JENGA ECONOMICS by Dr. Todd Brown

The analogy of a Jenga tower captures how interconnected social systems can become unstable when one piece is removed. Since Trump’s inauguration in 2025, aggressive new deportation policies have begun to pull at these pieces in the U.S. economy and society. Experts warned that the planned mass removals of undocumented immigrants would “upend entire communities and have severe economic fallout.” Deportation actions, including large-scale ICE enforcement and resulting self-deportation, have already begun to send ripples through blue-collar labor markets, school systems, and state budgets.

Many U.S. industries rely heavily on immigrant labor in jobs few U.S.-born workers fill. For example, an analysis by a Joint Economic Committee report estimates mass deportations could remove up to 225,000 farm workers and 1.5 million construction workers from the workforce. (Other sectors would also be hit hard: roughly 1.0 million hospitality workers, 870,000 manufacturing workers, and 461,000 transportation workers could be lost.) Deleting such large pools of workers immediately creates shortages. One Arizona economist noted, “If you remove a significant portion of the state’s labor force, what results is labor shortages… That creates supply chain issues (and) shortages of goods and services.” In practical terms, farms without enough pickers will yield less produce, construction sites will stall, and related services like sanitation (waste collection and processing) will struggle to find workers.

Even city trash collection and waste-removal services, which employ many immigrants, would face dangerous understaffing and higher costs. For instance, data shows that about 1 in 5 farm laborers and 1 in 8 construction workers lack permanent legal status. Officials warn that losing even a fraction of these workers “could have economic implications… in terms of housing costs like house building, but also terms of food costs.” Indeed, building homes requires laborers and materials; if deportations shrink the labor force, home prices and rents can rise. The same is true for groceries: with fewer workers to grow, pick, and process food, consumer prices climb. One report warned that such labor cuts “could hit agriculture and construction sectors hard, pushing up prices for homebuyers and grocery shoppers.”

Economists quantify these effects as a broad price shock. Models by think tanks predict that removing large numbers of immigrant workers could push prices several percent higher and shave points off GDP growth. In short, blue-collar industries form the bottom blocks of the societal tower: take enough of them away, and the whole structure, from supply chains to consumer costs, can wobble like a pulled Jenga block.

Deportation policies are also reshuffling families, especially those with school-aged children. Many immigrants with U.S.-citizen children are choosing to leave the U.S. altogether. For example, thousands of immigrant parents have already notified authorities that they plan to return home. When families pull up stakes, they withdraw their children from local schools.

Even short of permanent departure, fear alone causes absenteeism. Surveys and reports show immigrant families are “scared to send their children to school,” and many have kept their kids home during enforcement scares. In practice, this “chilling effect” leads to sudden drops in attendance. For instance, Denver Public Schools saw attendance fall about 3% in early 2025 compared to the prior year, with immigrant-heavy schools seeing around 4–5% declines. Nationwide, similar dips appear whenever ICE raid rumors circulate. The net result is tens of thousands fewer students in classrooms. Every absent child not only loses learning time but also leaves a gap in the enrollment count that schools rely on.

​Fewer students in school directly cuts funding, because U.S. public school budgets are almost always tied to enrollment. Virtually every state allocates money to schools on a per-student basis. About 35 states (plus Washington D.C.) give districts a fixed dollar amount per enrolled student. Even the states with more complex formulas ultimately base funding on headcount. A Kaiser Family Foundation analysis explains that every state’s formula is “directly or indirectly based on the number of students served”. Thus, when immigrant families stop showing up or move away, the money a district receives immediately shrinks. States with large immigrant-child populations, notably California and Texas, are especially exposed.

​In plain terms, declining enrollment creates budget holes. If a district loses 5% of its students, it typically loses about 5% of its state funding. Overheads like school buildings, utilities, and administrative staffing do not shrink as fast, so districts end up with less revenue for the same costs. The KFF report notes that attendance drops tied to immigration enforcement “could lead to decreases in school funding.”. This, in turn, forces hard choices: schools may have to cut programs, delay maintenance, or, most painfully, reduce staffing. Even small percentage drops in some neighborhoods can translate to millions of dollars lost, forcing cuts to special education, arts, or enrichment programs that were already underfunded.

Districts facing these shortfalls have limited options. They can ask local voters to raise taxes or pass bond measures to replace lost state funds, or they can trim expenses. If voters reject new revenue measures, districts have no choice but to make deeper cuts by laying off teachers, aides, and other staff to balance the budget. As one analysis notes, districts facing steep enrollment declines “must either shrink spending, often by reducing the number of staff or schools, or raise additional local dollars to compensate.”

Without new revenue, the adjustment falls on school budgets. This pattern is already playing out in states with large immigrant populations. In California, for example, sustained drops in student counts have coincided with budget gaps. A Los Angeles Times report found that districts getting fewer students “receive less revenue without a corresponding decrease in overhead,” forcing cuts to programs and services. One district, Santa Ana Unified in Orange County, voted in 2025 to cut 262 jobs in response to declining enrollment and a $154 million budget deficit. Los Angeles Unified has similarly projected the need to pull back staffing if enrollment does not recover. In short, if taxes do not rise to cover the gap, the only way for districts to balance their books is by cutting staff, classes, and services. In our Jenga analogy, that means removing yet more blocks (educators and programs) to keep the tower standing, at great cost to educational quality.

The pieces have begun falling like Jenga blocks. Aggressive deportations, whether by ICE enforcement or induced self-deportation, subtract crucial labor and pull children out of schools, triggering cascading problems across the economy. Stripping out large numbers of workers in agriculture, construction, and related fields creates shortages and higher prices.

Pushing families to leave abruptly shrinks school enrollments and funding, leading to layoffs and cutbacks. These interlocking effects illustrate how tightly woven our systems are. Policies intended to remove one “piece” of society risk destabilizing the whole structure. Each block matters in the interconnected Jenga tower of the economy, education, and communities. Remove one carelessly, and the rest can tumble. Keeping the tower standing will require comprehensive solutions that recognize these linkages, not just pulling blocks out and hoping nothing falls. ∎