Several weeks ago, the Trump administration announced new border wall segments would be constructed in San Diego County.<\/p>\n
More recently, the plan to do that in Laredo<\/a>, Texas, gained some attention.<\/p>\n The projects received some scattered criticism, but the general response seemed to be, \u201cOh, that.\u201d<\/p>\n Remarkably, what was once the centerpiece of President Donald Trump\u2019s immigration policy and politics is now almost an afterthought.<\/p>\n The past battles over Trump\u2019s wall may have diminished, though the price tag hasn\u2019t. Earlier this year, Congress approved $46.5 billion for the project, up from the $5 billion Trump requested in 2018 during his first term.<\/p>\n The \u201cbuild the wall\u201d ethos has been eclipsed by the focus on Trump\u2019s interior immigration enforcement, with tough, high-profile raids in cities that have at times snared U.S. citizens and people with a legal right to be in the country, in addition to undocumented immigrants.<\/p>\n Support them or not, those sometimes brutal actions have sent an unmistakable warning to would-be border crossers, while asylum restrictions and other measures at the border make it nearly impossible to come here \u2014 illegally and, to an increasing degree, legally.<\/p>\n Chad Wolf, Trump\u2019s acting homeland security secretary during his first administration, recently told<\/a> The New York Times he had not expected the numbers to drop so low so quickly.<\/p>\n \u201cDeterrence actually does work,\u201d he said. \u201cAnd so I think for the most part, people are thinking twice about coming illegally.\u201d<\/p>\n Illegal crossings have plunged along the southwestern border.<\/p>\n The Border Patrol\u2019s San Diego sector was the busiest along the Southwest border in migrant encounters for most of 2024, according<\/a> to Alexandra Mendoza of The San Diego Union-Tribune.\u00a0 In August, the sector recorded 715 encounters, a 95 percent decrease from August 2024.<\/p>\n San Diego has long had a fence and a more heavily fortified border than other regions, but the massive drop in crossings is a nationwide trend.<\/p>\n Border Patrol agents made just over 6,000 arrests in June, according to the Department of Homeland Security. Adam Isacson, a border expert at the Washington Office on Latin America, told the Times border crossings that month were the lowest since the 1960s.<\/p>\n It was a different picture during President Joe Biden\u2019s administration. Monthly arrests reached nearly 250,000 in December 2023, though the numbers dropped under 50,000 when Biden limited asylum toward the end of his White House tenure.<\/p>\n There had not been much new border wall construction when arrests began falling off the charts this year. That raises an obvious question: If this happened without continued expansion of the fence, why build it?<\/p>\n \u201cBorder walls are a 14th-century solution to 21st-century problems,\u201d Rep. Henry Cuellar, a Democrat from Laredo, said<\/a> in a statement. \u201cBorder crossings are already down, and Laredo continues to be one of the safest places to live in the United States. This was accomplished without additional border wall being added, but through enforcement of the law and investing in resources at our border.\u201d<\/p>\n The ongoing project across the border isn\u2019t just a fence but what the administration calls a \u201csmart wall\u201d with detection technology, cameras, lights, patrol roads and water barriers.<\/p>\n Critics say Trump\u2019s border policies leave people fleeing crushing poverty and threatening regimes and gangs stranded at the border, or forced to try crossing in more dangerous terrain.<\/p>\n Regardless, the debate over the wall seems academic at this point. Trump is moving ahead, declaring emergencies and issuing executive orders to get it done.<\/p>\n Supporters of the wall say it has helped deter crossings in some areas over the years and can help relieve staffing pressures.<\/p>\n With Trump\u2019s re-election, Democrats lost the border wall battle, as has been the case on pretty much every front regarding immigration enforcement. If they experience a rebound on this issue \u2014 polls<\/a> show Trump\u2019s current tough approach lacks support \u2014 it likely will result from presidential overreach rather than anything Democrats did.<\/p>\n In retrospect, it seems inevitable that Trump would get his wall, needed or not. It may not ultimately cover the full length of the border from the Pacific Ocean to the Gulf of Mexico, as Trump promised, but it may well cover most of it.<\/p>\n Lawsuits, logistics and politics stymied the project to some degree during his first term. Had he not won a second, the wall he envisions likely wouldn\u2019t have happened.<\/p>\n But it wasn\u2019t entirely halted under Biden. The fence was still being built, repaired and replaced in some areas. The new fence at Friendship Park<\/a> on the southwesternmost corner of San Diego County is but one local, and painful, example of this.<\/p>\n But then, hypocrisy on the border wall was nothing new for Democrats, despite regularly calling the project an abomination when Trump pursued it. As U.S. senators, Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama<\/a> and Biden<\/a> all supported some border fence projects.<\/p>\n Democrats likely missed an opportunity to get something of real value in exchange for the Trump wall. At one point during his first term, there was a surprising idea of trading<\/a> the wall for a permanent solution to the threatened DACA program, formally called Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals.<\/p>\n Trump and some Democratic leaders sounded amenable, though there\u2019s no telling whether that initial talk would have led to a real deal. Hardline immigration advocates and immigration restrictionists loudly opposed such a plan.<\/p>\n Now the wall is looking like an unstoppable reality, and DACA recipients remain in legal limbo<\/a> with potential deportation looming.<\/p>\n Biden was elected in 2020 in part because he appealed to moderates, but his initial immigration policy issued on his first day in office didn\u2019t include much middle ground. It called for worthy reforms, including a pathway to citizenship and other humane approaches to fixing the immigration system. But unlike previous comprehensive proposals, there was little about enforcement<\/a>.<\/p>\n The Biden administration soon appeared flummoxed by surging migration that caused chaos at the border, leading to public support for tougher restrictions. Some Democratic House members called for stronger action, including swing-district incumbents like Mike Levin who represents north coastal San Diego County.<\/p>\n Biden eventually enacted more restrictions, but, politically, it was too late.<\/p>\n There have been ebbs and flows of illegal immigration in the past, but perhaps nothing like what\u2019s happened in these past few years. Yet border crossers always seemed to find a way, albeit more risky and expensive, almost regardless of what border and immigration policies were.<\/p>\n It will be surprising if that history is repeated anytime soon.<\/p>\n What They Said<\/p>\n