Immigration prosecutions in San Diego on pace to double as cases for drugs, guns drop

They file into the courtroom in lines and tan jumpsuits, shackles chained around their feet. They watch intently, almost all of them wearing headphones for Spanish translation, as the judge explains their charges. Then they leave the courtroom and the next group comes. 

That was the scene in a federal courtroom in downtown San Diego this week, where an increasing number of migrants are facing criminal charges under the Trump administration for illegally entering the country.

Federal prosecutions for immigration crimes in San Diego and Imperial counties have surpassed more than 3,200 from October through June, the first three-quarters of this fiscal year. That number is on pace to more than double from the previous fiscal year, according to federal data from a nonpartisan research organization. 

The ramping up of prosecutions is part of the Trump administration’s response to record illegal border crossings under the Biden administration, which Trump claimed was an “invasion” that threatened public safety. Migrant crossings are now at record lows, though the numbers started to drop significantly during Biden’s last year in office. 

But in one of the busiest federal court districts in the nation, the shift in resources toward low-level immigration crime is raising questions about the crimes that aren’t getting prosecuted – and the resulting effect on public safety. 

While prosecutions for illegal entry are on pace to increase by more than 800% this year, prosecutions for white collar, weapons and drug crimes are on pace to drop, according to data from the Transactional Records Access Clearinghouse, or TRAC. 

Underscoring those concerns are reports of high-level resignations, vacancies and low morale in the U.S. Attorney’s Office in the Southern District of California, now led by Trump-appointee Adam Gordon. Times of San Diego reported that the administration’s focus on immigration prosecutions caused concern among staffers. 

Gordon, however, said the immigration prosecution numbers were promising. 

“These stats tell a very simple story: the border is now secure thanks to the Trump Administration,” he said in a statement through a spokesperson. “That unquestioned success now allows our office to devote additional resources to other Take Back America priorities such as our recent, highly publicized prosecutions targeting Sinaloa Cartel leadership.” 

While Gordon’s office has publicly touted a handful of high-profile cases as wins, immigration prosecutions are by far what’s driving the office’s work, making up about three-quarters of all new cases so far this fiscal year, data show. Most prosecutions were for illegal entry, a misdemeanor for the first offense, and illegal reentry, a felony. 

“It’s such a waste of money,” said Nate Crowley, a private defense attorney who had two illegal reentry cases in Judge Daniel Butcher’s courtroom Tuesday afternoon. Trump ran on fighting fentanyl at the border, but instead of seeing more drug cases, Crowley said he gets more immigration cases. 

Attorneys in San Diego who, like Crowley, sit on a federal defense panel for indigent clients said they have noticed the shift, too. 

“We’re not seeing any border bust cases. They’re not going after any drugs or guns right now,” said Crystal Erlandson, another attorney on the panel. “A lot of the resources are going towards these low-level, no-criminal-history guys walking through the hills, just coming here trying to get work.” 

‘All hands on deck’

With the White House laser-focused on its immigration crackdown, prosecutors in the Southern District of California are following suit, increasingly pursuing criminal charges against migrants encountered near the border wall after crossing into the U.S. as well those picked up within the country who have been here for decades. 

One man in Butcher’s courtroom was pulled over by ICE after leaving his home in Chula Vista one early morning in July. Now, he faces a felony for being in the country after having previously been deported more than two decades ago. 

Under the Biden and previous administrations, migrants who crossed illegally were more often dealt with administratively: Immigration officials would document their arrival and then process them for deportation. Though at the end of his term, prosecutors started ramping up immigration prosecutions as Biden tightened restrictions on the border. 

Those charged under Biden were often defendants with criminal histories or many prior deportations, said Eric Fish, a professor at UC Davis who studied federal immigration prosecutions and previously worked as a federal defender in San Diego. 

Now, under Trump, prosecutors are charging migrants without criminal histories, but who may have a prior deportation on their record, attorneys say. Those cases are “absolutely clogging up the federal court system,” said Andrew Nietor, an immigration attorney who is also on the panel. 

Many immigration prosecutions end in plea deals which close quickly with time served as the sentence and likely deportation from the U.S. once transferred to immigration custody. But other cases can drag on for weeks or longer if they go to trial. 

“It’s all hands on deck. I’ve seen prosecutors in there who are senior, they’re on the national security task force and they also got this (illegal entry case),” said David Zugman, another attorney on the panel. 

In a press release from August, the U.S. Attorney’s Office said it “has focused immigration prosecutions on undocumented aliens who are engaged in criminal activity in the U.S.” But TRAC data shows illegal entry was the lead charge in about 1,500 cases this fiscal year. 

Across all prosecutions in the Southern District this year, the biggest projected decline from the previous year is for prosecutions under Section 922 of Title 18 of the U.S. Code, which deals with illegal firearms possession and transportation. 

Those cases are on pace to be nearly 50% lower than the year before. Narcotics and drug prosecutions are on track to be down about 12% and white collar crime down about 17%, according to TRAC data. 

Upon returning to office in January, Trump deployed a range of agencies which normally don’t focus on immigration – from the FBI to the ATF – to help with immigration enforcement. That push has drawn sharp criticism, including from former U.S. Attorney Tara McGrath, who was fired a month after Trump took office. 

“Public safety is impacted I think primarily in this region due to the shift in the direction of certain agencies being refocused on immigration enforcement,” McGrath told KBPS in February. 

Trump 1.0 prosecutions and asylum

Immigration prosecutions now are not as high as during Trump’s first term in office, when they reached historic levels: more than 100,000 across the entire country in one year. Through June across the country, immigration prosecutions are at about 40,000.

The first Trump administration’s “zero tolerance” policy, announced by then-Attorney General Jeff Sessions in San Diego, aimed to prosecute every migrant that crossed the border illegally and later became the basis for family separations. 

Operation Streamline, a related program which was significantly expanded under Trump, led to dozens of migrants at a time pleading guilty and being sentenced to immigration crimes, what some called “assembly line justice” and criticized as a violation of due process. 

The policies were widely panned as being cruel and inhumane, not only for their treatment of families with children but also for criminalizing asylum-seekers who entered the U.S. fleeing violence or persecution in their home countries. 

So far, the administration hasn’t announced a restart of the policies, but the rising prosecutions are still stirring concerns for asylum-seekers who could face additional challenges if they go through a criminal prosecution. 

Under U.S. law, migrants who want to seek asylum or another type of protection must speak with an immigration official in order to be screened for eligibility. 

But migrants who are transferred between immigration custody and U.S. Marshal custody during a criminal prosecution may not know which officials to ask or the types of humanitarian protection they could apply for, according to Nietor, the immigration attorney.

Until recently, the Trump administration’s asylum ban meant that virtually no migrants had access to seek protection in the U.S. if they feared returning home. 

That changed earlier this month when a federal judge dealt the ban a blow, ruling that the administration cannot on its own suspend laws that prevent the U.S. from deporting migrants to places they would be tortured or persecuted. 

In the courtroom on Tuesday, the judge explained to the defendants that they faced likely deportation from the U.S. after their criminal case. Attorneys asked the judge for light sentences for their clients, explaining what had led them to the U.S. and to court that day. 

A baker in Sinaloa who was extorted by cartels. A man who lived in California for eight years who tried to come back after visiting his mom and kids in Mexico. A 28-year-old father who wanted to support his family in Sonora. 

“I would like to go back to be with them,” the last man told the judge.