Speaker 1: Today's episode of the Trip Cast is brought to you
by Ambassador Tony Garza and the Texas Tribune Speakers Bureau.
Welcome to this week's episode of the Trip Cast. I
am James Vadragan. With me, as always is intrepid Women's
health reporter Eleanor klebanoff Ari.
Speaker 2: I'm good.
Speaker 3: How are you you like that intro?
Speaker 2: Huh, I'm very intrepid, everyone says it.
Speaker 1: And our guest this week is Alejandra Serrano, who has
been writing a fair amount about our subject of the week, immigration.
Speaker 3: Alejandra, how are you good? Here are you go? Thank
you for having me? Great, We're very excited. Before we
get started, let's check in. How are we doing, folks?
Speaker 1: Have we recovered from the super Bowl and from the
Kansas City Chiefs playing an absolute egg in the Super
Bowl preventing our guy Travis Kelce from proposing to Taylor
Swift in the most man move that could possibly be
done in front.
Speaker 3: Of thousands of people just trying to watch sports.
Speaker 4: Okay, as we've established not a sports podcast, we don't
know that much about sports, but I will say we're
going to lean into this.
Speaker 2: You come to us for the.
Speaker 4: Sports and while we have you here, we will back
into some Texas politics.
Speaker 2: I will say.
Speaker 4: Personally, a little known fact about me is that I
lived in Philadelphia until I was eleven years old. So
I am a.
Speaker 2: A halfway Eagles fan.
Speaker 4: I tend to root for the Eagles when when given
the chance, and then I moved to Atlanta.
Speaker 2: So I am also a halfway Falcons fan who, when
given the chance to choose which of those teams to
root for in a Super Bowl, the Eagles are shown
or doing a better showing than the.
Speaker 3: Falcons, they were going to say, I'm rooting for the Birds.
Speaker 2: I'm rooting for the Birds.
Speaker 4: Yeah. So I had a great time watching the Super Bowl.
I thought it was I like to see one team
really kick the hell out of the other.
Speaker 2: It's more fun that way.
Speaker 3: One hundred Do you have thoughts on the Super Bowl?
I thought it was boring.
Speaker 4: Wow yeah wow.
Speaker 3: After the third quarter I was checked out me too.
Speaker 1: I was just reading reviews of the Kendrick Lamar halftime show,
which people went crazy for.
Speaker 4: Like, I'm both yeah, very divisive, I do think to
doesn't extent is everything just very divisive?
Speaker 5: Now, maybe those pants weren't I kind of like the
people generally, like I.
Speaker 4: Thought, in general, I like, yeah, you left in the
third quarter.
Speaker 2: So did President Trump. He left a little correct.
Speaker 1: And actually funny that you bring that up, because not
to inject politics into this podcast.
Speaker 2: The only thing we know how to do.
Speaker 3: But President Trump.
Speaker 1: Was there and I read in the AP that this
is the first time that a sitting president was in
attendance at the Super Bowl.
Speaker 3: I just thought that was interesting because we've had big
sports fans. Uh.
Speaker 1: You know, President Bush used to own a baseball team,
and right, that does surprise. President Obama was a big
basketball guy. He used to fill out the March Madness
bracket all the time.
Speaker 2: You think it's like a security thing.
Speaker 3: Yeah, I think that.
Speaker 4: Yeah, I'd say that, Yeah, I'd say it might be.
That makes sense, I really I would think there's like
nothing more American than going to watch the Super Bowl
as the president. Like the president should be like you
have to go watch the last game of the World Series,
Like you have to be the person who like the Knights,
you know, like in in the UK when they have
like the f A Cup, like Prince William goes and
hands them the trophy.
Speaker 2: You're I know a lot about the Royals.
Speaker 4: I don't know that much about football, but I do
know a lot about the Royals.
Speaker 3: Sports expert, kind of a sports expert.
Speaker 4: But I think we should make the president do that.
Like you give the World Series trophy unless it's one
of the Canadian teams. You give the NFL, you know,
the trophy, the Stanley Cup. How many trophies can I
name you? I think you cheated and limits, Yeah, the
Stanley Cup, the World Series, the Super Bowl?
Speaker 2: What their sports are there?
Speaker 3: The MLS Cup, the Los Angeles Galaxy six time.
Speaker 2: Champion, and the basketball what do they call that?
Speaker 3: Uh? I don't know. The NBA trophy, NBA trophy?
Speaker 2: Oh my god, guys, sorry we extended.
Speaker 3: Yes, sorry, Alejandro, thank you for joining us on this.
Speaker 2: The things we do know about.
Speaker 1: Okay, let's get to the real topic at hand. It's
a big one this week, and it's immigration. President Trump
promised to do mass deportations starting on day one. He
promised to continue building the wall. He promised to give
the death penalty to any migrant who killed an American citizen.
All these big, big promises, big big, sometimes controversial items,
and he's hit the ground running. I mean, it's only
been a couple of weeks that he's been in office,
and it seems like from watching your team, trying to
follow this news, it's very hard.
Speaker 3: It's like drinking from fire hydrant.
Speaker 1: So, Alejandro, so far, what are you seeing from the
Trump administration's immigration plan? It certainly looks like it's been
a blitz. To continue our football references, but do we
see any coherent plan here or is it just as
a Texas football fan would say, all gas, no breaks.
Speaker 5: Yeah, I think it's it's definitely been a blitz. I
mean Trump has done a lot. You know, he ended
use of an app asylum seeking migrants would use to
schedule an appointment at CBP one right, Yeah, with immigration officials.
He's removed temporary protections some people had. He's also delegated
more authority to state officials in some cases. But I
think the overall plan is not yet clear, and it
kind of seems like still a lot's unfolding. But it
certainly has been a flurry of things that have already
impacted people.
Speaker 4: It's interesting, like the really tangible things like so quickly,
like the app went down, right, like, you.
Speaker 2: Know, so that was pretty soon after inauguration.
Speaker 4: So there's like these tangible things as well as these
like large policy changes that take a while to see
the impact.
Speaker 5: Of right and has anticipated. I mean, some of the
stuff's being litigated. Like one of the hallmark promises was
ending birthright citizenship, and a lot of people were like, well,
you can't just get rid of the fourteenth Amendment. And
now it's become a legal battle in which a judge
has so far said, you know you can't.
Speaker 1: H And on the CBP one front, I mean on
the app, you and your colleague Uria Artia wrote a
story about some of the migrants who are waiting around
right and just trying to get their asylum claims to go,
and they were waiting and their meetings were suddenly canceled. Right,
So it's an immediate impact of the new administration coming
in and having an immigration crackdown.
Speaker 4: Yeah, can I ask you to put you to the
test really quickly and briefly catch us up on birthright citizenship,
Like what it is, why it's controversial.
Speaker 5: Yeah, it's the Well, the fourteenth Amendment pretty much grants this,
as I understand it.
Speaker 3: I haven't been covering this a.
Speaker 4: Lot version and I'm sure we'll get emails.
Speaker 5: If you know, the long and short of it is,
if you have a child in this country, they are
an American citizen and has been this way for a
long time, and Trump wanted to end this, but it
is encoded by the Constitution fourteenth Amendment, so a president
doesn't have the authority to just override the Constitution need
a congressional amendment, which is kind of now, I guess
where the battle is turning, and it's unclear what's next.
Speaker 1: And it's one of the obviously one of the amendments
that got passed after the Civil War, and it enfranchises people.
It gives them personhood, it gives them citizenship because previously,
of course, enslaved people did not have any of those rights.
So this goes far back, a long way, more than
a century. So we're talking to about radical changes to
the constitution, Alejandro. Numerous state officials, including Governor Abbott, Lieutenant
Governor Patrick Lan, Commissioner Don Buckingham, they've said that they
are hoping to offer the federal government help, and we've
seen the National Guard be deployed as well state troopers.
We've seen land Commissioner Buckingham offered to provide the federal
government some land for detention and mass deportations, the state
working with the feds, Like, what's that partnership? Looking like
they've obviously been they've cooperated together in the past, right,
but how is this different?
Speaker 5: Yeah, I mean, I think one way to clearly look
at it is the last four years a lot of
state officials felt like they were in opposition with the
federal government and Texas had conflicts with the feral government
when it came to immigration enforcement. And now it's the
opposite and they have a willing partner. So Texas kind
of going out of its way and being like, hey,
we want to help. So what does that look like
on the ground. While the governors directed state agencies to
cooperate with federal officials, he signed an agreement with the
Trump administration to give National Guard troops immigration arrest authority.
And those are kind of some of the bigger things,
and you have tinier things like that are not clear yet.
For instance, you brought up the Land Commissioner offering land.
We don't know yet that elase has been signed, but
we know the administration said it wants the land. So
it presents all these other questions of what does that
partnership look like. But the biggest thing here is like
now it's like two allies working toward the same goal instead.
Speaker 3: Of in opposition of each other.
Speaker 5: If that makes sense.
Speaker 1: Yeah, And will that you know, one of the things
that we were talking about in some of our budget
talks is will that lead to savings on the immigration front,
because theoretically with the federal partner, now maybe the state
can pull back. But what are you learning about whether
the state can take some of those billions of dollars
that it's invested and leave it to the federal government
and maybe turn that those billions of dollars towards something
else in the budget.
Speaker 5: Yeah, well, I mean that's a great question and point,
and it's kind of unclear right now. And if anything,
kind of the what the signals we're getting out of
all these components right what state officials are doing. The legislature,
which is just starting in earnest its budget negotiations, is
that Texas is going to double down on border security
and kind of further cement this role it has in
border security. The legislature is considering six point five billion
dollars of funding toward security, and when you think about
eleven billion that we spend the last four years as
a state. You know, six point five is kind of
a step more. It's it's not more than has been appropriated,
but it's also not less. So it's kind of saying something.
But also as a state, we have to remember that
we've done things that have also advanced this cementation.
Speaker 3: That's a word.
Speaker 5: And I think the kind of like the hallmark thing
recently is Senate Bill four, which would give state police
the authority to arrest people suspected of being undocumented. And
it's still being litigated, but you know, when we think
about Texas's role and immigration enforcement, all these things have
to be considered. And I'm sorry, I forgot what you asked.
Speaker 2: There's no evidence.
Speaker 4: I think there's like a version of events or maybe
even like a thing some people like you might think,
like okay, like now Texas has this partner in the
White House, like they can be like you know, for
years they've been saying, like to the Biden administration, like
do more. Now we can presume President Trump is going
to do more, and like you think, Texas one version
of events is Texas says like great, we can sit
back on our Laurels, we can let you do. You know,
we're going to work on this other issue. And I
think that is a foolish to think that that's how
that was going to go. Right, Texas is going to go.
Now we have a partner, let's go like turbo charged.
And I think to a certain extent, that's.
Speaker 3: What we're seeing right.
Speaker 5: Otherwise, Yeah, I don't know that it was foolish or not.
I mean, I guess it's not for me to say.
But what we do know is, you know, immediately after
the election, the governor and lieutenant governor separately floated this
idea that the state might scale back. The lieutenant governor
even mentioned like specific things that other that border security
money could be allocated for instead. So there was like
this kind of this like kind of like trial balloon
floated that was like, oh, but we also must consider
that in Texas, at least, like especially among Republican voters,
according to polling, there's like an endless appetite for border
security spending. So now we're seeing doubling down. So yeah,
for a minute, for a hot minute, it was like,
all right, we might cut back.
Speaker 4: Yeah.
Speaker 3: Now now it's like no.
Speaker 1: Well there's yeah, there's no doubt that politically it's good
to say I'm spending so much money, But just policy wise,
is it wise for the state to be spending that
much money when there is a federal government that is
theoretically doing these things already. And another thing to point
out is that the governor has been going to d
C having meetings with President Trump, having meetings with the
congressional delegation about getting these eleven billion dollars back. That's
something that's been floated in the past before and obviously
has not worked. But it seems like maybe there's an
appetite now to get clost some of that money back.
So that'll be interesting to see how it plays out,
because I can't imagine that the other states will be
too happy that Texas is getting eleven billion dollars or
some of that money.
Speaker 4: Right, it's a little bit of a I mean, it's
like a weird you're set up a little bit of
a weird system, right of like you know, if we
you know, in Texas's mind, right like we're doing your
job for you on sort of on layaway and just
give us the mone me back later.
Speaker 2: Is like you're setting.
Speaker 4: Yourself up for some potential issues, but obviously, you know,
being I'm sure the state would be thrilled to get
eleven billion dollars.
Speaker 3: Well, it depends the state.
Speaker 5: I think some states would probably support a reimbursement, such
as the governors who supported Operation Loans Start, right.
Speaker 2: They just might get in line for money too, That's.
Speaker 3: What I'm saying.
Speaker 1: Like Florida sent people North Dakota, South Dakota cent people,
so it's like they want they probably want reimbursements, right.
Speaker 4: I just would like to say, like if relevant, like
I would put myself in, I would like eleven billion
dollars if we're offering it.
Speaker 2: I don't know for what.
Speaker 4: I've never spent eleven billion dollars, but you know that'd
be my preference.
Speaker 3: Okay, Eleanor.
Speaker 1: We've talked about this before, but the FEDS are now
following the blueprint that Texas has laid out on immigration enforcement,
on the immigration crackdown, and I want you to talk
a bit about how Texas sort of did that in courts,
through the legal system, and because this is like something
that Texas has been doing for years now, for years now,
and you know, Governor Abbitt has talked about how the
FEDS are now taking basically his model and taking up
to the big leagues. So can you shed some light
on sort of what that looks like.
Speaker 4: Yeah, I know this is something all Hundre and I've
talked about a lot, so feel fit to chime in
as well. But I do think you know, Texas, on
not just immigration, but on a number of issues, has
sort of made this broader playbook, right of like do
something that you know they say it couldn't be done,
Texas does it. We fight it through the courts and
like increasingly commonly, like the court side with Texas, you
know in some cases because of their you know, novel
legal theories holding up in some cases because you know,
they are able to get this in front of judges
that you know, friendly judges to sort of see their
their argument. The Fifth Circuit obviously very conservative and a
lot of cases stall out there or you know, go
to the Supreme Court, which also obviously has a conservative majority.
Speaker 2: So Texas has.
Speaker 4: Done that on a number of things that you know,
then sort of become you know, legally more like more
sound than they were when Texas first passed the law,
first tried something immigration. We definitely have seen that you know, because.
Speaker 1: When when they first present things, it's it sounds like, oh,
that's crazy that.
Speaker 4: Right now you're like, I mean, I think there's a
lot of stuff, I mean on immigration, on abortion, on
other stuff where Texas is like pushing the envelope where
like even we as reporters are like, oh, like do
we even need to write about that? Like it's just
like you know, conservative grandstanding, and then it passes, and
then it goes to court and then sometimes it holds up.
Speaker 2: A lot of stuff does not end up holding up in.
Speaker 4: Court, we should say, But on immigration in particular, you
know SP four I think is an example of this,
Like that has you know, a you know sort of
using setting up a legal theory that had not really
been tested before that legal experts feel like if it
was upheld in court, it's not just about you know,
is Texas's law sound or not. It's about like who
has It's these like macro questions if who has the
authority to enforce immigration law, who has the authority to
govern the border, and sort.
Speaker 2: Of like what makes us a United States of America?
Like these big questions.
Speaker 4: So Texas has definitely laid out the playbook for like
let's try stuff and let the courts tell us no.
And we're certainly seeing that. I think the Trump administration,
we should say, the Trump adminstration is going to is
already doing a lot of stuff that Texas has laid
out and tried. Just because the federal government is doing
it does not automatically mean it's legal either, Right, Like,
the Trump administration will face legal pushback. Yeah, that will
go through the courts as.
Speaker 1: Well on things like executive orders on birthright citizenship, which
we've already seen being challenged.
Speaker 4: Right, So it's going to be a similar playbook in
that which is like nothing is you know, immediate, but
it still can slowly shift things.
Speaker 1: Yeah, And just to clarify that to s before the
most recent from twenty twenty three, not s before the
Sanctuary City's bill, which has also had some pretty novel
ideas on.
Speaker 3: How to enforce immigration all one hundred. I want to
go back to you.
Speaker 1: We discussed this proly previously on the show with our
DC reporter Matthew Troy. But there's a debate even among
congressional Texas Republicans about how to go forward with the
immigration enforcement that the president wants. Should it be more
targeted towards people who have committed violent crimes, or is
it just a sort of catch all anybody who crosses
an immigration enforcement person that they're they're going to get
picked up and deported. What are you seeing in the
first couple of weeks of this Trump administration on that question.
Speaker 5: Yeah, anecdotally, we're seeing that it's it's mostly everyone, like
any if you are undocumented in this country, it appears
this the administration's posture is you are fair game for deportation.
And this was kind of expected. Some people are surprised
because they've heard statements such as, you know, Trump and
some of his advisors say that they were going to
prioritize the most heinous criminals, people who've murdered, people who've raped,
people who have been released on bond and then committed
other crimes like they the administry, Trump and his advisors
focus often on these people. But what if I think
people either missed or didn't pay as much attention to,
is that the same people, including Trump and his advisors,
would criminalize everyone by saying, well, if you're in the
country illegally, you've broken a crime, so you are a
fair game.
Speaker 3: And which is what we're seeing now, and that is.
Speaker 5: I think it's fair to say that it is the
administration's posture, the wife.
Speaker 3: And the press secretary of exactly.
Speaker 5: Yeah. Yeah, So it's kind of we've seen like kind
of like a this criminalization but be like the acting
on it and being like, you know, well, if you're
a documented we're going to try to deport you. And
we've seen this anecdotally in Texas. My colleagues and I
have reported on that some but also bigger picture, we've
seen some reporting through leaks other publications that people who
have no criminal history are being deported.
Speaker 4: I was like our colleague Oriel wrote a story in
Premel Paso where he interviewed he was like at a
rally against some of this, and he interviewed someone who
was like, I voted for Trump and now I'm very
worried he might deport I believe it was like his
his father, a who's undocumented, and I think there was
this sense of like, you know, well, my father is
just you know, working, and he's not hasn't you know,
committed some heinous crime, Like I don't think, you know,
Trump would start by going after him. And as we're
seeing now like the way that plays out is is
really surprising.
Speaker 2: A lot of people.
Speaker 5: Yeah, I mean, I think it's important. I imagine we're
going to get into this, but it's also important to
remember the impact on humans, right Like we're talking like
this spreads fear, This raises a lot of concerns, questions.
Speaker 3: That's actually our next topic.
Speaker 1: But before that, we're going to take a quick break
to hear from our sponsors, Mexico more than just a neighbor.
For a timely cross border insight, turned to former US
Ambassador Antonio Garza. Learn more at Tony Garza dot com.
Deliver a Texas sized insight at your next event with
the Texas Tribune Speakers Bureau. Our reporters and editors are
ready to bring your event to life with context and
analysis only they can deliver. Book us at Texastribune dot org.
Slash Speakers, Alejandro, Let's talk a bit about the impact
on the endocumented community, which you rightfully brought up. Texas
has the second largest population of undocumented people in the
country behind California, largely because of our size. They power
a lot of the industries here, construction and farming, service industry,
food production. What can you say about the impact on
those communities from this immigration crackdown, because I know you've
reported on some of this.
Speaker 5: Yeah, it's huge, and it's wide. You know, we're talking
about a very diverse population. It's estimated to be one
point six million people who are undocumented in Texas, and
you know the state has thirty million people, and that's
an estimate, right based off people we can count. So yeah,
they are essential workers. They work restaurants, they pick produce,
but they're also small business owners, their parents, they're members
of communities up and down the state. So that's kind
of why the impact is diverse. But I mean what
we've been reporting on hearing is folks are concerned, lives
are already have been changed, even if people aren't being deported.
You know, some some folks are going straight to work
and back home, and you know, maybe like mom, if
she's in American goes grocery shopping, like you know, sometimes
parents aren't selling kids to school, sometimes they're not going
to doctor's appointments. So I think what we're seeing is
this change kind of unfold and it's still, like I
said at the beginning, the plan is still unclear, so
I don't know where it goes from here. But we
do know that people have fear, people have concerns, they're
worried about their loved ones, they're altering their lives and
so on.
Speaker 1: And you wrote this very interesting story about an undocumented
man in Lubbock who's pulled over for a traffic violation.
He ended up being referred to federal immigration authorities on
that traffic stop.
Speaker 3: Tell us more about that and what it says about the.
Speaker 1: Overall state of play for immigration enforcement, because I think
you mentioned you mentioned sort of mixed status families, and
this I think was a mic status family as well.
Speaker 3: If you can tell us a little bit more.
Speaker 5: Yeah, So the story was about a name Husse Albero's
that's his first name, and he's married to an American
citizen and they have three children who were all Americans,
and they went out to buy a baby formula last
month and there was some sort of issue with their
vehicle's tag. So a cop pulls them over and the wife,
her name is Ashley, explains, Hey, my husband's undocumented. He
doesn't have a license, but I don't know how to drive,
which is why he was driving. Hears the car's insurance
and his passport and according to Ashley, who was very
kind to speak with me, the officer was really kind,
goes back to his vehicle and calls ICE, so and
I shows up and takes Jose and begins removal proceedings.
So now, I mean that's the short version of the story.
You could read the whole report text tribute dot org.
But you know, now this family's life has been upended.
He's in removal proceedings, they have hearings, they have a
court date in August, and the government's going to try
to deport him. And this man has been in the
country for several years. And I think to your question
about what it says, you know, we interviewed experts about this,
and it kind of gets at the everyone's fair game idea,
which is like, if an administration sets directives for ICE agents,
you know, like prioritize these people or these people they
focus on that, it's like, all right, those are our efforts.
But here we have one officer at his discretion calling
ICE and ICE being like, we're going to do this,
and now they're deporting this person. So I think that's
what it tells us that there is kind of like
a sort of randomness to the enforcement that it could
be anyone.
Speaker 1: Right, and that has a deep impact on people in
the undocumented community because, like you said, they were just
going about doing a daily chore, a daily necessity kind
of and they were getting baby formulas in. Yeah, so
that sort of definitely complicates their lives, which is, to
be fair, exactly what the administration wants to do and
what immigration hardliners want to be happening, Like they want
their lives to be complicated so that they either don't
come or are eventually caught by federal immigration.
Speaker 4: And we should say, like the Trump administration has rolled
back some there were some protections or sort of guidelines
on where ICE agents would wouldn't go, right, Like they
wouldn't go into health care facilities, they wouldn't go into churches, right, schools, schools, Yes, schools,
that's the other one, Yes, schools, churches, health care facilities.
And that has now been rolled back. And so I
think there's sort of a sense of like, you know,
anyone anywhere is at potential at risk, which right as
seen as a deterrent, but for the people that are
already here, like it's also like those people who have
to go to work or those you know.
Speaker 1: Right, and this person was I think in some immigration
proceedings did you mention that other?
Speaker 5: Yeah, they were trying to get a green card, so
as you know, which is a long, arduous, expensive process.
They had a lawyer, so you know the way that
their lawyer looks at it, and she also spoke to
me for the story is in a lot of ways,
like according to the sis them, however you read it
is like he kind of went about it the right
way after being here, which is he met someone, they
fell in love, they had kids, they got married, and
they were going through the proceedings and now they are
presented with a sort of existential question of well, you know,
should he be deported? What are we going to do
as a family.
Speaker 1: Yeah, And I think that's the sort of thinking that
a lot of people in the immigrant community are thinking,
like how many risks can I take? Because, like I said,
they were just doing a daily necessity. Which will be
interesting and potentially complicating that even more is what our
state officials want to do. At the state level, We've
seen Lieutenant Governor Dan Patrick push a priority bill that
would require cities and counties to cooperate with federal immigration
enforcement Elmaric, Can you just chime in here a little
bit about what that kind of legislation, which inevitably is
going to be controversial at the legislature, Democrats will strongly
push back against that, what that kind of bill would
do to a session that so far everybody seems like
they're behavior and they're.
Speaker 2: All friendly, they're all good.
Speaker 4: Yeah, yeah, I mean, I think any bill that is controversial,
and we should say, like a bill like that is
controversial in two fronts, right, immigration, but also this question
of like local control and preemption and how much can
the state tell these big cities what to do and
how to run their their their governments basically is just
potentially something that can like grind the whole thing to
a halt. And I think, you know, anytime you I think,
as we talked about last week, right, Dan Patrick forty priorities,
certainly feels like he has the enough control over the
Senate to like push through what he wants. But anytime
you're throwing something controversial in the mix, you are potentially
it takes time. It takes like floor fights, it takes
horse trading, its negotiations to the conference committees, like you're
just dragging it out in a session where I mean,
obviously Governor Abbott has says he supports this measure. But
Governor Abbott Republican leadership the House certainly seems to have
blinders on and saying like, we have one thing to
do this session, like pass vouchers, stay focused, use our
capital on that, and now we maybe are going to
throw this in the mix, right, And.
Speaker 1: I mean, the thing about Governor Abbott's uh, I guess
position on this is that he did throw out support
for this, but it's not an emergency item, it's not
a priority item. So I think that sort of tells
you something. I think he probably thinks he can get done.
But like you said, the blind Now, sure are the
goals he laid out seven of them that are mostly
in line with what Speaker Borroughs has said he wants
to get done. And so if you got to focus
on these seven, do you really want to be taking
up a big fight over here over something that's definitely
gonna split Democrats and Republicans and potentially even some Republicans.
Speaker 4: Right, It's like a yeah, it's like just like do
not pass go do not collect two hundred dollars pass vouchers,
and like shot of about the rest of it seems
to be some vibes that were getting even while govern
abs throwing his support behind some other measures.
Speaker 1: Aljandro, just taking it back one step, can you sort
of just give us a just context about like how
the numbers are in terms of migrant crossings compared to
when President Biden was in office or the first Trump administration,
Like how necessary are some of these enforcement measures that
we're seeing.
Speaker 5: Well, I think those are two questions. The border's quiet.
I think a quiet border got even quieter since Trump
took office, and it started getting quiet kind of last
year really from record number of illegal crossings in December
twenty twenty three, Biden implemented a couple orders that really
kind of helped reduce that. According to his advisors when
they were in office, they took credit, but also a
big part of his Mexico's enforcement in some countries in
Central America. But essentially what we're seeing is low numbers,
Fewer people than in recent years are trying to cross
the border. Now, the second question you ask, is this necessary? Well,
I mean, I think that's an opinion and the current president,
President Trump, it is of the opinion that it is
he's declared an invasion, he still thinks like the hundreds
of crossings that we're seeing now is enough to merit
his actions. Will that be challenged, that ever means to
be seen.
Speaker 1: Yeah, And important to note Mexico's participation in this, because
they certainly had a lot of tough enforcement on their
southern border and now they've got enforcement on their northern border.
Mexican President Claudia Schinbaum has sent I think ten thousand
National Guard troops of her own national Guard up there
in this sort of trade over stopping terroiffts, so they're
playing a role as well. But it seems like a
lot of it is also just politics of like he
made these campaign promises and he wants to deliver on them.
Speaker 3: Yeah.
Speaker 4: Yeah, I think the other thing we should I mean
is like all of this is happening so fast in
the beginning of the administration sort of as promised. I
think that's what we expected, and there will it takes
some time for like the impact to be seen, obviously
in terms of border crossings, in terms of deportations, but
also in terms of like you know, there was a
lot of outrage during the last Trump administration about you know,
family separation and sort of the way these policies were
being implemented. It took a little while for like them
to be fully implemented and people to become aware of
them and there to be sort of more pushback against them.
And so I think, you know, we've seen protests already
at the capital about immigration. I think we've seen protests
and cities across the state, across the country about President
Trump' immigration policies. But I also think that I think
we can expect pretty significant political pushback on this, depending
on like how this all plays out.
Speaker 3: Yeah, maybe if people start realizing.
Speaker 1: I don't know, like the situation that you wrote about
where it's a mixed at this family, there's a person
who's an American citizen but their partner is not. You know,
people have family members and have good friends that are
undocumented and they I mean, if they're friends, they may
not know it. If they are family, they definitely know it.
And if something happens to those people, there is potential
for that backlash. So it'll be interesting to see how
that plays out.
Speaker 4: Yeah, And like if you you know the price of
food or eggs goes up because we don't have people work.
You know, It's like, right, some of that takes a
while to develop. But I do think you know, President
Trump's like very focused energy on this issue means like
a lot is changing really fast, and how the impact
of all of those changes sort of may take a
little bit longer to see.
Speaker 5: Yeah, that's also I think that's also like a big
question that means to be seen that my colleagues and
I haven't covered as much, but I've read other coverage.
It's like, well, what does that resistance look like? Because
definitely in Texas, so we haven't seen any mayors or
county judges you know, really pick a fight, be like
we're not in this. And part part of that might
be fear. I mean Trump ordered feral prosecutors to investigate
such local officials who get in the way. So I
think that that's also a big question as we look ahead.
Speaker 3: Okay, cool, I think that's a good place to stop.
Speaker 2: But one can I say one more thing before we go.
Speaker 3: Sure, we would.
Speaker 4: Be remiss if we did not wish a happy birthday
to our Texas Tribune trip cast co host James dash Bargun.
Speaker 3: And you want to sing?
Speaker 2: You told that's what we wanted to sing. Actually, yes, yes, no,
Happy birthday.
Speaker 3: Okay, thank you James.
Speaker 1: We're gonna end the conversation here, but one of reminder
of listeners. If you have bringing questions for us that
you want us to discuss about the latest in Texas politics,
please send them to trip cast at Texastribune dot org
and we will try to get them on a segment
of the show. Again, that's trip Cast at Texastribune dot org.
We hope to hear from you. That's all the time
we have for this week's episode of the trip Cast.
Don't forget to like and subscribe to our feed and
to leave feed back on the podcast app of your
choice to help other listeners find us, and please recommend
the show to a friend. Thank you to our sponsors,
former US Ambassador to Mexico Antonio Garza, and the Texas
Tribune Speakers Bureau. Our producers are Rob Avila and Chris Phoboda.
Our theme music is composed by Rob. Join us again
next week