Public radio’s longest-running daily global news program.AboutContactDonateMeet the TeamPrivacyTerms of use©2026 The World from PRXPRX is a 501(c)(3) organization recognized by the IRS: #263347402.The impact of the ‘War on Terror’ on immigration enforcement in the USGuest Maria Mitri with the Friends Committee on National Legislation argues that today’s militarized immigration enforcement grew out of the post-9/11 “War on Terror”. National security tactics developed abroad, she tells host Carolyn Beeler, have increasingly been brought home.5:59Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) trainees practice shooting handguns at the indoor firing range at the Federal Law Enforcement Training Centers (FLETC) in Brunswick, Ga., Aug. 21, 2025.The 9/11 attacks that occurred 25 years ago this Friday had a profound impact on how the United States operated on the global stage, from the wars it fought in the aftermath to the broader “War on Terror.” It also had a major impact on America’s immigration policies.Maria Mitri serves on the Friends Committee on National Legislation, where she lobbies for what she sees as a more just and humane immigration system. Host Carolyn Beeler spoke with her recently to explore the connections between the tactics and legal powers enacted after 9/11 and the way the US treats migrants at home today.Maria Mitri: In the last year, we’ve really seen what that looks like in unprecedented ways. Agencies beyond just Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) have been conducting enforcement. We’ve seen across the federal government from the National Guard, Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms, even Customs and Border Protection, which usually is limited to activity at and near the border, have been deployed on our streets in communities across the country, armed. Obviously, we’ve seen this has borne fatal results, not just in Minnesota, but in other states where citizens and immigrants have been killed or brutalized. And I think this has all been super-powered by an unprecedented level of funding in the last year, upwards of $200 billion. But the executive authorities that have been used, maybe stretched in the last year, were laid in the aftermath of 9/11.People arrive before the start of a naturalization ceremony at the US Citizenship and Immigration Services Miami Field Office in Miami, Aug. 17, 2018.Wilfredo Lee/AP/FileAt the high level, this country’s Department of Homeland Security was developed in direct response to the 9/11 attacks, right? We didn’t have a DHS before. So, after 9/11, we saw pretty quickly 20 or so offices across a couple federal departments consolidated into one big DHS, including Immigration and Customs Enforcement. And so, with immigration enforcement sort of folded into this umbrella of Homeland Security and counterterrorism, this immediate conflation happened, right, between immigration enforcement and counterterrorism. And this paradigm was created that foreign nationals are potential terrorists instead of potential newcomers or potential neighbors.And I think I’d also like to highlight just a couple other examples. I think a lot of listeners might be familiar with the PATRIOT Act, which granted the federal government, at the time, unprecedented powers to surveil, search and detain individuals. But it also amended immigration law to allow for deportations of foreign nationals on the basis of their alleged connections [designated] the US government as quote-unquote “terrorist groups,” or if the government considers them to be acting in support of quote-unquote “terrorist activity.” There was also a program called the National Security Entry-Exit Registration System, NSEERS for short, and this asked that tens of thousands of immigrant men — rather, required that tens of thousands of immigrant men, mostly from the Middle East, North Africa, and South Asia — register and check in with the federal government.US Attorney General John Ashcroft holds up a copy of “Report from the Field: The USA PATRIOT Act at Work” during a news conference in Washington, July 13, 2004.Evan Vucci/AP/File photoThen-President George W. Bush speaks on the global “War on Terror” at the Port of Tampa, Fla., Feb. 17, 2006.Mike Carlson/AP/File photoYeah, I think it’s a great question, right? Certainly every country has the right to enforce laws, has the right to develop laws, has the right to develop borders and secure those borders. But I think when it’s militarized in such a way that civil liberties are violated, right, that free speech is violated, that someone’s legal status who has a green card, who has a student visa, has done all the right things, followed the right steps, is now under threat of deportation, it’s a new level. You know, there was something to be said about the fear and anger and sorrow felt across this country in the aftermath of 9/11. But the construction of immigration as a matter of counterterrorism immediately caused undue harm to thousands of people and is what laid the foundation for the violence and abuse we’ve seen in immigration enforcement recently. And I think the United States really has to embrace an affirmative vision of the future and integrate that vision into the policymaking that happens domestically and abroad.This interview has been lightly edited and condensed for clarity.