Crackdown on Immigrants in Country Illegally Tears US Society Further Apart

Over the past decade, democratic beliefs around the world, especially in established democratic countries, have gradually lost ground in public discourse. The serious threat posed by populists has challenged human rights that were once taken for granted. Values once considered universally applicable are now frequently called into question, and in this climate, the threat posed by outsiders has become the issue of choice for populist politicians to exploit, blaming immigrant populations for unemployment, prices and even matters of public safety. Attacks on immigrants have become inseparable from right-wing populism.

Trump won the 2016 and 2024 presidential elections by successfully targeting the enemies of Americans (at home and abroad) and portraying them as the main threat; in turn naturally laying the foundation for his post-election policies of tariff wars and the deportation of immigrants. More importantly, he needed to deliver on his campaign promises to the voters who supported him.

In May, the Immigration and Customs Enforcement agency under the Trump regime started arresting immigrants living in the U.S. illegally across the country. However, these operations first encountered resistance in Los Angeles, widely seen as the most diverse city in the United States. Clashes with the public there prompted the president to send in the National Guard, and one can view this conflict between the regime and the public as an inevitable result of the increasing divisiveness within U.S. politics in recent years.

Before this, Trump had sought to dissolve the U.S. Department of Education, arguing that education fell within the authority of the individual states and should be returned to state governments. But in the crackdown on the protests in response to ICE operations, the federal government chose to take an adversarial approach with state governments, Trump going so far as threatening to arrest Democratic Gov. Gavin Newsom, and thus escalating the conflict between the public and the Trump regime to a showdown between the states and the federal government.

It is also worth noting that the conflict in California may have been something the Trump regime wanted to happen: California is a major Democratic stronghold, and although Trump won the 2024 presidential election with 49.8% of the votes nationwide, his opponent, Kamala Harris, won decisively in California with a 58% majority. Los Angeles in particular — the epicenter of protests against the arrests of immigrants living in the U.S. illegally — is a city in which nearly 70% of the population is non-white (mainly Spanish-speaking Latinos), and the Democratic Party has secured the support of 70% of voters there.

In a city with a non-white majority and overwhelming support for the Democratic Party, unrest due to dissatisfaction with the Trump administration’s policy on arresting immigrants without legal status has provided the regime with a golden opportunity to consolidate its base. By demonizing those who resist and branding them as troublemakers who bring further problems to the country, the regime seeks to discredit the opposition; at the same time, it claims that only through unwavering support for Trump and the Republican Party can these immigrants in the U.S. illegally — depicted as the source of many of the nation’s ills — be deported and America’s territory be returned to Americans.

Not only that, but many centrist voters who support the arrest of these immigrants may also be more inclined to back Trump and the Trump-influenced Republican Party in the future, ultimately further eroding support for the Democrats. This could increase the GOP’s chances of continued control over both houses of Congress and multiple state governorships in the November 2026 midterm elections.

In the wake of the protests, a nationwide poll by Reuters found that 48% of respondents supported the president’s deployment of the military to maintain order, while 41% were opposed, highlighting a divided public, but one with more support for tough presidential action than opposition to it.

On the face of it, although the continuation of this conflict is not good for any of the parties involved, in the long run, Trump — who rose to power on a populist platform — stands to gain the most. As president of the United States, Trump has sacrificed national unity on the altar of political expediency, and the political divides within society will continue to widen, while the rifts between people will become ever more difficult, if not impossible, to heal.