We may be unable to deport everybody. But I think very very strong enforcement is needed to further discourage any future illegals from making the attempt. America was built on friendly immigration policies more than any other country in the world. And through our history the overwhelming number of immigrants assimilated into American society fully and completely. This is obviously not happening in the same manner, especially when it comes to those here illegally. Immigration policy is built on a few pillars 1. It must be legal 2. The people immigrating must intend to become Americans and assimilate into Western Culture 3. Immigrants must not become a public charge 4. Immigrant must be a net benefit to the United States. As a final point, the very idea that someone who is permitted to immigrate legally to pur great country should be entitled by right to bring along any family besides spouse and minor children strikes me as insane. For the left I do not believe any of these exist any longer if they ever did. They will call anyone demanding these things xenophobic (or racist). They will call us White Nationalists even though millions upon millions of Americans are not white.
I see nothing wrong with removing illegal aliens. If I thought the Democrats would operate in good faith I would be open to amnesty for those who have been here for a long time, especially those brought here as children. But they don't. We have needed a major overhaul of immigration law and policy for going on 60 years now. But it will never happen.
I agree with almost everything you say. The question is not whether illegal immigration is good -- it isn't -- but whether the remedy should ALWAYS be deportation. Just as there is (rightly) mitigation permitted when dealing with other breaches of law, I think it should be permitted on a case-by-case basis for illegal entry. There would be and in my view should be lots of deportation, but it wouldn't be in every case regardless.
I mean that makes sense and I think that is basically what they are trying to do, focus on convicted criminals. But in the end who do we trust with this kind of discretion? The Democrats won't even cooperate when it comes to dangerous criminals. For many decades now Republicans have basically been willing to agree to normalize existing illegals in exchange for real border security and comprehensive reform. The last time I think was during Reagan when the Democrats lied, pocketed the Republican concession and refused to fund enforcement. There is simply no trust between the parties and this kind of thing requires compromise and consensus. Right now every issue is played for political advantage not for good government.
The problem with that very rational response is the sheer scale of the problem: in 4 years Biden and Mayorkas deliberately admitted 15-20MM unknown, unvetted aliens into this country, gave them access to public benefits, jobs (suppressing low income wages and hiking rents), etc.
There is no clean, easy way to sort this out, but any approach has to start with the criminal element, which Homan believes that 47%. The others - those who have gotten jobs, accepted state benefits, etc., are becoming trackable, but cannot be overlooked.
But if you normalize them, you ring the dinner bell for another round of 10, 20M in the future - and as much as we like to blame democrats for this recklessness, let's face it, there are plenty of republicans and libertarians who believe open borders are good for business and have sat on their hands for 20 years (e.g., "It's an act of love").
Another problem with incentivizing illegal crossing is the business opportunity it creates for the cartels, who have now diversified their activity into sex trafficking here in the US and what amounts to the indentured servitude of children and a multi-billion dollar annual business - money that allows cartels to buy protection from politicians, judges and cops in Mexico, Colombia and perhaps even here in the US.
Yet another problem is the opportunity it presents for Chinese political and espionage infiltration, as Peter Schweitzer has argued in his new book. He points out that the birth citizenship loophole in our immigration policy has gifted citizenship to 1M Chinese nationals, who are raised and educated in China and then free to return here to participate fully in the American system. That another dimension to our problem: immigration policy that does not serve the interests of the US, but seems designed to serve the interests of unskilled foreigners, cartels, and criminal gangs.
MS-13 and TdA were never present in this country until the were able to exploit two different waves of illegal immigration. Never forget how Margaret Brennan and democrat politicians dismissed TdA as trivial in 2025. It was not.
I've seen the direct impact of low-wage migrants being dumped in to rural Washington towns I've visited on business, tiny towns of 5,000 people now dealing with 1-2,000 migrants who live 12 to a hotel room or apartment, steal every chance they get, drive without licenses or insurance, etc., flood the schools and emergency rooms. This is a daily reality policy makers in Washington never have to deal with.
I doubt we'll deport them all, but the threat of deportation has to be real and imminent in order for self-deportation or any other non-police approach to work. If we get a third of them out in 3 years it will be stunning success - and if the policy is sustained over another four years, we may find that self-deportation and normalization for a small cohort take care of the rest.
Excellent, thoughtful summation. Also, I sincerely hope it's difficult to get into the country legally, including for those illegals who self-deport. There is unquestionably a problem where many (not all) recent immigrants, legal and illegal, have no desire to assimilate but in fact despise the fundamental values upon which this nation was founded. That should never be acceptable regardless of supposed economic or crime statistics.
This goes to pillar 4, the immigrant's presence must be a net benefit for the United States. Those who despise our fundamental values are by definition not a benefit to the United States and should not be allowed in. For everyone of these, there are 1000 or more who adore our values and would do anything to become a citizen.
Very disappointing that you have blurred the line between legal and illegal immigrants insofar as analysis of impact on the economy and domestic security.
I will never be able to find the source for the following, but I've read it more than once and in different places - legal immigrants do commit crime at a lower rate than the native-born, but illegals at a higher rate even discounting their initial unauthorized entry. Lumping the two groups together makes the illegal crime rate lower than it actually is.
I will add that - while I disfavor the lottery, amnesty, and overly-generous family migration - it is quite true (or at least was the case about 30 years ago when I took a basic class on immigration law with the thought I might get more business than practicing only family law, since there's often an overlap) that the majority of people here illegally would never be able to qualify for any category of immigration *on their own.*. Yes, they can marry an American, or try for the lottery - that's not on their own - but we don't need more semi-literate uneducated laborers. It is a rational decision to sneak in and work as much as they can and hopefully have an American kid that can naturalize them when the kid reaches AOM. The inability of low/no skilled non-refugees who have no American spouse or relative to get a visa is probably why so many illegals have not self-deported.
Working LE in a free for all big sanctuary city, I can tell you the criminality (and entitlement) of the illegal immigrant communities is appalling. Even if it's "lower" level (DUI prostitution DV), these areas are disproportionately more criminal. Some behaviors are cultural but does it matter when no one is forcing them to acclimate to new standards? Aren't there enough low life Americans trashing neighborhoods- why are we subsidizing badly behaved new arrivals? The focus on criminals, single men, recent entrants is great. But we need to 86 anyone convicted of a crime or on assistance. Compassion fatigue is real. I have rarely encountered an appreciative migrant. Those occasions have always involved someone very educated who left war torn hellscapes (Afghanistan or Lebanon), not economic migrants living off the dole. With local schools indoctrinating their kids to hate the US, it doesn't improve generationally. I can only hope the feds stay firm. Hard to see those in the middle/on the right capitulating.
One of the few times that I don’t find myself in total agreement with. To shrug and say “they’re here, so nothing can be done,” is exactly why we are in this mess. We have a process for legal immigration that far too many simply ignore. Absent some disincentive to illegally migrate, we truly have lost control of the border and shouldn’t go through the charade of claiming we have one.
How to prioritize enforcement is a different question and I agree has to be more nuanced. But if the nuance is so subtle as to basically ignore the problem we haven’t done anything.
I agree the way it’s been handled is at best ham handed an optically poor.
We may be unable to deport everybody. But I think very very strong enforcement is needed to further discourage any future illegals from making the attempt. America was built on friendly immigration policies more than any other country in the world. And through our history the overwhelming number of immigrants assimilated into American society fully and completely. This is obviously not happening in the same manner, especially when it comes to those here illegally. Immigration policy is built on a few pillars 1. It must be legal 2. The people immigrating must intend to become Americans and assimilate into Western Culture 3. Immigrants must not become a public charge 4. Immigrant must be a net benefit to the United States. As a final point, the very idea that someone who is permitted to immigrate legally to pur great country should be entitled by right to bring along any family besides spouse and minor children strikes me as insane. For the left I do not believe any of these exist any longer if they ever did. They will call anyone demanding these things xenophobic (or racist). They will call us White Nationalists even though millions upon millions of Americans are not white.
I see nothing wrong with removing illegal aliens. If I thought the Democrats would operate in good faith I would be open to amnesty for those who have been here for a long time, especially those brought here as children. But they don't. We have needed a major overhaul of immigration law and policy for going on 60 years now. But it will never happen.
I agree with almost everything you say. The question is not whether illegal immigration is good -- it isn't -- but whether the remedy should ALWAYS be deportation. Just as there is (rightly) mitigation permitted when dealing with other breaches of law, I think it should be permitted on a case-by-case basis for illegal entry. There would be and in my view should be lots of deportation, but it wouldn't be in every case regardless.
I mean that makes sense and I think that is basically what they are trying to do, focus on convicted criminals. But in the end who do we trust with this kind of discretion? The Democrats won't even cooperate when it comes to dangerous criminals. For many decades now Republicans have basically been willing to agree to normalize existing illegals in exchange for real border security and comprehensive reform. The last time I think was during Reagan when the Democrats lied, pocketed the Republican concession and refused to fund enforcement. There is simply no trust between the parties and this kind of thing requires compromise and consensus. Right now every issue is played for political advantage not for good government.
The problem with that very rational response is the sheer scale of the problem: in 4 years Biden and Mayorkas deliberately admitted 15-20MM unknown, unvetted aliens into this country, gave them access to public benefits, jobs (suppressing low income wages and hiking rents), etc.
There is no clean, easy way to sort this out, but any approach has to start with the criminal element, which Homan believes that 47%. The others - those who have gotten jobs, accepted state benefits, etc., are becoming trackable, but cannot be overlooked.
But if you normalize them, you ring the dinner bell for another round of 10, 20M in the future - and as much as we like to blame democrats for this recklessness, let's face it, there are plenty of republicans and libertarians who believe open borders are good for business and have sat on their hands for 20 years (e.g., "It's an act of love").
Another problem with incentivizing illegal crossing is the business opportunity it creates for the cartels, who have now diversified their activity into sex trafficking here in the US and what amounts to the indentured servitude of children and a multi-billion dollar annual business - money that allows cartels to buy protection from politicians, judges and cops in Mexico, Colombia and perhaps even here in the US.
Yet another problem is the opportunity it presents for Chinese political and espionage infiltration, as Peter Schweitzer has argued in his new book. He points out that the birth citizenship loophole in our immigration policy has gifted citizenship to 1M Chinese nationals, who are raised and educated in China and then free to return here to participate fully in the American system. That another dimension to our problem: immigration policy that does not serve the interests of the US, but seems designed to serve the interests of unskilled foreigners, cartels, and criminal gangs.
MS-13 and TdA were never present in this country until the were able to exploit two different waves of illegal immigration. Never forget how Margaret Brennan and democrat politicians dismissed TdA as trivial in 2025. It was not.
I've seen the direct impact of low-wage migrants being dumped in to rural Washington towns I've visited on business, tiny towns of 5,000 people now dealing with 1-2,000 migrants who live 12 to a hotel room or apartment, steal every chance they get, drive without licenses or insurance, etc., flood the schools and emergency rooms. This is a daily reality policy makers in Washington never have to deal with.
I doubt we'll deport them all, but the threat of deportation has to be real and imminent in order for self-deportation or any other non-police approach to work. If we get a third of them out in 3 years it will be stunning success - and if the policy is sustained over another four years, we may find that self-deportation and normalization for a small cohort take care of the rest.
Excellent, thoughtful summation. Also, I sincerely hope it's difficult to get into the country legally, including for those illegals who self-deport. There is unquestionably a problem where many (not all) recent immigrants, legal and illegal, have no desire to assimilate but in fact despise the fundamental values upon which this nation was founded. That should never be acceptable regardless of supposed economic or crime statistics.
This goes to pillar 4, the immigrant's presence must be a net benefit for the United States. Those who despise our fundamental values are by definition not a benefit to the United States and should not be allowed in. For everyone of these, there are 1000 or more who adore our values and would do anything to become a citizen.
Very disappointing that you have blurred the line between legal and illegal immigrants insofar as analysis of impact on the economy and domestic security.
I will never be able to find the source for the following, but I've read it more than once and in different places - legal immigrants do commit crime at a lower rate than the native-born, but illegals at a higher rate even discounting their initial unauthorized entry. Lumping the two groups together makes the illegal crime rate lower than it actually is.
I will add that - while I disfavor the lottery, amnesty, and overly-generous family migration - it is quite true (or at least was the case about 30 years ago when I took a basic class on immigration law with the thought I might get more business than practicing only family law, since there's often an overlap) that the majority of people here illegally would never be able to qualify for any category of immigration *on their own.*. Yes, they can marry an American, or try for the lottery - that's not on their own - but we don't need more semi-literate uneducated laborers. It is a rational decision to sneak in and work as much as they can and hopefully have an American kid that can naturalize them when the kid reaches AOM. The inability of low/no skilled non-refugees who have no American spouse or relative to get a visa is probably why so many illegals have not self-deported.
Working LE in a free for all big sanctuary city, I can tell you the criminality (and entitlement) of the illegal immigrant communities is appalling. Even if it's "lower" level (DUI prostitution DV), these areas are disproportionately more criminal. Some behaviors are cultural but does it matter when no one is forcing them to acclimate to new standards? Aren't there enough low life Americans trashing neighborhoods- why are we subsidizing badly behaved new arrivals? The focus on criminals, single men, recent entrants is great. But we need to 86 anyone convicted of a crime or on assistance. Compassion fatigue is real. I have rarely encountered an appreciative migrant. Those occasions have always involved someone very educated who left war torn hellscapes (Afghanistan or Lebanon), not economic migrants living off the dole. With local schools indoctrinating their kids to hate the US, it doesn't improve generationally. I can only hope the feds stay firm. Hard to see those in the middle/on the right capitulating.
One of the few times that I don’t find myself in total agreement with. To shrug and say “they’re here, so nothing can be done,” is exactly why we are in this mess. We have a process for legal immigration that far too many simply ignore. Absent some disincentive to illegally migrate, we truly have lost control of the border and shouldn’t go through the charade of claiming we have one.
How to prioritize enforcement is a different question and I agree has to be more nuanced. But if the nuance is so subtle as to basically ignore the problem we haven’t done anything.
I agree the way it’s been handled is at best ham handed an optically poor.