ACLU Comment on White House Request for $33 Billion for Border Militarization
WASHINGTON — Reports indicate that the Trump administration is requesting nearly $18 billion to construct border barriers and $15 billion for additional border security, including 5,000 Border Patrol agents.
Astrid Dominguez, director of the American Civil Liberties Union’s Regional Center for Border Rights, issued the following statement:
“The Trump administration’s astoundingly wasteful border militarization plan to balloon Border Patrol agent numbers and erect a divisive and destructive wall is deeply offensive to border communities. It fails to address border residents’ true needs including oversight and accountability for abusive Customs and Border Protection personnel.
“Increasing the number of agents would have little to no impact on security and would be fiscally irresponsible and unwarranted. Agents are far less busy than before and there’s currently over 2,000 open positions.
“The Department of Homeland Security itself says the border has never been harder to cross undetected. Taking private property and destroying ecosystems to build a wall would be an egotistical monument to the Trump administration’s intolerance and irrationality. Our communities face real health, poverty, education, and disaster relief challenges. We expect lawmakers to focus on real issues like passing the Dream Act and denouncing as a non-starter the folly of squandering $33 billion on measures that would further oppress border communities.”
Stay informed
Sign up to be the first to hear about how to take action.
By completing this form, I agree to receive occasional emails per the terms of the ACLU's privacy statement.
By completing this form, I agree to receive occasional emails per the terms of the ACLU's privacy statement.
Learn More About the Issues in This Press Release
Related Content
- MassachusettsApr 2025
Free Speech
Immigrants' Rights
Özturk v. TrumpÖzturk v. Trump
Whether someone with a valid visa within the U.S. can be arrested and detained on the basis of their political speech and advocacy.Status: Ongoing - Press ReleaseApr 2025
Free Speech
Immigrants' Rights
Court Rules Rümeysa Öztürk’s Lawsuit Should Move Forward in VermontCourt Rules Rümeysa Öztürk’s Lawsuit Should Move Forward in Vermont
BOSTON – The U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts today ruled that the challenge to ICE’s unlawful detention of Rümeysa Öztürk, a PhD student at Tufts University, should continue in Vermont. Ms. Öztürk was grabbed, arrested, and detained in Somerville, Massachusetts by plainclothes federal agents in apparent retaliation for an op-ed she co-authored in a student newspaper over a year ago. For nearly 24 hours, Ms. Öztürk’s attorney was unable to locate her. More than 16 hours after a federal court ordered that Ms. Öztürk not be moved out of Massachusetts in order to “preserve the status quo,” her counsel was kept in the dark about Ms. Öztürk’s whereabouts as ICE quickly and quietly moved her to three separate locations in three different states on her way to Louisiana. Yesterday, Ms. Öztürk’s legal team argued that if the court allowed this case to play out in Louisiana, this would reward the Trump administration’s deliberate and secretive hopscotch attempt to unlawfully game the system. Legal counsel successfully argued that if the case did not stay in Massachusetts, a transfer to the District of Vermont would be appropriate. Over 20 friends, colleagues, and professors, including the president of Tufts University, have sent letters of support to the court detailing Ms. Öztürk’s dedication to her work and her community and asking for her release. Ms. Öztürk is represented by Mahsa Khanbabai, the American Civil Liberties Union, ACLU of Massachusetts, CLEAR, and Emery Celli Brinckerhoff Abady Ward & Maazel LLP. The following are quotes from Ms. Öztürk’s legal team: Mahsa Khanbabai of Khanbabai Immigration Law: “Today’s ruling brings us one step closer to restoring Rümeysa Öztürk’s rights, and sends a clear message that the government cannot manipulate jurisdiction in order to target human rights defenders, in violation of their First Amendment rights. Let’s be clear: Rümeysa should never have been arrested or detained by ICE in the first place. What matters most right now is our continued fight to ensure her immediate release and safe return home.” Jessie Rossman, legal director at ACLU of Massachusetts: “The Court rightfully, and with appropriate urgency, rejected the Trump administration’s attempted manipulation to move Rümeysa Öztürk’s case to Louisiana. The speed of this ruling speaks volumes, and this decision is a crucial next step. Ms. Öztürk is currently detained for co-authoring an op-ed in a campus newspaper, and that is an emergency that a court must address as quickly as possible. We are ready to defend Ms. Öztürk’s rights in Vermont to bring her back to her loved ones and life in Somerville.” Sidra Mahfooz, staff attorney, ACLU’s Immigrants’ Rights Project: “With this ruling, the Court has rightfully reaffirmed that Rümeysa Öztürk's case belongs in Vermont — significantly closer to her community, her counsel, and her colleagues. While the trauma ICE has inflicted on her for writing an op-ed is irreparable, this is the first step towards bringing her home." Mudassar Toppa, staff attorney at CLEAR, a legal nonprofit and clinic at CUNY School of Law: “With today's order from the Court, Ms. Öztürk's battle for justice and redress for the government's flagrantly unconstitutional conduct will continue at a venue which is far more appropriate than the one the government sought. We will continue to tirelessly advocate for Ms. Öztürk to be expeditiously released from detention and for all her claims to be vindicated in Court.” Vasudha Talla, Of Counsel at Emery Celli Brinckerhoff Abady Ward & Maazel LLP: “The government doesn’t get to play keep-away with Ms. Öztürk's liberty and well-being. We look forward to defending her First Amendment rights in court.” The decision can be found here.Affiliate: Massachusetts - Press ReleaseApr 2025
Free Speech
+2 Issues
Court Hears Arguments on the Unconstitutional ICE Detention of Rümeysa ÖztürkCourt Hears Arguments on the Unconstitutional ICE Detention of Rümeysa Öztürk
BOSTON — Members of Rümeysa Öztürk’s legal team argued today before the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts in Boston that Ms. Öztürk’s challenge to her unlawful detention and attempted deportation by ICE should remain in Massachusetts, rather than Louisiana, where the Trump administration took Ms. Öztürk after she was arrested and where she is currently detained. “I am a Ph.D. student working with children and youth,” said Rümeysa Öztürk in a statement dictated to her attorney. “We know that injustice in the world and systemic brutality towards people of color has long-lasting negative effects on children, youth, and other communities. My life is committed to choosing peaceful and inclusive ways to meet the needs of children. I believe the world is a more beautiful and peaceful place when we listen to each other and allow different perspectives to be in the room. Writing is one of the most peaceful ways of addressing systemic inequality. Efforts to target me because of my op-ed in the Tufts Daily calling for the equal dignity and humanity of all people will not deter me from my commitment to advocate for the rights of youth and children.” Rümeysa Öztürk, a Ph.D. student at Tufts University, was grabbed, arrested, and detained in Somerville, Massachusetts by plainclothes ICE agents last week in apparent retaliation for a Tufts Daily op-ed she co-authored last year. Last Tuesday, a Massachusetts court ordered the government to not remove Ms. Öztürk from Massachusetts without prior notice. However, sometime after that order, ICE officials transferred Ms. Öztürk to Louisiana without notifying the court, her counsel, or Department of Justice counsel. “The government quietly and quickly hopscotched Ms. Öztürk across multiple states in a concerted effort to evade accountability. She never should have been grabbed from her street in Somerville and secretly moved over 1,300 miles away from her community,” said Carol Rose, executive director of the ACLU of Massachusetts. “We are asking the court to affirm that Ms. Öztürk’s case belongs in Massachusetts — near her friends, community, and legal counsel.” For nearly 24 hours, Ms. Öztürk’s friends, family, and counsel could not locate or contact her. When her attorney was finally able to speak with her, they learned that she had suffered an asthma attack while en route to Louisiana. “Snatching a student off the street in retaliation for an op-ed is a disturbing escalation of the administration’s callous disregard for our civil liberties,” said Noor Zafar, senior staff attorney at the ACLU. “Ms. Öztürk’s case should stay in Massachusetts, where she was cruelly ripped away from her community. We will not stop fighting until this injustice is righted, and until this kind of abusive tactic is unimaginable in America once again.” Ms. Öztürk is a former Fulbright scholar who came to the United States on a student visa and has not been charged with or accused of any crime. Over 20 friends, colleagues, and professors, including the president of Tufts University, have sent letters of support to the court detailing Ms. Öztürk’s dedication to her work and her community and asking for her release. “If the government is afraid of a Ph.D. student writing an op-ed denouncing genocide, then we should be seriously concerned about the integrity of our government,” said Mahsa Khanbabai of Khanbabai Immigration Law. “Rumeysa Ozturk did what we teach all people in America to do in the face of injustice — she spoke up. We will continue fighting until Rumeysa is back in Massachusetts where she belongs, and her rights and freedom are restored.” “From the moment a swarm of ICE agents abducted Ms. Öztürk in broad daylight, the government has spared no effort to evade accountability and deny her due process,” said Mudassar Toppa, a staff attorney at CLEAR, a legal nonprofit and clinic at CUNY School of Law. “We will likewise spare no effort to ensure the government's egregious unlawful conduct does not go unchecked, and that Ms. Öztürk and others like her can continue to express their sincerely held beliefs about Palestinian human rights without fear of retaliation.” “The federal government disappeared Rümeysa in front of horrified onlookers and spirited her away to a detention center in Louisiana, over a thousand miles away,” said Sonya Levitova, an associate at Emery Celli Brinckerhoff Abady Ward & Maazel LLP. “No matter what the government says its rationale is for pursuing Rümeysa’s deportation, the reality is this: the government is concocting violations of immigration law to chill and retaliate against speech it doesn’t like. That’s illegal and antithetical to a free society.” Ms. Öztürk is represented by Mahsa Khanbabai, the American Civil Liberties Union, ACLU of Massachusetts, CLEAR, and Emery Celli Brinckerhoff Abady Ward & Maazel LLP. More information about this case can be viewed here: https://www.aclum.org/en/cases/ozturk-v-trumpAffiliate: Massachusetts - Press ReleaseApr 2025
Immigrants' Rights
Groups File Lawsuit to Block Florida’s Unconstitutional Anti-Immigrant Law SB 4CGroups File Lawsuit to Block Florida’s Unconstitutional Anti-Immigrant Law SB 4C
The lawsuit exposes SB 4C as a sweeping and unlawful expansion of state power under the guise of immigration enforcement MIAMI — The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) of Florida, ACLU Immigrants’ Rights Project, and Americans for Immigrant Justice filed a federal lawsuit today challenging Florida’s new extreme anti-immigrant law, Senate Bill 4C (SB 4C), which authorizes state and local law enforcement to imprison people based on their manner of entering the country — powers the Constitution reserves exclusively to the federal government. The lawsuit, filed in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida, is brought on behalf of the Farmworker Association of Florida, the Florida Immigrant Coalition, and individual plaintiffs — including longtime Florida residents with pending federal immigration applications and with U.S. citizen family members who rely on their care. “Florida’s SB 4C is not just unconstitutional — it’s cruel and dangerous,” said Bacardi Jackson, executive director of the ACLU of Florida. “This law strips power from the federal government and hands it to state officers with no immigration training or authority, threatening to tear families apart and detain people who have every legal right to be here. Our communities deserve safety, dignity, and due process — not politically motivated attacks.” Signed into law by Gov. Ron DeSantis on February 13, SB 4C immediately criminalized a new set of immigration-related offenses under state law, punishing individuals who are 18 or older with mandatory incarceration for “illegal entry” or “illegal reentry” into the state of Florida — even if they are pursuing federal immigration relief which allows them to lawfully remain in the country. “Florida has already started to arrest and prosecute family members, friends, neighbors, and community members,” said Hannah Steinberg, staff attorney with the ACLU’s Immigrants’ Rights Project. “We are asking the court to immediately stop Florida from enforcing this unconstitutional law to prevent further devastation to communities across the state.” The law follows statutes from other states that federal courts have unanimously blocked, and it directly conflicts with the U.S. Constitution’s Supremacy Clause and Commerce Clause. The lawsuit asks the court to immediately halt enforcement of the unconstitutional law. “Our plaintiffs include a mother applying for a U visa as a victim of crime, a mother of four caring for a child with disabilities, and farmworkers who regularly travel between Florida and other states to harvest our food,” said Amy Godshall, legal fellow and immigrants' rights attorney at the ACLU of Florida. “This law not only violates the Constitution — it threatens the safety and well-being of people who have lived in our communities for decades.” The complaint details how SB 4C forces state law enforcement to make complex federal immigration determinations, authorizes the detention of people who pose no threat, and criminalizes individuals whom the federal government may later grant asylum, visas, or permanent status. The law makes no exceptions for people seeking humanitarian protection or people with pending applications for immigration relief. “Florida's recently passed SB 4C, is an attempt to bypass federal immigration oversight and empower state law enforcement officials to enforce immigration policies,” said Paul R. Chavez, litigation and advocacy director of Americans for Immigrant Justice. “This law could lead to the detention of individuals who pose no threat to our communities,and the denial of basic civil rights protections to immigrants. SB 4C is unconstitutional and may instill fear in the state, potentially driving many immigrants and their families into hiding. We proudly stand in solidarity with our immigrant community to advance and protect all our civil rights.” "Florida’s new SB 4C law is an unconstitutional and devastating attack on Floridians who are immigrants, criminalizing individuals based on just existing in our state,” said Tessa Petit, executive director of the Florida Immigrant Coalition. “For well over a century, courts have made clear that immigration enforcement is a federal responsibility, yet Florida is attempting to overstep its bounds, just as similar laws in Texas, Iowa, and Oklahoma tried. As a leading advocate for Florida’s immigrant community, FLIC is standing against this unconstitutional and unjust law." “Instead of addressing important issues such as affordable housing, inflation and public transportation, this law tears apart families,” said Rene Gomez, the Civic Engagement Coordinator of the Farmworkers Association of Florida (“FWAF”). “Our farmworking and immigrant community are the backbone of this state, contributing to billions in revenue through their labor and taxes. Every resident of our state, whether they are citizens or not, benefits from the contributions of our members and will also be negatively impacted by the economic toll this law will have.” The complaint is here.Court Case: FLORIDA IMMIGRANT COALITION v. UTHMEIFERAffiliate: Florida