Being Latino in the United States Should Not Be a Crime

 

Opinion

The Editorial Board

Being Latino in the United States Should Not Be a Crime

 

Oct. 27, 2025

By The Editorial Board

https://www.nytimes.com/2025/10/27/opinion/immigration-enforcement-latino-discrimination.html

 

The editorial board is a group of opinion journalists whose views are informed by expertise, research, debate and certain longstanding values. It is separate from the newsroom.

 

The Trump administration’s crackdown on illegal immigration has become a campaign of discrimination against Latinos. Federal agents are rounding up people with brown skin, catching both U.S. citizens and legal immigrants in their dragnet. Some Latinos are now afraid to speak Spanish or listen to Spanish music in public. Some are missing Mass and staying home on Sundays, or asking friends to pick up their children from school. American citizens are living in fear of a government that is sworn to protect their liberties and keep them safe.

 

They have reason to fear. In President Trump’s anti-immigration blitz, federal agents have repeatedly violated civil liberties and humiliated people. Masked officials have shattered car windows and pulled out drivers, leaving children sobbing in back seats. In the middle of the night in Chicago, agents with rifles swarmed an apartment building, broke down doors and dragged people from their homes in handcuffs. Dozens of those taken away were U.S. citizens. Nationwide, immigration officials have detained more than 170 American citizens, including 20 held for more than 24 hours without the ability to make a phone call, ProPublica reported.

 

These actions are undermining the public trust that is necessary for effective enforcement of the nation’s immigration laws. The behavior of federal agents is provoking an angry backlash in many of the communities that Mr. Trump claims he is trying to help. If all of this is supposed to convey a sense of renewed law and order, it is not working.

 

As is typical for Mr. Trump, he has identified a real problem — illegal immigration — but responded with a destructive solution. For decades, the United States tolerated a level of illegal immigration that fostered a sense of lawlessness at the border and frustrated many Americans, including many Latinos. The Biden administration’s porous policies worsened the situation, making possible the largest immigration surge in American history, with most of the arrivals lacking legal permission to enter the country. Mr. Trump campaigned on a promise to reverse those policies, and he has an electoral mandate to do so. At the border, he has succeeded at reducing illegal entries to the lowest levels in decades.

 

Yet he does not have a mandate to treat people cruelly or to break the law himself. Polls show that most Americans disapprove of his handling of the issue. The country does not need to choose between the chaos of the Biden approach and the chaos of the Trump approach. The best solution remains a comprehensive law that secures the border, deters future illegal entries, expands legal immigration and provides a pathway to citizenship for unauthorized migrants who have made their lives in the United States and are otherwise law-abiding members of society. Short of that — and Congress shows no signs of passing such a law — Mr. Trump can address illegal immigration in ways that are both more humane and effective. This country needs to enforce its laws without terrorizing innocent Americans and abandoning its values.

 

Of the many problems with Trump immigration policies, two themes stand out: the brutality toward immigrants who are here illegally and the unfairness toward citizens and legal immigrants.

 

People who entered this country illegally often did so at great risk to themselves, seeking a better life in the United States. They violated the law, yes, but the response should be proportional to their crimes. It should be both firm and humane. Instead, the Trump administration has reveled in harshness. Masked, plain-clothed Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents have tackled and body slammed people on the streets. Officials have launched raids into homes, destroying people’s property.

 

In one video, a federal agent said to a group of Latinos, including a U.S. citizen: “You got no rights here. You’re an amigo, brother.” After that encounter, one agent told another, referring to the immigrants, “We’re going to end up shooting some of them.” In another video, an agent yelled “adios” to the concerned wife of a detained migrant before he shoved her into a wall and she collapsed. Other disturbing videos have filled social media.

 

The tactics violate both the law and human decency. On the legal side, recent court decisions have emphasized that people accused of being here without permission have a constitutional right to some due process. That right is to all of our benefit: If the federal government could simply say that someone is in the country illegally without having to prove the claim, it could deport anyone with impunity. On the human side, a vast majority of these migrants have done nothing worse than come to the country illegally, in search of a better life. Federal agents should respond appropriately, not with the expectation that violence is necessary.

 

The second problem with the Trump approach is that its breadth inevitably sweeps up U.S. citizens and other legal residents. Federal officials are relying on racial profiling in a country where 20 percent of the population is Latino, most of whom are legal residents or citizens. The administration is able to do so because of Congress’s acquiescence on the topic and a wrongheaded ruling that the Supreme Court issued last month, upholding the use of racial profiling in the raids.

 

The use of racial discrimination in law enforcement should be an affront to all Americans. Videos show that many federal agents believe that the burden of proof is on Latinos to show they are here legally, not on the government officials who are accusing them of a crime. During a raid in California, officials yanked George Retes, a U.S. citizen who served in Iraq, from his car and held him for three days. Mr. Retes said he had a government ID in his vehicle, but officials did not let him show it to them. Similar treatment befell Javier Ramirez in California, Julio Noriega in Illinois and an unnamed military veteran in New Jersey, among others.

 

Americans have responded to these problems with protests. As if to prove the protesters’ point, federal agents have reacted with more abuses of power, using tear gas and pepper balls on peaceful demonstrators. Even after a federal judge demanded an end to these practices, they have continued.

 

Federal agents’ masks exacerbate the problems. Agents with masks know they are more likely to get away with violence and abuses of power because they are anonymous. To the community, masks signal that the government cares more about protecting its agents’ identities than democratic accountability. They create a sense that the government is sending faceless storm troopers to terrorize families.

 

Despite its aggressiveness, the crackdown has not even been effective at dealing with the millions of people who are in this country without legal permission. The administration is missing its own deportation benchmarks. It is on pace to deport fewer people than the Obama administration did in some years. The Obama administration’s approach made sense. It focused on people who arrived recently and on those who had committed crimes since arriving in this country — and it typically respected people’s rights to due process. It did not resort to masked agents and violent raids.

 

What separates democracy from authoritarianism, the rule of law from lawlessness and a decent society from an indecent one is not just the goal but the process. The government can, and should, reduce illegal immigration, but it should do so in a way that upholds American ideals.