President Trump’s claim that the U.S. cannot possibly give every deportee a trial has sparked a constitutional debate. Efficiency in immigration enforcement is one thing — dismissing due process is another.

Trump’s Statement on Deportation Trials

On April 21, 2025, President Trump stated on Truth Social that his administration cannot feasibly provide individual trials for every person it seeks to deport, asserting that doing so would take "200 years" without exaggeration. He emphasized the logistical challenges in removing individuals who are in the U.S. illegally, particularly those with criminal records.

We cannot give everyone a trial, because to do so would take, without exaggeration, 200 years.

source: Reuters

The Constitutional Issue

This statement has raised concerns among legal experts and human rights advocates who argue that due process is a fundamental right guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution. The Fifth Amendment states that "No person shall be... deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law," a clause interpreted to apply to all individuals within the United States, regardless of citizenship status.

Critics argue that bypassing individual trials undermines the legal protections afforded to immigrants and could lead to wrongful deportations. They emphasize the importance of case-by-case assessments to ensure that individuals are not unjustly removed from the country.

Related: our coverage of The One Big Beautiful Bill Act explores how legislative choices intersect with constitutional guarantees.

Policy Context & Political Debate

The administration's stance reflects a broader effort to expedite deportations and reduce the backlog in immigration courts. However, this approach has sparked a debate about the balance between efficient immigration enforcement and the preservation of constitutional rights.

Some supporters argue that without streamlining, immigration enforcement becomes unmanageable; opponents counter that such “efficiency” risks shredding basic liberties. In this sense, Trump’s remarks fit into a larger pattern of prioritizing speed and spectacle over process.

What Comes Next

Legal challenges are expected as advocacy groups prepare to contest policies that they believe violate due process protections. The outcome of these disputes could have significant implications for the rights of immigrants and the scope of executive power in immigration enforcement. If courts push back, it may reinforce constitutional limits on executive action; if not, it could expand presidential authority in immigration policy.

Related: see When Markets Fail, Strongmen Rise for a broader look at how concentrated power and weakened safeguards open space for authoritarian moves.