Will Trump Immigration Policies Threaten the Eastern Shore Economy? By Wilson Dean

Since assuming office, President Trump has initiated several aggressive policies designed to remake (some say destroy) the entire U.S. immigration system. What Trump has not addressed, however, is whether this is becoming a much more expansive project that will have long-term economic repercussions for our Eastern Shore, as well as the entire U.S.

President Trump and his appointees are dismantling the U.S. immigration system in three ways. First, the President has effectively shut down our borders to undocumented immigrants, including those seeking amnesty. Several million entered the U.S. during the Biden Administration, roughly 60 percent of all those apprehended at the border. 

Second, the Trump Administration is slashing the number of legal immigrants allowed to enter the U.S. The number of legal immigrants surpassed one million in both 2023 and 2024; however, a recent Forbes article quotes the National Foundation for American Policy (NFAP) as estimating that number will decline under the Trump policies by 33 to 50 percent (1.5-2.4 million people) over the next four years.  

In addition, the Trump Administration has revoked, or is in the process of revoking, Temporary Protected Status (TPS) for people from Venezuela, Haiti, and Afghanistan, thereby denying them the right to work in the U.S. This would result in the displacement of more than half a million workers.

Third, and most visible, is the deportation of people whose current presence in the U.S. is deemed to be illegal or, in some cases, just unwanted by the current Administration. Nationally, the government claims it deported 675,000 people in 2025. 

ICE has not responded to inquiries seeking detailed information about Maryland, but the Data Deportation Project has noted that more than 3.300 people were arrested by ICE through mid-October 2025 since the time President Trump took office, with 50.9 percent having no previous criminal charges at all. This is more than double the number of annual arrests in Maryland that have occurred in recent years.

So how is all this affecting businesses, and, in fact, all of us on the Maryland Eastern Shore? Data at the county level is weak, but a look at Maryland-wide information on immigrants is helpful in allowing us to reach some conclusions about the Eastern Shore. 

To understand the role of immigrants in Maryland, we note that the American Immigration Council estimates that immigrants comprise 17 percent of Maryland’s population. Immigrants in Maryland provide more than 60 percent of construction workers, as well as maids/housekeeping cleaners in the state. Immigrants also account for 54 to59 percent of carpenters, taxi drivers, and life scientists.

Among the immigrants in Maryland, about 23 percent (240,000) are calculated as being undocumented. Undocumented workers in Maryland represent a significant portion of the total workforce in the following industries: Construction (19.7 percent), Entertainment/Hospitality/food (9.8 percent), General Services (9.2 percent), and Manufacturing (5.2 percent). 

Key Eastern Shores industries are generally recognized to be agribusiness, tourism/hospitality, transportation/logistics, and maritime (seafood/fishing). The importance of immigrant workers to the hospitality industry is reflected in the Maryland state data. Another report indicates “immigrant labor, including undocumented workers, are the ‘backbone’ of the Maryland Eastern Shore’s agriculture and food production economy.”  In addition, immigrants fill more than 60 percent of seafood processing and crab-picking jobs on the Eastern Shore.

Disruption of businesses caused by Trump’s immigration crackdown is common throughout the major Maryland Eastern Shore industries. Raids have been reported across the region, including the largely immigrant town of Marydale in Caroline County, as well as Easton and Salisbury. Farmers and other employers of immigrants have mentioned both Cambridge and Henderson as other areas of the immigrant crackdown to me as well.

Now to the main point of this article. It has become clear that the impact of all these three initiatives under President Trump’s direction is to significantly suppress new immigration (as well as vastly reduce those of past immigration into the U.S). The Brookings Institute has stated that, for the first time in at least 50 years, the net number of immigrants in the U.S. in 2025 actually declined by 10,000 to 290,000. 

Whatever one’s view on the motivating force behind the destruction of the U.S. immigration system, there is strong bipartisan agreement among economists in opposition to reducing the number of immigrants entering our country every year (much less removing the ones already here). A large number of credible studies (e.g., Congressional Budget Office, NFAP, Peterson Institute of International Economics) have concluded that a minimum of one million new immigrant arrivals is needed to maintain the current workforce, while about 2.4 million would be needed to boost growth. 

Simply put, the U.S. is experiencing an insufficient native-born supply to its workforce, and it will only become worse. This is due in part to the massive retirement of the baby boomers, with more than four million reaching retirement age annually to 2027 and close to that number continuing to 2030. The labor shortage is further exacerbated by the low birthrate here in the U.S., a trend common to all well-developed countries. 

Beyond the impact on the workforce itself, the most concerning aspect of Trump’s immigration policy is that, while shutting off the inflow valve for people our economy so badly needs, the Trump Administration has offered no realistic Plan B to replace immigrant workers. Various Administration spokespersons have stated that the replacements will come from hiring native-born Americans, from enhanced workforce training, and from expanding the temporary seasonal importation of immigrant workers through the H2-A (agricultural) and H-2B (non-agricultural) visa programs. Let’s look at each of these three Administration positions below.

A wealth of studies (examples include the Economic Policy Institute and the Cato Institute) have shown that immigrants do not displace native-born U.S. workers. Most studies maintain that immigrants take jobs native workers are unwilling to take, but another major point is that the number of jobs in the U.S. is not infinite. Because of this, immigrant labor tends to raise the economy because it expands the workforce, thereby expanding economic growth by adding to demand as well as supply.

A conversation I had with one well-established, large employer on the Maryland Eastern Shore of immigrant laborers in a demanding physical occupation was revealing. He stated that he is open to anyone working for him, but the raw truth is that the immigrants in his workforce are hardworking, extremely skilled, and very loyal. He noted that he rarely has many native-born job applicants, and that most who do attempt the work lack the initiative and conscientiousness displayed by his immigrant workers. This is all admittedly anecdotal, but it contradicts the equally anecdotal claims of “America First” proponents who claim that native-born Americans could easily replace immigrants in the U.S.

Looking at the second Administration’s argument for how to replace immigrants, it is difficult to comment on the Trump Administration’s claim that increased workforce training can replace immigrant labor. This is because Administrative spokespersons have not provided any substantive information to more fully describe what kind of training they had in mind or how they would implement any such program.

With regard to the third Trump Administration’s proposed approach, its H-2A and H-2B plan to greatly expand the use of seasonal immigrant labor to replace permanent immigrants, may initially sound attractive. Nonetheless, it is fraught with legal and moral difficulties when it comes to implementation. The history of this program is replete with documented worker abuse, a fact that has led to the adoption in the U.S. of stringent standards businesses must now meet to ensure worker safety, decent living conditions, and reasonable wages for those participating in the program. 

The Trump Administration’s plan to overcome these problems is to simply eliminate most of these safeguards protecting seasonal laborers. This repeal of guard rails in Congress is largely led by our own Representative Andy Harris, resulting in the passage of amendments to this effect in the House Appropriations Committee last year. Nonetheless, critics claim it would have the effect of establishing a program of indentured servitude in the U.S., and Congress as a whole appears less convinced at present to support this approach. 

The upshot of the Trump Administration not having an acceptable strategic alternative to the loss of people entering the workforce is that there will be a disruptive and negative economic impact on all of us. The Trump Administration has made no effort whatsoever to quantify the economic consequences of its immigration policies. In contrast, NFAP analysis estimates these policies will ultimately lower U.S. economic growth by almost one-third, “harming U.S. living standards.”

The void left by destroying the immigration system will first manifest itself in businesses struggling to fill labor positions. The key sectors most vulnerable according to economic studies are construction, healthcare, and agriculture–all industries of major importance to the Maryland Eastern Shore. 

That, in turn, will inevitably translate into higher prices as consumers are forced to pay more for increasingly scarce products. The irony in all this, of course, is that Trump will have exacerbated the very issue many observers felt led to his 2024 election—high inflation/less affordability.

Wilson Dean was the Owner/President of a publishing and consulting firm for 34 years until 2021, providing economic, energy, and environmental policy and pricing forecasts for global clients. He lives in Talbot County, enjoying kayaking, wildlife, and babysitting his grandchildren with his wife, Carol.