United Nations Preparing to Send MORE Migrants to U.S. Border

As Trump’s return looms, the United Nations and NGOs are racing to secure funding for migration support at the U.S. southern border, despite potential policy shifts that could drastically reduce immigration flows.

At a Glance

  • UN and NGOs plan to allocate $1.4 billion in 2025 and $1.2 billion in 2026 for border migration support
  • Funding aims to provide essential services to migrants, including cash assistance and shelter
  • Republican lawmakers seek to cut expenditures on migration support
  • Trump administration plans sweeping immigration reforms, including mass deportations and increased border militarization
  • Potential policy changes could significantly impact U.S. economic growth and labor force

UN and NGO Funding Plans Amid Policy Uncertainty

The United Nations and various non-governmental organizations (NGOs) are moving forward with plans to secure substantial funding for migration support at the U.S. southern border. This initiative comes despite the looming possibility of significant policy changes under a potential second Trump administration that could drastically reduce immigration flows.

According to the UN’s 2025-2026 “Regional Refugee and Migrant Response Plan” (RMRP), a budget of $1.4 billion for 2025 and $1.2 billion for 2026 has been outlined to support migration towards the U.S. southern border. This funding is intended to provide essential services to migrants, including cash assistance and shelter, even as the political landscape threatens to shift dramatically.

In other words: they’re conspiring to stop Trump from securing the border.

Political Challenges and Controversy

The initiative faces significant political challenges, primarily from Republican lawmakers who are seeking to cut such expenditures. The use of U.S. taxpayer dollars to fund migration support has become a contentious issue, with some politicians arguing that it encourages illegal immigration.

“Under the Biden administration, U.S. dollars are being funneled through the United Nation’s IOM into programs that facilitate and encourage illegal migration into our own country,” Rep. Gooden said.

However, proponents of the funding argue that it is necessary to address humanitarian needs and manage migration flows effectively. The UNHCR, a major recipient of U.S. funding, maintains that its assistance is based on humanitarian need rather than political considerations.

Potential Impact of Trump’s Immigration Policies

When Donald Trump returns to the White House in just days, his administration is expected to implement sweeping immigration reforms that could significantly impact migrant flows. These plans include mass deportations, ending birthright citizenship, militarizing the border, and increasing surveillance.

But despite the potential for reduced migration flows under stricter policies, the UN and NGOs appear to be planning for long-term support of more migration. This is evidenced by investments in infrastructure, such as a large facility in Tapachula, Mexico, indicating expectations of continued migratory pressures.

Trump has four years to not only fix the border, but to stop these organizations from undermining U.S. law.