Migrant shelters across the United States are closing at an accelerated rate as the border crisis subsides, signaling a shift in the nation’s immigration landscape. In Arizona, the Pima County shelters have closed, alongside closures in San Diego and Texas, where the Migrant Resource Center shut down in February due to a significant decline in illegal crossings. On the East Coast, New York City has closed over 60 shelters this year, while Massachusetts has reduced its facilities from over 120 in 2024 to just four. These closures have been attributed to a combination of policy changes and a decrease in migration, with the White House citing President Trump’s border strategy as a key factor in the reduced inflow of migrants.
Customs and Border Protection (CBP) has also scaled back its operations, closing all ‘soft-sided’ processing sites in Texas, California, and Arizona. CBP spokespersons confirmed the agency no longer requires temporary facilities due to the expedited removal of migrants, attributing the decline in apprehensions to the administration’s border policies. However, this policy shift has sparked debate, with critics arguing that the current approach may lead to a more aggressive deportation strategy. House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries warned that “a deportation machine will be unleashed on steroids,” emphasizing concerns over the implications of such a policy for migrants and the broader population.
The White House’s reconciliation bill, which has received significant attention, includes provisions for $170 billion in funding for immigration enforcement. The bill also aims to increase deportation efforts, hire more agents, and expand detention capacities. The administration asserts that these measures will solidify border security and initiate one of the largest deportation campaigns in U.S. history. While the White House celebrates the results of its policies, critics remain skeptical of the long-term impact of such a significant shift in border enforcement strategies.