BREAKING: How The US Border Is Becoming a Tool of Control

Why new US-Canada border checks matter — and what they tell us about where the US is heading.

What we’ll cover here:

• This Isn’t Normal. Here’s Why It Matters

• What’s The Endgame?

• What To Look For Next

Dear friends,

Less than a month ago, I wrote to explain why Trump wouldn’t invoke the Insurrection Act. That piece focused on the Southern border with Mexico, because I’d let the headlines and rhetoric pull my attention there, just as they were designed to. Like many, I assumed the US-Canada border was irrelevant to the migrant issue. Safe. Uncontested.

I was wrong.

One of my valued subscribers recently reached out after reading about new checkpoints near crossings between the US and Metro Vancouver. Are they worth worrying about, especially given Project 2025’s obsession with the phrase “seal the border”?

My short answer is yes.

In fact, this development — U.S. border agents conducting outbound checks on Americans and Canadians as they leave the country — ought to raise serious concerns, not just for cross-border travellers but for anyone tracking how far the United States is moving toward a more militarised, internally policed society.

Let’s step back and unpack this clearly.

This Isn’t Normal. Here’s Why It Matters.

Ordinarily, U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) focuses on inbound traffic — those entering the U.S. — to enforce immigration law, seize contraband, or identify threats. Outbound checks do happen, but they’ve typically been limited, targeted, and event-driven (e.g., during Amber Alerts or when a fugitive’s on the run). What’s new here, as immigration lawyer Len Saunders points out, is the daily and systematic nature of the checks. That's not normal. Normally, they're only put in place during a crisis, like an amber alert or an on-the-run criminal. Nor does it make economic sense, given how much small towns like Blaine depend on Canadian tourism and trade.

U.S. Customs and Border Protection told CBC News it "routinely conducts inspections on outbound traffic" as part of its national security mission, aiming to apprehend "wanted individuals" and seize "a variety of contraband." But according to Blaine Mayor Mary Lou Steward, who observed the operation on Saturday, officers were stopping every fourth car, checking the trunk and backseat, then waving drivers through.

So it doesn't make sense.  Yet here it is, under the umbrella of "national security".

To understand what’s happening, we need to look at Project 2025, the Heritage Foundation–driven blueprint for a second Trump term, which uses phrases like “sealing the border” not just rhetorically but as a policy goal.

Project 2025 calls for:

- A massive expansion of interior enforcement (think checkpoints far from actual borders)

- Military and National Guard involvement in immigration control

- Surveillance and databasing of those suspected of aiding “illegal migration”

- And a radical redefinition of what constitutes a threat to “national sovereignty”

So when we see a quiet but persistent increase in border checkpoints, it’s not just a logistical change. It’s a behavioural nudge, a test of public response.

Let's be clear, this is meant as a deterrent — not just to smugglers, but to immigrants, dual nationals, and even U.S. citizens and Canadians who might oppose or question Trump-era policies. When people stop crossing, stop shopping, stop engaging, the border becomes less a gateway and more a gate.

There’s another layer to this: outbound checks offer the state a new tool of egress control — the ability to monitor or even block who leaves the country and what they take with them. That’s not standard practice in democratic countries. But it is standard in authoritarian ones. Think of it less like airport customs, and more like a soft closure of the border from both directions.

Should Americans panic? No. But they should pay attention. Especially when:

- Border checks are expanding beyond emergencies into daily routine

- “National security” is becoming a blanket justification with no clear criteria

- Economic self-harm is tolerated to enforce a political narrative

That’s when we’re no longer talking about border control. Instead we’re talking about border theatre — a visible performance designed to project strength, instil fear, and restrict freedom, all in the name of security.

---

What’s The Endgame?

The ultimate aim of this expanding border infrastructure — and Project 2025’s broader vision — is not just to “secure the border.” It's more likely to be to centralise control.

Let me walk you through it.

1. Locking in a Permanent Ruling Order

Project 2025’s core purpose is to dismantle the administrative state and replace it with loyalists. That includes purging civil servants, politicising the military, and putting federal law enforcement directly under presidential command. In that world, border security isn’t about geography—it’s a domestic tool of enforcement. It sets the tone: who belongs, who gets punished, who gets silenced.

2. Controlling Exit as Well as Entry

In most democracies, the freedom to leave is a basic right. But when a regime starts to fear whistleblowers, dissidents, or the outflow of wealth and knowledge, that right becomes a point of control. Outbound checks — like the ones now appearing at the Canadian border — start to feel normal.

And the surveillance doesn’t stop at the border; it extends beyond it, tracking where you go, who you meet, and what you take with you. That information can then be used to flag individuals as security risks. Sometimes it’s political or ideological, which is especially troubling, as it targets people for who they are or what they believe, not what they’ve done. Other times, it’s used to control journalists, economic actors, activists—anyone seen as inconvenient or disloyal. Then the right to travel becomes conditional — quietly tied to your perceived loyalty to the ruling administration.

That’s why these outbound checks matter: they don’t just monitor movement. They mark the line between a state that upholds rights, and one that decides who gets to have them.

3. Chilling Protest and Civil Resistance

If people know they can be stopped, searched, or entered into a government database simply for crossing a border, it changes how they behave. It plants a seed of hesitation. Maybe they’ll hold off on attending that cross-border protest. Maybe they’ll cancel a visit to speak at a conference, meet with family, or collaborate with others doing political or humanitarian work. Maybe they’ll avoid travelling altogether— because they don’t want to risk being flagged, questioned, or added to a watchlist.

The psychological effect is quiet but powerful. Over time, it isolates people. It discourages solidarity and suppresses connection. The border becomes more than a line between countries — it becomes a choke point for dissent. A place where participation in civil society is slowed, filtered, or blocked altogether.

(In a future post, I plan on unpacking the authoritarian playbook that’s been taking shape since the Occupy Wall Street movement — a playbook Trump is now poised to use to silence dissent. It’s imperative you understand what’s happening, especially if you intend to protest on June 14. Please subscribe if you don't want to miss it. )

4. Setting the Stage for Economic and Demographic Engineering

There’s a deep nativist streak running through Project 2025’s thinking — an ideal of “restoring” a certain national identity, often framed in nostalgic or exclusionary terms. This shows up in policies designed to deter immigration, roll back diversity initiatives, and promote selective reproduction in line with a preferred demographic profile. It also plays out in efforts to reshape the electorate, either by limiting who can vote or by redrawing the boundaries of belonging altogether.

Outbound restrictions fit neatly into this vision. They raise quiet but consequential questions: Who gets to leave without scrutiny? Who’s discouraged from coming back? Who’s tracked and databased—not just as a traveller, but as a citizen whose movements, choices, and loyalties are subject to evaluation? In this context, the border becomes a filter—not only for who enters the country, but for who is allowed to exit freely, and under what terms.

5. Normalising Emergency Powers

Frequent outbound checks, like warrantless searches and military involvement in civilian affairs, chip away at legal norms. Over time, the public gets used to it. Emergency powers become permanent powers. You don’t need martial law if you’ve already got checkpoints, data collection, and loyalty tests embedded into everyday life.

This is not about sealing the border. It’s about sealing control—over people, not just territory.

That doesn’t mean the country flips into authoritarianism overnight. But it does mean the conditions are set and the next crisis — whether real or manufactured — will accelerate the slide.

---

What to Look for Next

If you take these outbound border checks as a canary in the coal mine — and I strongly recommend you do — then the next phase of escalation will likely show up in one or more of these ways. Not dramatic all at once, but incremental, cumulative, and easy to ignore unless you're watching the pattern.

Here’s what to keep your eyes on:

1. Expanded Checks at Official Border Crossings

This is where it starts. International airports, seaports, and land crossings see a visible uptick in outbound inspections — more questioning, more baggage searches, more scrutiny of purpose and intent. The public is told it’s about national security, trafficking, or contraband. But over time, this normalises the idea that leaving the country is something that must be justified. It lays the groundwork for broader acceptance of outbound controls.

2. Interior Checkpoints Far from the Border

Once the idea of constant scrutiny at border points is established, the logic creeps inward. Under U.S. law, Customs and Border Protection can operate within 100 miles of any international border—a zone that covers about two-thirds of the population. That opens the door to more checkpoints on highways, at bus and train stations, and in major cities—not to catch people crossing borders, but to monitor internal movement. Think: a growing normalisation of ID checks by federal agents on domestic soil.

3. Increased Scrutiny of Outbound Travel

Watch for more cases where Americans are questioned not just about where they're going, but why —and what they’re carrying. Especially if you’re a dual national, an activist, or travelling with electronics. It starts looking less like border protection and more like egress control: who’s allowed to leave, and under what terms.

4. Expanded Data Collection at the Border

CBP already has the authority to search devices without a warrant. If you’re asked to unlock your phone, or if you notice more biometric scans — face, fingerprints, even voice — that’s part of the quiet build-up of a national surveillance infrastructure.

It’s important to understand how that infrastructure is expanding. In recent weeks, Elon Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) has been exposed for building a centralised “master database” that pulls in sensitive personal data from across the federal government—including the IRS, SSA, HHS, and HUD.

When CBP’s border powers converge with DOGE’s data ambitions, we’re no longer talking about routine government overreach. We’re looking at the framework for turnkey totalitarianism —a system of control that only needs a leader willing to throw the switch.

5. Greater Military or National Guard Presence

Project 2025 explicitly calls for using military forces for immigration enforcement. If troops start appearing near border crossings or transportation hubs (especially inland), that’s a flashing red light. It's also a constitutional grey zone, given the Posse Comitatus Act, which limits military involvement in civilian law enforcement.

6. Criminalisation of Dissent Framed as “Border Security”

Expect protests, migrant aid, or even humanitarian work near the border to be recast as security threats. If crossing to deliver supplies or attend a rally starts triggering searches or arrests, it’s not about smuggling. It’s about suppressing expression under the pretext of enforcement.

7. Canada Responding in Kind

If Canadian authorities begin tightening their side of the border — not for safety, but out of concern about the U.S. — that’s a geopolitical signal that allies no longer trust America’s border regime as benign. Watch for Canadian advisories, diplomatic protests, or even mirrored outbound checks on U.S. travellers.

8. Language Shift in Official Communications

Start tracking shifts in language. If “border security” morphs into phrases like “national purity,” “homeland sovereignty,” or “internal threats,” we’re sliding into the rhetorical territory of authoritarian nationalism. Project 2025 already plays with those boundaries.

This is how a democratic country builds an infrastructure of control before most people realise it’s being done. The changes are legal. They’re explained as temporary. They’re happening just far enough from daily life that they don’t trigger alarm.

But if you’re looking, really looking, the pattern is already visible.

Please be careful.

— Lori

---

                   If you don’t want to miss future posts, I invite you to subscribe. 

   And if you believe this kind of work is important — if you want more people to understand what’s really unfolding —  please consider becoming a paid subscriber. 

               This research is all-consuming, but it’s urgent. And it’s only 
                               with your support that I can keep it going.

                               However you show up, I welcome your support.