Border Patrol Chief Behind Chicago Crackdown Prepares New Operation in Charlotte
The Trump administration’s urban enforcement push is blurring the line between border control and domestic policing.
After a months-long deportation campaign in Chicago, Customs and Border Protection (CBP) agents are reportedly getting ready to leave the Windy City and depart for Charlotte, North Carolina, and later New Orleans.
On Monday, CBS News reported that some of the more than 200 "Border Patrol teams dispatched to Chicago could be diverted to Charlotte, North Carolina for an operation that is expected to start there this month." Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), meanwhile, will continue its work in Chicago. The Charlotte contingent will be led by sector chief Gregory Bovino, who oversaw deployments in Chicago and Los Angeles earlier this year.
Neither CBP nor the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) have publicly confirmed the reported redeployment, and local officials in Charlotte say they were caught off guard by the news. Charlotte‑Mecklenburg Police Department (CMPD) Chief Johnny Jennings told WBTV, a local CBS affiliate, "I don't know if that's going to happen or not. They haven't reached out to me, so I'm not sure what's going to occur." In a statement, the department added that it "does not participate in ICE operations, nor are we involved in the planning of these federal activities." The Mecklenburg County Sheriff's Office likewise told WBTV it "had not been contacted by any border patrol representatives, nor has it been involved in any planning or conversations."
It's unclear what the motive for this potential deployment will be. While CBP has often been deployed in cities that President Donald Trump deems "lawless," crime in Charlotte is dropping. The CMPD reported that from January through September, the city saw an 8 percent decrease in overall crime and a 20 percent drop in violent‐crime incidents, according to its third-quarter crime statistics.
The legal basis for such deployments also remains murky. CBP's statutory authority extends within 100 miles of the border, but the agency has long expanded that zone to include major inland cities. Within this area, CBP argues it has broader latitude to conduct stops and limited searches under the "border search" framework—though courts have repeatedly held that many warrantless searches away from the actual border would otherwise be unconstitutional.
But, as the American Civil Liberties Union notes, the Constitution's protections against "unreasonable searches and seizures" apply throughout the United States, including within the so-called 100-mile border zone. A Congressional Research Service report likewise explains that while the "border search exception" grants CBP broader authority near the border, searches and seizures conducted farther inland are "subject to greater Fourth Amendment scrutiny."
Questions about the legality of CBP enforcement in Charlotte are sure to be prevalent with Bovino at the helm. While overseeing operations in Chicago, Bonvino has drawn scrutiny for allowing his agent to implement legally dubious riot control tactics, including pepper-spraying a family during a grocery run, tear-gassing peaceful protestors, and pointing guns at veterans. As Reason's Autumn Billings recently reported, those incidents culminated in a sweeping injunction issued by a federal judge last week, finding that federal agents violated Fourth Amendment protections and used excessive force in multiple encounters.
Whether the Charlotte operation proceeds as reported remains to be seen. But the pattern is clear: if what happened in Chicago is any indication, deployments like this carry a real risk of civil rights violations. And it won't stop in Charlotte. The administration is already weighing similar operations elsewhere, with New Orleans reportedly next in line, suggesting that these tactics could soon spread across the country. Now, the question is no longer where the border is, but how far these abuses will reach before someone stops them.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please to post comments
There are millions of illegal alien rapefugees in the Unites States. Deport them all.
What Reason doesn't know is that border patrol can work with in 100 miles of any port of entry. Ports of entry include actual ports and international airports. Prime example Sacramento California has a port accessed by teh river thus boarder patrol can be anywhere within 100 miles of Sacramento. Most major cities are next to ports and/or have international airports. this gives border patrol a lot of ground they are allowed to cover
The 100 mile constitution free zone does not include a 100 mile radius around international airports (although the airport itself is subject to those relaxed rules). The 100 mile rule applies only to land borders and coastlines (which includes ports).
Still, this covers where ~2/3 of the US population lives.
https://www.aclumaine.org/know-your-rights/100-mile-border-zone/
Assuming immigration control is a legitimate task of the federal government, what do sanctuary cities and states expect? Illegal immigrants with any brains would stay as far away from those baited traps as possible.
Nullification of federal laws was the political cry of the slavocracy, one of the hallmarks of states rights racism, wasn't it? Suddenly federalism matters again.
Politicians suck because government sucks from having far too much power to meddle with people. They wanted more government. They applauded when Obama refused to prosecute millions of illegal immigrants and fought states which tried to enforce federal immigration laws. Suddenly the shoe is on the other foot, and the federal power they were in love with has turned against them.
Boo hoo. When statists rumble, it's the people who get hurt. I'd have a lot more sympathy for these crybabies if they cried against all statism, not just the principals they don't like.