Trump Blames the Democrats for Family Separation at the Mexican Border

Of course he does.

Guillermo Arias/ZUMA Wire/

Let our journalists help you make sense of the noise: Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily newsletter and get a recap of news that matters.

President Donald Trump blamed Democrats this morning for what he called the “horrible law that separates children from there (sic) parents,” a reference to the outcry over his administration’s policy of taking children away from their parents at the border as a means to deter undocumented immigration into the US.

Trump blames the Democrats for the “horrible law”—and also accuses Democrats of defending members of the violent street gang MS-13 after criticism of his use of the term “animals” in describing them—but his own Attorney General Jeff Sessions confirmed that the policy was part of the administration’s overall strategy in trying to stop undocumented immigration at the US-Mexico border.

“If you are smuggling a child, then we will prosecute you and that child will be separated from you as required by law,” Sessions said during a speech in San Diego on May 7.

Sessions added that Trump was fulfilling one of his central his campaign promises by these aggressive actions. 

“Donald Trump ran for office on that idea,” Sessions said. “I believe that is a big reason why he won. He is on fire about this. This entire government knows it.”

The government has denied that this policy is about deterrence, but John Kelly, Trump’s chief of staff and the former Secretary of Homeland Security, told CNN in March of 2017 that he was “considering” the policy “in order to deter more movement along this terribly dangerous network…They will be well cared for as we deal with their parents.” He reiterated the deterrent value of the policy in an interview with NPR in early May, saying that “a big name of the game is deterrence,” and that the “children will be taken care of—put into foster care or whatever.”

Those working within the immigration legal and activism community have seen a “noticeable increase in this practice in the summer,” Katharina Obser, senior policy advisor with the Women’s Refugee Commission,” told NPR in February. 

The New York Times reported in April that more than 700 children have been removed from their parents’ custody since October, including more than 100 under the age of four. But at a Senate hearing last month, Steven Wagner, the Acting Assistant Secretary at the Department of Health and Human Services’s Office of Refugee Resettlement (ORR) was “unable to determine with certainty the whereabouts” of 1,475 children between October and December.”

“The new practice of separating children from their parents at the border is just exacerbating an already inefficient system,” Michelle Brané, the director of the Migrant Rights and Justice program at the Women’s Refugee Commission and a leading expert on immigration detention, told Mother Jones. “You’re throwing hundreds—thousands—more children into this system. You’ve actually separated them from a parent and then you give them to ORR, whose job it is to reunify them with a parent. [It] is a colossal waste of money, and is overwhelming our system, and is just plain cruel.”


Headshot of Editor in Chief of Mother Jones, Clara Jeffery

It sure feels that way to me, and here at Mother Jones, we’ve been thinking a lot about what journalism needs to do differently, and how we can have the biggest impact.

We kept coming back to one word: corruption. Democracy and the rule of law being undermined by those with wealth and power for their own gain. So we're launching an ambitious Mother Jones Corruption Project to do deep, time-intensive reporting on systemic corruption, and asking the MoJo community to help crowdfund it.

We aim to hire, build a team, and give them the time and space needed to understand how we got here and how we might get out. We want to dig into the forces and decisions that have allowed massive conflicts of interest, influence peddling, and win-at-all-costs politics to flourish.

It's unlike anything we've done, and we have seed funding to get started, but we're looking to raise $500,000 from readers by July when we'll be making key budgeting decisions—and the more resources we have by then, the deeper we can dig. If our plan sounds good to you, please help kickstart it with a tax-deductible donation today.

Thanks for reading—whether or not you can pitch in today, or ever, I'm glad you're with us.

Signed by Clara Jeffery

Clara Jeffery, Editor-in-Chief

payment methods

We Recommend