By John Q. Hosedrinker 
New Mexico Governor Michelle Lujan Grisham vehemently opposes President-elect Trump’s plan to utilize the National Guard for mass deportations, citing devastating consequences for families and the state’s economy. She vows to utilize all legal means to fight these deportations and will collaborate with other states in this effort. While rejecting mass deportations, Lujan Grisham supports increased federal agents to address criminal activity related to immigration and calls for Congress to pass a stalled bipartisan border security bill. Instead of mass deportations, the Governor advocates for more respectful rhetoric concerning immigrants and a focus on comprehensive immigration reform.
Read the original article here
New Mexico’s Governor Michelle Lujan Grisham has unequivocally refused a request to deploy the state’s National Guard in support of mass deportations, a policy championed by a recently elected president. She views this plan as a serious threat to both the state’s economic well-being and the well-being of its families. The Governor’s stance is a strong rebuke of the incoming administration’s hardline immigration stance.
The Governor’s rejection isn’t simply a political disagreement; it’s a firm commitment to protecting New Mexico’s residents and economy. She believes that mass deportations would severely disrupt the state’s workforce and communities, leading to widespread negative consequences. This isn’t merely a symbolic gesture; the Governor has indicated her intent to use every legal avenue available to challenge this policy.
This decision is also framed within a larger context of political resistance. The Governor’s actions are seen by some as a necessary defiance of what they perceive as an authoritarian approach to immigration enforcement. There’s a sense that blindly obeying potentially harmful policies should be avoided at all costs. The Governor’s act of resistance is lauded by many as a crucial stand against potentially destructive policies.
The economic implications of mass deportations are a significant concern. The potential cost of such an undertaking is substantial, and some argue it would be more financially sensible to target businesses that hire undocumented workers, rather than undertaking a mass deportation effort. There’s a growing recognition of the significant economic contributions made by immigrants, and the potential economic damage caused by their removal.
Beyond economic factors, the human cost is also a major point of contention. Mass deportations would inevitably tear families apart, disrupting communities and causing significant personal hardship. This humanitarian concern is at the heart of the Governor’s opposition, highlighting the profound human cost of such policies. The potential for long-term, devastating societal consequences is driving much of the opposition to the proposed deportations.
The potential for escalation is a troubling concern. The possibility of federal intervention and the federalization of the National Guard raises the specter of a constitutional conflict. The scenario of federal forces being used to compel state compliance, potentially leading to the arrest or even harm of state officials, is a deeply unsettling prospect. This represents a significant threat to the balance of power between the federal government and individual states.
The potential ramifications of this conflict extend beyond a simple political dispute. A breakdown in the chain of command within the National Guard, or outright defiance of federal orders, could easily escalate into a crisis of immense proportions. Such a situation could potentially destabilize the country, particularly in light of a deeply divided populace. The very real possibility of widespread unrest, even armed conflict, is a significant threat.
The implications of such a large-scale deportation effort extend far beyond the borders of the United States. Other countries might be unwilling or unable to absorb the massive influx of deported individuals, which could lead to the creation of humanitarian crises. Such a situation could have global consequences that are difficult to predict, but likely to be profound. The prospect of human rights abuses in the context of mass deportations is also a significant worry.
Even setting aside the more dramatic possibilities, the idea of mass deportations is impractical and economically devastating. The logistics alone present insurmountable challenges, and there is no clear plan for how to manage such a massive undertaking. The economic impact on industries that rely heavily on undocumented workers would be catastrophic.
Ultimately, Governor Lujan Grisham’s decision represents a significant moment of resistance against potentially dangerous and disruptive policies. The potential consequences of mass deportations are far-reaching, affecting not just New Mexico but the entire nation and possibly the world. The Governor’s defiance, and the concerns it raises, serve as a stark warning of the potentially disastrous consequences of unchecked power.