First 100 Days: Trump’s Immigration Overhaul Faces Hurdles

President Donald Trump’s administration has implemented the most sweeping changes to U.S. immigration policy in decades during its first 100 days, but has encountered significant legal and logistical obstacles to fulfilling campaign promises of mass deportations.

Despite a sixfold increase in executive actions compared to his first term, the administration’s enforcement efforts have been repeatedly constrained by court challenges and practical limitations.

Ambitious Policy Blitz Meets Legal Resistance

The administration came into office with detailed policy blueprints from groups like the Heritage Foundation’s Project 2025 and has rapidly deployed them across federal agencies, according to Migration Policy Institute.

These actions have created “a heightened level of fear and uncertainty for immigrants legal and unauthorized alike, their families, and communities,” the institute reports, noting the administration’s actions have placed immigration enforcement at the heart of both domestic policy and international relations.

However, multiple federal judges have blocked key components of the deportation strategy, with courts consistently requiring that even expedited removals must maintain basic due process protections.

Alien Enemies Act Controversy

The administration’s controversial invocation of the 1798 Alien Enemies Act, previously used only during wartime, triggered intense legal scrutiny after it was applied to deport alleged Venezuelan gang members to El Salvador’s “Terrorism Confinement Center,” according to NPR.

While the Supreme Court allowed limited use of this statute in April, it imposed significant constraints, ruling that detainees “must receive notice after the date of this order that they are subject to removal under the Act” and must be given reasonable time to seek legal relief before removal.

This judicial intervention forced a substantial modification of the administration’s initial approach, which had sought to conduct mass deportations with minimal process.

Third-Country Deportation Strategy Blocked

A federal judge delivered another blow to the administration’s deportation strategy on Friday, blocking a policy of sending migrants to third countries without giving them an opportunity to raise safety concerns, reports Reuters.

U.S. District Judge Brian Murphy’s preliminary injunction requires the Department of Homeland Security to give individuals a “meaningful opportunity” to seek legal relief before deportation to countries other than their own.

“The Court has found it likely that these deportations have or will be wrongfully executed and that there has been no opportunity for Plaintiffs to demonstrate the substantial harms they might face,” Judge Murphy wrote in his decision.

Constitutional Constraints on Executive Power

Legal experts note that despite the administration’s assertion of broad executive authority, constitutional limitations on deportation powers remain intact and enforceable through the courts.

“The text of the Constitution is clear and so is the Supreme Court: All non-citizens on U.S. soil must be afforded ‘due process of law,'” explained a recent analysis by ABC News.

While the administration maintains that due process requirements shouldn’t require “a million or 2 million or 3 million trials,” courts have consistently held that some form of notice and opportunity to be heard must be provided even in expedited procedures.