According to National Public Radio, Trump’s administration has already begun deploying National Guard troops to multiple cities, including Washington, DC, Oregon, Illinois and Tennessee, following earlier mobilisations in Los Angeles this summer.

In a dramatic pivot toward militarised immigration enforcement, President Donald Trump is positioning the National Guard at the centre of his agenda to launch what he calls the “largest deportation operation in US history.” This account – reported by National Public Radio (NPR) and authored by Kat Lonsdorf – details how Guard units are being integrated into domestic immigration policy in ways that blur longstanding boundaries between military deployment and civil law enforcement.

According to NPR, Trump’s administration has already begun deploying National Guard troops to multiple cities, including Washington, DC, Oregon, Illinois and Tennessee, following earlier mobilisations in Los Angeles this summer. The article traces the origins of the plan to years of internal discussions by Trump and his key immigration strategist Stephen Miller, in which the Guard was identified as a crucial personnel source for mass deportation.

Throughout his 2024 presidential campaign, Donald Trump heavily emphasized anti-immigration rhetoric, repeatedly pledging to execute the largest mass deportation operation in US history.

Donald Trump’s First Term

During his first term (2017–2021), Trump pursued aggressive deportation goals but fell short of expectations, deporting fewer people overall than the Obama administration—around 1.5 million compared to over 3 million under Obama—due to challenges in expanding detention facilities, hiring sufficient ICE agents, legal hurdles, and limited cooperation from some local jurisdictions.

In an April 2024 interview with TIME Magazine, Trump was directly asked whether his deportation plan would involve the U.S. military. He replied: “I can see myself using the National Guard and, if necessary, I’d have to go a step further. We have to do whatever we have to do to stop the problem we have.” This signalled his openness to deploying federal troops inland, beyond typical border support roles, to round up and remove millions of undocumented immigrants.

In one widely-cited interview, Trump said “if we need more than the National Guard, we’ll send more than the National Guard because we’re going to have safe cities.” Guard troops are not yet reported to be carrying out arrests, but the NPR investigation warns that their deployment could pave the way for large-scale removal operations.

Legal and Political Fault Lines Deepen

The use of the National Guard in this context raises constitutional and statutory questions. The Posse Comitatus Act restricts the use of federal military forces for domestic law enforcement, but the Guard, when under state control, occupies a grey zone. NPR points out that converting Guard units into immigration-enforcement personnel, or federalising them without state governor consent, would test existing legal guardrails.

Politically, the plan has ignited fierce opposition from states and cities whose leaders view the move as an overreach of federal power. Democratic governors and legislators warn that nationalising the Guard for immigration enforcement undermines state sovereignty and threatens civil liberties. One state official cited by NPR noted that such ideas were “on the table long before” the current mobilisation.

Impact and Risks for Cities and Immigrant Communities

For immigrant communities and sanctuary cities, the implications are profound. The presence of Guard troops raises fears of sweeping raids and deportation efforts that could reach far beyond previous policy parameters. NPR reports that some of the thinking inside the administration involves recruiting Guard units from sympathetic red states and deploying them into places deemed non-cooperative – a scenario that one strategist called “deputising the Guard as immigration enforcement officers.”

City officials say that the mere prospect of mass deportation operations is already generating fear and anxiety among both undocumented and documented immigrants alike. Legal experts warn that without strict oversight, these operations risk sweeping up U.S. citizens, violating due-process rights, and provoking litigation and unrest. Furthermore, the symbolic message of troops on the streets sends a chilling signal to immigrant communities about their status and vulnerability.

As the Trump administration accelerates efforts toward what officials describe as a mass-deportation campaign, the role of the National Guard appears central, both logistically and symbolically. By mobilising troops domestically in immigration-related missions, the administration is rewriting long-standing expectations about how and where immigration enforcement occurs. NPR’s reporting makes clear that this is not simply a matter of policy shifts: it is part of a broader redefinition of power, enforcement and the role of the military inside the United States.

Cities, states and civil-rights advocates are now bracing for what could be the most aggressive removal effort in US history – one that hinges less on traditional law-enforcement frameworks and more on military-style mobilisation and deployment. As NPR’s investigation highlights, the guardrails of democracy, due process and state-federal balance are being tested in real time.

Trump and Project 2025

Project 2025, the Heritage Foundation’s 900-plus-page conservative blueprint drafted after Trump’s first term, quietly lays the ideological groundwork for federalizing National Guard units to enforce immigration laws in defiant blue cities – without ever spelling out the raids now unfolding in Chicago, Los Angeles, and Portland.

Though Trump disavowed the plan on the campaign trail – calling some ideas “absolutely ridiculous and abysmal” – he has stocked his second administration with its architects and dozens of its contributors, starting with Russell Vought, the document’s chief author, who now runs the Office of Management and Budget with near-unchecked authority over federal spending and staffing.

George Washington University historian Matt Dallek, who studies American conservatism, describes the playbook’s subtext in blunt terms: “Take any and all steps at the executive level to go into cities and states to enact the priority – which is to root out illegal immigration.”

Atlantic staff writer David A. Graham, author of a book-length dissection of the project, puts it even more starkly: Project 2025 treats the military as “just an underused resource for policing immigration,” framing undocumented migration as an “invasion” that justifies tapping “this huge, huge resource of armed people” to secure the nation.

Page 555 of the Mandate for Leadership explicitly floats “active-duty military personnel and National Guardsmen” for arrest operations along the border – a line the White House has already crossed by federalizing Guard units from red states, deputizing them for interior enforcement, and overriding Democratic governors who refuse to cooperate. What began as a border-support footnote has metastasized into street-level patrols, riot-control training inside detention centres, and quick-reaction forces on standby in every state – precisely the “creative and aggressive” escalation Project 2025 urged to bulldoze sanctuary cities and coerce local compliance.