The announcements of Stephen Miller as incoming deputy chief of staff, Thomas Homan as “border czar,” and Kristi Noem as Donald Trump’s nominee for Homeland Security secretary offer a clear sign of tougher immigration policies from the incoming Trump administration. During the campaign, Trump promised aggressive enforcement of the U.S. border – along with further measures to curb both illegal and legal immigration. What kinds of immigration policy changes can we expect next year, and how might the American public respond?
Immigration has long been Trump’s defining issue. Public concerns and negative sentiments about immigration were even higher in 2024 than they were during his 2016 presidential campaign. However, the recent anti-immigration turn in public opinion wasn’t just about the growing foreign-born population in the United States or particular pro-immigration policies. Instead, much of the frustration centered on what Americans perceived as chaos at the southern border. Justifiably or not, many Americans blamed the Biden administration – and Kamala Harris, specifically – for mismanagement of the asylum process and periods of record-high border encounters.
Yet, as recent history and experience of other countries suggest, public opinion may now start to swing back the other way. The research shows Americans may soon adopt more positive attitudes towards immigration, as people will likely see the incoming Trump administration’s anti-immigration policies as unhelpful and unnecessarily harsh.
What to expect in 2025
The second Trump administration will likely enact significantly tougher restrictions on immigration – few might argue otherwise. Still, until we know which key figures dominate the conversation, the full extent and direction of these policy changes remain unclear. Some business leaders like Elon Musk advocate for harsh border restrictions, coupled with streamlining the skilled immigration pathways that supply talented employees across America’s high-tech sector. Or will insiders like Miller claim Trump’s attention? In that scenario, expect to see the new Trump administration push for more restrictive measures on all U.S. immigration across the board.
Either way, according to immigration attorneys, policy experts, and scholars, we may see a continuation of the first Trump administration’s approach – with added hurdles for immigrant applicants of all kinds. The news that Trump selected Homan, the former acting U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) director, to be in charge of the border issues certainly suggests this might be the case.
Along the U.S. border, tougher measures are almost certain for anyone seeking to cross into the United States on humanitarian or other grounds. Longtime legal immigration pathways and programs – such as the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA), Temporary Protected Status (TPS), and the Diversity Visa lottery – are also likely to be on the chopping block.
Most prominently, of course, Trump has promised his supporters for months that he will swiftly deport unauthorized immigrants. Critics point out that initiating the largest mass deportation effort in U.S. history could be extremely costly, and devastating to many local communities. Although such a sweeping move would face huge logistical and legal hurdles, a significant uptick in deportations remains a strong possibility.
These moves could then shift public opinion back
Voter support for Trump increased across most U.S. counties, compared to the 2020 election data. And the final vote tally also echoes a broader anti-incumbent sentiment across the globe, and deep voter impatience with inflation pressures. Yet many analysts still point to immigration as a specific issue that fueled Trump’s victory. Despite the Harris campaign’s attempts to strike a moderate note on immigration and pivot to other issues like abortion, voters seemed to ultimately set the agenda. And U.S. voters made it clear that fixing immigration policy was a priority.
Immigration attorney Nicolette Glazer astutely noted that America has now handed Trump a “dark mandate on immigration.” Indeed, public sentiment has hardened in recent years. Some surveys have even suggested growing support for mass deportations. Importantly, this skepticism toward immigration includes Americans voters with an immigrant background themselves, who appear to be nearly as critical on immigration as other voters in recent surveys. Among immigrant or non-white voters – a group that includes many Hispanic voters – many shifted to support Trump in 2024. In part, this shift was driven by their often-overlooked conservative values and support for stricter immigration policies.
It’s important to note, however, that public attitudes in the United States toward immigration remain more nuanced than they might appear.
Americans support immigration more than we might think
As my upcoming book shows, very few Americans favor reducing immigration under all circumstances. Instead, the more detailed survey data show that a majority of Americans want better policies that benefit average citizens, even if those policies significantly increase immigration. In this respect, the American public generally supports policy changes that improve both border security and the legal immigration opportunities for foreign workers. Moreover, recent research also finds that Americans are more favorable toward immigrants who are already integrated into their communities – even those that lack legal status – than toward potential immigrants abroad. These findings challenge the Trump campaign’s narrative of widespread U.S. support for indiscriminate deportations or reducing immigration.
Above all, public opinion often functions as a “thermostat,” adjusting in response to either perceived or actual overreach in government positions and actions. In this respect, no matter what policies the incoming Trump administration pursues, public sentiment would probably swing back toward more pro-immigration positions. We’ve already seen these swings in public opinion on immigration in response to policy decisions during the Trump 2016 and Biden 2020 presidencies. Nevertheless, the extent of the positive opinion reversal will depend on the new Trump administration’s specific policy moves. Efforts to deport productive, non-criminal workers – or news stories about mistakenly deported U.S. citizens, which happens frequently – could lead to a more significant public backlash in favor of immigration.
Can Trump retain the GOP advantage on immigration?
To maintain its political advantage on immigration, the incoming Trump administration will thus need to avoid overreaching what his transition team no doubt sees as a public mandate for more deportations. Separating families, banning people from certain Muslim-majority countries, and other unnecessarily cruel policies during Trump’s first term produced swift protests and public disapproval. It’s easy to see how mass deportation efforts – and separating thousands of families, including U.S. citizens who voted for Trump – could produce a similar backlash.
One area where the new Trump administration could find some bipartisan support and increase public trust in its policies is in improving the existing high-skilled and other legal immigration pathways. Expanding visas for foreign professionals or streamlining processes for immigrants with a college degree would align with calls from business leaders. Trump, in fact, has occasionally endorsed such policies. However, a pivot in that direction would be a marked departure from the first Trump administration’s record. From 2017-2020, the White House focused on narrowing America’s legal immigration pathways of all kinds, as opposed to just reducing illegal immigration or prioritizing high-skilled immigration.
The administration could also learn more from Canada’s selective system or explore restrictive yet more fiscally responsible and humane solutions. For instance, the conservative Manhattan Institute recommends charging high fees instead of deporting unauthorized workers without a criminal record, as well as redirecting visas from unskilled to skilled pathways instead of slashing them altogether. These changes might provide a politically palatable way to address labor market needs without abandoning a tough-on-immigration stance.
Democrats have a different challenge
How will Democrats react to these anticipated changes – and prepare for the next elections? Most importantly, Democrats cannot simply ignore salient immigration concerns. This issue will not disappear anytime soon. To reduce their political disadvantage on immigration, Democrats need to advance new, tangible policy solutions to people’s genuine concerns about immigration, going beyond simply opposing Trump’s policies or relying on positive pro-immigration rhetoric. Advocating for constructive policy proposals that directly address public worries about border security but clearly signal that immigrants are an asset to the United States could help shift the debate in a more pro-immigration direction. Without such an effort, Democrats risk ceding further ground on one of the most potent issues in the country.
As the Trump administration and immigrant advocacy groups chart their next steps, the broader question remains: Can the U.S. reconcile its immigration policies with the public’s quest for security and a stable economy? The answer will define not only the next four years but the country’s long-term trajectory on one of its most contentious issues.
Indeed, the outcome of these upcoming policy decisions will profoundly shape the lives of millions across America. A second Trump term could solidify an enforcement-heavy approach, leading to widespread deportations and legal uncertainty for many immigrants, with broader implications for citizens and businesses. Yet, history clearly shows that public sentiment and political pressures can temper even extreme policy moves.
Alex Kustov is a 2024-2025 Good Authority fellow.
