For decades, a comprehensive overhaul of U.S. immigration policy has remained frustratingly elusive. During his second term, President George W. Bush pushed for changes that would strengthen border security while creating a temporary guest worker program and offering paths to legal status for millions of undocumented immigrants. Despite backing and support from key Democrats like Sen. Ted Kennedy (D-Mass.), the legislation collapsed under pressure from both parties.
Immigration legislation is tough to push through
Nearly two decades later, attempts to change the U.S. approach to immigration with compromise efforts continue to flounder. During the first Trump administration, Sen. Jeff Flake (R-Ariz.) led a bipartisan group of senators who proposed combining border security funding with a pathway to legal status and citizenship. Still, the effort failed before the bill was even introduced. Most recently, President Joe Biden’s comprehensive immigration bill quickly stalled in Congress, effectively killed by Donald Trump actively campaigning against it, with most Republican senators quickly falling in line behind Trump.
This recurring cycle of legislative failure persists even as public attitudes have dramatically shifted. Today, support for decreased immigration has surged from 28% in 2020 to 55%. That’s the largest shift ever recorded in U.S. polling history on this question.
Yet, beneath this rightward shift lies a more complex story. A plurality of Americans increasingly support both more vigorous border enforcement and pathways to citizenship for immigrants already living in the United States. This comprehensive view has skyrocketed in popularity, supported by more than 45% of Americans today, compared to less than 20% in 2016. Support among Democrats, in particular, is driving this shift in immigration attitudes. As Democrats have increasingly adopted more conservative positions on border security, they also continue to support legal pathways to U.S. citizenship. Thus, paradoxically, as overall support for this balanced solution has grown, the political coalition behind this support has fractured along party lines, making the compromise most Americans want even more challenging to achieve.
Surveys document how public opinion is changing
To understand how U.S. attitudes toward immigration have evolved, we analyzed data from the Cooperative Election Study (CES), which surveys tens of thousands of Americans annually. The CES since 2010 has consistently asked respondents about two key immigration policies: whether they support granting legal status to undocumented immigrants who have worked, paid taxes, and avoided felony convictions for at least three years; and whether they support increasing border patrol presence along the U.S. southern border.
By combining responses to these questions, we can identify four distinct groups: those who support both policies, those who support neither, those who only support a path to citizenship, and those who only support increased border security.
One thing to note about this data is that the question format changed between 2017 and 2019, which led to more respondents indicating that they support more than just one policy. Thus, changes between 2017 and 2019 should be considered with that important caveat in mind. Nevertheless, attitudes have continued to shift even after the format change between 2017 and 2019. That’s an indication that U.S. public opinion is genuinely shifting on these policies.
Border security remains a high priority
The data shows that support for citizenship without increased border security – shown with the yellow line in the figure above – plummeted from over 30% in 2020 to less than 20% in 2024. This decline reflects both “thermostatic politics” – where public opinion swings in the opposite direction in response to presidential actions – and the impact of visible border challenges. As media reporting showed border crossings hitting record highs, for example, even Democratic politicians shifted their messaging, focusing less on purely humanitarian concerns, and favoring tougher border measures.
Support for border security alone, as a primary approach to immigration policy, had remained relatively stable – but has been rising since 2022, suggesting a growing conservative response to the ongoing border situation. As immigration became central to the Trump campaign to reclaim the White House, this enforcement-only position – shown with the blue line in the figure – gained further traction among some Americans.
The most significant trend, however, is the growth in Americans supporting both stronger borders and legalization paths – as indicated in the green line in the figure. That’s precisely the compromise approach that legislators have repeatedly failed to enact. This group has more than doubled since 2016 and now reflects the preferred approach of over 45% of Americans. The steady increase during Biden’s presidency suggests Americans are increasingly rejecting the false choice between enforcement and compassion that has dominated political rhetoric.
Most Americans favor a combined approach
This shift in public opinion toward supporting both policies reveals a growing public recognition that effective immigration policy requires a nuanced solution. However, this apparent consensus masks deep partisan divisions that complicate the political path to changing U.S. immigration policy.
From 2010 to 2022, as shown in the figure above, roughly similar amounts of Democrats, Republicans, and independents supported both border security and the sympathetic treatment of immigrants already in the United States. But during the last few years, a partisan gap emerged. Support for this combined approach has surged to nearly 60% of Democrats, while support among Republicans has fallen back to around 35%. This divergence suggests that even as the overall constituency is growing for a balanced approach to immigration policy, the political coalition needed to enact such legislation is fracturing.
In theory, the continued growth of the ”supports both” group could eventually create enough pressure for compromise legislation. But the bigger question, perhaps, is whether the increasingly partisan composition of this group will limit its influence.
Why public support hasn’t translated into new immigration policies
While the growth in support for both policies seems promising, there’s a second barrier to change: Americans who support only one policy approach are generally unwilling to accept compromise solutions, even to achieve their preferred policy goal.
In the 2018 CES Competitive District Survey, respondents were first asked separately about whether they supported funding to build a border wall and whether they supported DACA – the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program, protecting over 500,000 young adults who entered the United States illegally as children. Later in the survey, respondents were asked whether they would support Congress passing Flake’s bill, combining border security measures with DACA protections.
The survey showed 71% of Americans – a massive majority – supported either a pathway to citizenship or increased border security. This suggests a bill that could deliver both enhanced enforcement and legal status for long-term residents would, theoretically, give most Americans at least half of what they want. Yet, just 31% of Americans supported the Flake bill, with 48% opposed and the rest unsure of their position.
But would Americans actually agree to compromise?
The striking finding, then, is that most Americans who support either border security or a path to citizenship, but not both, are unwilling to compromise to get their preferred policy. In fact, 60% of this group opposed a bill that combined both approaches. Only 20% of single-issue supporters were willing to accept this legislative compromise, with another 20% saying they were unsure if they would support or oppose the bill.
Flake’s proposal addressed both border security funding and DACA protections – elements that individually had significant support among Americans. Yet this proposal faced opposition from both sides. Conservatives labeled it ”amnesty” while progressives worried it would impose overly harsh border restrictions.
What these surveys tell us about the barriers to immigration policy overhaul carry profound implications for the country. As the ”both” position becomes increasingly Democratic rather than bipartisan, and single-policy supporters continue to reject compromise, we face the prospect that the immigration issue may be impossible to fix. It seems like the U.S. policymaking system may be structurally incapable of enacting policies that most Americans actually support. Until we can bridge these divides, immigration will likely remain a campaign talking point rather than a problem Washington can actually resolve – regardless of which party holds power.
Caroline Soler is a recent graduate of Tufts University, majoring in political science and mathematics, and is currently a research associate for the Cooperative Election Study.
Brian Schaffner is the Newhouse Professor of Civic Studies in the Department of Political Science and Tisch College at Tufts University. He also serves as a co-director for the Cooperative Election Study.
