Mayes: Trump’s 2025 asylum curbs lower crossings but endanger migrants

Arizona Attorney General Kris Mayes says President Trump’s 2025 immigration policies have made the state less safe, even as official numbers show border crossings have fallen to record lows. Since the January 20 executive order that restricted asylum and ordered mass deportations, U.S. Border Patrol reported just 7,181 people apprehended between ports of entry across the southwest in March 2025—about a 95% drop from March 2024.

In Arizona, migrant processing centers have closed and official crossings have slowed to a trickle. Yet Mayes argues the hard-line approach is pushing people into deadly desert routes, straining local resources, and stirring broader public safety and civil liberty concerns.

Mayes’ Critique and Humanitarian Concerns

Mayes, Arizona’s top law officer, focuses her criticism on the real-world effects she says she sees on the ground: humanitarian emergencies and law enforcement trade-offs.

• “Policies that close legal pathways and force desperate people into the desert do not make Arizona safer—they make it more dangerous for everyone, including law enforcement and local communities,” she said.
• Her office cites reports from humanitarian groups and volunteers in southern Arizona describing more rescues and a rise in migrant deaths as people take remote paths to avoid heightened enforcement.

DHS and CBP defend the policies, calling the United States “the most secure border in American history.” They point to record-low crossings and increased counter-narcotics efforts on both sides of the border. Analysis by VisaVerge.com attributes the steep fall in encounters since January to the new policies and enforcement surges.

Policy Changes Overview

The White House’s January 2025 order:

• Cut off most asylum access at the border.
• Directed agencies to speed up removals.

In Arizona, these measures were accompanied by new physical barriers and an expanded security footprint.

• In June 2025, CBP awarded a $309 million contract to build 27 miles of border wall in Santa Cruz County to close gaps and pursue “operational control.”
• The build-out includes more Border Patrol staff, National Guard, and military support.

CBP project details and updates are available at the U.S. Customs and Border Protection border barrier information: https://www.cbp.gov/border-security/along-us-borders/border-wall.

Drug enforcement and interdiction

• Fentanyl seizures at the border are down 54% year over year; officials link this to U.S. and Mexican crackdowns.
• Arizona’s National Guard Task Force SAFE (launched June 2024) says it helped seize more than 10 million fentanyl pills and nearly 4,000 pounds of other drugs.
• Governor Katie Hobbs supports targeted anti-drug operations but raises concerns about humanitarian and economic fallout from wall expansion and mass deportations.

Effects on Migrants and Local Responders

Mayes and other critics say narrowing formal asylum channels has led smugglers to adapt, forcing migrants—especially families and children—into remote, dangerous terrain.

• Local responders and volunteers report:
  • More people going missing in Arizona’s deserts and mountains.
  • Increased rescues and medical emergencies.
  • Search-and-rescue operations pulling staff away from investigations into transnational crime.

Humanitarian groups warn of overwhelmed shelters, more family separations, and increased exploitation by smugglers. Academic work from the Strauss Center documents heightened risks and deaths along migrant routes in Arizona. The Migration Policy Institute emphasizes that while crossings are down, the legal and humanitarian consequences are severe and the long-term impact of deterrence is contested.

“With shelter networks overwhelmed and legal pathways blocked, people face higher risks and communities bear growing costs,” say humanitarian advocates and researchers.

Impact on Communities and Law Enforcement

The policy debate involves more than statistics. Border towns report mixed outcomes:

• Some residents feel safer with fewer crossings and increased uniformed presence.
• Others report economic harm from reduced cross-border commerce and tourism.

Local impacts include:

• Small businesses losing day shoppers and weekend visitors due to heavier checks and longer waits.
• Santa Cruz County leaders objecting to the pace and placement of new wall segments that disrupt community ties and legal trade.

Environmental and civil-liberty concerns

• Construction near the Coronado National Memorial and the Santa Cruz River has sparked complaints about habitat loss and altered water flow.
• Conservationists warn barriers could block wildlife migration and harm fragile ecosystems.
• Federal waivers of environmental rules for border projects complicate mitigation, and critics say long-term damage could be difficult to repair.

Law enforcement trade-offs:

• More agents and Guard members help manage border activity, but critics argue:
  • Focus on mass deportations and foot crossings diverts resources from targeting cartels and cross-border criminal networks.
  • Civil liberties and profiling concerns arise in communities with family ties on both sides of the border.

For migrants, the practical choices are stark: wait in dangerous Mexican border areas or pay smugglers for treacherous passages through harsh terrain. Arizona counties, nonprofits, and volunteer groups report increased demand for:

• Water drops
• Rescue calls
• Medical aid

These needs stretch local search teams and emergency services, especially during harsh summer and winter conditions.

Economic effects

• Some industries benefit from fewer disruptions tied to large inflows.
• Hospitality and retail near the border report reduced tourism and fewer legal crossings.
• Trucking and port operations claim that inspections or checkpoint slowdowns increase costs and delay supply chains connected to Mexican manufacturing.

Public Input, State Support, and Deadlines

CBP is accepting public comments on new Arizona border barrier projects through July 7, 2025.

• Email: [email protected]
• Phone: (833) 412-2056

Officials say public input will inform build-out plans and environmental steps.

• For state support operations questions, the Arizona National Guard continues coordination through the Department of Emergency and Military Affairs.
• Task Force SAFE remains focused on drug interdiction and border support.

What Comes Next

Key developments to watch:

1. Legal challenges
   • The January 2025 asylum-limiting order is under active litigation.
   • Court rulings could restore or further limit asylum access in the coming months.
2. Continued construction
   • Wall segments will be built in stages; CBP promises opportunities for public input and environmental review.
   • Supporters argue closing gaps hinders smugglers and eases port-of-entry management.
   • Opponents counter that smugglers will shift routes and that barriers impose lasting economic, social, and environmental costs.
3. Policy evolution
   • Analysts at the Migration Policy Institute and researchers at the Strauss Center stress that the long-term effect of deterrence depends on whether root causes of migration ease and whether legal channels return.

The lived effects remain local: families, ranchers, first responders, small business owners, and law enforcement balance day-to-day realities against national policy choices.

Arizona is bearing the weight of a national conflict over immigration policy. Border crossings may be down, but human and community consequences persist. Whether the current approach produces safer streets and healthier border communities—or instead shifts risks onto migrants and small towns—will become clearer as courts, agencies, and politics shape the next chapter. For now, Arizona is living the trade-offs of a hard pivot at the border, with costs and gains felt in daily life, not just on paper.