The U.S. Supreme Court and the Trump administration are once again at the center of a heated national debate, as aggressive immigration policies collide with mounting concerns over the mental health of millions of children living in the United States. Over the past several months, the Supreme Court has repeatedly intervened to uphold aspects of President Trump’s ongoing immigration crackdown, a move that has not only shaped the legal landscape but also intensified the emotional and psychological struggles faced by immigrant families across the country.
According to Law.com, the nation’s highest court has supported the Trump administration’s immigration agenda on multiple occasions in recent months. These interventions have allowed controversial policies—ranging from expanded detainment and deportation efforts to workplace raids—to proceed, even as public opinion remains deeply divided along partisan lines. A recent Gallup poll cited by Law.com found that Americans’ approval of the Supreme Court’s performance is closely tied to their political affiliations, underscoring the polarized nature of the current debate.
While the legal wrangling continues, the human consequences are becoming harder to ignore. On July 25, 2025, researchers at the University of California, Riverside (UCR) School of Medicine published a sobering report in Psychiatric News documenting what they describe as a “mental health crisis” among both U.S.-born and foreign-born children. The report, highlighted by Newsweek, links the Trump administration’s aggressive immigration policies directly to profound emotional harm in children, citing increased rates of depression, anxiety, and post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) among those whose parents are at risk of deportation.
“Some of the glaring things that we have seen are that immigration rates and the threat of separation, which is a critical piece of this for children and families, has been identified with very significant mental health consequences—negative consequences for mental health for adults and those families as well,” said Lisa Fortuna, professor and chair of psychiatry and neuroscience at UCR and lead psychiatrist behind the report, in an interview with Newsweek.
Fortuna and her colleagues argue that the “ripple effects” of broad immigration enforcement—now reaching into environments once considered safe, such as schools, healthcare facilities, and community centers—are undermining the stability caregivers need to support their children. The study points to a surge in chronic anxiety and PTSD, even among children who merely fear a parent could be detained or deported, let alone those who have experienced it firsthand. “What we have found is that there’s an increased rate of depression, anxiety, even PTSD, among children who have even one parent who might be at risk of deportation even just at risk,” Fortuna explained. “And obviously, when there’s a deportation, there can be even elevated reactions of depression and anxiety and even difficulty focusing in school.”
This psychological toll is not limited to undocumented families. The UCR study warns that the expanding legal ambiguity around who may be targeted for enforcement—including U.S. citizens, lawful permanent residents, non-immigrant visa holders, and undocumented individuals—has intensified fear and uncertainty throughout immigrant communities. Enforcement actions are often applied inconsistently, and the lack of transparency has only heightened anxiety, the report notes.
Perhaps most alarming are the effects on children in mixed-status families, who are caught between worlds and live with the chronic worry that a loved one could be detained or deported at any moment. “Even the threat of separation can generate profound emotional harm,” the report states. Prolonged separations, especially during critical developmental periods, can undermine children’s attachment security and increase their vulnerability to anxiety, depression, and behavioral problems. These risks are compounded for children who have already experienced violence, poverty, or family loss in their countries of origin.
The UCR researchers cite a 2020 national study of 547 U.S.-born adolescents, which found that having a detained or deported family member was associated with elevated risks for suicidal ideation, externalizing behaviors, and alcohol use. For younger children, abrupt caregiver loss has been linked to sleep and appetite disturbances, emotional dysregulation, and developmental regression. Forcible separation from a caregiver is now recognized as an adverse childhood experience that contributes to toxic stress and long-term psychiatric risk.
Despite a reported 10.9 percent decrease in average daily deportations compared to fiscal year 2024, the average daily number of individuals held in immigration detention facilities has risen significantly as of mid-2025, according to the UCR report. “This shift reflects a concerning trend: While deportations may be declining, more individuals are being subjected to prolonged and often indefinite detention,” the study cautions.
The Trump administration, for its part, defends its approach as necessary for public safety and national security. In a statement to Newsweek on August 8, 2025, White House spokeswoman Abigail Jackson said, “The journey across the Southern Border is extremely dangerous and the Biden Administration’s open-border policies enabled smugglers and cartels to take advantage of vulnerable populations attempting to cross, including countless unaccompanied children that the Biden Administration then lost track of and inflicted with huge amounts of trauma. President Trump is rescuing these lost kids and rescuing them from dangerous situations of trafficking and exploitation. A secure border is a safe border—for both Americans and migrants.”
Echoing the administration’s stance, the White House also told Newsweek that “illegal alien parents who do not want to be separated from their children can self deport as a family.” This response, however, has drawn criticism from advocates and researchers, who argue that such policies fail to address the underlying trauma and instability faced by children in immigrant families.
As the legal battles continue, the Supreme Court is poised to weigh in on several related issues. Beyond immigration, the justices are considering whether nearly 30 states’ requirements for medical-malpractice plaintiffs to file expert affidavits should apply in federal diversity jurisdiction cases. They are also deliberating whether courts should be limited in their ability to consider race when addressing under-representation by minority voters—a decision that could have far-reaching implications for civil rights and electoral fairness.
University of Pittsburgh law professor Arthur Hellman, speaking to Law.com, noted, “The Fourth Circuit is in line with the three liberals on the [Supreme] Court. It’s out of line with the conservative majority. But you do have to dig a little more into [the cases].” This comment highlights the ongoing ideological divide on the Court, which continues to shape not only immigration law but the broader landscape of American justice.
Meanwhile, the clinical community is calling for a more proactive response to the mental health crisis facing immigrant children. “Psychiatry must take an active role—not just in treatment, but in advocacy. The mental health of immigrant children is inseparable from the systems that shape their lives,” said study co-author Kevin Gutierrez, assistant clinical professor of health sciences at UCR.
Researchers urge that addressing the crisis requires moving beyond symptom management to tackle the root causes of suffering, including the intergenerational impact of displacement and the daily stressors imposed by enforcement-driven policies. They emphasize the need for mental health professionals to advocate for systemic change, as well as provide support for young people and families struggling to cope with trauma and uncertainty.
As the Supreme Court continues to shape the legal contours of immigration enforcement, the psychological and societal costs of these policies remain in sharp focus. For the millions of children and families living with the daily threat of separation, the stakes could hardly be higher.