Immigration has been tearing at American politics since the birth of the nation

Photo: AP Images

IT

was June 2008 when I got the call from a friend — someone I’d served with in Congress.

“He lost the primary,” he said in a quiet, heavy voice.

“It was immigration, wasn’t it?” I asked, knowing the answer.

“Yes. Same issue, again and again. This time it proved too much.”

For years I had watched as my former boss, Congressman Chris Cannon (R-UT), had done battle within the Republican Party on immigration. Cannon, who passed away last year, was an impeachment manager during the Clinton trial and a longtime conservative, but when it came to immigration, he was a Republican outlier. He believed in and fought for common sense immigration policies and in so doing was defeated for re-election by a fellow Republican.

Immigration has been tearing at American politics since the birth of the nation. It’s been pitting political parties against each other almost as long, and it has more recently split the Republican Party. President Trump seemed to finally unite his party on the issue and win political adherents more broadly with a campaign promise to close the southern border. But having delivered on that, the president is at risk of seeing one of his more popular policies turn into his least popular.

The deaths of two Americans during Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) operations in Minnesota have shaken even the GOP center, and the issue seems to be fraying both his party and the larger nation. Can he steer the party through the internecine fighting and the loss of one of his top issues?

The GOP’s Pro-Immigration Past

To understand where the Republicans are today on immigration, we must look at the past. It may surprise modern-day Republicans to learn the pro-immigration platforms of several of their party’s presidents.

Reagan signed into law the 1986 Immigration Reform and Control Act (IRCA), arguably the most pro-immigration law in American history. Through Reagan’s actions, close to three million immigrants became citizens. George H.W. Bush signed the Immigration Act of 1990, which provided a path for millions more to become citizens while helping to create the worker visa system we know today.

But then trouble started to brew.

George W. Bush attempted to continue this trend, but an internal fight broke out within the Republican Party. Legislation championed by George W. would have seen over 12 million undocumented immigrants become citizens while shoring up our borders. The far right of the Republican Party wouldn’t have it and internal fighting began. While one side of the party torpedoed the bill, the activists in the street were building the Tea Party movement and preparing primary challenges to members of Congress, like my former boss. The Republican base was now ardently against anything that smelled of amnesty.

President Trump eventually rode this anger and passion to victory in 2016 and 2024. President Trump has been unabashedly anti-amnesty and pro-border control in both terms. The immigration policies of Reagan and both Bushes would not be tolerated in today’s Republican Party.

The Turning Point

The actions that the Trump administration initially took received universal support from the Republican base, and at times, a plurality of Americans. Building walls on the border and sending dangerous criminals back to their countries were things that many could agree on. ICE agents in American cities haven’t gone over so well.

Many Americans are comfortable with the restrictions and deportations they know are happening but don’t impact their day-to-day lives. The recent tactics of ICE feel very different to most Americans. ICE agents rappelling through windows, masked ICE agents patrolling major American cities, and now ICE agents shooting two American citizens on Minnesota streets in one month.

It’s unclear if the White House misread its mandate on immigration or if a number of ICE officers are overzealous and undertrained. Either way, Americans are not happy with the optics and polling is reflecting that. A YouGov poll released on January 24 showed that most Americans disapprove of the way ICE is handling its job. This same poll showed that 19% of Republicans now support eliminating the agency entirely, the highest number in any of their polls this month.

The GOP’s Next Move on Immigration

I suspect that the Republican Party and President Trump will look to focus their immigration actions away from American cities. The party can’t afford disunity and division on this issue. It has torn the GOP apart previously, and it could do so again. The Republicans don’t want to look like they are blinking on this issue but instead adjusting their strategies to be the most effective on immigration reform — likely pivoting away from current ICE tactics.

There have already been reports of a reshuffling of responsibilities in Minnesota with border czar Tom Homan being given more authority. Trump also made efforts to work with local Minnesota Democratic legislators, even going so far as to say, “We’re going to de-escalate a little bit.”

A Republican poll by a PAC linked to Senator Tom Cotton (R-AR) indicates that changing this tactic would be well-received; 88% of Republicans and independents don’t want “immigration and enforcement and deportations” to stop, but they do want ICE to “avoid unnecessary harm and confrontation.” There continues to be an appetite for deportation and enforcement, but not through ICE’s current tactics.

If ICE continues to make headlines and remains in American cities at its current escalation level, this issue will implode within the Republican Party now, as it has in the past.

Soaking the Rich

Meanwhile, in the Democratic camp, another fight brews — over taxing the rich.

New York City has a projected $12 billion deficit. Mayor Zohran Mamdani proposes a tax on millionaires.

California has a projected $18 billion deficit. Governor Gavin Newsom is openly trying to stop a tax on billionaires.

You read that right. Newsom is against the tax, believing that the ultra-wealthy will move if taxed.

This is a philosophical standoff to watch this year in the Democratic Party, as local and state elected officials try to close these yawning deficits while debating whether or not to tax the wealthy in the process.

(Originally featured in Mishpacha, Issue 1098)