Carlos Trujillo may not be a household name, but he was instrumental in helping President-elect Donald Trump hone his message and win a historic number of Latino voters last week.
Trujillo, who’s been a senior adviser to Trump since his 2016 presidential run and served in his first administration, believes the Republican’s decisive victory ushered in a mandate to implement far-reaching immigration reforms, including mass deportations.
The son of immigrants who defected from Fidel Castro’s communist Cuba, Trujillo applauds Trump’s recent decision to name immigration hard-liners Stephen Miller and Tom Homan as deputy chief of staff for policy and border czar, respectively. And he believes they’ll bring back two of Trump’s previous migration-deterrent policies: the so-called “safe third country” agreements and the “Remain in Mexico” program.
“Those hires are excellent ones and are going to help carry out the vision more than 74 million Americans — including Hispanics — voted for,” Trujillo told POLITICO.
This interview has been edited for length and clarity.
The president-elect has selected Stephen Miller and Tom Homan to help implement his mass deportation plans. Can you explain how that’s going to be carried out, especially since the president-elect is suggesting there may be no price tag for the scale of it?
So obviously, the price tag, I think it’s less expensive to deport people who are in this country illegally — committing crimes — than it is to keep them.
I worked with Stephen in the first Trump administration. Tom Homan has a spectacular reputation. And both are people who were very, very effective in curbing illegal migration.
Stephen was essential in negotiating the “safe third country” agreements, the “Remain in Mexico” policy — these were all issues that President Trump openly campaigned on, unlike his Democratic opponent who campaigned for sanctuary cities before flipping to saying she’s going to be really tough on the border.
Are you also angling for a position in the upcoming administration?
No, I’m helping Trump and the team through the transition process. But I’m not committed to any position or even entering the administration. I’m happy in the private sector.
Democrats hammered the first Trump administration on the imagery of the government breaking up families and putting kids in cages, or rounding up people who haven’t committed violent crimes.
Are you concerned Trump’s mass deportations plan is going to renew criticisms of family separation all over again?
So just to clarify, the kids in cages started under the Obama administration. President Trump has been very clear in that the first step is to remove criminals.
Let’s start with the 13,000 murderers; I think that’s a pretty good number of people we want to get out. There are over 600,000 people who have [had contact with] law enforcement or have criminal records in this country. I think, obviously, the mass deportations should focus on those who are the most dangerous and most violent and pose the most risk to our country.
Will this 600,000 be enough? My assumption is some will be looking for figures much higher than that. How do you balance a mass deportation plan with those who are stressing a humane approach to this?
I’m not sure of the narrative that you’re painting, that all these people are concerned. Were they concerned for the last four years when millions of people entered this country and showed up in cities that are completely overrun?
There are entire hotels dedicated to migrant staffing across this country. There are veterans who are being displaced from their houses. I’m not sure the narrative of “we’re going to separate children” is really an accurate narrative.
Is Trump’s agenda going to include finishing the border wall too?
Finishing the wall is very important, but I also think it’s important to focus on all the great policies that the Trump administration advanced in the first term, including the “safe third country agreements,” “Remain in Mexico” and Title 42 expulsions. Those are all important things I’m sure will be implemented in some shape or form [again] to deal with the migratory crisis.
A version of this initially appeared in The Recast, POLITICO’s race and politics newsletter.