read the full article here
