To the Victors, Go the Spoils: Part II
Welcome to our new subscribers, especially those (presumably) joining us via Bluesky! I’m thrilled to have you aboard. A big thank you as well to our longtime readers—you won’t catch me treating you like the cable company—handing out love only to the newbies.
This week we’re continuing our ongoing conversation about likely policies from the incoming administration. Last week we looked at the threatened tariffs and tax giveaways to the wealthy.
Right on cue Tuesday, the first round of tariffs was announced. A few key points: The US’s top trading partners are Canada, Mexico, and China, in that order. The president-elect has threatened to impose 25% tariffs on imports from both north and south of the U.S. border, as well as an additional 10% tariff on goods from China. The Chinese tariffs are lower than many expected but are in addition to existing import taxes imposed by the two previous administrations.
In response to the tariffs, PM Trudeau paid a Black Friday visit to Mar-a-lago. Mexican President Claudia Sheinbaum threatened retaliation—a predictable move given the nature of these tariffs. In her statement, she condemned the tariffs as a threat to jobs on both sides of the border.
As a reminder, the purported purpose of the tariffs is to encourage Canadian and Mexican authorities to crackdown on migrants and fentanyl coming across the border. Sheinbaum largely dismissed these points and retorted that the U.S. is the world’s largest illicit drug market and the primary source of illegal guns pouring into Mexico and fueling narco violence.
A trade war, with waves of retaliatory and escalating tariffs, would lead to rising prices and lost jobs in the US. This would disproportionately impact low income families—a seemingly repeating theme of the imminent policy agenda.
Immigration Enforcement is Coming: The traditional mantra from the political right in the US was that “we want to encourage legal immigration but eliminate illegal immigration.” That tune has changed to be more restrictionist and nativist in both categories.
Under a second Trump administration, proposed immigration policies include eliminating the DACA program, which protects over half a million individuals brought here as children from deportation, and expanding enforcement actions such as mass detentions, workplace raids, and potentially using the military to carry out these measures.
There is also a proposal to end birthright citizenship for some children of immigrants, in contravention of the 14th Amendment. Additionally, there have also been discussions about severely reducing the number of green cards issued in certain categories, greatly reducing America’s participation in the global asylum system, and reinstituting the previous travel ban from certain Muslim majority nations.
In anticipation of impending immigration executive orders, international students from UMass and scores of other universities received emails warning them to be back in the country by January 20, prior to the inauguration.
Anecdotally, I’ve noted elsewhere that I am seeing increasing numbers of my students here in the Gulf apply to schools in Canada and the Netherlands, rather than state schools and liberal arts colleges in the US. This is important and has long term implications. Many CEOs and founders of US companies began their journeys as international students. Satya Nadella, Microsoft’s CEO, moved from India to the U.S. to study computer science at the University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee. Likewise, Hamdi Ulukaya, founder of Chobani (damn, I love that yogurt), came to the U.S. from Turkey as a student. Another example is Sundar Pichai, the CEO of Google, who came from India to pursue a master’s degree at Stanford University after completing his studies in India.
Meanwhile, there seem to be a lot of people who are surprised that the incoming administration is planning to do exactly what they’ve been talking about for the last four years.
In the US, agriculture and meat packing plants tend to employ high numbers of undocumented and migrant workers. Immigration enforcement targeting them would again raise prices for working people and I don’t reckon many people with better options are lining up to pick berries in the Central California sun or to earn less than $20 an hour in an Ohio meat packing plant.
The headlines largely tell the story:
“Farms, Meat Plants Brace for Trump Immigration Crackdown,” WSJ
“Central Valley growers and farmworkers fear mass deportations if Trump wins election,” Fresno Bee
“As Trump threatens mass deportations, some rural areas that back him rely heavily on immigrant labor,” The Star Tribune
“US farm groups want Trump to spare their workers from deportation,” Reuters
The incoming administration has also threatened to punish local governments that don’t play ball with the immigration crackdowns in violation of prior precedents around commandeering. Commandeering is a legal principle grounded in the Tenth Amendment that stops the federal government from forcing states to carry out federal laws or policies. It protects states' independence by ensuring they aren’t required to use their resources or staff to enforce federal rules. The incoming administration has already threatened to withhold federal funds from states, counties, and municipalities that don’t play ball with enforcing immigration orders.
An estimated 11 million undocumented individuals live in the US, including a half million in the aforementioned DACA program, with another half million under Temporary Protected Status (TPS), which the incoming admin says it intends to revoke, making them eligible for deportation. The typical undocumented person has been in the US for over a decade. It’s crucial to note that the promised "mass deportations" of a population as large as Georgia's cannot be achieved without severe consequences, including state violence, the denial of due process, and the gut-wrenching separation of parents from children. This is what was promised and what the country voted for.
These last two newsletters haven’t been especially enjoyable to write. My intent here is not to depress you. This is the time to be thinking about how we are going to protect our communities and our loved ones. This is a time to think about what our red lines are and how we’ll respond when they’re crossed.
See you next Sunday where we’ll conclude this series with a preview of incoming federal K-12 education policy.
As always, if you have any thoughts or feedback about the newsletter, I welcome it, and I really appreciate it when folks share the newsletter with their friends.