Full Breakdown
Trump Administration Proposes $18,000 Civil Fines for Migrants Ordered Removed in Absentia
5/21/2026, 9:13:50 PM
$18,000 Fines Target Migrants Ordered Removed in Absentia
The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) announced a proposed increase in civil penalties from $5,130 to $18,000 per individual who has been ordered “removed in absentia.” The policy would affect more than 23,000 people annually and is intended to pressure migrants to self-deport. The fee increase was published in the Federal Register on May 20, with a public comment period ending June 22.
Legislative and Administrative Background
Congress directed DHS to begin charging removal-in-absentia fines last year. The Biden administration previously used the CBP One app for asylum applications; the Trump administration renamed it CBP Home, added a $2,600 cash incentive for self-deportation, and promised fine forgiveness for participants. DHS reports that over 100,000 migrants have used the app to leave the United States. Removal-in-absentia orders rose from 62,510 in 2022 to 223,000 in 2024, according to DHS statistics.
Key Agencies and Stakeholders
- DHS / ICE – responsible for drafting and enforcing the fine schedule and deploying roughly 330 officers to more than 40 states and Puerto Rico.
- White House – frames the fines as a deterrent to illegal presence.
- Advocacy groups – American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) and American Immigration Council (AIC) contest the policy.
- Immigration attorneys – represent affected migrants and highlight procedural concerns.
Enforcement Data and Financial Projections
- Proposed fine: $18,000 per person.
- Potential coverage: >23,000 individuals annually.
- DHS has issued $36 billion in fines to about 65,000 people from Jan 20 2025 to Mar 18 2026, averaging $553,000 per person.
- DHS acknowledges that most of the new fines are unlikely to be collected, given the average Mexican household income of $5,000.
- Self-deportation payments: $2,600 per participant; over 100,000 migrants have utilized the program.
Official Government Position
DHS officials state that the fines are meant to “encourage people to voluntarily self-deport” and to send a clear message that “illegal aliens in the country illegally should leave now or face consequences.” The agency is seeking public input on the rule and emphasizes that the penalties are a cost-recovery measure for arrest, detention, and removal expenses.
Criticism & Opposition
Advocacy groups argue the fines criminalize virtually every migrant, including lawful entrants. They contend the policy “terrifies people” and fails to address systemic barriers that prevent court attendance. Legal experts warn that higher penalties do not improve compliance when migrants lack notice or comprehension of proceedings.
On-the-Ground Legal Impacts
Immigration attorney Nicolas Chavez reported a client who received a $1.8 million fine after ICE back-dated a decades-old removal order the client never knew existed. Chavez notes many migrants skip mandatory hearings because they doubt they will receive a meaningful opportunity to present their case.
Conflicting Reports & Gaps
- DHS projects low collection rates for the $18,000 fines but provides no concrete data on actual payments from the prior $36 billion in fines.
- The administration cites deterrence as a goal, yet court-attendance data show a decline after the policy’s announcement, without clear attribution.
Verbatim Quotes
- “Our message is clear: Illegal aliens in the country illegally should leave now or face consequences,” — Homeland Security officials
- “Putting this fine or bounty on people's heads makes it feel even more like they're a fugitive from justice,” — Sarah Mehta, deputy director, ACLU Equality Division
- “Overall, the goal is to terrify people and make them feel they have to leave as soon as they can.” — Sarah Mehta
- “Effective enforcement means creating a system people can actually comply with, not just ratcheting up ever-bigger punishments when they can't,” — Aaron Reichlin-Melnick, senior fellow, American Immigration Council
- “Many of these immigrants believe they will not receive a meaningful opportunity to present their case before a judge and decide it’s better not to show up,” — Nicolas Chavez, immigration attorney
What’s Next
The public comment window closes on June 22, after which DHS will decide whether to finalize the rule. Stakeholders anticipate legal challenges and continued ICE deployments, while advocacy groups plan further outreach to affected communities.
