The Impact of Trump-Era Policies on Anti-Human Trafficking Services: Perspectives from Service Providers

Background and Purpose: Despite right-wing claims that President Trump is well-positioned to combat human trafficking, empirical evidence examining the consequences of the current administration’s policies remains limited. At the same time, scholars and advocates have raised concerns about actions that may undermine anti-trafficking efforts, including defunding critical nongovernmental organizations, erasing data and limiting research on highly marginalized populations, expanding restrictive immigration policies, and weakening anti-corruption efforts. Although these policy shifts are widely believed to increase vulnerability to trafficking, there is a notable lack of research assessing their impact. Thus, the purpose of this study was to explore service providers’ perspectives on the current sociopolitical climate and its impact on trafficked clients and services provided.

Methods: This qualitative study used a phenomenological approach to conduct interviews and focus groups with 24 participants, representing 10 unique agencies, located across the Northeastern U.S. between May and July 2025. Overall, 19 participants identified as cisgender women, 5 identified as transgender or nonbinary, and participants average age was 37. One-fourth of providers (n = 6) self-reported a history of human trafficking. Reflexive thematic analysis was conducted to identify themes.

Findings: Three themes were identified: (1) Foregrounding conditions of instability in the anti-trafficking field; (2) Pressures and harm resulting from a repressive political climate; and (3) Exacerbated marginalization of structurally vulnerable communities. Participants reported that the current administration did not introduce entirely new challenges but intensified longstanding structural vulnerabilities across funding, enforcement, and social service systems. These foregrounding conditions were largely due to risks associated with politically driven funding, longstanding dysfunction within legal and immigration systems dysfunction, and bureaucracy within social services that were deemed inefficient and trauma-inducing for clients. Still, the current sociopolitical climate was experienced as one that imposes significant organizational and structural harm to communities affected by human trafficking and the providers that serve them. Indeed, participants reported ethical and financial pressures that often resulted in self-censorship, strategic service reduction, and provider and client strain. Participants lamented that together the foregrounding conditions of structural instability coupled with a repressive contemporary sociopolitical climate significantly affected clients’ access to critically needed services and their overall well-being. While participants felt that these impacts were experienced broadly among communities affected by human trafficking, they believed that the effects were particularly acute for client’s facing compounded marginalization, particularly undocumented and LGBTQ+ clients.

Conclusion and Implications: Our findings offer insights on how contemporary policies enacted by the Trump administration negatively impact anti-trafficking efforts from the unique vantage points of providers who are on the ground, responding in real time. Findings illustrate a feedback loop in which policy-driven service disruptions reduce access and engagement, which may then be misinterpreted as decreased need, resulting in further funding cuts and weakened systems of care. Lastly, this study highlights clear disconnects between our nation’s vocal commitments to address human trafficking and continued development of policies that undermine efforts to reduce trafficking and support those impacted by it.