General

* An immigrant is “a person who leaves one country to settle permanently in another.”[1]

* In the context of immigration, the legal terms “foreign national” and “alien” refer to people who are not citizens of the nations where they are residing or visiting.[2] [3] [4] [5]

* In the United States, immigrants can be classified into three broad categories:

1. Citizens[6]
2. Non-citizens who live in the U.S. legally[7]
3. Non-citizens who live in the U.S. illegally[8]

* The U.S. allows visitors and temporary residents from other nations to stay in the United States for certain periods, but they are not immigrants because their stay in the U.S. is temporary.[9] [10]

* Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) is the federal agency that “enforces federal laws governing border control, customs, trade and immigration to promote homeland security and public safety.”[11] [12]

* U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) is the federal agency that “oversees lawful immigration to the United States.”[13]

* ICE and USCIS are divisions of the Department of Homeland Security, which is under the authority of the U.S. President.[14] [15] [16]

* Before 2002, the Immigration and Naturalization Service carried out the functions of both ICE and USCIS.[17]

---

Citizens

* Immigrants who have become citizens of the United States are known as “naturalized citizens.”[18] [19]

* Per U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, some of the benefits of becoming a naturalized citizen include the ability to:

• “vote in federal elections.”
• “travel with a U.S. Passport.”
• “run for elective office where citizenship is required.”
• “participate on a jury.”
• “become eligible for federal and certain law enforcement jobs.”
• “obtain certain state and federal benefits not available to noncitizens.”
• “obtain citizenship for minor children born abroad.”
• “expand and expedite their ability to bring family members to the United States.”[20]

---

Legal Non-Citizens

* Non-citizen immigrants who legally live in the U.S. are known as “legal permanent residents” or “lawful permanent residents.” These people are authorized to permanently live, work, and study in the United States.[21] [22]

* The federal government issues green-colored identification cards to legal permanent residents, and thus, they are also known as “green card holders.”[23] [24]

* At certain points in time, “green cards” have been colors other than green, but the front of the cards issued since 2010 are green:

[25]

---

Illegal Non-Citizens

* Immigrants who illegally live in the U.S. are known as “unauthorized,” “illegal,” or “undocumented” immigrants.[26] [27] [28] [29] [30] [31]

* Unauthorized immigrants include people who enter the United States through:

• illegal means like crossing the border without inspection.

• legal means with a tourist, student, or work visa but overstay the timeframe allowed by the visa.[32] [33] [34]

* Under federal law:

• illegally entering the U.S. is generally a criminal offense and also carries civil penalties.[35] [36] [37]
• unlawful presence in the U.S. is generally a civil violation and can result in deportation but not a prison sentence.[38] [39] [40] [41]

---

Visitors & Temporary Residents

* Foreigners are generally permitted to visit the U.S. if they:

• obtain a travel visa, which is “an official document or mark in your passport that allows you to enter or leave a country for a specific purpose or period of time,” or
• meet certain criteria and are from nations that have visa-free travel agreements with the U.S.[42] [43] [44]

* Some foreigners can legally reside in the U.S. for extended but temporary periods through mechanisms like student or work visas.[45] [46]

* The U.S. government issues many different types of visas, such as those for tourists, athletes, students, businesspeople, agricultural workers, nannies, journalists, nurses, missionaries, and cultural exchange visitors.[47] [48]

* Under federal law, foreigners are generally ineligible for visas and entry to the U.S. if they pose various risks to the health, safety, or finances of others.[49] Examples include people who:

• have been convicted of or admit to committing certain crimes “that involve moral turpitude, whether under U.S. law or foreign law….”[50]
• are “likely at any time to become a public charge,” a “person unable to take care of himself or herself.”[51] [52] [53]
• have “a communicable disease of public health significance.”[54]
• are drug abusers or addicts.[55]
• have physical or mental disorders that “may” endanger “the property, safety, or welfare of the individual or others.”[56]
• apply for student visas and don’t “possess sufficient funds to cover educational expenses….”[57]
• do not “make a credible showing” that “all” of the activities they will engage in “while in the United States are consistent” with their visa applications.[58]
• have “inadequate documentation” to prove that they meet the criteria above or other requirements of federal law.[59]

Data Caveats

* The Census Bureau, which is tasked to measure the U.S. population and its demographics, is a core source of data for the numbers and types of immigrants in the U.S.[60] [61]

* Census Bureau data on immigration is obtained via surveys, and the answers provided by respondents are “not validated against other sources.”[62] [63] [64]

* The Census Bureau has difficulty obtaining accurate counts of immigrants. With regard to this, the academic book American Immigration states that:

• “many” unauthorized immigrants “speak English poorly and may be illiterate as well, so they have trouble filling out the [Census] forms.”
• “in 2010, the Census Bureau offered forms in roughly fifty languages.”
• some immigrants are “isolated and suspicious of the government.”
• “illegal immigrants may fear deportation, despite laws ensuring the confidentiality of their responses.”
• census takers “follow up nonresponses with personal visits,” but “the immigrant population remains hard to find.”
• “the Census Bureau has formed partnerships with many organizations and churches in the immigrant community to encourage responses to the census.”
• “questions about sensitive matters such as legal status no longer appear on the Census form.”
• “no one directly measures who leaves the country [United States].”[65] [66] [67]

* Per the Congressional Budget Office, estimates for the number of unauthorized immigrants in the U.S. “are subject to considerable uncertainty.”[68] This is because:

• millions of immigrants use fraudulent Social Security numbers, fake birth certificates, or other forms of identity fraud to conceal that they are in the U.S. illegally.[69] [70]
• surveys generally require random, unbiased samples in order to be accurate,[71] [72] and some immigrants, especially unauthorized ones, avoid surveys out of fear of exposing their immigration status.[73] [74]
• surveys are dependent upon respondent honesty, and certain groups of non-citizens often misrepresent themselves as citizens on surveys.[75]

---

All Immigrants

* According to the Census Bureau:

• 45.3 million immigrants were living in the U.S. as of 2021.[76] [77] [78]
• immigrants comprised 13.6% of the U.S. population in 2021.[79]
• from 1850 to 2021, the portion of the U.S. population comprised of immigrants ranged from 5% to 15%, with a median of 13% and an average of 11%:

[80]

Nations of Origin

* The Census Bureau estimates that the immigrants living in the U.S. during 2021 came from the following regions:

[81]

* The Census Bureau estimates that immigrants from the following 10 nations comprised 24.9 million or 55% of the foreign-born population living in the U.S. during 2021:

[82]

* Per a 2015 article from Pew Research:

• From 1890 to 1919, “Germany dominated as the country sending the most immigrants to many of the U.S. states, although the United Kingdom, Canada and Italy were also strongly represented.”
• “Since 1965, when Congress passed legislation to open the nation’s borders, immigrants have largely hailed from Latin America and Asia.”
• “Nearly 59 million immigrants have arrived in the United States since 1965, making the nation the top destination in the world for those moving from one country to another.”
• “Mexico, which shares a nearly 2,000-mile border with the U.S., is the source of the largest wave of immigration in history from a single country to the United States.”[83]

* In a scientific bilingual survey of Hispanics living in the U.S. during 2013, 59% said they were not born in the United States or Puerto Rico.[84]

Education

* Per the academic encyclopedia Immigration in America Today, “the 1965 Immigration and Naturalization Act dramatically changed the immigrant composition in America” from “almost entirely working-class” to a mixture of “highly educated and trained workers” and “a large group” of “low-skilled and under-educated immigrants” that “rose in numbers and in percentages in the 1980s and 1990s.”[85]

* In 2022, 63% of Asian immigrants aged 25–64 had a bachelor’s degree or higher, as compared to 39% of people born in the U.S. in the same age group. The rates for other groups were as follows:

[86] [87]

* In 2022, 43% of Mexican and Central American immigrants aged 25–64 did not have a high school diploma or GED, as compared to 5% of people born in the U.S. in the same age group. The rates for other groups were as follows:

[88] [89]

States

* Per the Congressional Budget Office:

* In 2021, 27% of California residents were foreign-born, and this varied by state as follows:

[91]

* From 1995 to 2022, the foreign-born U.S. population rose by 53%, and the native-born population fell by 5%.[92]

* Per various academic texts that address the geographic locations of immigrants in the United States:

---

Citizens

* According to Census data, 22.9 million immigrants who were U.S. citizens lived in the United States during 2022. This equates to 7.0% of the U.S. population.[96]

* From 1907 to 2020, the U.S. awarded citizenship to 31.9 million people, with a median of 164,700 per year and an average of 280,000 per year:

[97]

* In 2021, more immigrants from Latin America were U.S. citizens than from any other area of the world. Since 2004, the portions of immigrants from all areas who were U.S. citizens varied as follows:

[98] [99]

* Since 2004, the portion of the foreign-born population that attained citizenship varied by region of birth as follows:

[100]

* In a scientific bilingual survey of Hispanics living in the U.S. during 2013, 67% said they were U.S. citizens.[101]

---

Non-Citizens

* Non-citizen immigrants living in the U.S. are comprised of both legal and illegal immigrants.[102]

* According to Census data, 24.0 million immigrants who were not U.S. citizens lived in the United States during 2022. This equates to 7.3% of the U.S. population.[103]

* In 2021, more immigrants from Latin America were not U.S. citizens than from any other area of the world. Since 2004, the specific number from all areas were as follows:

[104] [105]

* In 2021, roughly 30% of all Hispanics and Asians aged 18 and older in the U.S. labor force were not U.S. citizens. Since 2004, the portion of non-citizens in the labor force varied by race and ethnicity as follows:

[106]

* In a scientific bilingual survey of Hispanics living in the U.S. during 2013, 33% said they were not U.S. citizens.[107]

---

Legal Non-Citizens

* According to estimates from the U.S. Department of Homeland Security, 13.1 million lawful permanent residents were living in the U.S. as of January 2021.[108] This equates to 4.0% of the U.S. population.[109] Among these lawful permanent residents:

• 70% were eligible to become U.S. citizens.
• 27% of those eligible to become citizens were from Mexico, the leading country of origin.[110]

* The U.S. government granted legal permanent resident status to:

• 87 million people from 1820 to 2020, or an average of 431,331 people per year.
• 11 million people from 2011 to 2020, or an average of 1.1 million people per year.[111]

[112]

* From 2010 to 2020, more immigrants from Latin America were granted legal permanent resident status than from any other area of the world. The specific numbers from all areas were as follows:

2010–2020 Legal Permanent Residence Grants
Region	Number	Portion of Total
Latin America and the Caribbean	4,514,089	40%
Asia	4,323,483	38%
Europe and Canada	1,171,878	10%
Africa and Oceania	1,178,874	10%
Other and Not Specified	152,484	1%
Total	11,340,808	100%

[113]

* In 2020, 63% of the people who became lawful permanent residents were granted this status based on being a relative of someone in the U.S. Since 1986, these portions have varied as follows:

[114] [115]

---

Illegal Non-Citizens

* Using methods detailed in the accompanying footnotes, the following sources have estimated the number of illegal immigrants in the U.S. to be:

Year	Source	Number (Millions)
1980	Demography (Academic Journal)[116]	2–4
1986 Amnesty Legalizes 2.7 Million Unauthorized Immigrants[117]
1990	U.S. Immigration and Naturalization Service[118]	3.5
1995	Pew Research[119]	5.7
2000	U.S. Immigration and Naturalization Service[120]	7.0
2000	Department of Homeland Security[121]	8.5
2005	Bear Stearns[122]	≤ 20
2007	Former Associate General Counsel of the U.S. Immigration and Naturalization Service[123]	38
2007	Ph.D. Demographer[124]	Unknowable
2012	U.S. Department of Homeland Security[125]	11.4
2013	Pew Research[126]	11.3
2014	Center for Migration Studies[127] [128]	10.9
2018	PLOS One (Academic Journal)[129]	16.2–29.5
2018	Pew Research[130]	10.7
2019	Pew Research[131]	10.5
2020	Center for Migration Studies[132] [133]	10.6
2021	Department of Homeland Security[134]	11.4
NOTE: Some of the studies above from different organizations were authored by some of the same people.

* Based on Department of Homeland Security estimates, immigrants from Mexico comprised 48% of illegal immigrants living in the U.S. during 2018. The portions from all nations were as follows:

[135]

* Based on Department of Homeland Security estimates, 23% of illegal immigrants in the U.S. during 2018 were living in California. The portions in all states were as follows:

[136]

* Per the academic book American Immigration, unauthorized immigrants “tend to be located in primarily Democratic regions of the country—urban areas and states such as California and New York….”[137]

* Based upon population estimates from the United Nations, the International Organization for Migration, and Pew Research, in 2015, 4% of the world’s population and 36% to 55% of the world’s illegal immigrants lived in the United States.[138] [139]

---

Nonimmigrant Admissions

* During 2019, the U.S. granted more than 186 million admissions to nonimmigrant visitors.[140] These admissions equate to 57% of the U.S. population.[141]

* Based on estimates by the Department of Homeland Security:

• an average of 3.2 million nonimmigrants lived in the U.S. during 2019.
• 50% were temporary workers and their families.
• 35% were students and their families.
• about 60% were from Asia.[142] [143] [144]

* Amid the Covid-19 pandemic and government-mandated travel restrictions,[145] [146] the U.S. granted admissions to:

• more than 86 million nonimmigrant visitors in 2020, equating to 26% of the U.S. population.[147] [148]
• more than 35 million nonimmigrant visitors in 2021, equating to 10% of the U.S. population.[149] [150]

Survey Data

* In 2021, Pew Research commissioned a nationally representative survey of 1,623 Latino immigrants in the U.S. It found that 87% said it was easier to get ahead in the U.S. than in the country from which they came.[151] [152]

* In 2014, NPR, the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, and the Harvard School of Public Health commissioned a nationally representative survey of 1,478 Latinos in the U.S., 58% of which were immigrants. The following portions of these immigrants said that they came to the U.S. for these major reasons:

• to have a “better life” – 81%
• to find a better job or other economic motives – 70%
• to live in a safer community – 62%
• to join family members – 50%
• to get better healthcare – 32%[153] [154]

* Mexico, which shares a 2,000 mile border with the U.S., is the largest single source of immigration to the United States.[155] [156] In 2009, Pew Research conducted a nationally representative poll of 1,000 adults in Mexico. It found that:

• 17% of Mexicans considered crime to be a “moderately big problem,” and 81% considered it to be a “very big problem.”
• 26% of Mexicans considered “corrupt political leaders” to be a “moderately big problem,” and 68% considered them to be a “very big problem.”
• 51% of Mexicans had in the past year done a favor, given a gift, or paid a bribe to a “government official in order to get services or a document that the government is supposed to provide.”
• 33% of Mexicans said they would “go to live in the United States” at “this moment” if they “had the means and opportunity.”
• among the 33% of Mexicans who said they would move to the U.S. immediately if they could, 55% said they would do so “without authorization.”[157]

---

International

NOTE: The following graphs show correlations between migration and factors that may spur people to migrate, but it is important to realize that correlation does not prove causation.[158] [159] [160] However, the graphs are consistent with surveys of immigrants about their motives for migrating.

* Per the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics:

* Per the textbook Microeconomics for Today (and other academic sources):

* Based on data from more than 175 countries, people tend to migrate away from nations with lower GDPs per person to those with higher GDPs per person:

[165]

* Based on data from more than 175 countries, people tend to migrate away from nations with worse public-sector corruption to those with less public-sector corruption and “higher degrees of press freedom, access to information about public expenditure, stronger standards of integrity for public officials, and independent judicial systems”:

[166] [167] [168] [169]

* Based on data from more than 175 countries, people tend to migrate to nations with regulations that are more business-friendly:

[170]

* Based on data from more than 175 countries, people tend to migrate away from nations with higher murder rates to those with lower murder rates:

[171]

* Per the textbook Introduction to Air Pollution Science:

* Based on data from over 150 countries, people tend to migrate away from nations with lower electricity consumption per person to those with higher electricity consumption per person:

[173]

* Based on data from over 175 countries, people tend to migrate away from nations with lower health spending per person to those with higher health spending per person:

[174]

---

United States

NOTE: The following graphs show correlations between migration and factors that may spur people to migrate, but it is important to realize that correlation does not prove causation.[175] [176] [177] However, the graphs are consistent with surveys of immigrants about their motives for migrating.

* The top 10 birthplaces of immigrants in the U.S. have the following GDPs per person relative to the United States:

[178] [179]

* The top 10 birthplaces of immigrants in the U.S. have the following levels of business regulation relative to the United States:

[180] [181]

* The top 10 birthplaces of immigrants in the U.S. have the following levels of public-sector transparency and accountability relative to the United States:

[182] [183] [184] [185] [186]

* The top 10 birthplaces of immigrants in the U.S. have the following murder rates relative to the United States:

[187] [188]

* The top 10 birthplaces of immigrants in the U.S. have the following levels of electricity consumption relative to the United States:

[189] [190]

* The top 10 birthplaces of immigrants in the U.S. have the following levels of health spending relative to the United States:

[191] [192]

---

Illegally to the United States

NOTE: The following graphs show correlations between migration and factors that may spur people to migrate, but it is important to realize that correlation does not prove causation.[193] [194] [195] However, the graphs are consistent with surveys of immigrants about their motives for migrating.

* The top 10 birthplaces of illegal immigrants in the U.S. have the following GDPs per person relative to the United States:

[196] [197]

* The top 10 birthplaces of illegal immigrants in the U.S. have the following levels of business regulation relative to the United States:

[198] [199]

* The top 10 birthplaces of illegal immigrants in the U.S. have the following levels of public-sector transparency and accountability relative to the United States:

[200] [201] [202] [203] [204]

* The top 10 birthplaces of illegal immigrants in the U.S. have the following murder rates relative to the United States:

[205] [206]

* The top 10 birthplaces of illegal immigrants in the U.S. have the following levels of electricity consumption relative to the United States:

[207] [208]

* Since 1986, U.S. law has required most hospitals with emergency departments to provide an “examination” and “stabilizing treatment” for anyone who comes to such a facility and requests care for an emergency medical condition or childbirth, regardless of their ability to pay and immigration status.[209] [210] [211] [212]

* The top 10 birthplaces of illegal immigrants in the U.S. have the following levels of health spending relative to the United States:

[213] [214]

History

* Before the late 1800s, immigration to the United States was largely unregulated.[215]

* In the late 1800s, Congress enacted laws to prohibit the entry of:

• criminals.
• people with infectious diseases.
• any “person unable to take care of himself or herself without becoming a public charge.”
• most people from China, based on claims that they drove down wages and caused cultural and moral harm to society.[216] [217] [218]

* In 1917, Congress passed legislation that:

• required all immigrants over the age of 16 to show that they were able to read in a language of each immigrant’s choice.
• gave immigration officials more discretion to decide if people should be admitted.
• banned from entry all people from Asia except for Japan and the Philippines.[219]

* In the 1920s, Congress enacted numerical restrictions on immigration from each foreign nation. These laws:

• created immigration quotas based on the number of people from each country who were already in the United States.
• did not apply to spouses and children of U.S. citizens.
• banned from entry all people from Asia except for the Philippines.[220] [221] [222]

* In 1940, near the outset of World War II, the U.S. government took measures to prevent wartime enemies from sabotaging the U.S. by enacting a law that required

immigrants to be fingerprinted, registered, and removed if they were illegally present.[223]

* In the 1940s and early 1950s, Congress repealed the laws that barred Asians from immigrating to the United States. Quotas still limited immigration from Asia to a greater degree than from Western countries.[224] [225] [226]

* In 1965, Congress passed a law that:

• repealed immigration quotas based on the number of people from each country who were already in the United States.
• created uniform quotas for immigration from each nation.
• created preferences for family members, refugees, and employees deemed by the federal government to be in high demand.[227] [228]

* In 1976 and 1978, Congress modified U.S. immigration quotas to limit:

• total immigration to the U.S. to 290,000 people per year.
• immigration from any single country to 20,000 people per year.[229]

* In 1986, Congress passed a comprehensive immigration reform as a compromise between political parties, business interests, religious groups, and ethnic organizations.[230] [231] [232] The resulting bill was approved by 58% of the House and 72% of the Senate, and Republican President Ronald Reagan signed it into law.[233] [234] This legislation:

• legalized most illegal immigrants who had been in the U.S. since the beginning of 1982 and gave them a path to citizenship.[235] [236] [237]
• required these immigrants “to meet certain standards for English proficiency and knowledge of U.S. history and government” in order to become legal permanent residents.[238] [239]
• prohibited “newly legalized” immigrants “from receiving most types of federal public welfare, although Cubans and Haitians were exempted.”[240]
• legalized most “seasonal agricultural workers employed at least 90 days during the year preceding May 1986.”[241]
• made it illegal to discriminate in employment because of a person’s national origin or immigration status, as long as they were legally authorized to work in the U.S.[242] [243]
• increased border enforcement.[244] [245]
• “imposed sanctions on employers who knowingly hired illegal aliens” in order to “remove the incentive for illegal immigration by eliminating the job opportunities which draw illegal aliens here.”[246] [247] [248]
• required new employees to fill out a form and present documents to their employers that show they are U.S. citizens or are otherwise authorized to work in the United States.[249] [250] [251]
• required employers to review the documents presented by employees and certify “that the documents reasonably appear genuine and relate to the individual presenting them.”[252]
• “was meant as a one-time resolution of a longstanding problem.”[253]

* In 1990, Congress enacted a law to increase the number of immigrants admitted to the United States and make other changes to the immigration system.[254] The bill passed with 72% of Democrats and 60% of Republicans voting for it.[255] Republican President George H. Bush signed it into law.[256] This legislation:

• increased the annual immigration limit from 290,000 people to 675,000 people, plus another 125,000 for refugees.
• “established the Diversity Visa Program, making immigrant visas available to randomly selected noncitizens coming from countries with historically low rates of immigration.”
• narrowed the list of medical issues that prohibit people from gaining entry to the U.S.[257] [258] [259]

* In 2010, the Obama administration issued a regulation declaring that HIV was not a “communicable disease of public health significance.” This decision allowed immigrants with HIV to enter the United States and become legal permanent residents.[260] [261] [262]

---

Current Requirements

* Under federal law, there are more than 40 pathways for immigrants to become a legal permanent resident of the United States.[263] Some of these paths have no numerical limits, and some are based on being:

• a relative or fiancé of a U.S. citizen.[264] [265] [266] [267]
• an entrepreneur or worker with a job offer or special skills.[268] [269]
• a Violence Against Women Act petitioner.[270]
• a crime or human trafficking victim.[271]
• a refugee or asylum seeker.[272]
• a Diversity Visa recipient.[273]
• a religious worker or someone who falls into numerous other specialized categories.[274]
• a foreign resident who enlisted in the U.S. military under special circumstances.[275]

* When the demand to become a legal permanent resident under certain pathways exceeds the yearly limits allowed by law, the federal government places people on waiting lists. The rules of these waiting lists are outlined in this footnote:[276]

* Federal law generally requires immigrants to pass a criminal background check before becoming legal permanent residents of the United States.[277]

* Under federal law, certain people who are currently residing in the U.S. are generally not eligible to become legal permanent residents, although there are exceptions to these rules.[278] Some of the ineligible people include those who:

• illegally entered the U.S.[279]
• illegally worked in the U.S.[280] [281]
• are illegally present in the U.S.[282] [283] [284]

* Under federal law, certain people are not allowed to reside in the U.S. or become legal permanent residents, although there are exceptions to these rules.[285] Some of the ineligible people include those who:

• have engaged in “fraud or willful misrepresentation” to obtain benefits under U.S. immigration law.[286] [287] [288]
• have medical issues like:
  • a “communicable disease of public health significance.”
  • a “failure to show proof of required vaccinations.”
  • a “physical or mental disorder with associated harmful behavior.”
  • “drug abuse or addiction.”[289] [290] [291]
• are members of Communist, Nazi, or other totalitarian parties.[292]

Public Charge

* Federal law prohibits foreigners from immigrating to the U.S. if they are “likely at any time to become a public charge,” meaning a burden to taxpayers.[293] [294] Federal law also states:

* The public charge law doesn’t exclude immigrants who are poor but those who cannot or will not work and those who are likely to rely on taxpayers to provide for their personal needs.[296]

* Under guidelines issued by Democratic President Bill Clinton in 1999, the federal government construed the “public charge” law in the following manner until February of 2020:

* Under Clinton’s guidelines:

• the federal government did not consider the following welfare benefits when determining if people were likely to become a burden to taxpayers:
  • Medicaid and other healthcare (except for long-term institutional care)
  • nutrition programs like Food Stamps, School Lunch, and School Breakfast
  • housing benefits
  • energy assistance
  • educational programs like Head Start[303]
• an immigrant could not be deported under the public charge law unless all of the following applied:
  • He or she received cash welfare within five years of entering the U.S.
  • The government agency that provided the welfare demanded the money back.
  • The immigrant didn’t pay it back.[304]

* In 2019, Republican President Donald Trump issued a regulation that rescinded some of Clinton’s guidelines and defined a public charge as someone who is likely to receive one or more of the following federal welfare benefits for a total of more 12 months over a period of three years:[305]

• Supplemental Security Income
• Temporary Assistance to Needy Families
• Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (formerly food stamps)
• most forms of Medicaid
• some forms of housing assistance[306]

* Following the issuance of Trump’s regulation:

• various cities, counties, states, elected officials, and special interest groups filed nine lawsuits to overturn it.[307] [308] [309] [310] [311] [312] [313] [314] [315]
• in all but one of those lawsuits, judges appointed by Democratic presidents Bill Clinton and Barack Obama issued injunctions to stop Trump’s regulation. Four of these injunctions were nationwide in scope.[316] [317] [318] [319] [320] [321] [322] [323] [324] [325] [326]
• higher courts temporarily set aside those injunctions.[327] [328] [329] [330]
• Trump’s regulation became nationally effective in February of 2020.[331]

* Trump’s regulation did not change Clinton’s guidelines on deporting immigrants who later become public charges.[332] [333]

* Following the implementation of Trump’s regulation:

• the Second, Seventh, and Ninth Circuit Courts of Appeals affirmed prior injunctions against the rule.[334] [335] [336] [337]
• a U.S. District Court judge appointed by Barack Obama reversed the rule, and a higher court set that decision aside pending appeal.[338] [339] [340] [341] [342]
• the Biden administration decided to not defend the rule, and the Clinton guidelines took effect again in 2021.[343] [344] [345] [346] [347]

* In 2022, the Biden administration formally reinstated the Clinton guidelines. It also restricted the federal government from considering the following factors when determining if a person is likely to become a burden on taxpayers:

• Applying for or being approved for future welfare benefits.
• Benefits received by other members of the same household.[348] [349]

* As of 2017, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services was not recording how many:

• people are denied residency or citizenship under the public charge law.
• immigrants become public charges after they are granted U.S. residency.[350] [351]

History

* In 1790, the first U.S. Congress passed a law that allowed immigrants to become U.S. citizens if they:

• were “free white” persons.
• lived in the U.S. for at least two years.
• proved to a court that they were “of good character.”
• took an oath to support the Constitution of the United States.[352] [353]

* In 1795, the third U.S. Congress changed the law so that immigrants could not become U.S. citizens unless they:

• lived in the U.S. for at least five years.
• renounced “forever all allegiance and fidelity to any foreign prince, potentate, state, or sovereignty….”
• proved to a court that they were “attached to the principles of the Constitution of the United States, and well-disposed to the good order and happiness of the same.”[354]

* In 1798, the U.S. Congress changed the law so that immigrants could not become U.S. citizens unless they:

• lived in the U.S. for at least 14 years.
• were not from a nation that was at war with the United States.[355]

* In 1868, shortly after the U.S. Civil War ended and slavery was abolished,[356] [357] the federal government ratified the 14th Amendment of the Constitution, which reads in part:

* In 1870, Congress passed a law that allowed people who were born in Africa to become U.S. citizens.[359]

* In 1882, Congress passed a law that barred the Chinese from becoming U.S. citizens, based on claims that they drove down wages and caused cultural and moral harm to society.[360] [361] [362]

* Before 1906, “any court of record” could award U.S. citizenship, and the federal government gave the courts limited guidance on this process. In 1906, Congress created the Bureau of Immigration and Naturalization and placed it in “charge of all matters concerning the naturalization of aliens.” The purpose of this was to create uniform national standards for immigration and citizenship.[363]

* In 1940, Congress passed a law requiring that immigrants pass a test showing they can read and write in English in order to become U.S. citizens.[364]

* In the 1940s and early 1950s, Congress repealed laws that barred the Chinese and other Asians from becoming U.S. citizens.[365] [366]

* In 1986, Congress passed a comprehensive immigration reform as a compromise between political parties, business interests, religious groups, and ethnic organizations.[367] [368] [369] The resulting bill was approved by 58% of the House and 72% of the Senate, and Republican President Ronald Reagan signed it into law.[370] [371] This legislation:

• legalized most illegal immigrants who had been in the U.S. since the beginning of 1982 and gave them a path to citizenship.[372] [373] [374]
• “imposed sanctions on employers who knowingly hired illegal aliens” in order to “remove the incentive for illegal immigration by eliminating the job opportunities which draw illegal aliens here.”[375] [376] [377]
• “was meant as a one-time resolution of a longstanding problem.”[378]

---

Current Requirements

* Immigrants can become citizens of the United States through varying pathways.[379] In order to do so, federal law generally requires immigrants to:

• be a legal permanent resident of the U.S. for at least five years.[380]
• pass a full FBI criminal background check.[381] [382] [383]
• pass a test showing they can read and write in English.[384] [385] [386]
• pass a test showing they have a basic knowledge of U.S. history and civics.[387] [388] [389]
• pass an interview process in which they are placed under oath and questioned about their qualifications for citizenship.[390] [391]
• have good moral character, which generally excludes people who have engaged in polygamy, adultery, failure to support their children, failure to pay taxes, habitual drunkenness, or illegal drug usage.[392] [393] [394] [395]
• be dedicated to the principles of the U.S. Constitution.[396]
• publicly renounce all foreign allegiances and titles of nobility.[397]
• take an oath of allegiance to the U.S Constitution in a public ceremony.[398] [399] [400]

* Under federal law, certain people are not generally eligible to become citizens of the United States, although there are exceptions to these rules. Some of the ineligible people include those who:

• are members of the Nazi Party, the Communist Party, “any other totalitarian party,” or a terrorist organization.[401]
• have engaged in persecution, genocide, torture, or severe violations of religious freedom.[402] [403]
• have given false oral testimony in order to obtain an immigration benefit, such as legal permanent resident status.[404]
• misrepresented themselves as a citizen in order to vote.[405]

* Per the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, some of the benefits of becoming a United States citizen include the ability to:

• “vote in federal elections.”
• “travel with a U.S. Passport.”
• “run for elective office where citizenship is required.”
• “participate on a jury.”
• “become eligible for federal and certain law enforcement jobs.”
• “obtain certain state and federal benefits not available to noncitizens.”
• “obtain citizenship for minor children born abroad.”
• “expand and expedite their ability to bring family members to the United States.”[406]

---

Birthright Citizenship

* In 1866, shortly after the Civil War ended and slavery was abolished,[407] [408] a bloc of Congressmen called the “Radical Republicans” passed a civil rights law that states:

* To guarantee that the Civil Rights Act of 1866 was constitutional, the Radical Republicans fought for and secured passage of the 14th Amendment to the Constitution in 1868,[412] [413] which reads in part:

* Under the current prevailing interpretation of the sentence above, children born in the U.S. to illegal immigrants, temporary residents, visitors, and tourists automatically become U.S. citizens.[415] [416] Hence, they:

• are eligible for all state and federal welfare benefits, such as food stamps, housing, home energy, child care, and health insurance. These benefits are generally awarded based on the reported incomes of their households or families.[417] [418] [419] [420] [421] [422] [423]
• can sometimes serve as shields to prevent their parents from being deported.[424] [425] [426]
• can sponsor their relatives to become legal permanent residents and U.S. citizens.[427] [428] [429]

* The birthright citizenship clause was added to the 14th Amendment by a vote of the U.S. Senate on May 30, 1866.[430] Jacob Howard, a Republican senator from Michigan who introduced the 14th Amendment,[431] [432] proposed the clause by stating:

* The senators then discussed the meaning of the proposed language and voiced conflicting views about it.[434] With regard to the phrase “subject to the jurisdiction,” Howard stated that:

* As ratified, the birthright citizenship clause of the 14th Amendment contains the exact words proposed by Howard.[436] [437]

* In 2018, Pew Research estimated that 88% of the children of illegal immigrants were U.S. citizens.[438]

Current Law

* Federal law generally prohibits employers from hiring unauthorized immigrants, and it imposes civil and criminal penalties (including jail time) on employers who knowingly do so.[439] [440] [441] [442]

* Under federal law:

• unlawfully entering the U.S. is generally a criminal offense and also carries civil penalties.[443] [444] [445]
• unlawful presence in the U.S. is generally a civil violation and can result in deportation but not a prison sentence or criminal conviction.[446] [447] [448] [449] Other examples of federal civil violations include:
  • breaking certain environmental laws.[450]
  • creating a disturbance by spreading a non-toxic powder in a federal building.[451]

* Except under special circumstances, immigrants who are illegally present in the U.S. can be deported under federal law.[452] [453] [454] [455]

* Except in cases like child abuse and custody battles, deported immigrants are free to bring any children born to them in the U.S. back with them to their country of origin.[456]

* Federal law requires the U.S. attorney general to begin removal proceedings “as expeditiously as possible” when a non-citizen is convicted of a “deportable” offense.[457] Such offenses include but are not limited to:

• a “crime for which a sentence of one year or longer may be imposed.”
• “an aggravated felony.”
• possessing a firearm.
• drug crimes “other than a single offense involving possession for one’s own use of 30 grams or less of marijuana.”
• domestic violence.
• stalking.
• identity fraud.
• falsely claiming to be a citizen to get a job or receive welfare benefits.
• voting in U.S. elections.[458] [459]

---

Employers

* Some businesses hire illegal immigrants because such immigrants have limited employment options and will often work:

• for less compensation than U.S. citizens and legal immigrants. In 2006, typical workers in Mexico earned one-tenth what their counterparts earned in the United States.[460] [461] [462] [463] [464]
• more flexible hours and with fewer demands.[465]
• under hazardous conditions and without any recourse to labor laws.[466] [467] [468]
• “under the table” or “off the books,” which enables employers to avoid paying Social Security and Medicare payroll taxes, unemployment taxes, and workers’ compensation insurance premiums.[469] [470] [471] [472] [473]

* In 1986, Congress passed a compromise between political parties, business interests, religious groups, and ethnic organizations that granted legal residency to millions of illegal immigrants.[474] [475] [476] [477] As part of the exchange for this amnesty, the law:

• required new employees to fill out an “I-9” employment eligibility verification form and present documents to their employers that show they are U.S. citizens or are otherwise authorized to work in the United States.[478] [479] [480] [481]
• required employers to review the documents presented by employees and certify “that the documents reasonably appear genuine and relate to the individual presenting them.”[482]
• “imposed sanctions on employers who knowingly hired illegal aliens.”[483] [484] [485]

* In the signing ceremony for the 1986 amnesty, President Reagan stated that the law’s punishment of employers who hire illegal immigrants is its “keystone and major element” because this “will remove the incentive for illegal immigration by eliminating the job opportunities which draw illegal aliens here.”[486]

* Per the 2006 academic encyclopedia Immigration in America Today, employers who knowingly hire illegal immigrants “are seldom punished” because the U.S. “lacks a viable system to verify the eligibility of new workers.”[487]

* In 2007, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services launched a program called “E-Verify.” This was an upgraded version of an earlier program designed to help employers ensure that illegal immigrants don’t use fraudulent documents to obtain employment.[488] [489]

* In 2008, the U.S. Government Accountability Office reported that E-Verify had a challenge with misidentifying people who were authorized to work. In June 2004 through March 2007, 8% of the people who were initially determined by E-Verify and its predecessor to be unauthorized to work in the U.S. were later found to be authorized.[490]

* In 2021, 0.13% of the people who were initially determined by E-Verify to be unauthorized to work in the U.S. were later found to be authorized.[491]

* In 2010, the U.S. Government Accountability Office reported that E-Verify was unable to detect certain forms of identity fraud.[492]

* In 2013, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services announced a security enhancement to E-Verify to “help combat identity fraud by identifying and deterring fraudulent use of Social Security numbers (SSNs) for employment eligibility verification.”[493]

* In 2021, U.S. Senator Chuck Grassley, a Republican from Iowa, introduced a bill to:

• permanently implement the E-Verify program.
• change E-Verify from a largely voluntary program to a mandatory one for all employers.
• increase “penalties for employers who illegally hire undocumented workers.”[494]

* Grassley’s bill was the sixth one like it. The Senate has never voted on any of them.[495] [496] [497] [498] [499] [500]

---

Overstays

* Foreigners are generally permitted to visit the U.S. if they obtain a travel visa or meet certain criteria and are from nations that have visa-free travel agreements with the U.S.[501] [502] [503] Some foreigners can also legally reside in the U.S. for extended periods through mechanisms like student or work visas.[504] [505]

* Under federal law, foreigners are generally ineligible for visas or entry to the U.S. if they pose various risks to the health, safety, or finances of others.[506] [507]

* “Overstays” are foreigners who are legally admitted to the United States for a temporary period but don’t leave by their lawfully required time.[508]

* About 56 million foreigners who were lawfully admitted to the U.S. through air and sea ports of entry were legally required to leave during 2019. Among these people, 497,272 were still in the U.S. three months past the end of the year.[509]

* Amid government-mandated travel restrictions during the Covid-19 outbreak, during 2020 about 46 million foreigners who were lawfully admitted to the U.S. through air and sea ports of entry were legally required to leave. Among these people, 566,993 were still in the U.S. three months past the end of the year.[510] [511] [512]

* About 55 million foreigners who were lawfully admitted to the U.S. for business or pleasure through air and sea ports of entry were legally required to leave during 2018. Among these people, 324,593 were still in the U.S. 12 months past the end of the year.[513]

* The figures above do not include foreigners who were legally admitted through land ports of entry, including those who arrived via cars, trains, buses, ferries, bicycles, trucks, and foot. The Department of Homeland Security is currently unable to determine how many of these people overstay their legal limits.[514] [515]

---

Border Crossings

* People who illegally cross the U.S. border typically fall into four broad categories:

1. Apprehensions who are captured by Border Patrol or willingly turn themselves in to Border Patrol.
2. Gotaways who are detected by Border Patrol but not caught.
3. Turn backs who return to the country from which they entered before they are apprehended.
4. Undetected entries who cross the border without Border Patrol’s knowledge.[516] [517] [518]

* In 2022, the Biden administration began allowing masses of migrants who are inadmissible under federal law to cross U.S. borders via airplanes and land ports of entry.[519] [520] [521] [522] [523] The Biden administration:

• claims it can do this under its general regulatory powers and a provision of the law that allows for temporary entries “only on a case-by-case basis for urgent humanitarian reasons or significant public benefit.”[524] [525] [526] [527]
• allows the migrants to enter by using a free app.[528] [529] [530]
• is being challenged and sued by various states for redefining “illegal crossings as lawful pathways” and “inflicting serious costs” on the states.[531] [532]

* Federal law requires the Department of Homeland Security to report “border security metrics,” including “inadmissible travelers who attempt to, or successfully, enter the United States at a port of entry.”[533] [534] [535] The government generally reports these measures based on the federal fiscal year, which begins and ends three months before the calendar year.[536]

Southwest Border Apprehensions

* In the past, the number of immigrants apprehended by the U.S. Border Patrol at the U.S./Mexico border has often served as a rough proxy for illegal entries, which are impossible to fully measure due to undetected entries. Data on apprehensions extend back to 1960 and include illegal border crossers who are caught while trying to evade Border Patrol and those who turn themselves into Border Patrol because they expect to be processed into the United States. These figures don’t include gotaways, illegal Northern border crossings, illegal ocean crossings, or encounters of inadmissible migrants at ports, which multiplied during the Biden administration.[537] [538] [539] [540] [541]

* From 1960 to 2023, U.S. Border Patrol apprehended about 49 million people who illegally crossed the Southwest border, or an average of 770,000 per year. These figures include some people who were counted more than once because they crossed the border on multiple occasions and were apprehended two or more times. In 2023, U.S. Border Patrol apprehended 2.0 million people at the Southwest border, or 2.9 times the pre-Biden historical average:

[542] [543] [544]

Gotaways

* Relibale data on gotaways, which extends back to 2014, doesn’t include illegal immigrants who enter the U.S. without being detected by Border Patrol.[545] Per the Inspector General of the Department of Homeland Security:

* From 2014 to 2023, U.S. Border Patrol detected 2.6 million got aways at the Southwest Border, or an average of 264,000 per year. In 2023, U.S. Border Patrol detected at least 769,000 got aways, or 6.1 times the pre-Biden average:

[547] [548] [549] [550]

Inadmissible Encounters & Gotaways

* Encounters with inadmissible migrants at all borders and ports plus gotaways is a broad proxy for total illegal entries and attempted entries.[551] [552] This measure, which extends back to 2017, paralleled Southwest border apprehensions until the Biden administration began routinely releasing illegal border crossers into the country and allowing masses of inadmissible migrants in through ports.[553] [554]

* From 2017 to 2023, there were 13.2 million encounters with inadmissible migrants at all borders and ports plus gotaways, or an average of 1.9 million per year. In 2023, this figure was 4.0 million, or 4.5 times the pre-Biden average:

[555] [556] [557] [558] [559]

Border Crossing Deaths

* Data on border crossing deaths extend back to 1998.[560] When these fatalities surged in 2021 and 2022, the Biden administration began delaying and refusing to release the data, but Border Patrol employees leaked it to the press.[561] The Biden administration then changed the definition of this measure to exclude dead migrants whose remains are discovered by any government or private entity other than Customs and Border Protection.[562] [563]

* Under pressure from the U.S. Government Accountability Office,[564] the Biden administration released the full number of border crossing deaths for 2022 but hasn’t released the data for 2023 as of August 19, 2024.[565]

* From 1998 to 2022, about 9,520 people died while illegally crossing the U.S./Mexico border, or an average of 381 people per year. In 2022, 895 people died, or 2.6 times the pre-Biden average:

[566] [567]

Caught Multiple Times

* In 2021, 27% of people apprehended by the U.S. Border Patrol were caught crossing the border at least two times that year:[568]

[569]

---

Border Barriers

* The border between Mexico and the United States is about 2,000 miles long.[570] [571]

* From 2007 to 2016, U.S. Customs and Border Protection spent about $303 million per year on tactical infrastructure (like fencing, gates, roads, bridges, lighting, and drainage) to prevent or slow the flow of illegal immigrants, terrorists, drugs, and other contraband across the U.S./Mexico border.[572] [573] This amounted to less than 0.01% of federal government spending over these years.[574]

* In June 2020, the U.S. had:

• 401 miles of pedestrian barriers covering 21% of its border with Mexico.[575] Such barriers are designed to:
  • divert illegal border crossers from urban areas (where they can easily escape by blending in with numerous people and buildings) to rural areas (where Border Patrol can more easily apprehend them).
  • delay illegal border crossers so that Border Patrol has more time to apprehend them.[576]
• 299 miles of vehicle barriers covering 15% of its border with Mexico.[577] Such barriers:
  • are typically deployed in rural areas and are designed to stop and delay people who use motorized vehicles for drug trafficking and human smuggling.
  • do not stop pedestrians.[578]
  • contributed to a 73% decline in trafficking and human smuggling in rural areas near Tucson, Arizona.[579]

* Modern post-style pedestrian fences give Border Patrol agents an unobstructed view into Mexico, which:

• reduces the ability of illegal border crossers to hide.
• “makes it more difficult for illegal entrants to ambush agents.”
• “reduces illegal entrants’ ability to stage mass crossings, which can overwhelm agents and jeopardize agents’ safety.”[580]

* In 2015, about 82% of the pedestrian fences and 75% of the vehicle fences along the Mexican border consisted of modern designs implemented since 2006,[581] like these:

Post-Style Pedestrian Fence

[582]

Post-Style Vehicle Fence

[583]

Double Steel Mesh Pedestrian Fence

[584]

* In 2015, about 18% of the pedestrian fences and 25% of the vehicle fences along the Mexican border consisted of older designs implemented before 2006,[585] like these:

Steel Wall Pedestrian Fence

[586]

Chain Link Pedestrian Fence

[587]

* Some border fencing is located more than half a mile into U.S. territory. In combination with certain U.S. policies, this fencing placement allows non-Mexican foreigners under the age of 18 to:

• illegally enter the U.S. without evading a fence,
• deliberately turn themselves over to the U.S. Border Patrol,
• be transported at taxpayer expense to live with relatives in the U.S., and
• avoid deportation indefinitely.[588] [589] [590] [591]

* In 2017 and 2018, some of the U.S./Mexico border fencing was in disrepair and being replaced. For example, about a quarter mile from the U.S. city of Sunland Park, New Mexico, debris that had collected on the Mexico side of the fence made the fence effectively two feet high. In the same area, a falling fence was held up with cables:

[592] [593]

* From 2019 to 2021, illegal border crossers created an average of 1,091 holes per year in “new segments” of border barriers along the Mexican border. U.S. Customs and Border Protection repaired these holes at an average cost of $795 per breach.[594] [595] [596]

* Between 2010 and 2015, older barrier designs were breached at a rate of 82 per mile, while newer designs were breached at a rate of 14 per mile.[597]

* In addition to cutting holes, illegal border crossers also attempt to evade border barriers by:

• jumping over sections where the fencing is low.
• scaling taller fences.
• creating tunnels.
• building ramps to drive over vehicle fencing.
• using small aircraft to transport drugs.[598] [599]

* Beyond barriers, other factors that impact the ability of the U.S. Border Patrol to prevent illegal border crossings include “terrain, geography, demographics, Border Patrol agent manpower, and surveillance technology.”[600]

* Click here for an article from Just Facts about the effectiveness of border barriers in various nations.

Donald Trump

* In February of 2019, Republican President Donald Trump declared a national emergency to deal with a “border security and humanitarian crisis” at the southern border “that threatens core national security interests.” With this, he announced plans to build new border barriers by using a combination of $8.1 billion in congressional funds explicitly designated for border security, general military construction funds, and other resources.[601] [602]
 

* After Trump’s announcement, various groups filed legal challenges against his plans, including the U.S. House of Representatives, 16 states, a county in Texas, and several special interest groups.[603] [604] [605] [606] Various courts issued, denied, upheld, and set aside injunctions to prevent Trump from using military funds for border barrier construction.[607] [608] [609] [610] [611] [612]

* In 2019, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled (5–4) that border barrier construction could proceed while the issue is litigated in lower courts.[613]

* In June 2020, the U.S. Court of Appeals ruled (2–1) that Trump could not legally transfer funds from the military to border barrier construction projects. It further ordered that border wall construction cease immediately.[614] The Biden administration withdrew the federal government’s appeal to the Supreme Court.[615] [616]

* In 2019, U.S. Customs and Border Protection reported that:

• it had “received approximately $9.8 billion to construct approximately 509 miles of new border wall system….”
• the money came from “a combination of the Department of Homeland Security and Department of Defense funding and the Treasury Forfeiture Fund.”
• it “expects to have completed a total of 450 miles of new border wall system” by the end of 2020.[617]

* As of the end of 2020, work on new border barriers had yielded:

• 423 completed miles.
• 228 miles under construction.
• 87 miles in pre-construction.[618] [619] [620] [621]

* Some of the new barrier construction entailed replacing old vehicle barriers (shown on the left) with modern pedestrian barriers (shown on the right):

[622]

* On his first day in office,[623] Democrat President Joe Biden signed an executive order halting all border wall construction.[624]

---

Apprehensions, Returns & Removals

* From 1925 to 2020, U.S. immigration officials apprehended 59 million immigrants suspected of being illegally present in the United States. The median over this period was 524,000 per year, and the average was 614,000 per year:

[625] [626]

* When immigrants are apprehended on suspicion of unlawful presence, they generally are either:

• asked or ordered to “voluntarily” return to their home country.
• forcibly removed or deported.
• issued a notice to appear before an immigration court.[627] [628] [629]

* From 1927 to 2020, 57 million immigrants were returned or removed to their country of origin. The median over this period was 550,000 per year, and the average was 608,000 per year:

[630]

---

Illicit Drugs

* The U.S. Centers for Disease Control defines “illicit drugs” as those that are “prohibited by law” and used for “non-medical” purposes. These can include:

• amphetamine-type stimulants, like meth and ephedrine.
• marijuana or cannabis.
• cocaine.
• heroin and other opioids.
• synthetic drugs, like ecstasy and fentanyl.[631] [632]

* In the U.S. during 2021, roughly:

• 108,886 people were killed by drug overdoses.[633]
• 99,086 people were killed by accidental drug overdoses.[634]
• 91,246 people were killed by illicit drug overdoses.[635]
• 83,034 people were killed by accidental overdoses from illicit drugs.[636]

* Mexico is the primary source of fentanyl, heroin, cocaine, and methamphetamine in the United States.[637] [638] [639]

* The chemicals used to manufacture fentanyl in Mexico mainly come from China.[640] [641]

* In the U.S. from 2010 to 2020, the age-adjusted overdose death rates for the drugs above grew by 4.1 to 17.8 times:

[642]

* In 2016, the U.S. Centers for Disease Control estimated that:

* Since 2019, U.S. Customs and Border Protection have seized 2.1 million pounds of illegal drugs at the U.S./Mexico border:

Year	Southwest Border Drug Seizures (Thousands of Pounds)
	Marijuana	Meth	Cocaine	Fentanyl	Heroin	All
2019	517	131	24	3	6	681
2020	502	170	19	5	5	701
2021	213	183	27	11	5	438
2022 (1/1–10/14)	86	160	25	14	2	287
Total	1,318	644	95	32	17	2,106

[644]

* Since 2019, U.S. Customs and Border Protection have seized enough illegal drugs at the U.S./Mexico border to kill 9.4 billion people, or 28 times the entire population of the United States:

Year	Southwest Border Drug Seizures (Millions of Lethal Doses)
	Meth	Cocaine	Fentanyl	Heroin	All
2019	397	9	597	50	1,053
2020	514	7	1,034	47	1,602
2021	552	10	2,401	45	3,008
2022 (1/1–10/14)	485	10	3,199	14	3,707
Total	1,948	36	7,231	156	9,370

[645]

---

1940s & 1950s Enforcement

* During the presidencies of Democrat Harry Truman and Republican Dwight Eisenhower,[646] the federal government increased the number of illegal immigrants that it returned and removed to their home countries from 41,000 in 1944 to 1.1 million in 1954:

[647]

* The immigration enforcement efforts of the 1950s culminated in “Operation Wetback.” This was an initiative to remove Mexican immigrants who had illegally entered the U.S. in large numbers after the U.S. enacted a policy to allow many Mexican citizens to temporarily work in the United States.[648] [649] [650]

---

1986 Amnesty

* In 1986, Congress passed a comprehensive immigration reform as a compromise between political parties, business interests, religious groups, and ethnic organizations.[651] [652] [653] The resulting bill was approved by 58% of the House and 72% of the Senate, and Republican President Ronald Reagan signed it into law.[654] [655] This legislation:

• legalized most illegal immigrants who had been in the U.S. since the beginning of 1982 and gave them a path to citizenship.[656] [657] [658]
• required these immigrants “to meet certain standards for English proficiency and knowledge of U.S. history and government” in order to become legal permanent residents.[659] [660]
• prohibited “newly legalized” immigrants “from receiving most types of federal public welfare, although Cubans and Haitians were exempted.”[661]
• legalized most “seasonal agricultural workers employed at least 90 days during the year preceding May 1986.”[662]
• made it illegal to discriminate in employment because of a person’s national origin or immigration status, as long as they were legally authorized to work in the U.S.[663] [664]
• increased border patrols.[665]
• “imposed sanctions on employers who knowingly hired illegal aliens” in order to “remove the incentive for illegal immigration by eliminating the job opportunities which draw illegal aliens here.”[666] [667] [668]
• required new employees to fill out a form and present documents to their employers that show they are U.S. citizens or are otherwise authorized to work in the United States.[669] [670] [671]
• required employers to review the documents presented by employees and certify “that the documents reasonably appear genuine and relate to the individual presenting them.”[672]
• “was meant as a one-time resolution of a longstanding problem.”[673]

* Under this law, the U.S. government granted legal permanent resident status to 2.7 million people:[674]

[675]

* Under this law, the U.S. government granted citizenship to 1.1 million people.[676]

* While Congress negotiated the 1986 amnesty bill, illegal immigration to the U.S. increased substantially,[677] and Southwest border patrol apprehensions reached a record high that has been exceeded in three years since then:

[678]

* The immigrants who were granted amnesty under the 1986 law were eligible to become U.S. citizens after five years of lawful permanent residency.[679] [680] This created a surge of citizenship applications beginning in 1993 during the presidency of Democrat Bill Clinton. In 1995, the Clinton administration launched an initiative called “Citizenship USA” to speed the processing of these applications.[681] [682] [683] In 2000, the Inspector General of the U.S. Department of Justice published an investigation of this program that found:

• the amnesty and citizenship applications for agricultural workers were “rife with fraud” and allowed ineligible immigrants to obtain amnesty and citizenship.[684]
• the Clinton administration Immigration and Naturalization Service [INS] was aware of this fraud “at the highest level” and promised to address it, but:
  • “evidence of fraud was not adequately explored and, in some instances, was completely disregarded.”
  • “many” INS employees “believed that they were prohibited from reviewing documents in an applicant’s file” that would reveal such fraud and “could not consider it in the determination of citizenship.”[685]
• the INS did not perform “a complete criminal history background check” for 18% of the people who were granted citizenship.[686]
• the INS “did not properly enforce the English-language requirement” for U.S. citizenship.[687]
• the INS gave “superficially trained, inexperienced” employees five minutes to conduct citizenship interviews. During these interviews, the employees had to determine if applicants had good moral character, had accurately answered all of the questions on their applications, and met other legal qualifications for citizenship.[688]

* In the signing ceremony for the 1986 amnesty, President Reagan stated that the law would “humanely regain control of our borders.”[689]

* In the years surrounding the 1986 amnesty, the following sources estimated the number of illegal immigrants in the U.S. to be:

Year	Source	Number (Millions)
1980	Demography (Academic Journal)[690]	2–4
1986 Amnesty Legalizes 2.7 Million Unauthorized Immigrants[691]
1990	U.S. Immigration and Naturalization Service[692]	3.5
1995	Pew Research[693]	5.7
2000	U.S. Immigration and Naturalization Service[694]	7.0
2000	Department of Homeland Security[695]	8.5
2005	Bear Stearns[696]	≤ 20
2007	Former Associate General Counsel of the U.S. Immigration and Naturalization Service[697]	38
2007	Ph.D. Demographer[698]	Unknowable
2012	U.S. Department of Homeland Security[699]	11.4
2013	Pew Research[700]	11.3
2014	Center for Migration Studies[701] [702]	10.9
2018	PLOS One (Academic Journal)[703]	16.2–29.5
2018	Pew Research[704]	10.7
2019	Pew Research[705]	10.5
2020	Center for Migration Studies[706] [707]	10.6
2021	Department of Homeland Security[708]	11.4
NOTE: Some of the studies above from different organizations were authored by some of the same people.

---

1990s to 2000s

* In 1994, Congress and Democratic President Bill Clinton passed an amnesty that gave certain illegal immigrants a temporary pathway to legalize without leaving the United States.[709]

* Congress and Clinton extended the 1994 amnesty four times from 1997 to 2000.[710] [711] [712] [713]

---

Asylum

* U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services defines a person seeking asylum as:

* Asylees differ from other refugees by being present in the U.S. or at a U.S. port of entry before seeking protection.[715] [716] [717]

* The “credible fear” provision of U.S. immigration law allows people who are otherwise not legally present in the U.S. to stay if they can convince an immigration judge that they “have been persecuted or have a well-founded fear of persecution” because of their “race, religion, nationality, membership in a particular social group, or political opinion if returned” to their homelands.[718] [719]

* In 2019, a U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement official testified before Congress that the “credible fear” standard had “proved to be ineffective in screening out those with meritless claims” and created:

• an incentive to file false claims.
• a strain on the system that inhibited “the government’s ability to timely address meritorious asylum claims….”
• a situation where delayed administrative justice encourages more illegal immigration.[720]

* From 2016 to 2020, the number of immigrants who used the “credible fear” provision to apply for asylum increased 132%. The portion who were granted asylum varied as follows:

Defensive Asylum 2016–2020
Year	Applications	Applications Granted	Portion Granted
2016	81,730	8,693	11%
2017	142,971	10,565	7%
2018	164,062	13,194	8%
2019	213,307	18,904	9%
2020	189,838	14,565	8%

[721]

---

Political Party Platforms

* The 2020 Democratic Party Platform supports:

• increasing legal immigration.
• opening access to government-funded healthcare programs for “low-income, lawfully present immigrants” regardless of whether they are citizens.
• ensuring that “every child, everywhere, is able to receive a world-class education” regardless of “immigration or citizenship status….”
• “a roadmap to citizenship for the millions of undocumented workers, caregivers, students, and children….”[722] [723]

* The Republicans didn’t adopt a new platform in 2020.[724]

* The 2016 Republican Party Platform opposes “any form of amnesty” for illegal immigrants and supports:

• helping legal immigrants to become U.S. citizens.
• “building a wall along our southern border and protecting all ports of entry.”
• vetting all refugees before allowing them into the U.S., “especially those whose homelands have been the breeding grounds for terrorism.”
• defunding sanctuary cities.
• making E-Verify mandatory to ensure that illegal immigrants don’t use fraudulent documents to obtain employment.[725]

* The 2022 Libertarian Party Platform supports “unrestricted” immigration.”[726] [727] [728]

* The 2020 Green Party Platform supports:

• legalizing and providing a path to citizenship for all unauthorized immigrants except those who “present a clear and present danger.”
• “immediate dismantling” of the border wall.
• welcoming “all persons fleeing political, racial, religious, or other types of persecution.”
• forcing “courts, social service agencies, and all government agencies dealing with the public” to “provide trained and certified translators.”[729] [730]

---

Barack Obama

* The U.S. Constitution gives the president the responsibility and power to ensure that federal laws are “faithfully executed” and to select people who will carry out this work.[731] [732]

* Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) is the agency that “enforces federal laws governing border control, customs, trade and immigration to promote homeland security and public safety.” It is a division of the U.S. Department of Homeland Security, which is under the authority of the president.[733] [734]

* In June of 2010, the administration of Democratic President Barack Obama announced:

• ICE “only has resources to remove approximately 400,000 aliens per year, less than 4 percent of the estimated illegal alien population in the United States.”

• “Absent extraordinary circumstances or the requirements of mandatory detention,” ICE will “not expend detention resources on aliens”:
  • who “demonstrate that they are primary caretakers of children or an infirm person.”
  • who “are disabled, elderly, pregnant, or nursing.”
  • who “are known to be suffering from serious physical or mental illness.”
  • “whose detention is otherwise not in the public interest.”

• ICE officers will be prohibited from detaining aliens “who are not subject to mandatory detention” unless they get “approval from the field office director.”[735]

Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals

* In 2012, Obama announced that his administration would not deport illegal immigrants for two years if they:

• were currently under the age of 31.
• arrived in the U.S. before 2007.
• were under the age of 16 when they arrived.
• applied for this program and passed a criminal background check.[736] [737] [738]

* This “guideline,” called “Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals” or DACA, was applicable to 1.2 million people. At least 636,000 illegal immigrants applied for and were approved for it.[739]

* Beyond protection from deportation, this directive also gave these individuals:

• Social Security numbers
• authorization to legally work in the United States.
• eligibility for various government social programs.[740]

* In 2014, the Obama administration expanded this “guideline” to:

• remove the age limit of 31 years old.
• extend the latest arrival date from 2007 to 2010.
• allow immigrants to renew (in 3-year increments) their relief from deportation and ability to work.[741]

* A federal law to combat human trafficking forbids the U.S. government from immediately returning “unaccompanied alien children” to nations that don’t directly border the United States. This law requires that when immigrants “apprehended at the border” are under the age of 18 and from anywhere but Mexico or Canada, they must be:

• “promptly placed in the least restrictive setting that is in the best interest of the child….”
• provided access to legal counsel.
• “placed in removal proceedings.”[742] [743] [744]

* From 2012 to 2014, the number of unaccompanied children from Central America apprehended crossing the border increased by roughly 10 times.[745] [746] This overwhelmed the ability of U.S. officials to care for the children and created what the White House called an “urgent humanitarian situation.”[747] [748] [749]

* By mid-2014:

• the Obama administration had placed 85% of these children—who were mostly male and over the age of 14—with their relatives in the United States.[750]
• 87% of people admitted to the U.S. under this “guideline” over the previous five years had not been ordered to leave the United States.[751]

* NBC News, CNN, Washington Post, and the Center for American Progress published articles that blamed this surge of immigration on violence and poverty in the children’s homelands.[752] [753] [754] [755]

* In the three nations that were the primary sources of these unaccompanied child immigrants (Honduras, Guatemala, and El Salvador[756]), the murder rates were lower during all years of the 2012–2014 border surge than in 2011:

[757]

* In 2014, Breitbart News obtained a leaked report from a federal government center that provides “tactical, operational, and strategic intelligence support” to law enforcement agencies.[758] The report examined “the probable drivers” of the “recent surge of Central American children to the U.S. Southwest border” and found:

* In 2021, a U.S. District Court judge declared the DACA program illegal and issued a permanent injunction that:

• set aside the DACA “guidelines” and sent them back to the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) to address legal defects.
• allowed current DACA recipients to keep their status until DHS completes their review and a court evaluates it.
• prevented DHS from granting DACA status to new applicants.
• permitted DHS to continue receiving DACA applications.[761] [762] [763]

Deferred Action for Parents of Americans

* During Obama’s presidency, Democratic politicians and Latino activists repeatedly called on him to shield more illegal immigrants from deportation. Obama publicly replied:

• “The problem is, is that I’m the president of the United States, I’m not the emperor of the United States. My job is to execute laws that are passed.”
• “If we start broadening that, then essentially I’ll be ignoring the law in a way that I think would be very difficult to defend legally.”[764]

* In June of 2014, Democratic Congressman Luis Gutierrez, a vocal supporter of amnesty for unauthorized immigrants, declared there was no possibility that Congress would pass an amnesty during Obama’s presidency. He then called on Obama to act on his own.[765]

* In November of 2014, the Obama administration announced that it would not deport illegal immigrants for three years and would allow them to legally work in the U.S. if they:

• were in the U.S. since January 1, 2010,
• had a child who was a U.S. citizen or lawful permanent resident,
• were “not an enforcement priority,” and
• applied to this program and were not “threats to national security, border security, and public safety.”[766] [767]

* This directive, called “Deferred Action for Parents of Americans”:

• was applicable to roughly four-to-five million unauthorized immigrants.[768] [769] [770]

• required federal agencies to issue them work authorizations and Social Security numbers.[771]
• required Texas and possibly other states to issue them driver’s licenses.[772]
• required government agencies to make them eligible for an array of benefit programs.[773] [774]

* After Obama announced this directive, 26 states sued the federal government to stop it from taking effect. In February of 2015, a federal judge agreed with the states and issued a temporary order to halt it.[775] [776]

* In November of 2015, a three-judge panel of a federal appeals court agreed with the federal judge and ruled (2–1) that Obama’s directive was “beyond the scope” of what federal law “can reasonably be interpreted to authorize.”[777] [778]

* In June of 2016, the Supreme Court deadlocked on taking up this case, which left the appeals court ruling in place.[779]

Convicted Felons

* In November of 2014 on the same day that Obama announced his policy of Deferred Action for Parents of Americans,[780] his Secretary of Homeland Security instructed all federal immigration and border security personnel to:

• never pursue the “removal of an alien not identified as a priority” unless an ICE Field Office Director concludes that “removing such an alien would serve an important federal interest.”
• apply “prosecutorial discretion” as to “whom to stop, question, and arrest; whom to detain or release; whether to settle, dismiss, appeal, or join in a motion on a case; and whether to grant deferred action, parole, or a stay of removal instead of pursuing removal.”[781]

* The policies above:

• were summarized by the Obama administration as “more refined civil immigration enforcement priorities” that “placed increased emphasis and focus on the removal of convicted felons and other public safety threats over non-criminals.”[782]
• became effective on January 5, 2015 with “training and guidance … provided to the workforce prior to the effective date.”[783]

* In the federal government’s 2015 and 2016 fiscal years (October 2014 through September 2016[784]), ICE removed 21% fewer convicted criminals per year than in its 2014 fiscal year:

[785]

* In 2014, the Obama administration “released from its custody 30,558 criminal aliens with a total of 79,059 convictions instead of deporting them.”[786]

* From October 1, 2009 to July 21, 2015, the Obama administration released 124 criminal aliens who were later charged with murder-related crimes committed in the U.S. after their release and before February 2016.[787] [788] [789]

* For additional facts and context about Obama’s actions on immigration and crime, see the crime and politics section of this research.

Deportations & Returns

* With regard to President Obama’s record on immigration enforcement, the following media outlets reported that he:

• “deported a record 1.5 million” illegal immigrants during “his first term.”
  – NPR, 2012[790]
• deported “more people than any other president in U.S. history.”
  – WNYC New York Public Radio, 2017[791]
• “has carried out many more deportations than previous presidents, setting a record of more than 2.4 million formal removals.”
  – New York Times, 2016[792]
• “has deported more people than any other president’s administration in history. In fact, they have deported more than the sum of all the presidents of the 20th century. … and Obama’s numbers don’t reflect his last year in office, for which data is not yet available.”
  – ABC News, 2016[793]

* During a 2011 meeting with Hispanic media outlets, a reporter from AOL Latino asked Obama why he has “been deporting much more immigrants than the previous administration did in eight years.” Obama replied that:

* The federal government expels illegal immigrants from the U.S. through processes known as “returns” and “removals.” “Removals” are also called “deportations.”[796] [797] [798]

* Under a process change that began during the presidency of George W. Bush and expanded under Obama, the federal government began issuing orders of “removal” when it caught illegal immigrants near the Mexican border. Before this, it typically returned these people to Mexico without issuing formal orders of removal. This procedural change altered the classification of such immigrants from “returns” to “removals.”[799] [800]

* Under the Obama administration, combined returns and removals of illegal immigrants declined from 1.2 million in 2008 to 460,000 in 2015:

[801]

---

Donald Trump

* The U.S. Constitution gives the president the responsibility and power to ensure that federal laws are “faithfully executed” and to select people who will carry out this work.[802] [803]

* Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) is the agency that “enforces federal laws governing border control, customs, trade and immigration to promote homeland security and public safety.” It is a division of the U.S. Department of Homeland Security, which is under the authority of the president.[804] [805]

* Within days of taking office in January of 2017,[806] Republican President Donald Trump issued an executive order to ensure:

• “the faithful execution of the immigration laws of the United States.”
• “that jurisdictions that fail to comply with applicable federal law do not receive federal funds, except as mandated by law.”
• that federal resources are prioritized to remove non-citizens who:
  • “have been convicted of any criminal offense.”
  • “have been charged with any criminal offense, where such charge has not been resolved.”
  • “have committed acts that constitute a chargeable criminal offense.”
  • “have engaged in fraud or willful misrepresentation in connection with any official matter or application before a governmental agency.”
  • “have abused any program related to receipt of public benefits.”
  • “are subject to a final order of removal, but who have not complied with their legal obligation to depart the United States.”
  • “in the judgment of an immigration officer, otherwise pose a risk to public safety or national security.”[807]

NOTE: In accord with this executive order, Trump took actions detailed in the sections of this research on border barriers, sanctuary cities, and welfare benefits.

---

Joseph Biden

* The U.S. Constitution gives the president the responsibility and power to ensure that federal laws are “faithfully executed” and to select people who will carry out this work.[808] [809]

* Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) is the agency that “enforces federal laws governing border control, customs, trade and immigration to promote homeland security and public safety.” It is a division of the U.S. Department of Homeland Security, which is under the authority of the president.[810] [811]

* On his first day in office in January 2021,[812] Democratic President Joseph Biden issued multiple executive orders terminating prior presidential directives that:[813] [814] [815]

• ensured that “aliens ordered removed from the United States are promptly removed.”[816]
• stopped fining illegal immigrants who don’t leave the U.S. after they have been ordered to do so.[817]
• denied federal funding to sanctuary “jurisdictions that fail to comply with applicable federal” immigration laws or refuse to cooperate with efforts to enforce them.[818]
• funded 317 miles of new border barrier construction in 2020.[819] [820] [821] [822]
• declared a National Emergency concerning the Southern Border of the United States.[823]
• strengthened visa screenings procedures to prevent the entry of foreign nationals who posed a threat to public safety.[824] [825] [826] [827]

* In his first two weeks as president,[828] Biden:

• sent amnesty legislation to Congress that would allow “nearly 11 million” illegal immigrants living in the U.S. to become citizens,[829] [830] giving them the ability to vote and expanded access to welfare.[831]
• took actions to “ensure that Central American refugees and asylum seekers have access to legal avenues to the United States” by ending and reviewing “a host of Trump Administration proclamations, rules, and guidance documents that have effectively closed the U.S. border to asylum seekers.”[832]
• selected Alejandro Mayorkas to lead the Department of Homeland Security.[833] [834]

* During his first month in office, Mayorkas enacted “temporary guidelines” that stopped ICE agents from “pursuing cases” against illegal immigrants unless they “present threats to national security, border security, and public safety” or unless ICE agents “obtain prior approval from their chain of command….”[835]

* In March 2021, the Biden administration ended the federal government’s effort to prevent immigration by people who are likely to become a burden to taxpayers.[836] [837] [838] [839] [840] [841] [842]

* April 2021, the Biden administration cancelled illegal immigrants’ accumulated fines for failing to leave the U.S. after they were ordered to do so.[843]

* In September 2022, the Biden administration decided that federal government can no longer consider the following factors when determining if a person is likely to become a burden on taxpayers:

• Applying for or being approved for future welfare benefits.
• Benefits received by other members of the same household.[844] [845]

Income

* In 2021, the reported average cash income of families living in the U.S. was $109,299.[846] [847] [848] This varied by immigration status and Hispanic origin as follows:

[849] [850] [851]

* In 2017, the median reported cash income of families living in the U.S. was $67,123. This varied by immigration status and Hispanic origin as follows:

[852] [853]

* In 2021, the median reported cash income of families living in the U.S. was $91,162. This varied by citizenship status as follows:

[854]

* In 2021, full-time, year-round male workers earned a median reported cash income of $60,428, and females earned $49,263. This varied by immigration status as follows:

Immigration Status	Median Cash Earnings
	Male	Female
Native-born	$61,346	$50,042
Foreign-born U.S. citizen	$64,035	$51,628
Foreign-born non-citizen	$44,643	$36,098

[855] [856]

Wage Assimilation Trends

* Male immigrants who arrived in the U.S. during:

• 1965–69 earned an average of 24% less than native-born workers of the same age. Ten years later, they were earning 12% less. Twenty years later, they were earning 2% less. Forty years later, they were earning 18% more.
• 1985–89 earned an average of 33% less than native-born workers of the same age. Ten years later, they were earning 27% less. Twenty years later, they were earning 25% less.
• 1995–99 earned an average of 27% less than native-born workers of the same age. Ten years later, they were earning 27% less.[857]

[858]

Education Trends

* One of the primary factors associated with immigration-related income disparities is education.[859]

* Per the academic encyclopedia Immigration in America Today:

* In 2022, 43% of Mexican and Central American immigrants aged 25–64 did not have a high school diploma or GED, as compared to 5% of people born in the U.S. in the same age group. The rates for other groups were as follows:

[862] [863] [864] [865]

* In 2022, 63% of Asian immigrants aged 25–64 had a bachelor’s degree or higher, as compared to 39% of people born in the U.S. in the same age group. The rates for other groups were as follows:

[866] [867]

English Proficiency Trends

* One of the primary factors associated with immigration-related income disparities is the ability to speak English proficiently.[868]

* A 2014 study by the Brookings Institution found that:

• workers with limited English proficiency “earn 25 to 40 percent less than their English proficient counterparts.”
• “high-skilled immigrants who are not proficient in English are twice as likely to work in ‘unskilled’ jobs (i.e. those requiring low levels of education or training) as those who are proficient in English.”[869]

* In 2021, 8% of people living in the U.S. did not speak English “very well.” This varied by immigration status as follows:

Immigration Status	Not Fluent in English
Native-born	2%
Foreign-born U.S. citizen	37%
Foreign-born non-citizen	56%

[870]

* Immigrants who entered the U.S. in 1975–79 made more progress learning to speak English than those who entered in 1985–89 and 1995–99:

[871]

* Click here for an article from Just Facts about how media outlets and activists mislead the public about the English proficiency of immigrants.

---

Price Effects

* Increased numbers of workers vying for the same jobs creates increased competition, which generally leads to lower consumer prices.[872] [873] [874]

* In 2016, the National Academies of Sciences published a 495-page analysis of the economic and fiscal consequences of immigration. With regard to the effect of immigration on the prices of goods and services, the report states:

* In 2017, the Giannini Foundation of Agricultural Economics at the University of California estimated the effects of immigration on the prices of fresh fruits and vegetables. It found that the cost of farm labor would rise by about 40% if the influx of migrant workers slowed or stopped, and this would cause average annual spending on fresh fruits and vegetables to rise by about $21 per U.S. household. Per the study:

---

Wage Effects

* Increased numbers of workers vying for the same jobs creates increased competition, which generally leads to lower wages for those jobs.[877] [878]

* From 1970 to 2021, the immigrant portion of U.S. workers aged 25 and older increased from:

• 6% to 17% for the pool of workers with a bachelor’s degree or higher.
• 6% to 57% for the pool of workers without a high school diploma.[879] [880]

* In 2021, the reported median cash earnings of foreign-born workers aged 25 and older:[881]

• was 16% lower than native-born workers.[882]
• without a high school diploma was 9% lower than native-born workers without a high school diploma.[883]
• with a high school degree and no further education was 11% lower than native-born workers without a high school degree and no further education.[884]
• with a bachelor’s degree or higher was 6% more than native-born workers with a bachelor’s degree or higher.[885]

* All studies that have attempted to quantify the wage effects of immigration employ assumptions, and they have produced conflicting and uncertain results.[886]

* In 2016, the National Academies of Sciences published a 495-page analysis of the economic and fiscal consequences of immigration. This report summarizes 22 results from studies that estimate the effects of immigration on the wages of U.S.-born workers. The studies use differing methods and examine varying groups of workers but mainly those with low incomes. Among these 22 results:

• 18 indicate that immigration has reduced the wages of some U.S.-born workers.
• 4 indicate that immigration has increased the wages of some U.S.-born workers.
• the average result is that each 1% increase in the number of workers in a labor market caused by immigration decreased the wages of U.S.-born workers in that market by 0.5%. The median result is a decrease of 0.4%.[887]

* The National Academies of Sciences summarized the studies above by stating that:

• the wages of U.S. high school “dropouts tend to be more negatively affected” by immigration “than better-educated” Americans.
• this “negative effect” on the wages of U.S.-born workers “may be compounded for native minorities.”
• one of the “largest negative effects” among these studies is on “Hispanic dropouts with poor English….”[888]

* Per the same National Academies of Sciences report:

---

Taxes

* Relative to U.S.-born citizens, the average reported cash income of families of:

• foreign-born U.S. citizens is 2% higher.
• non-citizens is 22% lower.
• Hispanic non-citizens is 43% lower.[891] [892] [893]

* In 2019, prior to the Covid-19 pandemic,[894] a comprehensive analysis of federal taxes by the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) showed that the average effective federal tax burdens increased with income as follows:

[895] [896] [897]

* In 2020—amid Covid-19 government lockdowns and intensified social spending,[898] [899] [900] CBO’s analysis shows that the average effective federal tax burdens increase with income as follows:

[901] [902] [903]

Tax Fraud

* In 2013, the chief actuary of the U.S. Social Security Administration estimated that in 2010, 3.9 million illegal immigrants worked “in the underground economy.”[904] This allows workers and employers to avoid paying income taxes and social insurance taxes.[905] [906] [907] [908] [909]

* Per the IRS’s Taxpayer Advocate, unpaid taxes represent an effective tax on most taxpayers “to subsidize noncompliance by others,” and:

Social Security

* In 2010, illegal immigrants using fraudulent/expired Social Security numbers paid about $13 billion in Social Security taxes and received about $1 billion in Social Security benefits.[912] This disparity between taxes and benefits is because:

• federal law prohibits illegal immigrants from receiving Social Security benefits, although some receive them through fraud.[913]
• before reaching the age of 62, workers are not eligible to receive Social Security old-age benefits, and 96% of illegal immigrants were under the age of 55 in 2011 (as compared to 72% of people born in the United States).[914] [915] [916] This relative scarcity of older illegal immigrants is because:
  • the 1986 amnesty transformed most illegal immigrants from that era into legal immigrants.[917]
  • three-quarters of all U.S. immigrants are in their primary working years (as compared to half of the people born in the United States).[918]

Tax Credits

* In 2010, 3.0 million illegal immigrants and foreign investors filed federal tax returns using an Individual Taxpayer Identification Number (ITIN). The IRS issues these numbers to people regardless of their immigration status, and it enables them to file federal tax returns without a Social Security number.[919] [920] Among the people who filed such returns in 2010:

• 72% paid no income tax and received cash payments from the federal government for child tax credits (foreign investors cannot receive these payments). In comparison, 14% of people who filed regular tax returns (with a Social Security number) paid no income tax and received these payments.[921] [922]
• the entire group paid a total of $0.9 billion in income taxes and received total cash payments of $4.9 billion.[923]

* For facts about how a politician and a “fact-checker” have misled the public about income taxes paid by illegal immigrants, see Just Facts’ article about this issue.

---

Government Benefits

* Government welfare programs are generally designed to provide more benefits to lower-income people.[924]

* In 2021, 13% of U.S. households had reported income below the poverty line, and 29% had income below twice the poverty line. This varied by immigration status as follows:

Immigration Status	Income Below …
	Poverty Line	Twice Poverty Line
Native-born	13%	28%
Foreign-born U.S. citizen	11%	26%
Foreign-born non-citizen	18%	41%

[925]

* In 2011, 31% of U.S.-born citizens were reportedly in or near poverty. This varied for U.S. immigrants (and their children) from various homelands as follows:

Homeland	Portion in or Near Poverty
South Asia	21%
Europe	28%
East Asia	31%
South America	37%
Caribbean	46%
Sub-Saharan Africa	46%
Middle East	48%
El Salvador	57%
Honduras	66%
Guatemala	67%
Mexico	68%

[926]

* The last four nations listed above are the homelands of roughly 73% of the illegal immigrants living in the U.S. in 2012.[927]

* Federal law states:

* Federal laws, court rulings, and administrative decisions provide the following benefits to immigrants, regardless of whether they are in the U.S. legally:

• Federal taxpayers must provide annual cash payments to low-income immigrants for each dependent child they have.[929] [930]

• Most hospitals with emergency departments are required to provide an “examination” and “stabilizing treatment” for anyone who comes to such a facility and requests care for an emergency medical condition, a childbirth, routine prenatal care, or routine postpartum care—regardless of their ability to pay or immigration status.[931] [932] [933] [934]
• Federally funded programs provide job training, adult education, clinic-based healthcare, emergency rent assistance, and emergency food assistance to immigrants.[935]
• States cannot deny a free public education to anyone based on their immigration status.[936]
• Everyone who is eligible for free public education is also eligible for the national school lunch and school breakfast programs.[937]
• Immigrants can enroll their children in federally funded childcare and preschool programs.[938] [939]

• The federal government grants automatic citizenship to all children born in the United States, whether their parents are illegal immigrants, visitors, or tourists.[940] [941] This entitles their children to all federal welfare benefits, such as food stamps, housing, home energy, and health insurance. These benefits are generally awarded based on the reported incomes of the children’s households or families.[942] [943] [944] [945] [946] [947] [948]

* Due to birthright citizenship, about 88% of the children of illegal immigrants are U.S. citizens.[949]

* The majority of states and numerous cities and towns offer welfare and other benefits to illegal and/or non-citizen immigrants that extend beyond what the federal government provides.[950] [951] [952] [953] [954]

* Federal law does not provide the following welfare benefits to illegal immigrants and people temporarily living in the U.S. with visas:

• Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (food stamps)
• Non-emergency Medicaid
• Temporary Assistance for Needy Families and Supplemental Security Income (cash welfare)[955] [956]

* Under federal law, legal non-citizen immigrants are generally ineligible to receive benefits from the federal welfare programs listed directly above for five years or more from when they first enter the United States. One of the exceptions to this rule is that children can receive food stamps without a waiting period.[957] [958]

* Refugees and asylees are generally eligible for all federal welfare programs and for other programs specifically for refugees and asylees.[959] [960]

Food Stamps

* In 2021, 12% of U.S. households received food stamps. This varied by immigration status as follows:

Immigration Status	Receiving Food Stamps
Native-born	12%
Foreign-born U.S. citizen	15%
Foreign-born non-citizen	16%

[961]

* In 2019, 1.1 million or 3% of all food stamps recipients were non-citizens.[962]

* In 2019, 2.5 million or 7% of all food stamps recipients were U.S. citizen children who were living with non-citizens.[963]

Social Security

* Relative to U.S.-born citizens, in 2021 the average reported cash income of families of:

• foreign-born U.S. citizens is 2% higher.
• non-citizens is 22% lower.
• Hispanic non-citizens is 43% lower.[964] [965] [966]

* Social Security’s formula for old-age benefits is structured to provide people with lower incomes higher ratios of annual benefits to taxes.[967] The graph below compares the annual old-age benefits to lifetime payroll taxes for 23-year-olds who will work until the age of 67 while earning constant incomes:

[968]

* Longer lifespans increase the financial strains on the Social Security program.[969] Workers who are currently 40 years old will receive full Social Security retirement benefits when they turn 67 years old.[970] The following table shows their life expectancies beyond this age:

Race/Sex	Years of Expected Life Beyond the Age of 67
Hispanic females	15.5
White females	13.8
Black females	10.7
Hispanic males	10.3
White males	9.5
Black males	5.0

[971] [972]

Education

* Per academic texts that discuss the impacts of immigration on educational methods:

---

Federal Enforcement & State Prison Costs

* Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) is a federal agency that works “to protect America from the cross-border crime and illegal immigration that threaten national security and public safety.”[975]

* In 2022, ICE employed more than 20,000 people and spent about $8 billion, or about 0.1% of total federal spending.[976] [977]

* From 2010 through 2015, state governments spent about $6.7 billion dollars on “selected annual estimated operating costs—correctional officer salaries, medical care, food service, and utilities” to imprison criminal aliens. This equates to about 0.04% of state and local government spending over this period. The federal government reimbursed the states for about 11% of these incarceration costs.[978] [979]

Data Caveats

* Government statistics on the crime rates of immigrants are often unclear because:

• they lump together non-citizens who are lawfully present in the U.S. and were vetted for criminality with those who were not. This includes people who entered the United States:
  • as legal permanent residents, which requires passing a rigorous criminal background check and meeting other requirements to ensure they don’t pose a risk to others.
  • by using temporary visas, which requires passing a screening for various risks.
  • by illegally crossing the border, which avoids all criminal background checks and safety screenings.[980] [981] [982] [983]
• certain state and local governments have enacted sanctuary policies that prohibit law enforcement from examining or recording the immigration status of arrestees.[984] [985] [986]
• federal, state, and local governments differ in how they define and record the immigration status of people who pass through the criminal justice system.[987]
• illegal immigrant crime victims may not report crimes committed against them due to fear of deportation.[988]
• millions of immigrants use fraudulent Social Security numbers, fake birth certificates, or other forms of identity fraud to mask their immigration status.[989] [990] [991]
• crime statistics are sometimes based on surveys that are dependent upon respondent honesty, and certain groups of immigrants often misrepresent themselves as citizens in surveys.[992]
• the numbers and types of immigrants in the U.S., which comprise the denominators for determining crimes rates, are uncertain.

---

General

* Most of the facts below don’t account for crimes that don’t result in arrests.[993] In the United States:

• one person is arrested for every 2.6 aggravated assaults that are committed.[994] [995] [996] [997]
• the portion of murders in which a suspect is identified and acted upon by the criminal justice system declined from 92% in 1960 to 54% in 2020.[998] [999] [1000]
• murders committed by racial and ethnic minorities are less likely to be solved than other murders.[1001]

* Arrest and incarceration rates of non-citizens who enter the U.S. are higher than those who remain in the U.S. because:

• in the decade from 2011 to 2020, the federal government deported 1,546,450 non-citizens who were convicted of committing crimes in the U.S.[1002] [1003] This is 14 times the number of non-citizens in U.S. adult correctional facilities at the end of this period (108,008).[1004] [1005]
• convicts released from state prisons have an average of about 4.4 prior convictions in addition to those that led to their imprisonment.[1006] [1007]
• after convicts are released from state prisons, roughly 81% of them are arrested within a decade for committing new crimes (not probation or parole violations), with an average of five arrests per released prisoner.[1008] [1009] [1010]

* In 2011, the U.S. Government Accountability Office published a study of 249,000 non-citizens in U.S. prisons and jails during 2003–2009. The study:

• found that these non-citizen inmates had been arrested for the following crimes committed within the U.S.:
  • 213,047 assaults.
  • 115,045 burglaries.
  • 94,492 weapons violations.
  • 69,929 sex offenses.
  • 25,064 homicides.
• did not count some crimes because it only covered “a portion of the total population of criminal aliens who may be incarcerated at the state and local levels” since there “are no reliable population data on criminal aliens incarcerated in all state prison systems and local jails.”[1011]

* In 2018, the U.S. Government Accountability Office published a study of non-citizens in U.S. prisons and jails during 2010–2016.[1012] The study:

• found that these non-citizen inmates had been arrested/transferred for the following crimes committed within the U.S. during 1964–2017:
  • 1,097,800 drug offenses.
  • 505,400 assaults.
  • 219,900 burglaries.
  • 169,200 weapons violations.
  • 133,800 sex offenses.
  • 33,300 homicides.
  • 24,200 kidnappings.
  • 1,500 acts of terrorism.

• double-counted some crimes because the “data did not allow” the study to “distinguish between a new arrest and a transfer from one agency to another.”
• did not count some crimes because it only covered “a portion of the total population of criminal aliens incarcerated at the state and local level” since there “are no reliable population data on all criminal aliens in every U.S. state prison and local jail.”[1013]

* Based on data from the U.S. Department of Justice, the Congressional Research Service determined in 2016 that:

* In 2018, non-citizens who remained in the U.S. accounted for:

• 7% of the U.S. population.
• 15% of federal arrests for non-immigration crimes.
• 24% of federal drug arrests.
• 9% of federal arrests for violent crimes.[1015] [1016]

* Based on U.S. Census data from 2016 to 2020, immigrants who remain in the U.S. and:

• are U.S. citizens are 81% less likely than the general U.S. population to be incarcerated in adult correctional facilities.
• are not U.S. citizens are 4% less likely than the general U.S. population to be incarcerated in adult correctional facilities.
• are from Latin America are 4.4 times more likely to be incarcerated than immigrants from Europe and 6.0 times more likely than immigrants from Asia.[1017] [1018]

* Based on U.S. Census data from 2016 to 2020, the numbers and types of immigrants who remain in the U.S. and are incarcerated in adult correctional facilities varied as follows:

Immigrant Type	Portion of …
	U.S. Population	Prisoners
All	13.6%	7.7%
U.S. Citizen	6.9%	1.3%
Non-Citizen	6.6%	6.4%
Asian	4.2%	0.7%
European	1.5%	0.3%
Latin American	6.8%	6.3%

[1019] [1020]

---

Removable Criminal Aliens

* “Removable criminal aliens” are non-citizens who have been convicted of crimes in the U.S. that warrant immediate deportation hearings. This term can apply to both legal and illegal immigrants, but it does not apply to immigrants who:

• are living in the U.S. illegally but have not been convicted of a crime (unlawful presence in the U.S. is not a criminal offense unless the person was previously deported or fled the nation after a removal order was issued).
• have only been convicted of minor offenses like public intoxication.
• have become U.S. citizens.[1021] [1022]

* Based on data from 2007 to 2009, the U.S. Department of Homeland Security estimated in 2010 that about:

• “900,000 arrests of aliens for crimes occur every year.”
• “550,000 criminal aliens convicted of crimes exit law enforcement custody every year.”
• “1.94 million removable criminal aliens are in the United States today.”[1023]

* Federal law requires the U.S. Attorney General to begin removal proceedings “as expeditiously as possible” when an alien is convicted of a crime that “makes the alien deportable.”[1024] [1025] The Attorney General is under the authority of the president.[1026]

---

Media & Academia

* In 2016, Gary Johnson, the Libertarian candidate for president of the U.S., told CNN that Mexican immigrants “are more law-abiding than U.S. citizens, and that is a statistic.”[1027] PolitiFact, a group with a mission to “help you find the truth in politics,”[1028] reported that this statement is “mostly true.”[1029]

Misrepresenting Association as Causation

* In support of its “mostly true” ruling, PolitiFact wrote that “crime involvement among foreign-born residents is lower than that of U.S.-born citizens.” As evidence of this, PolitiFact cited a report from the American Immigration Council written by three Ph.D.’s and accurately paraphrased it as follows:

* Per an academic textbook about analyzing data:

Cherry-Picking

* In their analyses, PolitiFact and the American Immigration Council did not mention that the foreign-born share of the U.S. population also increased during the 1970s and 1980s, and during this time, the homicide rate rose, fell, and rose again:

[1037]

* Per an academic book about analyzing data:

Mixing Data

* As further support for its “mostly true” ruling, PolitiFact wrote that the same American Immigration Council report:

* The Census does specify citizenship status,[1041] and all immigrants who have become U.S. citizens are, by definition, legally present in the United States.[1042] This Census data shows that non-citizen immigrants were 5.2 times more likely to be incarcerated in correctional facilities than citizen immigrants during 2011–2015.[1043] [1044]

Obscuring Data

* The documentation provided by the American Immigration Council to support its claim about the rate of immigrant incarceration consists of one footnote that states “2010 American Community Survey.”[1045] Just Facts repeatedly requested data to verify this claim from the American Immigration Council, and they did not provide it.[1046]

* Per an academic book about research integrity:

• “An important goal in the social sciences is that results, and therefore the data, be reproducible.”
• “When data are not available, researchers must either trust past published results, or they must recreate the data as best they can based on descriptions in the published works, which often turn out to be too cryptic.”
• “Descriptions are no substitute for the data itself.”[1047]

* Per an academic work about data analysis and the “importance of transparency”:

Bait & Switch

* As evidence that Mexican immigrants are “less likely to commit crimes than the native-born,” PolitiFact cited the same American Immigration Council report and wrote that:

* If the claim above is accurate, it would not show that Mexican immigrants are “less likely to commit crimes than the native-born.” It would show that young, male Mexican immigrants with low education who remain in the U.S. are less likely to be incarcerated than native-born young men without a high-school diploma. With regard to:

• education:
  • In 2012, 54% of Mexican and Central American immigrants aged 25–64 did not have a high school diploma or equivalent, as compared to 7% of people born in the U.S. in the same age group.[1054]
  • In 2009, 65% of male prison inmates did not have a high school diploma, as compared to 19% of adults in the general population.[1055]
• remaining in the U.S.:
  • In the decade from 2006 to 2015, the federal government deported 1,504,934 non-citizens who were convicted of committing crimes in the U.S.[1056] [1057] This was 10 times the number of non-citizens in U.S. adult correctional facilities at the end of this period (151,324).[1058] [1059]
  • After convicts are released from state prisons, roughly 81% of them are arrested within a decade for committing completely new crimes (not probation or parole violations), with an average of five arrests per released prisoner.[1060] [1061] [1062]
• age:
  • In 2016, people aged 17–34 comprised 24% of the U.S. population and committed about 67% of the murders.[1063] [1064]
  • In 2016, non-citizens comprised about 7.2% of the U.S. population and about 10.2% of the population aged 17–34.[1065] [1066]

Bait & Switch 2

* As further evidence that Mexican immigrants are “less likely to commit crimes than the native-born,” PolitiFact wrote:

* The statement above is based on a paper authored by Bersani that was published by the journal Justice Quarterly in 2014. This study is based on the self-reported criminal activities of a group of youth born in 1980 to 1984.[1069]

* Bersani’s paper does not compare the nationally representative crime rates of foreign-born residents to U.S.-born citizens. It compares the crime rates of foreign-born residents to U.S.-born citizens using “an over-sample of Hispanic and African-American youth.”[1070] [1071] With regard to such samples:

• In cases where law enforcement identified the race or ethnicity of murder perpetrators in 2014, black people were 7.2 more times likely to commit murder than white people, and Hispanics were 2.6 times more likely to commit murder than whites.[1072]
• Surveys of crime victims conducted by the U.S. Department of Justice from 2012 to 2014 show that black people are about 2.4 more times likely to commit non-homicidal violent crimes than white people, and Hispanics are 5% less likely to commit such crimes than whites.[1073] [1074] [1075] [1076] [1077]

Statistical Strategies

* Bersani’s paper does not provide a straightforward accounting of crimes committed by Mexican immigrants.[1078] [1079] Instead, it uses an “analytic strategy” called “group-based trajectory modeling” to identify “clusters of individuals who display similar behavioral trajectories over a period of time.” Using this strategy, Bersani found that:

• “violent crime is virtually non-existent among first generation immigrants.”
• “drug crime” is “virtually non-existent among first generation immigrants….”[1080]

* In 2011, the U.S. Government Accountability Office published a study of 249,000 non-citizens in U.S. prisons and jails during 2003–2009. The study covered “a portion of the total population of criminal aliens who may be incarcerated at the state and local levels” and found that they had been arrested for the following violent and drug crimes committed within the U.S.:

• 25,064 homicides.
• 69,929 sex offenses.
• 94,492 weapons violations.
• 213,047 assaults.
• 504,043 drug crimes.[1081]

* In 2018, the U.S. Government Accountability Office published a study of non-citizens in U.S. prisons and jails during 2010–2016.[1082] The study covered “a portion of the total population of criminal aliens incarcerated at the state and local level” and found that they had been arrested/transferred for the following violent and drug crimes committed in the U.S. during 1964–2017:

• 1,500 acts of terrorism
• 24,200 kidnappings.
• 33,300 homicides.
• 133,800 sex offenses.
• 505,400 assaults.
• 1,097,800 drug offenses.[1083]

* Using the same analytic strategy, Bersani found that:

* Based on U.S. Census data from 2011 to 2015, Latin American immigrants who remain in the U.S. are 5.1 times more likely to be incarcerated than European immigrants and 6.3 times more likely than Asian immigrants:

Immigrant Type	Portion of …
	U.S. Population	Prisoners
Asian	3.9%	0.7%
European	1.5%	0.3%
Latin American	6.8%	7.5%

[1085] [1086]

* Per various academic publications that address the topic of statistical analytic strategies:

• “Statistical analysis is very easy to misuse and misinterpret. Any method of analysis used, whenever applied to data, will provide a result, and all statistical results look authoritative.”[1087]
• “Manipulation of data involves subjecting data to multiple statistical techniques until one achieves the desired outcome.”[1088]
• “A general principle of data analysis recommends using the most appropriate, yet simplest, statistical techniques in research so findings can be better understood, interpreted, and communicated.”[1089] [1090]
• Statistical “malpractice typically occurs when complex analytical techniques are combined with large data sets. … Indeed, as a general rule, the better the science, the less the need for complex analysis….”[1091]

Other Media Outlets

* Citing the same or similar studies as PolitiFact, various media outlets have reported that:

• “immigrants are far more law-abiding than natives, regardless of race, class or education.”
  – New York Times[1092]
• “immigrants—regardless of nationality or legal status—are less likely than the native population to commit violent crimes or to be incarcerated.”
  – Wall Street Journal[1093]
• in 2010, “1.6 percent of immigrant males 18 to 39 years old were incarcerated, compared to 3.3 percent of native-born males. … The trend holds when comparing less educated Mexican, Salvadoran and Guatemalan men—who make up the bulk of the undocumented immigrant population—to their native-born counterparts….”
  – Washington Post[1094]

---

Federal Politics

* The U.S. Constitution gives Congress the power to pass laws regarding citizenship with the approval of the president or by overriding a presidential veto. A veto override requires the votes of two-thirds of both houses of Congress.[1095] [1096]

* The U.S. Constitution gives the president the responsibility and power to ensure that federal laws are “faithfully executed” and to select people who will carry out this work.[1097] [1098]

* Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) is the agency that “enforces federal laws governing border control, customs, trade and immigration to promote homeland security and public safety.” It is a division of the U.S. Department of Homeland Security, which is under the authority of the president.[1099] [1100]

Party Platforms

* The 2020 Democratic Party Platform is silent about the issue of immigration and crime and promises to:

• use detention of illegal immigrants only as a “last resort.”
• end all funding “to construct an unnecessary, wasteful, and ineffective wall on the southern border.”
• “terminate the Trump Administration’s discriminatory travel and immigration bans that disproportionately impact Muslim, Arab, and African people” from nations with high levels of terrorist activity.[1101] [1102] [1103] [1104] [1105]
• “end workplace and community raids.”
• “end programs that force state and local law enforcement to also be responsible for immigration enforcement.”
• hold immigration agencies “accountable for any inappropriate, unlawful, or inhumane treatment.”[1106] [1107]

* The Republicans didn’t adopt a new platform in 2020.[1108]

* With regard to immigration and crime, the 2016 Republican Party Platform states:

Releasing Convicts

* Federal law requires the U.S. Attorney General begin removal proceedings “as expeditiously as possible” when a non-citizen is convicted of a “deportable” offense.[1110] The Attorney General is under the authority of the president,[1111] and deportable offenses include but are not limited to:

• a “crime for which a sentence of one year or longer may be imposed.”
• “an aggravated felony.”
• possessing a firearm.
• drug crimes “other than a single offense involving possession for one’s own use of 30 grams or less of marijuana.”
• domestic violence.
• stalking.
• identity fraud.
• falsely claiming to be a citizen to get a job or receive welfare benefits.
• voting in U.S. elections.[1112] [1113]

* In 2001, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled (5 to 4) in Zadvydas v. Davis that the government must release illegal immigrants who are ex-convicts into the U.S. population if their home countries refuse to take them back.[1114] In this case:

• both of the justices appointed by Democrats and three justices appointed by Republicans ruled that the government must release them.
• four justices appointed by Republicans ruled that the government is not required to release them.[1115]

* U.S. law specifies penalties for foreign nations that refuse to take back people who are slated for deportation:

* During a July 2016 congressional hearing, Obama administration officials from the State Department and the Department of Homeland Security stated that:

• the federal law above that requires the Secretary of State to stop granting visas to nations that won’t take back their people is a “very, very powerful tool” to remove criminal immigrants from the U.S.
• the Obama administration has never “used” this law.
• “Tens of thousands” of convicts who were slated for deportation have been released onto U.S. streets because their home countries refused to take them back.[1117] [1118]

* In 2014, the Obama administration “released from its custody 30,558 criminal aliens with a total of 79,059 convictions instead of deporting them.”[1119] [1120]

* Between October 1, 2010 and July 21, 2015, the Obama administration released 124 criminal aliens who were later charged with murder-related crimes committed in the U.S. after their release and before February 2016.[1121] [1122] [1123]

* In 2015, the Boston Globe published an investigation of immigrants convicted of sex crimes who were released since 2008 by the Bush and Obama administrations. It found that:

• “hundreds of immigrants convicted of sex crimes who should have been deported” were instead “released in the United States because their homelands refused to take them back.”
• “immigration officials have released them without making sure they register with local authorities as sex offenders.”
• the Obama administration refused to reveal the names of these convicted sex offenders “to protect their privacy,” but the Boston Globe filed a federal lawsuit to force the release of these names by “arguing that the privacy policy endangered Americans and immigrants alike.”
• the Globe won this lawsuit, but the Obama administration “provided complete records only for the criminals freed from 2008 to 2012, the year the Globe filed the lawsuit.” The Globe “demanded a more current list,” but the administration would not supply it.
• “using the 2008 to 2012 list with names of more than 6,800 criminals, the Globe identified 424 released immigrants who had previously been convicted of sex-related crimes, including 209 who had appeared in the national public sex offender registry.”
• “at least 34 of the 424 released sex offenders—including some who did register with local police—were back in jail as of last month, state records show, some for heinous crimes committed after ICE released them.”[1124] [1125]

Removing Convicts

* In November of 2014, the Obama administration formally changed its immigration enforcement policies to “focus on the removal of convicted felons and other public safety threats.” It did this by directing all immigration and border security personnel to:

• apply “prosecutorial discretion” as to “whom to stop, question, and arrest; whom to detain or release; whether to settle, dismiss, appeal, or join in a motion on a case; and whether to grant deferred action, parole, or a stay of removal instead of pursuing removal” for all illegal immigrants.
• never pursue the “removal of an alien not identified as a priority” unless an ICE Field Office Director concludes that “removing such an alien would serve an important federal interest.”[1126] [1127] [1128]

* Obama’s policy officially became effective on January 5, 2015 with “training and guidance … provided to the workforce prior to the effective date.”[1129]

* In the federal government’s 2015 and 2016 fiscal years (October 2014 through September 2016[1130]), ICE removed 21% fewer convicted criminals per year than in its 2014 fiscal year:

[1131]

Detaining Convicts

* An immigration “detainer” or “hold” is a request from ICE to a local law enforcement agency to detain a non-citizen convicted of a criminal offense who has been taken into custody by local law enforcement. ICE typically asks the agency to hold the individual for 48 hours, so that ICE can decide whether or not the person should be deported and take appropriate action before the criminal is released.[1132] [1133]

* The Bush administration began issuing tens of thousands of detainers in the last three years of his presidency, reaching a peak of 186,978 in 2008. The Obama administration continued to increase this up to 309,697 detainers in 2011. Thereafter, the Obama administration issued fewer detainers every year though the end of his presidency, reaching a low of 85,720 in 2016:

[1134]

* From 2012 to 2015, the Obama administration deported less than half of the people that ICE took into custody under immigration detainers.[1135]

* The Transactional Records Access Clearinghouse at Syracuse University is an organization that provides the public with “information about staffing, spending, and enforcement activities of the federal government.”[1136] Per a February 2017 report by this organization about immigration detainers:

• “A recent and dramatic change” in ICE policies “occurred in the waning months of the Obama Administration.”
• “Fields of information that ICE had routinely provided” in response to Freedom of Information Act requests “started getting left off the files … without explanation.”
• These missing fields make the information “largely unusable.”
• “Omitted, for example, from the files were … what actions ICE took to deport individuals once they were in ICE custody, along with many other data fields.”
• “All of this information … are essential to the public’s understanding of what the agency is actually doing to enforce immigration laws.”
• “Thus far, administrative appeals within the agency have been unavailing,” and a lawsuit “appears to be needed to challenge these new unlawful practices.[1137]

* In January 2017, Republican President Donald Trump issued an executive order to ensure “that jurisdictions that fail to comply with applicable federal” immigration laws or refuse to cooperate with efforts to enforce them “do not receive federal funds, except as mandated by law.”[1138]

* In February 2020, a three-judge panel of a federal appeals court ruled that the federal government can deny federal grants to states and localities that fail to comply with federal immigration laws or refuse to cooperate with efforts to enforce them.[1139]

---

Sanctuary Policies

* Sanctuary cities, counties, and states are those that shield certain illegal immigrants from deportation by refusing to cooperate with federal immigration authorities. Some of these governments have officially enacted sanctuary policies into law, and others implement them through less formal means.[1140] [1141]

* One of the primary ways that sanctuary jurisdictions shelter illegal immigrants is by releasing them from jail (and other forms of custody) before Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) can detain them under the following circumstances:

• After state and local law enforcement agencies arrest people, they typically conduct criminal background checks by sending their fingerprints to the FBI. In accord with federal law, the FBI shares these fingerprints with ICE. In turn, ICE checks to see if the fingerprints match people who have been previously fingerprinted by immigration authorities.[1142] [1143] [1144] [1145] [1146] [1147]
• When fingerprints match, ICE investigates to determine if the arrestee is a priority for deportation. Priorities generally include people with convictions or arrests for terrorism, aggravated assault, gang activity, drug distribution, firearm offenses, DUIs, repeated immigration violations, domestic violence, sexual abuse, and other crimes.[1148] [1149] [1150]
• If ICE determines that an arrestee may be a priority for deportation, it issues a “detainer” or “hold” for him. This is an official request to the law enforcement agency asking it to notify ICE before releasing the suspect and/or to maintain custody of him for up to 48 hours. This allows ICE time to decide if the suspect should be deported and take appropriate action before he is released.[1151] [1152] [1153] [1154] [1155]
• Sanctuary jurisdictions often flout these detainers and release the illegal immigrants before ICE can detain them.[1156] [1157]

* State and local law enforcement agencies declined to honor about:

• 21,205 detainers from January 2014 to September 2016. These agencies were located in 567 counties in 48 states, including the District of Columbia.[1158] [1159]
• 19,162 detainers from October 2014 to September 2017.[1160]

* Per U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement:

* Per the American Civil Liberties Union, “more than 300 jurisdictions across the country” have adopted “community trust policies,” and:

* The following illegal immigrants have killed people after they were arrested and released by sanctuary jurisdictions that flouted ICE detainers for these individuals:

• Josue Rafael Fuentes-Ponce, Joel Ernesto Escobar, and two other MS-13 gang members murdered Ariana Funes-Diaz, a 14-year-old Maryland girl, with a machete and baseball bat. Ponce and Escobar carried out this crime after they were arrested and released by Prince George’s County, MD for “attempted first-degree murder, attempted second-degree murder, participation in gang activity, conspiracy to commit murder, attempted robbery, and other related charges.”[1163] [1164] [1165] [1166]
• Nery Estrada Margos beat Veronica Cabrera Ramirez to death two weeks after Sonoma County, California Sheriff Rob Giordano released him following an arrest for beating the same woman. In this case, Giordano and his team:
  • blamed ICE for this murder by stating that they notified ICE of the pending release but ICE failed to pick up Margos.
  • released Margos 16 minutes after they notified ICE—while knowing that the nearest ICE office was 50 miles away—thus ensuring that ICE could not detain him.
  • had released numerous other illegal immigrants in the same manner by not notifying ICE until shortly beforehand.[1167] [1168] [1169] [1170] [1171]
• Edwin Ramos murdered Tony Bologna and two of his sons, Michael and Matthew. Ramos mistook one of the sons for a rival gang member and gunned down his family as they drove by in their car.[1172] [1173]
• Victor Aureliano Martinez broke into the home of 64-year-old Marilyn Pharis, raped her, and beat her with a hammer. Jose Fernando Villagomez, a U.S. citizen, also participated in this crime.[1174] [1175] [1176]
• Ever Valles fatally shot 32-year-old Tim Cruz during a robbery. Valles was a known gang member.[1177] [1178]
• Juan Francisco Lopez-Sanchez shot and killed 32-year-old Kathryn Steinle while she was out for a walk with her father and a family friend. Lopez-Sanchez had been deported five times.[1179] [1180]
• Kendel Anthony Felix kidnapped and murdered New York real estate developer Menachem Stark. Felix was previously arrested and released on six occasions.[1181] [1182] [1183]
• Luis Rodrigo Perez shot and killed Steven Marler, Aaron Hampton, and Sabrina Starr in Springfield, Missouri. In this case, government officials of Middlesex County, NJ:
  • disregarded an ICE detainer and released Perez less than a year before the killings.
  • claimed that “all responsibility” for Perez’s actions rest “squarely upon ICE” because ICE didn’t obey their county policy of getting “an order of deportation from a federal judge.”
  • disregarded the fact that federal law gives all immigration officers “power without warrant to arrest any alien in the United States, if he has reason to believe that the alien” is violating any immigration law.[1184] [1185] [1186] [1187] [1188]

* The following illegal immigrants have been arrested for allegedly killing people after they were arrested and released by sanctuary jurisdictions that flouted ICE detainers for these individuals. The outcomes of their criminal cases were still pending as of October 2022:

• Reeaz Khan allegedly raped and murdered Maria Fuertes, a 92-year old woman, in New York City. In this case:
  • the administration of Democratic Mayor Bill de Blasio claimed the city never received an ICE detainer and that the city honors detainers for people convicted of violent crimes committed within five years prior to their arrest.
  • ICE released a fax verification report proving that the city had received the detainer.
  • the city honored a total of 25 detainers in 2019 among 7,526 detainers issued for people with criminal histories that include “more than 3,500 assaults, 1,500 DUIs, 1,000 sex crimes, 1,000 weapon offenses, 500 robberies, and 200 homicide offenses.”[1189] [1190] [1191] [1192] [1193]
• Carlos Eduardo Arevalo-Carranza allegedly stalked, beat, and stabbed to death Bambi Larson, a 59-year-old medical testing company manager who lived in San Jose, California. In this case, the accused was a gang member who had been previously arrested and convicted of burglary, battery of an officer, false imprisonment, and other crimes. ICE had filed at least nine detainers for him, all of which were ignored.[1194] [1195] [1196]
• Carlos Iraheta-Vega allegedly murdered 16-year-old Juan Carlos Con Guzman by beating him with a baseball bat and chopping his neck with a machete. This case occurred in King County, Washington, which encompasses Seattle and surrounding areas.[1197] [1198] [1199]

* A California sanctuary law prohibits local law enforcement agencies from honoring ICE detainers under certain circumstances. During 2019, the Orange County Sheriff’s Department was forced by this law to release 1,015 inmates with ICE detainers without notifying ICE. In February 2020, the county sheriff reported:

Donald Trump

* In January 2017, Republican President Donald Trump issued an executive order to ensure that “jurisdictions that fail to comply with applicable federal” immigration laws or refuse to cooperate with efforts to enforce them “do not receive federal funds, except as mandated by law.”[1201]

* In May 2019:

• U.S. Senator Catherine Cortez Masto (D–NV) sponsored a bill to rescind Trump’s executive order.[1202] During that congressional session:
  • 23 Democrats, 1 Independent, and 0 Republicans cosponsored this bill.[1203]
  • the full Senate never voted on it.[1204]

• U.S. Congressman Tom McClintock (R–CA) sponsored a bill that would limit federal funding to sanctuary jurisdictions.[1205] U.S. Senator Pat Toomey (R–PA) sponsored the same bill in the Senate.[1206] During that congressional session:
  • 60 Republicans and 0 Democrats cosponsored these bills.[1207]
  • neither the full House nor full Senate voted on them.[1208] [1209]

* In February 2020, a three-judge panel of a federal appeals court ruled that the federal government can deny federal grants to states and localities that fail to comply with federal immigration laws or refuse to cooperate with efforts to enforce them.[1210]

Joseph Biden

* On his first day in office in January 2021,[1211] Democratic President Joseph Biden issued an executive order that rescinded Trump’s order.[1212]

---

Illicit Drugs

* The U.S. Centers for Disease Control defines “illicit drugs” as those that are “prohibited by law” and used for “non-medical” purposes. These can include:

• amphetamine-type stimulants, like meth and ephedrine.
• marijuana or cannabis.
• cocaine.
• heroin and other opioids.
• synthetic drugs, like ecstasy and fentanyl.[1213] [1214]

* In the U.S. during 2021, roughly:

• 108,886 people were killed by drug overdoses.[1215]
• 99,086 people were killed by accidental drug overdoses.[1216]
• 91,246 people were killed by illicit drug overdoses.[1217]
• 83,034 people were killed by accidental overdoses from illicit drugs.[1218]

* If U.S. drug overdose deaths remain at current levels, one in every 39 people in the U.S. will ultimately have their lives cut short by a drug overdose.[1219] The average age of people who die of drug overdoses is about 43 years.[1220]

* A scientific, nationally representative survey commissioned in 2020 by Just Facts found that 40% of U.S. voters believe the average lifetime risk of dying from a drug overdose is about 1 in 1,000, and 29% believe it is about 1 in 100,000.[1221] [1222]

* Mexico is the primary source of fentanyl, heroin, cocaine, and methamphetamine in the United States.[1223] [1224] [1225]

* The chemicals used to manufacture fentanyl in Mexico mainly come from China.[1226] [1227]

* In the U.S. from 2010 to 2020, the age-adjusted overdose death rates for the drugs above grew by 4.1 to 17.8 times:

[1228]

* In 2016, the U.S. Centers for Disease Control estimated that:

* Since 2019, U.S. Customs and Border Protection have seized 2.1 million pounds of illegal drugs at the U.S./Mexico border:

Year	Southwest Border Drug Seizures (Thousands of Pounds)
	Marijuana	Meth	Cocaine	Fentanyl	Heroin	All
2019	517	131	24	3	6	681
2020	502	170	19	5	5	701
2021	213	183	27	11	5	438
2022 (1/1–10/14)	86	160	25	14	2	287
Total	1,318	644	95	32	17	2,106

[1230]

* Since 2019, U.S. Customs and Border Protection have seized enough illegal drugs at the U.S./Mexico border to kill 9.4 billion people, or 28 times the entire population of the United States:

Year	Southwest Border Drug Seizures (Millions of Lethal Doses)
	Meth	Cocaine	Fentanyl	Heroin	All
2019	397	9	597	50	1,053
2020	514	7	1,034	47	1,602
2021	552	10	2,401	45	3,008
2022 (1/1–10/14)	485	10	3,199	14	3,707
Total	1,948	36	7,231	156	9,370

[1231]

---

Identity, Document & Tax Fraud

* Federal law generally prohibits illegal immigrants from earning income in the United States.[1232] [1233]

* According to the Social Security Administration, roughly 7.0 million or 65% of illegal immigrants worked for income during 2010.[1234]

* According to Pew Research, roughly 8.1 million or 72% of illegal immigrants worked for income or looked for such work during 2012.[1235]

* Illegal immigrants earn income in the U.S. by using fraudulent or expired documentation or working for cash “under the table” or “off the books.”[1236] [1237]

* In 2013, the chief actuary of the U.S. Social Security Administration estimated that in 2010:

• 0.6 million illegal immigrants “had temporary work authorized at some point in the past and have overstayed the term of their visas.”
• 0.7 million illegal immigrants worked by using Social Security numbers obtained by using “fraudulent birth certificates.”
• 1.8 million illegal immigrants worked by using Social Security numbers “that did not match their name.”
• 3.9 million illegal immigrants worked “in the underground economy.”[1238]

False Documents

* In 2017, California Senate Leader and Democrat Kevin De Leon testified before the Senate’s Public Safety Committee:

* Federal law states:

* The law above was initially enacted in 1986 as part of a comprehensive immigration reform compromise between political parties, business interests, religious groups, and ethnic organizations.[1242] [1243] [1244] [1245] The resulting bill was approved by 58% of the House and 72% of the Senate, and Republican President Ronald Reagan signed it into law.[1246] [1247] This legislation:

• legalized most illegal immigrants who had been in the U.S. since the beginning of 1982 and gave them a path to citizenship.[1248] [1249] [1250]
• made verification of immigration status a “lasting requirement for all new hires.”[1251] [1252] [1253]
• “was meant as a one-time resolution of a longstanding problem.”[1254]

* In 2002, the U.S. Government Accountability Office published an investigation of identity fraud by immigrants. It found that:

• “the use of fraudulent documents by aliens is extensive.”
• “at ports of entry,” immigration officials “have intercepted tens of thousands of fraudulent documents in each of the last few years.”
• “the types of false documents most frequently intercepted … include border crossing cards, alien registration cards, nonimmigrant visas, and passports and citizenship documents (both U.S. and foreign).”
• “significant numbers of aliens unauthorized to work in the United States have used fraudulent documents to circumvent the employment verification process designed to prevent employers from hiring them.”
• in November 1998, immigration officials in Los Angeles “seized nearly two million counterfeit documents, such as … permanent resident cards and Social Security cards, which were headed for distribution points around the country.”
• “some aliens use fraudulent documents in connection with more serious illegal activities, such as narcotics trafficking and terrorism.”[1255]

* Per a 2005 article in the New York Times:

Identity Theft

* In 2010, an ABC News affiliate in Utah reported:

• “As of February, 1,265 Utah children, under the age of 12, are victims of somebody else misusing their [Social Security] number.” This figure accounts only for reported cases.
• Utah Assistant Attorney General Rich Hamp stated, “In virtually every case we have investigated, with the exception of one, it has come back to an illegal immigrant.”
• “Hamp says it is just so much easier to use a child’s number versus an adult’s number. ‘Someone on a child’s number is going to get away with years of misuse before anyone discovers it.’ ”
• “The state estimates around 20,000 Utah children’s numbers are being used. Some, like Ron Mortensen, a child identity expert, believe the number could be closer to 50,000.”[1257]

* In 2016, the IRS Inspector General reported:

• During “the period February 2011 to December 2015, the IRS identified almost 1.1 million taxpayers who were victims of employment-related identity theft.”
• “In cases of employment-related identity theft, the discrepancy results from the innocent taxpayer’s stolen identity being used by another individual to gain employment. This can cause significant burden to innocent taxpayers, including the incorrect computation of taxes based on income that does not belong to them.”[1258]

* In 2017, the IRS identified about 556,000 taxpayers who were victims of employment-related identity theft.[1259]

* In 2020, a U.S. Treasury review of tax returns identified 883,000 victims of employment-related identity theft.[1260]

Tax Evasion

* Willfully evading federal taxes is a felony offense punishable by up to five years in prison and fines of up to $250,000 for individuals and $500,000 for corporations.[1261]

* In 2013, the chief actuary of the U.S. Social Security Administration estimated that 3.9 million or 36% of illegal immigrants worked “in the underground economy” during 2010.[1262]

* Per the IRS’s Taxpayer Advocate, unpaid taxes represent an effective tax on most taxpayers “to subsidize noncompliance by others” and:

* In instances where income was reported to the IRS and withheld by third parties (such as employers), the noncompliance rate was about 1% from 2011 to 2013. In instances where income was not subject to reporting or withholding, the noncompliance rate was 55%.[1265]

Tax Credits

* Tax credits are provisions of tax law that reduce income taxes for people who engage in certain behaviors or meet other criteria. Some tax credits are refundable, and low-income households with tax credits that exceed the income tax they owe receive the difference as cash payments from the federal government.[1266] [1267] [1268] Per the Treasury Department’s Inspector General for Tax Administration, “the risk of fraud for these types of claims is significant.”[1269]

* Federal law prohibits illegal immigrants from receiving most federal benefits, but the IRS has concluded that this restriction does not apply to refundable child tax credits.

* In 2022, the maximum refundable child tax credit is $2,000 per child.[1270]

* In 2010, the IRS paid out $4.2 billion in refundable child tax credits to 2.3 million tax filers who were not legally authorized to work in the United States.[1271] [1272]

* In 2012, WTHR, an NBC News affiliate in Indiana, aired a report by investigative journalist Bob Segall about illegal immigrants who were fraudulently obtaining child tax credits by claiming credit for children who live in Mexico. The IRS responded to the report by stating that the agency “has procedures in place specifically for the evaluation of questionable credit claims early in the processing stream and prior to issuance of a refund.”[1273]

* In the wake of the WTHR news report, 11 current and former IRS employees contacted WHTR and made statements such as the following:

• “I just saw your report and there’s something I need to tell you. I see this stuff every day and there isn’t anything I can do about it.”
• “Most of these documents are fraudulent and there’s absolutely no system here to catch it.”
• “We don’t have the resources to follow up on much and we’re not allowed to flag problems.”
• “We get applications from Mexico, Honduras, China, Japan, Bulgaria, all over the world. … I guarantee 90% of them are phony. We see the same signatures hundreds of times. We see the same docs photocopied and attached to different applications. It’s the same person, same photo, same address. I’ve seen the same birth certificate twelve times now in the past day.”[1274]

* Two months later, the Treasury Department’s Inspector General for Tax Administration published an audit of the IRS department that handles tax returns for illegal immigrants and foreign investors. Since these individuals are ineligible to receive Social Security Numbers, the IRS issues them ITINs (Individual Taxpayer Identification Numbers).[1275] The audit found:

• The IRS had issued 9,909 ITINS to 9,522 people allegedly living at a single address in Tulsa, Oklahoma (more examples in footnote).[1276]
• The IRS had mailed 23,994 ITIN refunds totaling $46,378,040 to a single address in Atlanta, Georgia (more examples in footnote).[1277]
• The IRS had deposited 2,706 ITIN refunds totaling $7,319,518 into a single bank account (more examples in footnote).[1278]
• In 2010, the IRS eliminated a process used to detect fraud in ITIN applications.[1279]
• “The environment created by [IRS] management discourages tax examiners from identifying questionable ITIN applications.”[1280]

* With regard to fraudulent tax refunds obtained through identity theft, IRS Inspector General J. Russell George stated, “Once the money is out the door, it is almost impossible to get it back.”[1281]

* Various members of Congress have sponsored bills to prevent the IRS from awarding refundable child tax credits to illegal immigrants, none of which have become law. For example:

• In 2012, Republican Congressman Paul Ryan sponsored a wide-ranging bill with a provision that would restrict illegal immigrants from obtaining refundable child tax credits.[1282] [1283] The bill passed the House of Representatives with 90% of Republicans voting for it and 96% of Democrats voting against it.[1284] The Senate never voted on it.[1285]
• In 2013, Republican Congressman Sam Johnson sponsored a bill that would restrict illegal immigrants from obtaining refundable child tax credits.[1286] [1287] The bill was cosponsored by 67 Republicans and no Democrats. It was never voted upon.[1288] [1289]
• In 2015, Republican Congressman Larry Bucshon sponsored a bill that would restrict illegal immigrants from obtaining refundable child tax credits.[1290] [1291] The bill was cosponsored by four Republicans and no Democrats.[1292] The House never voted on it.[1293]
• In 2017, Republican Congressman Gus Bilirakis sponsored a bill that would restrict illegal immigrants from obtaining refundable child tax credits.[1294] [1295] The bill was cosponsored by two Republicans and no Democrats.[1296] The House never voted on it.[1297]
• In 2019, Republican Congressman Bill Posey sponsored a bill that would restrict illegal immigrants from obtaining refundable child tax credits.[1298] [1299] The bill was cosponsored by ten Republicans and no Democrats.[1300] The House never voted on it.[1301]
• In 2020, Republican Senator Rand Paul proposed an amendment that would restrict illegal immigrants from obtaining refundable child tax credits.[1302] [1303] [1304] The amendment failed to pass the Senate with 91% of Republicans, 100% of Democrats, and 100% of Independents voting against it.[1305]

• In 2021, Republican Congressman Bill Posey sponsored a bill that would restrict illegal immigrants from obtaining refundable child tax credits.[1306] [1307] As of October 2022, the House has not voted on it.[1308]

* In 2017, Congress passed and President Trump signed a law that forbids parents from receiving child tax credits unless their children are U.S. citizens and have a Social Security number.[1309] Due to birthright citizenship, about 88% of the children of illegal immigrants are U.S. citizens.[1310]

* President Trump’s 2018, 2019, 2020, and 2021 budget proposals called for restricting illegal immigrants from obtaining refundable child tax credits.[1311] [1312] [1313] [1314]

Political Patterns

* A 2012 poll of 2,900 immigrants who were U.S. citizens found that 62% identified as Democrats, 25% as Republicans, and 13% as Independents.[1315] [1316]

* A nationally representative bilingual poll of 784 immigrant Latinos commissioned by Pew Research in 2011 found that:

• 81% would prefer “a bigger government providing more services,” and 12% would prefer “a smaller government with fewer services.” (In comparison, Pew found that 41% of the general U.S. population would prefer a bigger government, and 48% want a smaller one.)
• 58% said abortion should be illegal in most or all cases, as compared 41% of the general U.S. population.
• 53% said homosexuality should be accepted by society, as compared to 58% of the general U.S. population.[1317]

* A nationally representative bilingual poll of 800 Hispanic adults conducted by McLaughlin & Associates in 2013 found that:

• 59% were born outside the U.S.
• 53% considered themselves to be Democrats.
• 12% considered themselves to be Republicans.
• 29% considered themselves to be independents or another party.[1318]

* Based on estimates from Pew Research:

• 76% of unauthorized immigrants in 2009 were Latinos.[1319]
• in U.S. presidential elections from 1980 to 2012, Latinos voted for the Democratic candidate over the Republican candidate by margins ranging from 18 to 51 percentage points.[1320]
• 71% of Latinos voted for Barack Obama in the 2012 U.S. presidential election, as compared to 27% for Mitt Romney.[1321]

* Eliseo Medina, a former executive vice president of the Service Employees International Union, led “the union’s efforts to achieve comprehensive immigration reform….”[1322] In a 2009 speech, Medina stated:

• Latinos have “voted overwhelmingly for progressive candidates” and given Barack Obama “two out of every three” of their votes.
• the “progressive community” can “expand and solidify the progressive coalition for the future” by putting “12 million” unauthorized immigrants “on the path to citizenship and eventually voting.”
• turning illegal immigrants into citizens will create a progressive “governing coalition for the long term, not just for an election cycle.”[1323]

* Illegal immigrants typically live in areas of the U.S. where Democrats have greater political power.[1324]

* Per the Encyclopedia of Minorities in American Politics:

• Judicial interpretation of the 1982 amendments to the Voting Rights Act “requires states with large minority populations to draw boundaries that will increase the probability that minorities will win seats.”
• “Hispanics have thus dramatically improved their representation in national political office, from a little more than 3,000 Hispanic public officials in 1985 to nearly 5,200 in 1998.”[1325]

---

Illegal Registration & Voting Laws

* All U.S. states require people to be U.S. citizens in order to register to vote in federal and state elections.[1326] [1327]

* Federal law forbids non-citizens from falsely claiming to be a U.S. citizen in order to register to vote. If convicted, the penalties for:

• making a false claim to U.S. citizenship in order to register to vote include a fine and up to five years in prison.[1328]
• illegal voting include a fine and up to one year in prison.[1329]

---

Illegal Registration & Voting Openings

* Federal law requires all states to accept and use the same form to register voters for federal elections. The form requires people to declare under penalty of perjury that they are U.S. citizens, but it does not require them to provide proof of this.[1330] [1331]

* Some states require people to submit their Social Security numbers when they register to vote. The states then use these numbers to conduct checks to see if the information provided by applicants is valid.[1332]

* In 2013, the chief actuary of the U.S. Social Security Administration estimated that in 2010:

• 0.7 million illegal immigrants worked by using Social Security numbers obtained by using “fraudulent birth certificates.”
• 1.8 million illegal immigrants worked by using Social Security numbers “that did not match their name.”[1333]

* Voter registration requirements vary by state, but they generally require some form of identification.[1334] [1335]

* In 2017, California Senate Leader and Democrat Kevin De Leon testified before the Senate’s Public Safety Committee:

* Per a 2005 article in the New York Times:

* In 2002, the U.S. Government Accountability Office published an investigation of identity fraud by immigrants. It found that:

• “the use of fraudulent documents by aliens is extensive.”
• “significant numbers of aliens unauthorized to work in the United States have used fraudulent documents to circumvent the employment verification process designed to prevent employers from hiring them.”
• in November 1998, immigration officials in Los Angeles “seized nearly two million counterfeit documents, such as … permanent resident cards and Social Security cards, which were headed for distribution points around the country.”[1339]

* Early in 2016, the Obama administration supported a court injunction to prevent Kansas, Alabama, and Georgia from requiring people to provide documentary proof of citizenship in order to register to vote.[1340] In 2020, a federal appeals court panel upheld a permanent injunction against such laws.[1341]

* In 2020, the state of Kansas petitioned the Supreme Court to overturn the federal appeals court decision.[1342] The petition was denied.[1343]

* Shortly before the 2016 U.S. presidential election, Barack Obama stated in an interview with actress Gina Rodriguez that voting records are not cross-checked against immigration databases and “there is not a situation where the voting rolls somehow are transferred over and people start investigating, etcetera.”[1344]

---

2013 McLaughlin Survey

* In 2013, McLaughlin & Associates conducted a scientific bilingual poll of 800 Hispanic adults living in the U.S.[1345] [1346] [1347] [1348] In this survey, 13% of self-declared non-citizens stated they were registered to vote.[1349] Based on:

• the number of non-citizens in this poll,[1350] the margin of sampling error is ± 6 percentage points with at least 95% confidence.[1351] [1352] [1353]

• these survey results and Census Bureau population estimates, 800,000 to 2.2 million non-citizen Hispanics stated they were registered to vote in 2013.[1354]

* Uncertainties in the data above that could understate the number of non-citizen Hispanics registered to vote include the following:

• Some non-citizens claim they are not registered to vote when, in fact, they are. In a 2008 Harvard/YouGov survey (detailed below), 14% ± 9 percentage points of self-declared non-citizens who said they were not registered to vote were found to be registered when matched to a database of consumer and voting data.[1355] [1356] [1357] [1358]
• The Census Bureau counts only the number of non-citizens who respond to Census surveys, and some immigrants, especially unauthorized ones, avoid such surveys out of fear of exposing their immigration status.[1359] [1360]
• Certain groups of immigrants often misrepresent themselves as citizens in Census surveys.[1361]

* Uncertainties in the data above that could overstate the number of non-citizen Hispanics registered to vote include the following:

• Non-citizens who are not registered to vote may be more risk-averse to exposing their immigration status and thus more likely to:
  • avoid the McLaughlin survey than non-citizens who are registered to vote.
  • misrepresent themselves as citizens in the McLaughlin survey than non-citizens who are registered to vote.

---

2008 Harvard/YouGov Survey

* In 2008, Harvard University’s Cooperative Congressional Election Study analyzed data from 32,800 adults polled by YouGov to assess their political views and activities.[1362] The authors of a 2014 paper in the journal Electoral Studies weighted the data from self-declared non-citizens in this survey to make it representative of the non-citizen population in the United States.[1363] Based on this data:

• 15% of non-citizens stated they were registered to vote.
• a database match with consumer and voter registration records showed that an additional 12% of non-citizens in the database were registered to vote, even though they said they were not registered.[1364]

* Based on:

• the number of non-citizens in this poll,[1365] the margin of sampling error for their self-declared voter registration is ± 5 percentage points with at least 95% confidence.[1366] [1367] [1368]
• the number of non-citizens in this poll who were in the database,[1369] the margin of sampling error for their undeclared voter registration is ± 8 percentage points with at least 95% confidence.[1370] [1371] [1372]
• these study results and Census Bureau population estimates, 2.8 million to 7.9 million non-citizens were registered to vote in 2008.[1373]

* In the same Harvard/YouGov study:

• 8% of self-declared non-citizens said “I definitely voted” in the 2008 U.S. presidential election.
• 82% of the non-citizens who said “I definitely voted” stated that they voted for Barack Obama.
• a database match with consumer and voting records showed that an additional 8% of non-citizens in the database voted in this election, even though they said they had not voted.[1374]

* Based on:

• the number of non-citizens in this poll,[1375] the margin of sampling error for their self-declared voting is ± 5 percentage points with at least 95% confidence.[1376] [1377] [1378]
• the number of non-citizens in this poll who were in the database,[1379] the margin of sampling error for their undeclared voting is ± 8 percentage points with at least 95% confidence.[1380] [1381] [1382]
• these study results and Census Bureau population estimates, 594,000 to 5.7 million non-citizens voted illegally in the 2008 election.[1383] [1384]

* Uncertainties in the data above that could overstate or understate the number of non-citizens registered or voting include the following:

• The YouGov data was collected via an internet poll,[1385] which are generally unreliable because they do not collect a random sample of respondents.[1386] The Harvard study corrects for this by using a process called “matching.” This involves using a portion of the survey respondents that “mimics” the target population characteristics, like race, age, and education. Matching is a common procedure for turning non-random samples into random ones, but it relies on an “assumption” that there is “no difference” in how people would answer a survey if they have the same characteristics.[1387]
• The Harvard study matched the YouGov polling data to the characteristics of U.S. citizens,[1388] but all of the voting and registration data above was weighted by the authors of the 2014 Electoral Studies paper to make it representative of non-citizens. Like matching, weighting relies on the assumption that that there is no difference in how people would respond to the registration and voting questions if they have similar characteristics.[1389] [1390] [1391]

* Uncertainties in the data above that could overstate the number of non-citizens registered or voting include the following:

• If survey respondents make random errors on the citizenship question, it is far more likely that citizens will misidentify themselves as non-citizens than vice-versa. This is because the survey population has many more citizens than non-citizens.[1392] However, other data from this study suggests that such errors did not materially affect the results of this survey.[1393]
• The total registration and voting figures are based on the assumption that everyone who said they registered/voted or were recorded in the database as registered or voting had, in fact, done so. This means that either a self-report or database match were counted as evidence of registration/voting. This methodology is consistent with the facts that:
  • a 2016 paper published in the journal Public Opinion Quarterly found that “several apparently viable methods of matching survey respondents to government records severely underestimate the proportion of Americans who were registered to vote.”[1394]
  • non-citizens commonly use false identifications and Social Security numbers,[1395] and they may register or vote under these names. Such usage of false identifications is evidenced by the fact that the consumer/voting database matches conducted for this survey found records for 90% of all participants but only 41% of all non-citizen participants.[1396] [1397]

• Non-citizens who are not registered to vote may be more risk-averse to exposing their immigration status and thus more likely to:
  • avoid the YouGov survey than non-citizens who are registered to vote.
  • misrepresent themselves as citizens in the YouGov survey more often than non-citizens who are registered to vote.

* Uncertainties in the data above that could understate the number of non-citizens registered or voting include the following:

• The Census Bureau counts only the number of non-citizens who respond to Census surveys, and some immigrants, especially unauthorized ones, avoid such surveys out of fear of exposing their immigration status.[1398] [1399]
• Certain groups of immigrants often misrepresent themselves as citizens in Census surveys.[1400]
• The study doesn’t account for any non-citizens who denied being registered/voting and did so using a false identity.[1401]

* For facts that address criticisms of the data above, see the following articles from Just Facts:

• False Arguments Against Evidence of Vote Fraud
• Substantial Numbers of Non-Citizens Vote Illegally in U.S. Elections
• PolitiFact’s Deceptive Report on Illegal Voting by Non-Citizens
• USA Today & Facebook Use Slanderous “Fact Check” to Suppress Facts About Illegal Voting By Non-Citizens

---

2010 Harvard/YouGov Survey

* In the 2010 Harvard/YouGov survey:

• 16% of self-declared non-citizens stated they were registered to vote.
• 3.5% said they “definitely voted” in the mid-term elections that year.[1402]

* Based on:

• the number of non-citizens in this poll,[1403] the margin of sampling error for their self-declared registration and voting is about ± 5 percentage points with at least 95% confidence.[1404] [1405] [1406]
• these survey results and Census Bureau population estimates, 1.9 million to 3.9 million non-citizens stated they were registered to vote, and –291,000 to 1.6 million said they voted.[1407]

* The uncertainties of the 2008 Harvard/YouGov survey also apply to the 2010 survey. In addition, the following factor could understate the number of non-citizens registered or voting:

• Some non-citizens claim they are not registered to vote when, in fact, they are. In a 2008 Harvard/YouGov survey (detailed below), 14% ± 9 percentage points of self-declared non-citizens who said they were not registered to vote were found to be registered when matched to a database of registered voters.

---

2012 Harvard/YouGov Survey

* In the 2012 Harvard/YouGov survey:

• 14% of self-declared non-citizens stated they were registered to vote, and 9% stated they “definitely voted” in the 2012 U.S. presidential election.
• database matches with consumer and voting records showed that 22% of non-citizens in the database were registered to vote, and 11% voted in the 2012 U.S. presidential election.[1408]

* Based on:

• the number of non-citizens in this poll,[1409] the margin of sampling error for their self-declared registration and voting is about ± 4 percentage points with at least 95% confidence.[1410] [1411] [1412]
• the number of non-citizens in this poll who were in the database,[1413] the margin of sampling error for their self-declared registration and voting is about ± 6 percentage points with at least 95% confidence.[1414] [1415] [1416]
• these self-reported registration/voting rates and Census Bureau population estimates, 2.0 million to 3.6 million non-citizens stated they were registered to vote, and 1.0 million to 2.6 million said they voted.[1417]
• these database-matched registration/voting rates and Census Bureau population estimates, 3.2 million to 5.6 million non-citizens were registered to vote, and 1.2 million to 3.6 million voted.[1418]

* The uncertainties of the 2008 Harvard/YouGov survey also apply to the 2012 survey. In addition, the following factor could understate the number of non-citizens registered or voting:

• Unlike the data for the 2008 Harvard/YouGov survey, the 2012 data cited above does not provide a total figure for the number of unique non-citizens who said they registered/voted or were recorded in the database as registered/voting. Instead, these figures are isolated in the 2012 data, and the overlap between them is unknown to Just Facts.