Trump policy would Fine Migrants $998 Daily for Ignoring Deportation Orders

Title: Civil Penalties for Failure to Depart: How 8 U.S.C. § 1324d Is Shaping U.S. Immigration Enforcement in 2025

A spokesperson for the U.S. Department of Homeland Security, Tricia McLaughlin, emphasized that individuals residing unlawfully in the United States are now expected to utilize a government mobile application—formerly known as CBP One and now rebranded as CBP Home under new policy guidance—to initiate their own departure from the country. According to DHS, failure to comply with this self-deportation process will result in strict financial consequences, including civil fines of $998 per day for each day an individual remains in the U.S. beyond their final order of removal.

8 U.S.C. § 1324d is a provision in U.S. immigration law that allows civil fines to be issued to individuals who do not depart the country after receiving a voluntary departure order. Enacted as part of the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996, the statute authorizes fines of up to $500 per day for non-compliance. While this law has existed for nearly three decades, it has not been widely enforced until recent years.

Voluntary departure is a process that allows individuals subject to removal to leave the United States on their own within a specified period. It is intended to avoid the legal consequences of formal deportation. However, if the person does not depart within the allotted timeframe, they may become subject to financial penalties under § 1324d. The fines are assessed for each day the person remains in the country beyond the departure deadline.

Historically, federal authorities rarely used this provision. Prior to 2018, there were limited instances of these fines being issued. During that time, immigration enforcement primarily focused on removal proceedings and detention, not civil financial penalties.

In 2018, during the Trump administration, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) began utilizing 8 U.S.C. § 1324d more actively. ICE issued notices of intent to fine undocumented immigrants who had remained in the U.S. after receiving removal orders or after failing to comply with voluntary departure. In some cases, individuals were issued fines exceeding $300,000. The penalties were calculated based on the daily maximum multiplied by the number of days the individual remained in the country beyond the voluntary departure period.

In 2021, under the Biden administration, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) suspended these fines, calling them ineffective and not aligned with enforcement priorities at the time. Existing fines were withdrawn and the policy was paused.

On April 8, 2025, officials associated with former President Donald Trump’s campaign announced plans to reinstate and expand the use of 8 U.S.C. § 1324d if Trump returns to office. According to public statements, the updated plan proposes increasing the maximum daily fine from $500 to $998. Additionally, the policy would allow for retroactive application of the fines for up to five years, potentially resulting in penalties totaling more than $1 million per person. The plan also includes enforcement mechanisms such as asset seizures and wage garnishment in cases where individuals fail to pay.

On April 7, 2025, the U.S. Supreme Court issued a ruling related to immigration enforcement that could influence how civil penalties and deportations are carried out. In a 5-4 decision, the Court upheld the government’s authority to use a separate law—the Alien Enemies Act of 1798—to remove certain individuals considered security risks. However, the Court also affirmed the importance of providing due process to affected individuals, including notice and the opportunity to contest their removal.

Legal experts note that although the Supreme Court ruling did not address civil fines directly, it may set a precedent regarding how far the executive branch can go in using rarely enforced immigration laws. Immigration advocacy groups and legal analysts have raised concerns about the proportionality of the proposed fines and the financial impact on low-income individuals. Supporters of the policy argue that civil penalties serve as a necessary deterrent for those who do not comply with immigration law.

As of now, 8 U.S.C. § 1324d remains in effect as federal law. Its use and enforcement are subject to administrative policy decisions and legal challenges. The future of the statute will likely depend on upcoming elections, policy shifts, and court rulings.

This development highlights the evolving nature of immigration enforcement in the United States and the growing role of civil penalties in immigration policy. Stakeholders, including lawmakers, legal experts, and advocacy organizations, are expected to continue monitoring the implementation and legal implications of these penalties in the months ahead.