opinion essay immigration

• Social Justice
• Environment
• Health & Happiness
• Get YES! Emails
• Teacher Resources

• Give A Gift Subscription
• Teaching Sustainability
• Teaching Social Justice
• Teaching Respect & Empathy
• Student Writing Lessons
• Visual Learning Lessons
• Tough Topics Discussion Guides
• About the YES! for Teachers Program
• Student Writing Contest

Follow YES! For Teachers

Eight brilliant student essays on immigration and unjust assumptions.

Read winning essays from our winter 2019 “Border (In)Security” student writing contest.

For the winter 2019 student writing competition, “Border (In)Security,” we invited students to read the YES! Magazine article “Two-Thirds of Americans Live in the “Constitution-Free Zone” by Lornet Turnbull and respond with an up-to-700-word essay. 

Students had a choice between two writing prompts for this contest on immigration policies at the border and in the “Constitution-free zone,” a 100-mile perimeter from land and sea borders where U.S. Border Patrol can search any vehicle, bus, or vessel without a warrant. They could state their positions on the impact of immigration policies on our country’s security and how we determine who is welcome to live here. Or they could write about a time when someone made an unfair assumption about them, just as Border Patrol agents have made warrantless searches of Greyhound passengers based simply on race and clothing.

The Winners

From the hundreds of essays written, these eight were chosen as winners. Be sure to read the author’s response to the essay winners and the literary gems that caught our eye.

Middle School Winner: Alessandra Serafini

High School Winner: Cain Trevino

High School Winner: Ethan Peter

University Winner: Daniel Fries

Powerful Voice Winner: Emma Hernandez-Sanchez

Powerful Voice Winner: Tiara Lewis

Powerful Voice Winner: Hailee Park

Powerful Voice Winner: Aminata Toure

From the Author Lornet Turnbull

Literary Gems

Middle school winner.

Alessandra Serafini

Brier Terrace Middle School, Brier, Wash.

Broken Promises

“…Give me your tired, your poor,

Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,

The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.

Send these, the homeless, tempest-tossed to me,

I lift my lamp beside the golden door!”

These words were written by Emma Lazarus and are inscribed on the base of the Statue of Liberty. And yet, the very door they talk about is no longer available to those who need it the most. The door has been shut, chained, and guarded. It no longer shines like gold. Those seeking asylum are being turned away. Families are being split up; children are being stranded. The promise America made to those in need is broken.

Not only is the promise to asylum seekers broken, but the promises made to some 200 million people already residing within the U.S. are broken, too. Anyone within 100 miles of the United States border lives in the “Constitution-free zone” and can be searched with “reasonable suspicion,” a suspicion that is determined by Border Patrol officers. The zone encompasses major cities, such as Seattle and New York City, and it even covers entire states, such as Florida, Massachusetts, and New Jersey. I live in the Seattle area, and it is unsettling that I can be searched and interrogated without the usual warrant. In these areas, there has been an abuse of power; people have been unlawfully searched and interrogated because of assumed race or religion.

The ACLU obtained data from the Customs and Border Protection Agency that demonstrate this reprehensible profiling. The data found that “82 percent of foreign citizens stopped by agents in that state are Latino, and almost 1 in 3 of those processed are, in fact, U.S. citizens.” These warrantless searches impede the trust-building process and communication between the local population and law enforcement officers. Unfortunately, this lack of trust makes campaigns, such as Homeland Security’s “If You See Something, Say Something,” ineffective due to the actions of the department’s own members and officers. Worst of all, profiling ostracizes entire communities and makes them feel unsafe in their own country.

Ironically, asylum seekers come to America in search of safety. However, the thin veil of safety has been drawn back, and, behind it, our tarnished colors are visible. We need to welcome people in their darkest hours rather than destroy their last bit of hope by slamming the door in their faces. The immigration process is currently in shambles, and an effective process is essential for both those already in the country and those outside of it. Many asylum seekers are running from war, poverty, hunger, and death. Their countries’ instability has hijacked every aspect of their lives, made them vagabonds, and the possibility of death, a cruel and unforgiving death, is real. They see no future for their children, and they are desperate for the perceived promise of America—a promise of opportunity, freedom, and a safe future. An effective process would determine who actually needs help and then grant them passage into America. Why should everyone be turned away? My grandmother immigrated to America from Scotland in 1955. I exist because she had a chance that others are now being denied.

Emma Lazarus named Lady Liberty the “Mother of Exiles.” Why are we denying her the happiness of children? Because we cannot decide which ones? America has an inexplicable area where our constitution has been spurned and forgotten. Additionally, there is a rancorous movement to close our southern border because of a deep-rooted fear of immigrants and what they represent. For too many Americans, they represent the end of established power and white supremacy, which is their worst nightmare. In fact, immigrants do represent change—healthy change—with new ideas and new energy that will help make this country stronger. Governmental agreement on a humane security plan is critical to ensure that America reaches its full potential. We can help. We can help people in unimaginably terrifying situations, and that should be our America.

Alessandra Serafini plays on a national soccer team for Seattle United and is learning American Sign Language outside of school. Her goal is to spread awareness about issues such as climate change, poverty, and large-scale political conflict through writing and public speaking.

  High School Winner

Cain Trevino

North Side High School, Fort Worth, Texas

Xenophobia and the Constitution-Free Zone

In August of 2017, U.S. Border Patrol agents boarded a Greyhound bus that had just arrived at the White River Junction station from Boston. According to Danielle Bonadona, a Lebanon resident and a bus passenger, “They wouldn’t let us get off. They boarded the bus and told us they needed to see our IDs or papers.” Bonadona, a 29-year-old American citizen, said that the agents spent around 20 minutes on the bus and “only checked the IDs of people who had accents or were not white.” Bonadona said she was aware of the 100-mile rule, but the experience of being stopped and searched felt “pretty unconstitutional.”

In the YES! article “Two-Thirds of Americans Live in the ‘Constitution-Free Zone’” by Lornet Turnbull, the author references the ACLU’s argument that “the 100-mile zone violates Fourth Amendment protections against unreasonable search and seizure.” However, the Supreme Court upholds the use of immigration checkpoints for inquiries on citizenship status. In my view, the ACLU makes a reasonable argument. The laws of the 100-mile zone are blurred, and, too often, officials give arbitrary reasons to conduct a search. Xenophobia and fear of immigrants burgeons in cities within these areas. People of color and those with accents or who are non-English speakers are profiled by law enforcement agencies that enforce anti-immigrant policies. The “Constitution-free zone” is portrayed as an effective barrier to secure our borders. However, this anti-immigrant zone does not make our country any safer. In fact, it does the opposite.

As a former student from the Houston area, I can tell you that the Constitution-free zone makes immigrants and citizens alike feel on edge. The Department of Homeland Security’s white SUVs patrol our streets. Even students feel the weight of anti-immigrant laws. Dennis Rivera Sarmiento, an undocumented student who attended Austin High School in Houston, was held by school police in February 2018 for a minor altercation and was handed over to county police. He was later picked up by Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and held in a detention center. It is unfair that kids like Dennis face much harsher consequences for minor incidents than other students with citizenship.

These instances are a direct result of anti-immigrant laws. For example, the 287(g) program gives local and state police the authority to share individuals’ information with ICE after an arrest. This means that immigrants can be deported for committing misdemeanors as minor as running a red light. Other laws like Senate Bill 4, passed by the Texas Legislature, allow police to ask people about their immigration status after they are detained. These policies make immigrants and people of color feel like they’re always under surveillance and that, at any moment, they may be pulled over to be questioned and detained.

During Hurricane Harvey, the immigrant community was hesitant to go to the shelters because images of immigration authorities patrolling the area began to surface online. It made them feel like their own city was against them at a time when they needed them most. Constitution-free zones create communities of fear. For many immigrants, the danger of being questioned about immigration status prevents them from reporting crimes, even when they are the victim. Unreported crime only places more groups of people at risk and, overall, makes communities less safe.

In order to create a humane immigration process, citizens and non-citizens must hold policymakers accountable and get rid of discriminatory laws like 287(g) and Senate Bill 4. Abolishing the Constitution-free zone will also require pressure from the public and many organizations. For a more streamlined legal process, the League of United Latin American Citizens suggests background checks and a small application fee for incoming immigrants, as well as permanent resident status for Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) and Temporary Protected Status (TPS) recipients. Other organizations propose expanding the green card lottery and asylum for immigrants escaping the dangers of their home countries.

Immigrants who come to the U.S. are only looking for an opportunity to provide for their families and themselves; so, the question of deciding who gets inside the border and who doesn’t is the same as trying to prove some people are worth more than others. The narratives created by anti-immigrant media plant the false idea that immigrants bring nothing but crime and terrorism. Increased funding for the border and enforcing laws like 287(g) empower anti-immigrant groups to vilify immigrants and promote a witch hunt that targets innocent people. This hatred and xenophobia allow law enforcement to ask any person of color or non-native English speaker about their citizenship or to detain a teenager for a minor incident. Getting rid of the 100-mile zone means standing up for justice and freedom because nobody, regardless of citizenship, should have to live under laws created from fear and hatred.

Cain Trevino is a sophomore. Cain is proud of his Mexican and Salvadorian descent and is an advocate for the implementation of Ethnic Studies in Texas. He enjoys basketball, playing the violin, and studying c omputer science. Cain plans to pursue a career in engineering at Stanford University and later earn a PhD.  

High School Winner

Ethan Peter

Kirkwood High School, Kirkwood, Mo.

I’m an expert on bussing. For the past couple of months, I’ve been a busser at a pizza restaurant near my house. It may not be the most glamorous job, but it pays all right, and, I’ll admit, I’m in it for the money.

I arrive at 5 p.m. and inspect the restaurant to ensure it is in pristine condition for the 6 p.m. wave of guests. As customers come and go, I pick up their dirty dishes, wash off their tables, and reset them for the next guests. For the first hour of my shift, the work is fairly straightforward.

I met another expert on bussing while crossing the border in a church van two years ago. Our van arrived at the border checkpoint, and an agent stopped us. She read our passports, let us through, and moved on to her next vehicle. The Border Patrol agent’s job seemed fairly straightforward.

At the restaurant, 6 p.m. means a rush of customers. It’s the end of the workday, and these folks are hungry for our pizzas and salads. My job is no longer straightforward.

Throughout the frenzy, the TVs in the restaurant buzz about waves of people coming to the U.S. border. The peaceful ebb and flow enjoyed by Border agents is disrupted by intense surges of immigrants who seek to enter the U.S. Outside forces push immigrants to the United States: wars break out in the Middle East, gangs terrorize parts of Central and South America, and economic downturns force foreigners to look to the U.S., drawn by the promise of opportunity. Refugees and migrant caravans arrive, and suddenly, a Border Patrol agent’s job is no longer straightforward.

I turn from the TVs in anticipation of a crisis exploding inside the restaurant: crowds that arrive together will leave together. I’ve learned that when a table looks finished with their dishes, I need to proactively ask to take those dishes, otherwise, I will fall behind, and the tables won’t be ready for the next customers. The challenge is judging who is finished eating. I’m forced to read clues and use my discretion.

Interpreting clues is part of a Border Patrol agent’s job, too. Lornet Turnbull states, “For example, CBP data obtained by ACLU in Michigan shows that 82 percent of foreign citizens stopped by agents in that state are Latino, and almost 1 in 3 of those processed is, in fact, a U.S. citizen.” While I try to spot customers done with their meals so I can clear their part of the table, the Border Patrol officer uses clues to detect undocumented immigrants. We both sometimes guess incorrectly, but our intentions are to do our jobs to the best of our abilities.

These situations are uncomfortable. I certainly do not enjoy interrupting a conversation to get someone’s dishes, and I doubt Border Patrol agents enjoy interrogating someone about their immigration status. In both situations, the people we mistakenly ask lose time and are subjected to awkward and uncomfortable situations. However, here’s where the busser and the Border Patrol officer’s situations are different: If I make a mistake, the customer faces a minor inconvenience. The stakes for a Border Patrol agent are much higher. Mistakenly asking for documentation and searching someone can lead to embarrassment or fear—it can even be life-changing. Thus, Border Patrol agents must be fairly certain that someone’s immigration status is questionable before they begin their interrogation.

To avoid these situations altogether, the U.S. must make the path to citizenship for immigrants easier. This is particularly true for immigrants fleeing violence. Many people object to this by saying these immigrants will bring violence with them, but data does not support this view. In 1939, a ship of Jewish refugees from Germany was turned away from the U.S.—a decision viewed negatively through the lens of history. Today, many people advocate restricting immigration for refugees from violent countries; they refuse to learn the lessons from 1939. The sad thing is that many of these immigrants are seen as just as violent as the people they are fleeing. We should not confuse the oppressed with the oppressor.

My restaurant appreciates customers because they bring us money, just as we should appreciate immigrants because they bring us unique perspectives. Equally important, immigrants provide this country with a variety of expert ideas and cultures, which builds better human connections and strengthens our society.

Ethan Peter is a junior. Ethan writes for his school newspaper, The Kirkwood Call, and plays volleyball for his high school and a club team. He hopes to continue to grow as a writer in the future. 

University Winner

Daniel Fries

Lane Community College, Eugene, Ore.

Detained on the Road to Equality

The United States is a nation of immigrants. There are currently 43 million foreign-born people living in the U.S. Millions of them are naturalized American citizens, and 23 million, or 7.2 percent of the population, are living here without documentation (US Census, 2016). One in seven residents of the United States was not born here. Multiculturalism is, and always has been, a key part of the American experience. However, romantic notions of finding a better life in the United States for immigrants and refugees don’t reflect reality. In modern history, America is a country that systematically treats immigrants—documented or not—and non-white Americans in a way that is fundamentally different than what is considered right by the majority.

The Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment states,“No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.” When a suspected undocumented immigrant is detained, their basic human rights are violated. Warrantless raids on Greyhound buses within 100 miles of the border (an area referred to by some as the “Constitution-free zone”) are clear violations of human rights. These violations are not due to the current state of politics; they are the symptom of blatant racism in the United States and a system that denigrates and abuses people least able to defend themselves.

It is not surprising that some of the mechanisms that drive modern American racism are political in nature. Human beings are predisposed to dislike and distrust individuals that do not conform to the norms of their social group (Mountz, Allison). Some politicians appeal to this suspicion and wrongly attribute high crime rates to non-white immigrants. The truth is that immigrants commit fewer crimes than native-born Americans. In fact, people born in the United States are convicted of crimes at a rate twice that of undocumented non-natives (Cato Institute, 2018).

The majority of immigrants take high risks to seek a better life, giving them incentive to obey the laws of their new country. In many states, any contact with law enforcement may ultimately result in deportation and separation from family. While immigrants commit far fewer crimes, fear of violent crime by much of the U.S. population outweighs the truth. For some politicians, it is easier to sell a border wall to a scared population than it is to explain the need for reformed immigration policy. It’s easier to say that immigrants are taking people’s jobs than explain a changing global economy and its effect on employment. The only crime committed in this instance is discrimination.

Human rights are violated when an undocumented immigrant—or someone perceived as an undocumented immigrant—who has not committed a crime is detained on a Greyhound bus. When a United States citizen is detained on the same bus, constitutional rights are being violated. The fact that this happens every day and that we debate its morality makes it abundantly clear that racism is deeply ingrained in this country. Many Americans who have never experienced this type of oppression lack the capacity to understand its lasting effect. Most Americans don’t know what it’s like to be late to work because they were wrongfully detained, were pulled over by the police for the third time that month for no legal reason, or had to coordinate legal representation for their U.S. citizen grandmother because she was taken off a bus for being a suspected undocumented immigrant. This oppression is cruel and unnecessary.

America doesn’t need a wall to keep out undocumented immigrants; it needs to seriously address how to deal with immigration. It is possible to reform the current system in such a way that anyone can become a member of American society, instead of existing outside of it. If a person wants to live in the United States and agrees to follow its laws and pay its taxes, a path to citizenship should be available.

People come to the U.S. from all over the world for many reasons. Some have no other choice. There are ongoing humanitarian crises in Syria, Yemen, and South America that are responsible for the influx of immigrants and asylum seekers at our borders. If the United States wants to address the current situation, it must acknowledge the global factors affecting the immigrants at the center of this debate and make fact-informed decisions. There is a way to maintain the security of America while treating migrants and refugees compassionately, to let those who wish to contribute to our society do so, and to offer a hand up instead of building a wall.

Daniel Fries studies computer science. Daniel has served as a wildland firefighter in Oregon, California, and Alaska. He is passionate about science, nature, and the ways that technology contributes to making the world a better, more empathetic, and safer place.

Powerful Voice Winner

Emma Hernandez-Sanchez

Wellness, Business and Sports School, Woodburn, Ore.

An Emotion an Immigrant Knows Too Well

Before Donald Trump’s campaign, I was oblivious to my race and the idea of racism. As far as I knew, I was the same as everyone else. I didn’t stop to think about our different-colored skins. I lived in a house with a family and attended school five days a week just like everyone else. So, what made me different?

Seventh grade was a very stressful year—the year that race and racism made an appearance in my life. It was as if a cold splash of water woke me up and finally opened my eyes to what the world was saying. It was this year that Donald Trump started initiating change about who got the right to live in this country and who didn’t. There was a lot of talk about deportation, specifically for Mexicans, and it sparked commotion and fear in me.

I remember being afraid and nervous to go out. At home, the anxiety was there but always at the far back of my mind because I felt safe inside. My fear began as a small whisper, but every time I stepped out of my house, it got louder. I would have dreams about the deportation police coming to my school; when I went to places like the library, the park, the store, or the mall, I would pay attention to everyone and to my surroundings. In my head, I would always ask myself, “Did they give us nasty looks?,” “Why does it seem quieter?” “Was that a cop I just saw?” I would notice little things, like how there were only a few Mexicans out or how empty a store was. When my mom went grocery shopping, I would pray that she would be safe. I was born in America, and both my parents were legally documented. My mom was basically raised here. Still, I couldn’t help but feel nervous.

I knew I shouldn’t have been afraid, but with one look, agents could have automatically thought my family and I were undocumented. Even when the deportation police would figure out that we weren’t undocumented, they’d still figure out a way to deport us—at least that was what was going through my head. It got so bad that I didn’t even want to do the simplest things like go grocery shopping because there was a rumor that the week before a person was taken from Walmart.

I felt scared and nervous, and I wasn’t even undocumented. I can’t even imagine how people who are undocumented must have felt, how they feel. All I can think is that it’s probably ten times worse than what I was feeling. Always worrying about being deported and separated from your family must be hard. I was living in fear, and I didn’t even have it that bad. My heart goes out to families that get separated from each other. It’s because of those fears that I detest the “Constitution-free zone.”

Legally documented and undocumented people who live in the Constitution-free zone are in constant fear of being deported. People shouldn’t have to live this way. In fact, there have been arguments that the 100-mile zone violates the Fourth Amendment, which gives people the right to be protected from unreasonable searches and seizures of property by the government. Unfortunately, the U.S. Supreme Court has consistently upheld these practices.

One question that Lornet Turnbull asks in her YES! article “Two-Thirds of Americans Live in the ‘Constitution-Free Zone’” is, “How should we decide who is welcome in the U.S and who is not?” Instead of focusing on immigrants, how about we focus on the people who shoot up schools, rape girls, exploit women for human sex trafficking, and sell drugs? These are the people who make our country unsafe; they are the ones who shouldn’t be accepted. Even if they are citizens and have the legal right to live here, they still shouldn’t be included. If they are the ones making this country unsafe, then what gives them the right to live here?

I don’t think that the Constitution-free zone is an effective and justifiable way to make this country more “secure.” If someone isn’t causing any trouble in the United States and is just simply living their life, then they should be welcomed here. We shouldn’t have to live in fear that our rights will be taken away. I believe that it’s unfair for people to automatically think that it’s the Hispanics that make this country unsafe. Sure, get all the undocumented people out of the United States, but it’s not going to make this country any safer. It is a society that promotes violence that makes us unsafe, not a race.

Emma Hernandez-Sanchez is a freshman who is passionate about literature and her education. Emma wan ts to inspire others to be creative and try their best. She enjoys reading and creating stories that spark imagination. 

  Powerful Voice Winner

Tiara Lewis

Columbus City Preparatory Schools for Girls,

Columbus, Ohio

Hold Your Head High and Keep Those Fists Down

How would you feel if you walked into a store and salespeople were staring at you? Making you feel like you didn’t belong. Judging you. Assuming that you were going to take something, even though you might have $1,000 on you to spend. Sometimes it doesn’t matter. This is because people will always judge you. It might not be because of your race but for random reasons, like because your hair is black instead of dirty blonde. Or because your hair is short and not long. Or just because they are having a bad day. People will always find ways to bring you down and accuse you of something, but that doesn’t mean you have to go along with it.

Every time I entered a store, I would change my entire personality. I would change the way I talked and the way I walked. I always saw myself as needing to fit in. If a store was all pink, like the store Justice, I would act like a girly girl. If I was shopping in a darker store, like Hot Topic, I would hum to the heavy metal songs and act more goth. I had no idea that I was feeding into stereotypes.

When I was 11, I walked into Claire’s, a well-known store at the mall. That day was my sister’s birthday. Both of us were really happy and had money to spend. As soon as we walked into the store, two employees stared me and my sister down, giving us cold looks. When we went to the cashier to buy some earrings, we thought everything was fine. However, when we walked out of the store, there was a policeman and security guards waiting. At that moment, my sister and I looked at one another, and I said, in a scared little girl voice, “I wonder what happened? Why are they here?”

Then, they stopped us. We didn’t know what was going on. The same employee that cashed us out was screaming as her eyes got big, “What did you steal?” I was starting to get numb. Me and my sister looked at each other and told the truth: “We didn’t steal anything. You can check us.” They rudely ripped through our bags and caused a big scene. My heart was pounding like a drum. I felt violated and scared. Then, the policeman said, “Come with us. We need to call your parents.” While this was happening, the employees were talking to each other, smiling. We got checked again. The police said that they were going to check the cameras, but after they were done searching us, they realized that we didn’t do anything wrong and let us go about our day.

Walking in the mall was embarrassing—everybody staring, looking, and whispering as we left the security office. This made me feel like I did something wrong while knowing I didn’t. We went back to the store to get our shopping bags. The employees sneered, “Don’t you niggers ever come in this store again. You people always take stuff. This time you just got lucky.” Their faces were red and frightening. It was almost like they were in a scary 3D movie, screaming, and coming right at us. I felt hurt and disappointed that someone had the power within them to say something so harsh and wrong to another person. Those employees’ exact words will forever be engraved in my memory.

In the article, “Two-Thirds of Americans Live in the ‘Constitution-Free Zone’,” Lornet Turnbull states, “In January, they stopped a man in Indio, California, as he was boarding a Los Angeles-bound bus. While questioning this man about his immigration status, agents told him his ‘shoes looked suspicious,’ like those of someone who had recently crossed the border.” They literally judged him by his shoes. They had no proof of anything. If a man is judged by his shoes, who else and what else are being judged in the world?

In the novel  To Kill a Mockingbird , a character named Atticus states, “You just hold your head high and keep those fists down. No matter what anybody says to you, don’t you let’em get your goat. Try fighting with your head for a change.” No matter how much you might try to change yourself, your hairstyle, and your clothes, people will always make assumptions about you. However, you never need to change yourself to make a point or to feel like you fit in. Be yourself. Don’t let those stereotypes turn into facts.

Tiara Lewis is in the eighth grade. Tiara plays the clarinet and is trying to change the world— one essay at a time. She is most often found curled up on her bed, “Divergent” in one hand and a cream-filled doughnut in the other.

Hailee Park

 Wielding My Swords

If I were a swordsman, my weapons would be my identities. I would wield one sword in my left hand and another in my right. People expect me to use both fluently, but I’m not naturally ambidextrous. Even though I am a right-handed swordsman, wielding my dominant sword with ease, I must also carry a sword in my left, the heirloom of my family heritage. Although I try to live up to others’ expectations by using both swords, I may appear inexperienced while attempting to use my left. In some instances, my heirloom is mistaken for representing different families’ since the embellishments look similar.

Many assumptions are made about my heirloom sword based on its appearance, just as many assumptions are made about me based on my physical looks. “Are you Chinese?” When I respond with ‘no,’ they stare at me blankly in confusion. There is a multitude of Asian cultures in the United States, of which I am one. Despite what many others may assume, I am not Chinese; I am an American-born Korean.

“Then… are you Japanese?” Instead of asking a broader question, like “What is your ethnicity?,” they choose to ask a direct question. I reply that I am Korean. I like to think that this answers their question sufficiently; however, they think otherwise. Instead, I take this as their invitation to a duel.

They attack me with another question: “Are you from North Korea or South Korea?” I don’t know how to respond because I’m not from either of those countries; I was born in America. I respond with “South Korea,” where my parents are from because I assume that they’re asking me about my ethnicity. I’m not offended by this situation because I get asked these questions frequently. From this experience, I realize that people don’t know how to politely ask questions about identity to those unlike them. Instead of asking “What is your family’s ethnicity?,” many people use rude alternatives, such as “Where are you from?,” or “What language do you speak?”

When people ask these questions, they make assumptions based on someone’s appearance. In my case, people make inferences like:

“She must be really good at speaking Korean.”

“She’s Asian; therefore, she must be born in Asia.”

“She’s probably Chinese.”

These thoughts may appear in their heads because making assumptions is natural. However, there are instances when assumptions can be taken too far. Some U.S. Border Patrol agents in the “Constitution-free zone” have made similar assumptions based on skin color and clothing. For example, agents marked someone as an undocumented immigrant because “his shoes looked suspicious, like those of someone who had recently crossed the border.”

Another instance was when a Jamaican grandmother was forced off a bus when she was visiting her granddaughter. The impetus was her accent and the color of her skin. Government officials chose to act on their assumptions, even though they had no solid proof that the grandmother was an undocumented immigrant. These situations just touch the surface of the issue of racial injustice in America.

When someone makes unfair assumptions about me, they are pointing their sword and challenging me to a duel; I cannot refuse because I am already involved. It is not appropriate for anyone, including Border Patrol agents, to make unjustified assumptions or to act on those assumptions. Border Patrol agents have no right to confiscate the swords of the innocent solely based on their conjectures. The next time I’m faced with a situation where racially ignorant assumptions are made about me, I will refuse to surrender my sword, point it back at them, and triumphantly fight their ignorance with my cultural pride.

Hailee Park is an eighth grader who enjoys reading many genres. While reading, Hailee recognized the racial injustices against immigrants in America, which inspired her essay. Hailee plays violin in her school’s orchestra and listens to and composes music. 

Aminata Toure

East Harlem School, New York City, N.Y.

We Are Still Dreaming

As a young Muslim American woman, I have been labeled things I am not: a terrorist, oppressed, and an ISIS supporter. I have been accused of planning 9/11, an event that happened before I was born. Lately, in the media, Muslims have been portrayed as supporters of a malevolent cause, terrorizing others just because they do not have the same beliefs. I often scoff at news reports that portray Muslims in such a light, just as I scoff at all names I’ve been labeled. They are words that do not define me. 

In a land where labels have stripped immigrants of their personalities, they are now being stripped of something that makes them human: their rights. The situation described in Lornet Turnbull’s article, “Two-Thirds of Americans are Living in the ‘Constitution-Free Zone’,” goes directly against the Constitution, the soul of this country, something that asserts that we are all equal before the law. If immigrants do not have protection from the Constitution, is there any way to feel safe?

Although most insults are easy to shrug off, they are still threatening. I am ashamed when I feel afraid to go to the mosque. Friday is an extremely special day when we gather together to pray, but lately, I haven’t been going to the mosque for Jummah prayers. I have realized that I can never feel safe when in a large group of Muslims because of the widespread hatred of Muslims in the United States, commonly referred to as Islamophobia. Police surround our mosque, and there are posters warning us about dangerous people who might attack our place of worship because we have been identified as terrorists.

I wish I could tune out every news report that blasts out the headline “Terrorist Attack!” because I know that I will be judged based on the actions of someone else. Despite this anti-Muslim racism, what I have learned from these insults is that I am proud of my faith. I am a Muslim, but being Muslim doesn’t define me. I am a writer, a student, a dreamer, a friend, a New Yorker, a helper, and an American. I am unapologetically me, a Muslim, and so much more. I definitely think everyone should get to know a Muslim. They would see that some of us are also Harry Potter fans, not just people planning to bomb the White House.

Labels are unjustly placed on us because of the way we speak, the color of our skin, and what we believe in—not for who we are as individuals. Instead, we should all take more time to get to know one another. As Martin Luther King Jr. said in his “I Have a Dream” speech, we should be judged by the content of our character and not the color of our skin. To me, it seems Martin Luther King Jr.’s dream is a dream that should be a reality. But, for now, we are dreaming.

Aminata Toure is a Guinean American Muslim student. Aminata loves spoken-word poetry and performs in front of hundreds of people at her school’s annual poetry slam. She loves writing, language, history, and West African food and culture. Aminata wants to work at the United Nations when she grows up.

From the Author 

Dear Alessandra, Cain, Daniel, Tiara, Emma, Hailee, Aminata and Ethan,

I am moved and inspired by the thought each of you put into your responses to my story about this so-called “Constitution-free zone.” Whether we realize it or not, immigration in this country impacts all of us— either because we are immigrants ourselves, have neighbors, friends, and family who are, or because we depend on immigrants for many aspects of our lives—from the food we put on our tables to the technology that bewitches us. It is true that immigrants enrich our society in so many important ways, as many of you point out.

And while the federal statute that permits U.S. Border Patrol officers to stop and search at will any of the 200 million of us in this 100-mile shadow border, immigrants have been their biggest targets. In your essays, you highlight how unjust the law is—nothing short of racial profiling. It is heartening to see each of you, in your own way, speaking out against the unfairness of this practice.

Alessandra, you are correct, the immigration system in this country is in shambles. You make a powerful argument about how profiling ostracizes entire communities and how the warrantless searches allowed by this statute impede trust-building between law enforcement and the people they are called on to serve.

And Cain, you point out how this 100-mile zone, along with other laws in the state of Texas where you attended school, make people feel like they’re “always under surveillance, and that, at any moment, you may be pulled over to be questioned and detained.” It seems unimaginable that people live their lives this way, yet millions in this country do.

You, Emma, for example, speak of living in a kind of silent fear since Donald Trump took office, even though you were born in this country and your parents are here legally. You are right, “We shouldn’t have to live in fear that our rights will be taken away.”

And Aminata, you write of being constantly judged and labeled because you’re a Muslim American. How unfortunate and sad that in a country that generations of people fled to search for religious freedom, you are ashamed at times to practice your own. The Constitution-free zone, you write, “goes directly against the Constitution, the soul of this country, something that asserts that we are all equal before the law.”

Tiara, I could personally relate to your gripping account of being racially profiled and humiliated in a store. You were appalled that the Greyhound passenger in California was targeted by Border Patrol because they claimed his shoes looked like those of someone who had walked across the border: “If a man is judged by his shoes,” you ask, “who else and what else are getting judged in the world?”

Hailee, you write about the incorrect assumptions people make about you, an American born of Korean descent, based solely on your appearance and compared it to the assumptions Border Patrol agents make about those they detain in this zone.

Daniel, you speak of the role of political fearmongering in immigration. It’s not new, but under the current administration, turning immigrants into boogiemen for political gain is currency. You write that “For some politicians, it is easier to sell a border wall to a scared population than it is to explain the need for reformed immigration policy.”

And Ethan, you recognize the contributions immigrants make to this country through the connections we all make with them and the strength they bring to our society.

Keep speaking your truth. Use your words and status to call out injustice wherever and whenever you see it. Untold numbers of people spoke out against this practice by Border Patrol and brought pressure on Greyhound to change. In December, the company began offering passengers written guidance—in both Spanish and English—so they understand what their rights are when officers board their bus. Small steps, yes, but progress nonetheless, brought about by people just like you, speaking up for those who sometimes lack a voice to speak up for themselves.

With sincere gratitude,

Lornet Turnbull

Lornet Turnbull is an editor for YES! and a Seattle-based freelance writer. Follow her on Twitter  @TurnbullL .

We received many outstanding essays for the Winter 2019 Student Writing Competition. Though not every participant can win the contest, we’d like to share some excerpts that caught our eye:

After my parents argued with the woman, they told me if you can fight with fists, you prove the other person’s point, but when you fight with the power of your words, you can have a much bigger impact. I also learned that I should never be ashamed of where I am from. —Fernando Flores, The East Harlem School, New York City, N.Y.

Just because we were born here and are privileged to the freedom of our country, we do not have the right to deprive others of a chance at success. —Avalyn Cox, Brier Terrace Middle School, Brier, Wash.

Maybe, rather than a wall, a better solution to our immigration problem would be a bridge. —Sean Dwyer, Lane Community College, Eugene, Ore.

If anything, what I’ve learned is that I don’t know what to do. I don’t know how to change our world. I don’t know how to make a difference, how to make my voice heard. But I have learned the importance of one word, a simple two-letter word that’s taught to the youngest of us, a word we all know but never recognize: the significance of ‘we.’ —Enna Chiu, Highland Park High School, Highland Park, N.J.

Not to say the Border Patrol should not have authorization to search people within the border, but I am saying it should be near the border, more like one mile, not 100. —Cooper Tarbuck, Maranacook Middle School, Manchester, Maine.

My caramel color, my feminism, my Spanish and English language, my Mexican culture, and my young Latina self gives me the confidence to believe in myself, but it can also teach others that making wrong assumptions about someone because of their skin color, identity, culture, looks or gender can make them look and be weaker. —Ana Hernandez, The East Harlem School, New York City, N.Y.

We don’t need to change who we are to fit these stereotypes like someone going on a diet to fit into a new pair of pants. —Kaylee Meyers, Brier Terrace Middle School, Brier, Wash.

If a human being with no criminal background whatsoever has trouble entering the country because of the way he or she dresses or speaks, border protection degenerates into arbitrariness. —Jonas Schumacher, Heidelberg University of Education, Heidelberg, Germany

I believe that you should be able to travel freely throughout your own country without the constant fear of needing to prove that you belong here . —MacKenzie Morgan, Lincoln Middle School, Ypsilanti, Mich.

America is known as “the Land of Opportunity,” but this label is quickly disappearing. If we keep stopping those striving for a better life, then what will become of this country? —Ennyn Chiu, Highland Park Middle School, Highland Park, N.J.

The fact that two-thirds of the people in the U.S. are living in an area called the “Constitution-free zone” is appalling. Our Constitution was made to protect our rights as citizens, no matter where we are in the country. These systems that we are using to “secure” our country are failing, and we need to find a way to change them. —Isis Liaw, Brier Terrace Middle School, Brier, Wash.

I won’t let anyone, especially a man, tell me what I can do, because I am a strong Latina. I will represent where I come from, and I am proud to be Mexican. I will show others that looks can be deceiving. I will show others that even the weakest animal, a beautiful butterfly, is tough, and it will cross any border, no matter how challenging the journey may be. —Brittany Leal, The East Harlem School, New York City, N.Y.

Get Stories of Solutions to Share with Your Classroom

Teachers save 50% on YES! Magazine.

Inspiration in Your Inbox

Get the free daily newsletter from YES! Magazine: Stories of people creating a better world to inspire you and your students.

Home — Essay Samples — Social Issues — Immigration Reform — Argumentative Essay On Immigration

Argumentative Essay on Immigration

• Categories: Immigration Reform

About this sample

Words: 638 |

Published: Mar 5, 2024

Words: 638 | Page: 1 | 4 min read

Cite this Essay

To export a reference to this article please select a referencing style below:

Let us write you an essay from scratch

• 450+ experts on 30 subjects ready to help
• Custom essay delivered in as few as 3 hours

Get high-quality help

Dr Jacklynne

Verified writer

• Expert in: Social Issues

+ 120 experts online

By clicking “Check Writers’ Offers”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy policy . We’ll occasionally send you promo and account related email

No need to pay just yet!

Related Essays

6 pages / 2544 words

4 pages / 1674 words

3 pages / 1257 words

4 pages / 1667 words

Remember! This is just a sample.

You can get your custom paper by one of our expert writers.

121 writers online

Still can’t find what you need?

Browse our vast selection of original essay samples, each expertly formatted and styled

Related Essays on Immigration Reform

Joppke, Christian. 'The Content of Citizenship Tests: How Liberal?' Citizenship Studies, vol. 16, no. 2, 2012, pp. 179-193.Groenendijk, Kees, and Monique Kremer. 'A Touchstone of Belonging or a Barrier to Entry? The Role of [...]

Borderlands/La Frontera: The New Mestiza is a groundbreaking book written by scholar and activist Gloria Anzaldúa. Published in 1987, the book explores the concept of the border, both physical and metaphorical, as experienced by [...]

Police brutality is a pressing issue in contemporary society that demands urgent attention and effective solutions. Over the years, numerous incidents of excessive use of force by law enforcement officers have sparked unrest, [...]

When immigrants come of age many grew up feeling like outcasts in contrast to citizens. Immigration is a considerably large importance in the U.S, especially because it was originally founded and forged by immigrants. The land [...]

Illegal immigration has been a hotly debated topic in the United States for many years, and it continues to be a contentious issue today. The influx of undocumented immigrants into the country has sparked heated discussions on [...]

Since its birth, America has been declared a nation of immigrants, an asylum for those who must to abandon their country, be it because of famine, religious or political oppression, the aspiration of owning land or the [...]

Related Topics

By clicking “Send”, you agree to our Terms of service and Privacy statement . We will occasionally send you account related emails.

Where do you want us to send this sample?

By clicking “Continue”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy policy.

Be careful. This essay is not unique

This essay was donated by a student and is likely to have been used and submitted before

Download this Sample

Free samples may contain mistakes and not unique parts

Sorry, we could not paraphrase this essay. Our professional writers can rewrite it and get you a unique paper.

Please check your inbox.

We can write you a custom essay that will follow your exact instructions and meet the deadlines. Let's fix your grades together!

Get Your Personalized Essay in 3 Hours or Less!

We use cookies to personalyze your web-site experience. By continuing we’ll assume you board with our cookie policy .

• Instructions Followed To The Letter
• Deadlines Met At Every Stage
• Unique And Plagiarism Free

Apr 10, 2023

How To Write Essays About Immigration (With Examples)

Immigrants bring diverse perspectives and skills that can enrich our societies and economies. If you want to gain insight into the impact of immigration on society and culture, keep reading!

Immigration, a subject deeply woven into the fabric of global discussions, touches on political, economic, and social nuances. As globalization propels many to seek new horizons, understanding the multifaceted impacts of migration is crucial. Crafting a compelling essay on such a vast topic requires more than just research; it demands the delicate weaving of insights into a coherent narrative. For those keen on delivering a polished essay on immigration, considering assistance from a reliable essay writing tool can be a game-changer. This tool not only refines the craft of writing but ensures your perspectives on immigration are articulated with clarity and precision.

Here are our Top 5 Essay Examples and Ideas about Immigration:

The economic impact of immigration on host countries, introduction.

In many nations, immigration has been a hotly debated issue, with supporters and opponents disputing how it would affect the home nation. The economic impact of immigration on host countries is one of the essential components of this discussion. Immigration's economic effects may be favorable or harmful, depending on many circumstances.

This article will examine the economic effects of immigration on the receiving nations, examining both the advantages and disadvantages that immigration may have. You will better know how immigration impacts a nation's economy and the variables that influence it after this article.

Immigration's effects on labor markets

An essential component of the total economic impact of immigration is how it affects labor markets. Immigration may affect labor markets, including shifting labor supply and demand, opening new job possibilities, and perhaps affecting local employees' earnings and prospects. This section will examine how immigration affects labor markets in receiving nations.

The shift in the labor supply is one of immigration's most apparent effects on labor markets. When more employees are available in the host nation due to immigration, there may be more competition for open positions. In fields that serve immigrant populations, such as ethnic food shops or language schools, immigrants can also generate new jobs.

Another significant impact of immigration on labor markets is its effect on wages and income distribution. Some studies have suggested that immigration can reduce wages for native workers, particularly those who are less educated or have lower skill levels. 

Immigrants can also contribute to economic growth and innovation, which can positively impact labor markets. Immigrants often have unique skills, experiences, and perspectives that can help drive innovation and create new job opportunities in the host country. Furthermore, immigrants are often more entrepreneurial and more likely to start businesses, which can generate new jobs and contribute to economic growth.

The effect of immigration on wages and income distribution

The effect of immigration on wages and income distribution is a crucial area of concern in the overall economic impact of immigration. Immigration can affect wages and income distribution in various ways, which can have significant implications for both native workers and immigrants. In this section, we will explore the effect of immigration on wages and income distribution in host countries.

One of the primary ways that immigration can impact wages and income distribution is by changing the supply and demand of labor. With an influx of immigrants, the labor supply increases, which can lead to increased competition for jobs. Some studies suggest that immigration harms wages for native workers, while others offer no significant effect.

Another way that immigration can impact wages and income distribution is through its effect on the composition of the workforce. Immigrants often fill low-skilled jobs in industries such as agriculture, construction, and hospitality, which tend to pay lower wages. 

Immigration can also impact income distribution by contributing to the overall level of economic inequality in a host country. While immigration can lead to lower wages for some native workers, it can also lead to higher wages and increased economic mobility for some immigrants. Furthermore, immigrants may face various barriers to upward mobility, such as discrimination or lack of access to education and training. This can lead to increased income inequality between native and immigrant workers.

The contribution of immigrants to economic growth and innovation

Immigrants have historically played a significant role in driving economic growth and innovation in host countries. In this section, we will explore the contribution of immigrants to economic growth and innovation and the factors that enable them to do so.

One of the primary ways that immigrants contribute to economic growth is through their entrepreneurial activities. Immigrants are often more likely to start their businesses than native-born individuals, and these businesses can create jobs and drive economic growth. Immigrant entrepreneurs have contributed to developing industries such as technology, healthcare, and hospitality. Additionally, immigrants are often overrepresented in STEM fields, which is critical to driving innovation and economic growth.

Another way that immigrants contribute to economic growth is through their impact on the labor force. Immigrants tend to be more mobile than native-born individuals, which can lead to a more flexible and adaptable workforce. Immigrants also tend to fill critical roles in industries such as healthcare and agriculture, which are essential to maintaining the functioning of the economy. By filling these roles, immigrants contribute to the overall productivity and growth of the economy.

The costs and benefits of social welfare programs for immigrants

The issue of social welfare programs for immigrants has been a controversial topic in many host countries. In this section, we will explore the costs and benefits of social welfare programs for immigrants and the policy implications.

One of the primary benefits of social welfare programs for immigrants is that they can help reduce poverty and promote social inclusion. Immigrants often face significant barriers to economic mobility, such as language barriers and discrimination. Social welfare programs can help provide a safety net for those struggling to make ends meet and promote social cohesion by reducing inequalities.

However, social welfare programs for immigrants also come with costs. One concern is that these programs may attract immigrants primarily seeking to access social welfare benefits rather than contributing to the economy. This can strain public finances and create resentment among native-born individuals who feel their tax dollars are being used to support immigrants.

Another concern is that social welfare programs may create disincentives for immigrants to work and contribute to the economy. If the benefits of social welfare programs are too generous, some immigrants may choose to rely on them rather than seek employment. This can create long-term dependence and reduce overall economic productivity.

The impact of immigration on public finances and fiscal policies

The effect of immigration on public finances and fiscal policies is a topic of significant interest and debate. This section will explore how immigration affects public finances and how host countries can implement budgetary policies to manage the impact.

One way that immigration can impact public finances is through taxes. Immigrants who are employed and pay taxes can contribute to the tax base of the host country, which can provide additional revenue for public services and infrastructure. However, immigrants who are not employed or earn low wages may contribute fewer taxes, which can strain public finances. 

Fiscal policies can be used to manage the impact of immigration on public finances. One guideline is to increase taxes on immigrants to offset the costs of public services they use. However, this can create a disincentive for highly skilled and educated immigrants to migrate to the host country. Another policy is to increase spending on public services to accommodate the needs of immigrants. However, this can strain public finances and lead to resentment among native-born individuals who feel their tax dollars are being used to support immigrants.

In conclusion, the economic impact of immigration is a complex issue with both costs and benefits for host countries. Immigration can impact labor markets, wages and income distribution, economic growth and innovation, social welfare programs, public finances, and fiscal policies. 

The social and cultural implications of immigration

Immigration has social and cultural implications that affect both immigrants and host countries. The movement of people from one place to another can result in a blending of cultures, traditions, and ideas. At the same time, immigration can also result in social and cultural tensions as different groups struggle to integrate and adjust to new environments. 

The social and cultural implications of immigration have become increasingly important in today's globalized world as the movement of people across borders has become more common. In this article, we will explore the various social and cultural implications of immigration and how they impact immigrants and host communities.

The impact of immigration on social cohesion and integration

Immigration has a significant impact on social cohesion and integration in host countries. Social cohesion refers to the degree to which members of a society feel connected and share a sense of belonging. In contrast, integration refers to the process by which immigrants become a part of the host society. Immigration can either enhance or hinder social cohesion and integration, depending on how it is managed and perceived by the host society.

Another factor that can impact social cohesion and integration is the level of diversity within the host society. Increased diversity can lead to greater cultural exchange and understanding but also social tensions and the formation of segregated communities. Promoting social interaction and cooperation among diverse groups can help mitigate these tensions and promote social cohesion.

The perception of immigrants by the host society also plays a significant role in social cohesion and integration. Negative stereotypes and discriminatory attitudes can hinder integration and create barriers to social cohesion. On the other hand, positive attitudes towards immigrants and their contributions to society can facilitate integration and promote social cohesion.

The role of language and communication in the integration of immigrants

Language and communication play a crucial role in integrating immigrants into host societies. Immigrants may need the ability to communicate effectively with others to overcome significant barriers to social and economic integration. Language and communication skills are essential for accessing education, finding employment, and participating in civic life.

Language is one of the primary barriers immigrants face when integrating into a new society. Without proficiency in the host country's language, immigrants may struggle to understand instructions, participate in conversations, and access essential services. This can lead to social isolation and hinder economic opportunities.

Language training programs are one way to address this issue. Effective language training programs can help immigrants learn the host country's language and develop the communication skills necessary for successful integration. These programs can also give immigrants the cultural knowledge and understanding essential to navigate the host society.

The effect of immigration on cultural diversity and identity

Immigration can significantly impact the cultural diversity and identity of both host societies and immigrant communities. The cultural exchange resulting from immigration can enrich societies and provide opportunities for learning and growth. However, immigration can also pose challenges to preserving cultural identities and maintaining social cohesion.

One of the primary ways in which immigration affects cultural diversity and identity is through the introduction of new customs, traditions, and beliefs. Immigrant communities often bring unique cultural practices, such as food, music, and art, that can enhance the cultural landscape of the host society. Exposure to new cultures can broaden the perspectives of individuals and communities, leading to greater tolerance and understanding.

The challenges and benefits of multiculturalism in host countries

Multiculturalism refers to the coexistence of different cultural groups within a society. It is a concept that has become increasingly important in modern societies characterized by race, ethnicity, religion, and language diversity. 

Multiculturalism is often promoted to promote tolerance, social cohesion, and the celebration of diversity. 

Challenges of multiculturalism

Multiculturalism presents a range of challenges that can impact host societies. These challenges include social division, discrimination, language barriers, and cultural clashes. For example, when immigrants share different values or traditions than the host society, this can lead to misunderstandings and conflict. Similarly, language barriers can limit communication and make it difficult for immigrants to integrate into the host society.

Benefits of multiculturalism

Multiculturalism can also bring a range of benefits to host societies. These benefits include increased cultural awareness and sensitivity, economic growth, and exchanging ideas and perspectives. For example, cultural diversity can provide opportunities for host societies to learn from different cultural practices and approaches to problem-solving. This can lead to innovation and growth.

Social cohesion

Social cohesion refers to the ability of a society to function harmoniously despite differences in culture, ethnicity, religion, and language. Multiculturalism can pose a challenge to social cohesion, but it can also promote it. Host societies can foster social cohesion by promoting the acceptance and understanding of different cultural groups. This can be achieved through policies and programs that promote intercultural dialogue, education, and community-building.

Discrimination and prejudice

Multiculturalism can also increase the risk of discrimination and prejudice. Discrimination can take many forms, including racial, religious, and cultural bias. Host societies can combat discrimination by implementing anti-discrimination laws and policies and promoting diversity and inclusion.

Economic benefits

Multiculturalism can also bring economic benefits to host societies. The presence of a diverse range of skills and talents can lead to innovation and economic growth. Immigrants can also get various skills and experiences contributing to the host society's economic development.

In conclusion, immigration has significant social and cultural implications for both host countries and immigrants. It affects social cohesion, integration, cultural diversity, and identity. Host countries face challenges and benefits of multiculturalism, including economic growth, innovation, and social change.

The role of immigration in shaping national identity

Immigration has always been a significant driver of cultural and social change, with immigrants often bringing their unique identities, values, and traditions to their new homes. As a result, immigration can play a crucial role in shaping national identity, as it challenges existing cultural norms and values and introduces new ideas and perspectives. 

In this article, we will explore the role of immigration in shaping national identity, including its effects on cultural diversity, social cohesion, and political discourse. We will also discuss the challenges and opportunities presented by immigration to national identity and the importance of embracing a diverse and inclusive national identity in today's globalized world.

Immigration and the evolution of national identity

The relationship between immigration and national identity is complex, as immigration can challenge and reinforce existing national identities. As immigrants bring new cultural practices and values, they challenge the existing norms and values of the host society, prompting a re-evaluation of what it means to be part of that society. This can create a more inclusive and diverse national identity as different cultural traditions and practices are recognized and celebrated.

At the same time, the influx of new immigrants can also create a sense of fear and anxiety among some members of the host society, who may view the changes brought about by immigration as a threat to their cultural identity. This can lead to calls for stricter immigration policies and a more limited definition of national identity, which can exclude or marginalize certain groups.

The role of immigrants in shaping cultural diversity

Immigrants have played a significant role in shaping cultural diversity in many countries. Their arrival in a new land brings their customs, traditions, beliefs, and practices, which contribute to society's richness and vibrancy. 

One of the key ways in which immigrants have shaped cultural diversity is through their contributions to the local community. Immigrants bring a wealth of knowledge, skills, and talents that can benefit the societies they move to. For example, they may introduce new cuisines, music, art, and literature that add to the cultural landscape of their new home. This can create a more diverse and inclusive society where different cultures are celebrated and appreciated.

Another important aspect of cultural diversity is the challenges immigrants face when adapting to a new culture. Moving to a new country can be a daunting experience, especially if the culture is vastly different from one's own. Immigrants may struggle with language barriers, cultural norms, and social customs that are unfamiliar to them. This can lead to feelings of isolation and exclusion, which can negatively impact their mental health and well-being.

The challenges of maintaining social cohesion amidst diversity

Strengthening social cohesion amidst diversity is a complex challenge many societies face today. Cultural, ethnic, religious, and language diversity can lead to tensions and conflicts if managed poorly. 

One of the main challenges of maintaining social cohesion amidst diversity is the need to balance the interests of different groups. This involves recognizing and respecting the cultural, religious, and linguistic diversity of society while also promoting a sense of shared identity and common values. This can be particularly challenging in contexts with competing interests and power imbalances between different groups.

Another challenge is the need to address discrimination and prejudice. Discrimination can take many forms, including unequal access to education, employment, housing, hate speech, and violence. Prejudice and stereotypes can also lead to social exclusion and marginalization of certain groups. Addressing these issues requires a concerted effort from the government, civil society, and individuals to promote tolerance and respect for diversity.

Promoting inclusive policies is another crucial factor in maintaining social cohesion amidst diversity. This includes policies promoting equal opportunities for all, regardless of background. This can involve affirmative action programs, targeted social policies, and support for minority groups. Inclusive policies can also create a sense of belonging and ownership among different groups, which helps foster social cohesion.

In conclusion, immigration profoundly influences the formation of national identity. As individuals from various backgrounds merge into a new country, they not only introduce their distinct cultural and ethnic traits but also embark on a journey of personal growth and adaptation. This process mirrors the development of key skills such as leadership, character, and community service, essential for thriving in diverse environments. These attributes are not only vital for immigrants as they integrate into society but are also exemplified in successful National Honor Society essays , where personal growth and societal contribution are celebrated. Thus, the experiences of immigrants significantly enrich the societal tapestry, reflecting in our collective values, beliefs, and practices.

To sum it all up:

To recapitulate writing a five-paragraph essay about immigration can be challenging, but with the right approach and resources, it can be a rewarding experience. Throughout this article, we have discussed the various aspects of immigration that one can explore in such an essay, including the economic impact, social and cultural implications, and the evolution of national identity. 

If you're looking for an AI-powered writing assistant to help you with your next writing project, sign up for Jenni.ai today. With its advanced language models and intuitive interface, Jenni.ai can provide you with personalized suggestions and feedback to improve your writing. Give it a try, Sign up for free and take your writing to the next level!

Start Writing With Jenni Today

Sign up for a free Jenni AI account today. Unlock your research potential and experience the difference for yourself. Your journey to academic excellence starts here.

• Foreign Affairs
• CFR Education
• Newsletters

Climate Change

Global Climate Agreements: Successes and Failures

Backgrounder by Lindsay Maizland December 5, 2023 Renewing America

• Defense & Security
• Diplomacy & International Institutions
• Energy & Environment
• Human Rights
• Politics & Government
• Social Issues

Myanmar’s Troubled History

Backgrounder by Lindsay Maizland January 31, 2022

• Europe & Eurasia
• Global Commons
• Middle East & North Africa
• Sub-Saharan Africa

How Tobacco Laws Could Help Close the Racial Gap on Cancer

Interactive by Olivia Angelino, Thomas J. Bollyky , Elle Ruggiero and Isabella Turilli February 1, 2023 Global Health Program

• Backgrounders
• Special Projects

United States

Book by Max Boot September 10, 2024

• Centers & Programs
• Books & Reports
• Independent Task Force Program
• Fellowships

Oil and Petroleum Products

Academic Webinar: The Geopolitics of Oil

Webinar with Carolyn Kissane and Irina A. Faskianos April 12, 2023

• Students and Educators
• State & Local Officials
• Religion Leaders
• Local Journalists

NATO's Future: Enlarged and More European?

Virtual Event with Emma M. Ashford, Michael R. Carpenter, Camille Grand, Thomas Wright, Liana Fix and Charles A. Kupchan June 25, 2024 Europe Program

• Lectureship Series
• Webinars & Conference Calls
• Member Login

The U.S. Immigration Debate

• The United States is home to more foreign-born residents than any other country in the world. In 2022, immigrants composed almost 14 percent of the U.S. population.
• Congress has failed for decades to agree on how to address immigration challenges, leaving many policy questions up to the courts and executive branch.
• President Joe Biden has reversed many of the Donald Trump administration’s restrictive policies, even while implementing his own in response to a historic influx of migrants.

Introduction

Immigration has been a touchstone of the U.S. political debate for decades, as policymakers have weighed economic, security, and humanitarian concerns. However, Congress has continued to disagree on comprehensive immigration reform, effectively moving some major policy decisions into the executive and judicial branches of government and fueling debate in the halls of state and municipal governments.

Former President Donald Trump has put efforts to reshape asylum, border, and deportation policy at the center of his political movement. President Joe Biden had pledged to reverse Trump’s first-term actions and reform the system, but the end of pandemic-related border restrictions and a historic surge in migration have complicated his plans.

What is the immigrant population in the United States?

• Immigration and Migration
• Border and Port Security
• Donald Trump

Immigrants composed an estimated 13.9 percent of the U.S. population in 2022, amounting to roughly 46 million people out of a total of almost 335 million, according to U.S. Census Bureau data released in April 2024. Together, immigrants and their U.S.-born children made up about 27 percent of U.S. inhabitants, per the Current Population Survey. Though the share of the population that is foreign born has steadily risen since 1970, when there were fewer than ten million immigrants in the country, recent figures still fall below the record high of 14.8 percent in 1890. 

As of 2022, Mexico was the top country of origin for U.S. immigrants, with Mexicans constituting 23 percent of the total immigrant population. Other major countries of origin include India (6 percent); China, including Hong Kong and Macau (5 percent); and the Philippines (4 percent).

Undocumented immigration. The U.S. government estimated the undocumented population to be some eleven million people in 2022. This total represents a slight decrease from 11.8 million before the 2008 economic crisis [PDF], which led some immigrants to return to their home countries and discouraged others from coming to the United States. In fiscal year 2023 (FY 2023), Customs and Border Protection (CBP) apprehended nearly 2.5 million people trying to illegally cross the southern U.S. border, a record high.

Until 2013, almost all of those trying to cross the U.S.-Mexico border were Mexican citizens, and most were individuals seeking work. Between 2013 and 2021, most immigrants came from Asia, particularly China and India. Mexico has since regained its status as the top country of origin, and Central Americans have made up an increasingly larger share of migrants at the southern U.S. border. Generally, they are coming not for work but to make asylum claims, and many of them are unaccompanied children. Some of these immigrants have different legal rights from Mexican nationals in the United States: Under a 2008 anti–human trafficking law, unaccompanied minors from noncontiguous countries have a right to a hearing before being deported to their home countries. The increase in Central American migration has strained the U.S. immigration system. At the end of FY 2023, there were nearly 2.8 million cases pending in immigration courts, the most on record.

Though many of the policies that aim to reduce unlawful immigration focus on enforcement at the border, individuals who arrive in the United States legally and overstay their visas comprise a significant portion of the undocumented population. A Center for Migration Studies report found that, between 2010 and 2018, individuals who overstayed their visas far outnumbered those who arrived by crossing the border illegally.

Legal immigration. The United States granted more than one million individuals [PDF] legal permanent residency in FY 2022, close to pre-pandemic levels. Some 58 percent of them were admitted on the basis of family reunification. Other categories included: employment-based preferences (27 percent), refugees (3 percent), diversity (4 percent), and asylees (5 percent). As of late 2023, more than four million applicants were on the State Department’s waiting list [PDF] for family- and employer-related immigrant visas, nearly a third of whom were from Mexico.

Hundreds of thousands of foreign nationals work legally in the United States under various types of nonimmigrant visas. In FY 2023, the United States granted more than  265,000 visas for high-skilled workers  [PDF], known as H1B visas, and over 310,000 visas for temporary workers in agriculture and other industries, or H2A visas. H1B visas are capped at 85,000 per fiscal year, with exceptions for certain fields .

Immigrants made up 18.6 percent of the U.S. civilian workforce [PDF] in 2023, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, up from 18.1 percent the previous year. Compared to those born in the United States, greater shares of immigrants worked in service fields (21.8 percent of all foreign-born people); production, transportation, and material moving (15.2 percent); and natural resources, construction, and maintenance (13.8 percent). 

How do Americans feel about immigration?

A February 2024 poll by Gallup showed that 28 percent of surveyed Americans considered immigration to be the top problem facing the United States. In a separate Gallup poll conducted that same month, the majority of respondents felt that illegal immigration was a “critical” threat to U.S. national security.

A Pew Research Center poll conducted in April found that some 60 percent of the registered voters surveyed believed that undocumented immigrants currently in the United States should be allowed to stay, with 36 percent of respondents saying that undocumented immigrants should have the opportunity to apply for citizenship. In addition, a large majority of Americans still consider immigration to be overall good for the country.

How has Congress tried to address the issue?

The most recent push for an immigration policy overhaul was in 2013, following a decade in which Congress debated numerous immigration reforms, some considered comprehensive and others piecemeal. (Comprehensive immigration reform refers to omnibus legislation that attempts to address the following issues: demand for high- and low-skilled labor, the legal status of the millions of undocumented immigrants living in the country, border security, and interior enforcement.) The last major legislation to make it through Congress was under President Ronald Reagan in 1986, when his administration granted legal amnesty to some three million undocumented residents; in 1990, President George H.W. Bush further expanded legal immigration by increasing the cap for immigrant visas from 270,000 to 700,000, though he lowered the quota to 675,000 after several years. In 2007, President George W. Bush worked with congressional Democrats to reach a compromise on a new comprehensive bill, but it ultimately failed to win enough support in the Senate.

President Barack Obama pressed hard for a comprehensive bill that would pair a path to legalization for undocumented residents with stronger border security provisions. The Democrat-led Senate passed this legislation in 2013, but the bill stalled in the Republican-controlled House of Representatives. Both Presidents Trump and Biden put forward their own plans, which were not seriously considered by Congress.  

What was the Obama administration’s approach?

With legislation thwarted, Obama focused on executive action, a tactic that his successors continued. In 2012, his administration began a program known as DACA, or Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals , which offered renewable, two-year deportation deferrals and work permits to undocumented immigrants who had arrived in the United States as children and had no criminal records. 

Obama characterized the move as a “ stopgap measure ” and urged Congress to pass the DREAM Act , or Development Relief and Education for Alien Minors—legislation first introduced in 2001 that would have benefited many of the same people. Since then, more than 830,000 people have participated in DACA, and it’s estimated that almost 1.2 million more were eligible as of 2023. Obama attempted to extend similar benefits to undocumented parents of U.S. citizens and permanent residents through a program known as Deferred Action for Parents of Americans (DAPA), but the Supreme Court effectively killed it in 2016.

In 2014, Obama also grappled with a surge of more than sixty thousand unaccompanied minors at the southern border, mostly from Central America. He directed $750 million in aid to the region to improve conditions there. Meanwhile, his administration faced criticism for its enforcement policies, including detaining children in poor conditions and overseeing the deportation of more people— approximately three million —than either the Bill Clinton or George W. Bush administrations had.

What was the Trump administration’s approach?

Immigration remains a signature issue for Trump. He blames previous administrations for failing to secure the southern border, and in his first term, he advocated for sharply reducing both legal and illegal immigration. He repeatedly used executive action to reshape asylum, deportation, and border policy.

Border security and enforcement . Trump vowed to expand the wall along the U.S.-Mexico border, which he claimed would stop drugs and gangs from entering the country. He was unsuccessful in securing funding from Congress, leading to a federal government shutdown in 2019 and a subsequent declaration of a national emergency , which allowed him to divert funds to build the wall.

Other enforcement measures under Trump included increasing border personnel; sending thousands of active-duty troops to the border; threatening Mexico with tariffs if it did not increase its own border enforcement; and attempting to cut federal funding to so-called sanctuary cities, or jurisdictions that refuse to enforce federal immigration directives.

Trump also ratcheted up previous administrations’ deterrence efforts. He implemented a zero-tolerance policy, under which authorities arrested and prosecuted everyone caught crossing the southern border without authorization. This caused thousands of family separations , since by law children must be held apart from parents facing criminal prosecution. (Presidents Bush and Obama likewise faced criticism for child detention, but they did not make separations a matter of policy.)

DACA . Trump sought to end DACA, calling it unconstitutional. The move spurred multiple legal challenges and, in June 2020, the Supreme Court blocked Trump’s plan . A December 2020 federal court ruling forced the Trump administration to resume accepting new applicants.

Travel bans and refugee cap . Trump aimed to sharply reduce the number of refugees and other immigrants granted legal entry into the United States. In 2017, he instituted a ban on immigration and travel from several Muslim-majority countries, including Iran, Somalia, and Yemen. The original order was rejected by the courts, but the Supreme Court upheld a more limited version. Trump also lowered the cap on the number of refugees the United States accepts each year to less than fifteen thousand for FY 2021—the lowest figure in the history of the U.S. refugee program . Additionally, he ended temporary protected status (TPS)—a program that allows migrants from certain crisis-stricken nations to live and work in the United States for a limited period—for several countries.

Asylum policy . Trump implemented new restrictions on asylum seekers. In 2018, the administration began “metering” asylum applications, or only accepting a limited number [PDF] each day. The next year, it launched the Migrant Protection Protocols , also known as the “Remain in Mexico” program, which required asylum seekers to wait in Mexico while their cases were processed in U.S. courts. At the same time, it sought “safe third country” agreements with several Latin American countries, which would have allowed U.S. authorities to send asylum seekers who traveled through those countries back there. Only an agreement with Guatemala was implemented before that country terminated it in 2021. Additionally, the Trump administration invoked Title 42, previously a rarely used public health law, to deny asylum on health-related grounds amid the COVID-19 pandemic.

Comprehensive reform effort . Like his immediate predecessors, Trump proposed broad immigration reform . His would have created a merit-based system to replace the current one,  which prioritizes family reunification. It also included an expansion of the border wall and an employment verification system known as E-Verify, but it did not address the status of current undocumented residents. Congress ultimately did not take up the proposal.

What has been Biden’s approach?

Ahead of the 2020 presidential election, Biden campaigned on overturning almost all of Trump’s immigration policies. Since then, the Biden administration has reduced immigration enforcement within the United States, ended the travel bans, expanded green-card access for certain undocumented immigrants, and ended the controversial Title 42 policy, though it did initially maintain many pandemic-related restrictions. The administration also initially halted construction of the U.S.-Mexico border wall, though it has since moved forward with plans to build additional sections; expanded TPS protections; terminated the Remain in Mexico program (with Supreme Court approval); and raised the refugee cap to 125,000 for fiscal years 2022–24. 

However, Biden’s efforts to undo Trump-era policies have been challenged by a historic influx of migrants at the southern border. The record surge in border crossings has prompted the administration to implement several new restrictions since 2023, including a so-called transit ban allowing the government to deny asylum to migrants who did not previously apply for protection in a third country. In addition, the administration can temporarily bar asylum requests when the number of illegal crossings exceeds a certain threshold; since the start of 2024, illegal crossings have slowed . 

Meanwhile, Biden has worked with Latin American leaders to increase aid to refugee populations, improve border management, and better coordinate emergency responses, even as his own comprehensive immigration reform bill and other border security legislation have failed in Congress. His administration has also launched efforts to accelerate the reunification of migrant families, including by reinstating the Central American Minors (CAM) program, which reunites children in the so-called Northern Triangle countries with their parents in the United States, and by creating a family-reunification task force. Additionally, Biden has pledged to invest $4 billion to address the drivers of migration from Central America, and he has sought to revive DACA; the Department of Homeland Security continues to accept and process renewal requests amid ongoing legal challenges to the program.

Daily News Brief

A summary of global news developments with cfr analysis delivered to your inbox each morning.  weekdays., the world this week, a weekly digest of the latest from cfr on the biggest foreign policy stories of the week, featuring briefs, opinions, and explainers. every friday., think global health.

A curation of original analyses, data visualizations, and commentaries, examining the debates and efforts to improve health worldwide.  Weekly.

How are state and local authorities handling these issues?

States vary widely in how they treat unauthorized immigrants. Some, including California and Massachusetts, allow undocumented immigrants to apply for drivers’ licenses, receive in-state tuition at universities, and obtain other benefits. At the other end of the spectrum are states such as Texas, where the legislature passed a law [PDF] mandating that local governments and law enforcement agencies cooperate with federal immigration officers.

The federal government is generally responsible for enforcing immigration laws, but it delegates some immigration-related duties to state and local law enforcement. However, the degree to which local officials are obliged to cooperate with federal authorities is a subject of intense debate: dozens of counties across thirteen states are home to so-called sanctuary cities that limit cooperation with immigration enforcement.

The degree to which local officials are obliged to cooperate with federal authorities is a subject of intense debate.

President Trump decried these sanctuary jurisdictions and reinstated a controversial Obama-era program known as Secure Communities, in which the FBI shares fingerprints of suspects collected by state and local law enforcement with federal immigration authorities. Under the program, state and local agencies also hand over individuals presumed to be in the country illegally. Biden terminated the program shortly after taking office. 

A range of court rulings during the Trump era increased pressure on states. In 2018, the Justice Department launched a lawsuit against California over sanctuary jurisdictions, which was ultimately dismissed by the Supreme Court. It filed similar suits against New Jersey and Washington, and a federal court ruled in 2020 that the Trump administration could withhold federal funding from sanctuary jurisdictions, including New York City. Under Biden, the Justice Department reversed this stance, leading the Supreme Court to dismiss several pending cases .

The ongoing border crisis has driven increasing controversy over local responses. After Trump called on states to deploy National Guard contingents to the southern border, several governors refused. Others, including Texas’s Greg Abbott, embraced Trump’s views, continuing to expand the border wall and seeking to boost the role of state and local law enforcement in carrying out federal immigration policy. In the Biden era, Abbott has sought to impose stronger enforcement at the Texas-Mexico border despite federal opposition. The governor signed a law in December 2023 making it a state crime to cross the border into Texas illegally and authorizing law enforcement to arrest and deport migrants. The bill remains on hold amid legal challenges; several other states are attempting to enact similar legislation.

Recommended Resources

This CFR Backgrounder explains who is responsible for securing the U.S. border.

This timeline traces changes to U.S. postwar immigration policy.

The Washington Post ’s Eduardo Porter and Youyou Zhou argue that the United States’ efforts to limit immigration a century ago actually helped diversify the country .

In this CFR webinar, experts discuss how immigration is shaping political conversations ahead of the 2024 presidential election.

On this episode of The President’s Inbox , the American Immigration Council’s Dara Lind breaks down the situation at the southern border .

The Migration Policy Institute’s Muzaffar Chishti, Kathleen Bush-Joseph, and Colleen Putzel-Kavanaugh look at Biden’s immigration record at his term’s three-year mark.

• Central America

Emily Lieberman, Nathalie Bussemaker, Samuel Parmer, and Danielle Renwick contributed to this Backgrounder. Will Merrow created the graphics.

• How many immigrants are in the U.S.?
• What has Congress done?
• What was Obama’s approach?
• What was Trump’s approach?
• What is Biden’s approach?
• What’s happening at the state and local levels?

More From Our Experts

How Will the EU Elections Results Change Europe?

In Brief by Liana Fix June 10, 2024 Europe Program

Iran Attack Means an Even Tougher Balancing Act for the U.S. in the Middle East

In Brief by Steven A. Cook April 14, 2024 Middle East Program

Iran Attacks on Israel Spur Escalation Concerns

In Brief by Ray Takeyh April 14, 2024 Middle East Program

Top Stories on CFR

Getting Economic Security Right

Article by Matthew P. Goodman September 4, 2024 RealEcon

Philippines

Why Tensions in the South China Sea Are Bolstering the U.S.-Philippines Alliance

Expert Brief by Joshua Kurlantzick and Abigail McGowan September 5, 2024 Asia Program

From the Ukraine Conflict to a Secure Europe

Report by Thomas Graham September 4, 2024 Center for Preventive Action

Presentations made painless

• Get Premium

101 Immigration Essay Topic Ideas & Examples

Inside This Article

Immigration has been a hot-button issue in recent years, with debates raging over border security, refugee resettlement, and the economic impact of immigration. If you're tasked with writing an essay on immigration, you may be struggling to come up with a topic that is both interesting and relevant. To help you get started, we've compiled a list of 101 immigration essay topic ideas and examples to inspire your writing.

• The history of immigration in the United States
• The impact of immigration on American culture
• Immigration policies and their effects on immigrant communities
• The economic benefits of immigration
• The social challenges faced by immigrants
• The role of immigration in the labor market
• Immigration and crime rates
• The ethics of border enforcement
• The challenges faced by undocumented immigrants
• The impact of immigration on public health
• The experience of refugee resettlement
• The impact of immigration on education
• Immigration and the environment
• The politics of immigration reform
• The role of immigration in shaping national identity
• The impact of immigration on urban development
• Immigration and globalization
• The impact of immigration on family dynamics
• The role of immigration in the spread of disease
• The impact of immigration on social welfare programs
• Immigration and human trafficking
• The impact of immigration on rural communities
• Immigration and the criminal justice system
• The impact of immigration on housing markets
• The role of immigration in international relations
• Immigration and national security
• The impact of immigration on healthcare systems
• Immigration and labor rights
• The impact of immigration on income inequality
• The role of immigration in shaping political ideologies
• Immigration and climate change
• The impact of immigration on technology and innovation
• Immigration and economic development
• The role of immigration in addressing demographic challenges
• Immigration and social mobility
• The impact of immigration on language diversity
• Immigration and social cohesion
• The role of immigration in shaping cultural identity
• Immigration and food culture
• The impact of immigration on public transportation
• Immigration and urban planning
• The role of immigration in revitalizing declining communities
• Immigration and gentrification
• The impact of immigration on small businesses
• Immigration and entrepreneurship
• The role of immigration in addressing labor shortages
• Immigration and education disparities
• The impact of immigration on rural economies
• Immigration and agricultural production
• The role of immigration in addressing healthcare shortages
• Immigration and environmental conservation
• The impact of immigration on social services
• Immigration and income inequality
• The role of immigration in cultural exchange
• Immigration and the arts
• The impact of immigration on sports
• Immigration and media representation
• The role of immigration in shaping public opinion
• Immigration and social media
• The impact of immigration on voting patterns
• Immigration and civic engagement
• The role of immigration in community organizing
• Immigration and social justice movements
• The impact of immigration on political participation
• Immigration and activism
• The role of immigration in shaping public policy
• Immigration and civil rights
• The impact of immigration on political polarization
• Immigration and the role of government
• The role of immigration in international development
• Immigration and conflict resolution
• The impact of immigration on peacebuilding efforts
• Immigration and humanitarian aid
• The role of immigration in addressing global challenges
• Immigration and sustainable development
• The impact of immigration on human rights
• Immigration and social change
• The role of immigration in promoting diversity
• Immigration and cultural preservation
• The impact of immigration on indigenous communities
• Immigration and gender equality
• The role of immigration in addressing social inequalities
• Immigration and intergenerational mobility
• The impact of immigration on social cohesion
• Immigration and social welfare
• The role of immigration in addressing poverty
• Immigration and social justice
• The impact of immigration on human development
• Immigration and social inclusion
• The role of immigration in promoting social progress
• Immigration and social integration
• The impact of immigration on community resilience
• Immigration and disaster response
• The role of immigration in addressing humanitarian crises
• Immigration and conflict prevention
• The impact of immigration on peacebuilding
• Immigration and human security
• The role of immigration in promoting global peace
• Immigration and international cooperation
• The impact of immigration on sustainable development goals
• Immigration and the future of humanity

These are just a few examples of the many immigration essay topics you could explore in your writing. Whether you're interested in the social, economic, political, or cultural aspects of immigration, there is no shortage of compelling topics to explore. So pick a topic that resonates with you, do some research, and start writing!

Want to research companies faster?

Instantly access industry insights

Let PitchGrade do this for me

Leverage powerful AI research capabilities

We will create your text and designs for you. Sit back and relax while we do the work.

Explore More Content

• Privacy Policy
• Terms of Service

© 2024 Pitchgrade

5 Essays about Immigration

According to the UN, the number of international migrants surpassed 270 million in 2019. This represents an increase of 51 million since 2010. Nearly half of all international migrants moved to one of 10 countries. 19% of the world’s total immigrant population lives in the United States. One of every seven international migrants is younger than 20 years old. What are the stories behind these statistics? What does the world think of immigrants? To start answering these questions, here are five essays about immigration:

“Out of Eden Walk” (2013-present) – Paul Salopek

At the time of this 2019 essay, Paul Salopek has been walking for seven years. In 2013, he started from an ancient fossil site north of Ethiopia. His plan? Cover 21,000 miles over ten years, retracing humankind’s walk out of Africa. While he’s walking through the past, his project is also timely. Numbers-wise, we’re living with the largest diaspora in human history. More than 1 billion people are on the move, both within their own countries and beyond borders. During his journey, Salopek covers climate change, technological innovation, mass migration, and more. Through essays, photographs, audio, and video, he creates a vivid tapestry of stories from people rarely heard from. This essay is a great introduction to Salopek’s “slow journalism.” You can find more at OutofEdenWalk.org.

Journalist and writer Paul Salopek is a two-time Pulitzer Prize winner. He has reported for publications like The Atlantic and National Geographic Magazine. John Stanmeyer, who took the photos for this essay, is an Emmy-nominated filmmaker and photographer.

“Mohsin Hamid: why migration is a fundamental human right” (2014)

Author Mohsin Hamid was born in Pakistan and educated in the US. He lives in the UK. In this essay, he explains how he wishes for “a world without borders.” He believes the right to migrate (which includes emigration and immigration) is as vital as other human rights, like freedom of expression. People have always moved, crossing borders and sharing cultures. Humans are also migrants in that simply by living, we move through time. Unfortunately, this human right has been denied all over the world. Hamid looks forward to a day when migration is respected and welcomed.

Mohsin Hamid is the author of several books, including Discontent and Its Civilizations: Dispatches from Lahore, New York, and London. He writes both fiction and nonfiction.

“I’m a Dreamer. Ask my 80+ Employees if I should be deported.” (2020) – Victor Santos

Young and brilliant, Victor Santos is the founder of Airfox, a Boston-based tech startup. On the surface, Santos is living the American Dream. In this essay in the Boston Globe, he describes that for the past 10 years, he’s worried about ICE taking him away. He’s an undocumented immigrant dependent on DACA. Santos briefly describes his experience growing up in the US, working through college, and getting opportunities because of DACA. Following the publication of this piece, the Supreme Court ruled that the Trump administration cannot immediately end DACA. For now, Santos and the other hundreds of thousands of Dreamers are protected.

Victor Santos is the founder and CEO of Airfox, a loan app that uses mobile data to estimate credit risk. He was on the list of MIT Technology Review in Spanish’s Innovators Under 35 Latin America 2018.

“My Life As An Undocumented Immigrant” (2011) – Jose Antonio Vargas

Vargas opens this essay describing how, at 12-years old, he left the Philippines for the US in 1993. At 16, while going to get his driver’s permit, he was told his green card was fake. He realized he was undocumented. In this essay from 2011, partially inspired by four students who walked from Miami to Washington to lobby for the DREAM Act, he spoke out. The essay describes Vargas’ life and career in America, navigating the system with his secret. It’s a vivid, personal look at Vargas’ experience of “hiding” in plain sight and an act of courage as he owns his story.

Jose Antonio Vargas is a former reporter for the Washington Post. He shared a Pulitzer Prize for coverage of the Virginia Tech shooting. He is also a filmmaker, writer, and immigrant rights activist. He founded Define American, a nonprofit that strives for dialogue about immigration, in 2011.

“A Young Immigrant Has Mental Illness, And That’s Raising His Risk of Being Deported” – Christine Herman

Immigrants, especially undocumented immigrants, deal with a variety of challenges. One of them is the mental health care system. Those with untreated mental illnesses are at higher risk of getting in trouble with the law. When the person who is mentally ill is also undocumented, things get even more complicated. Deportation to a country with an even worse mental healthcare system could be a death sentence. This story from NPR is about a specific family, but it highlights issues that affect many.

Christine Herman is Ph.D. chemist and award-winning audio journalist. She’s a 2018-2019 recipient of a Rosalyn Carter fellowship for mental health journalism.

You may also like

13 Facts about Child Labor

Environmental Racism 101: Definition, Examples, Ways to Take Action

11 Examples of Systemic Injustices in the US

Women’s Rights 101: History, Examples, Activists

What is Social Activism?

15 Inspiring Movies about Activism

15 Examples of Civil Disobedience

Academia in Times of Genocide: Why are Students Across the World Protesting?

Pinkwashing 101: Definition, History, Examples

15 Inspiring Quotes for Black History Month

10 Inspiring Ways Women Are Fighting for Equality

15 Trusted Charities Fighting for Clean Water

About the author, emmaline soken-huberty.

Emmaline Soken-Huberty is a freelance writer based in Portland, Oregon. She started to become interested in human rights while attending college, eventually getting a concentration in human rights and humanitarianism. LGBTQ+ rights, women’s rights, and climate change are of special concern to her. In her spare time, she can be found reading or enjoying Oregon’s natural beauty with her husband and dog.

Numbers, Facts and Trends Shaping Your World

Read our research on:

Full Topic List

Regions & Countries

• Publications
• Our Methods
• Short Reads
• Tools & Resources

Read Our Research On:

• Around the World, More Say Immigrants Are a Strength Than a Burden

Publics divided on immigrants’ willingness to adopt host country’s customs

Table of contents.

• Acknowledgments
• Methodology
• Appendix A: References
• Appendix B: Demographic tables

Majorities of publics in top migrant destination countries say immigrants strengthen their countries, according to a 2018 Pew Research Center survey of 18 countries that host half of the world’s migrants.

In 10 of the countries surveyed, majorities view immigrants as a strength rather than a burden. Among them are some of the largest migrant receiving countries in the world: the United States, Germany, the United Kingdom, France, Canada and Australia (each hosting more than 7 million immigrants in 2017).

By contrast, majorities in five countries surveyed – Hungary, Greece, South Africa, Russia and Israel – see immigrants as a burden to their countries. With the exception of Russia, these countries each have fewer than 5 million immigrants.

Meanwhile, public opinion on the impact of immigrants is divided in the Netherlands. In Italy and Poland, more say immigrants are a burden, while substantial shares in these countries do not lean one way or the other (31% and 20% respectively).

Countries surveyed hold half of the world’s migrants

The 18 nations surveyed contain more than half (51%) of the world’s migrant population, or some 127 million people, according to United Nations and U.S. Census Bureau estimates.

Countries with some of the world’s largest immigrant populations were surveyed, including more traditional destinations like the United States, Canada and Australia that have seen waves of immigrants arrive since at least the 19th century . Also surveyed were more recent destination countries in the European Union such as Germany, the United Kingdom, France, Spain, Italy, the Netherlands, Sweden and Greece, all of which experienced immigration waves after World War II .

Japan and Israel were also surveyed. Japan is making efforts to attract more migrants due to its aging population. Israel has been a destination for immigrants since it enacted its 1950 Law of Return for Jewish people worldwide. Russia was surveyed since it has one of the world’s largest foreign-born populations. At the same time, South Africa continues to be a top destination country for many Africans.

Also included in the survey were some newer destinations. Mexico, for example, has become an increasingly important destination and transit country for migrants fleeing violence from El Salvador, Guatemala and Honduras. Similarly, Hungary became an important transit country for migrants entering Europe during the refugee surge that peaked in 2015. And although Poland for many years was a country of emigration, it has seen a recent wave of immigrants from Eastern Europe .

Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates are top immigrant destinations that were not surveyed. Pew Research Center does not have a history of conducting surveys in these countries.

In the U.S., the nation with the world’s largest number of immigrants , six-in-ten adults (59%) say immigrants make the country stronger because of their work and talents, while one-third (34%) say immigrants are a burden because they take jobs and social benefits. Views about immigrants have shifted in the U.S. since the 1990s, when most Americans said immigrants were a burden to the country.

Meanwhile, in six European Union countries surveyed, public opinion about the impact of immigrants has changed since 2014. That was the last time the Center asked European publics this question. It was also before hundreds of thousands of asylum seekers arrived on Europe’s shores in 2015. In Greece, Germany and Italy, three countries that experienced high volumes of arrivals, the share of adults saying immigrants make their countries stronger dropped significantly.

By contrast, public opinion shifted in the opposite direction in France, the UK and Spain, countries surveyed that received fewer asylum seekers in 2015. In all three countries in 2018, majorities said immigrants made their countries stronger, up from about half who said the same in 2014. 1

While majorities in many of the 18 countries surveyed see immigrants as a strength, this opinion is not equally shared across all groups within countries. In most countries surveyed, those on the left of the ideological spectrum are more positive about immigration’s impact on their country than those on the right. Similarly, in many countries surveyed, those with higher levels of education, younger adults, and those with higher incomes are more likely to say immigrants make their countries stronger because of their work and talents. (See Appendix B for group breakdowns .)

Also, in all countries surveyed, those saying they want fewer immigrants arriving in their countries are less likely to view immigrants as making their countries stronger.

Publics split on immigrants’ willingness to adopt their societies’ customs and way of life

Attitudes are mixed on immigrants’ willingness to adopt the destination country’s customs or wanting to be distinct from its society. A median of 49% among countries surveyed say immigrants want to be distinct from the host country’s society, while a median of 45% say immigrants want to adopt the host country’s customs and way of life.

In six destination countries – Japan, Mexico, South Africa, the U.S., France and Sweden – publics are more likely to say immigrants want to adopt the host country’s customs and way of life than say immigrants want to be distinct.

Japan is an outlier: A large majority of the public (75%) says immigrants want to adopt the country’s customs and way of life. This country, whose aging population and low birth rate make immigration relevant for its population growth, has recently changed its policies to attract more foreigners. Views about immigrant integration in Japan could be linked to the low number of immigrants the country hosts and that many immigrants in Japan are ethnically Japanese .

By contrast, in eight destination countries – Hungary, Russia, Greece, Italy, Germany, Poland, Israel and Australia – more people say immigrants want to be distinct than say they are willing to adopt the host country’s customs. Majorities hold this view in Hungary, Russia, Greece, Italy and Germany. In addition, sizable shares of people in most of these countries refused to choose one option or the other when asked this question.

In many countries surveyed, younger adults, those with higher levels of education and those on the left of the political spectrum are generally more likely to say immigrants are adopting the country’s customs and way of life (see Appendix B for group breakdowns ).

Publics are less concerned about immigrant crime than the risk they pose for terrorism

In recent years, security concerns about immigration have become part of the public debate in many countries. Some of these concerns are about crime and immigration, while others are about terrorism and immigration.

Immigrants and crime

In several immigrant destination countries, large majorities say immigrants are not more to blame for crime than other groups. This is the case in Canada, the U.S., France and the UK. Among other countries surveyed, only in South Africa, Sweden and Greece do majorities believe that immigrants are more to blame for crime than other groups.

In the Netherlands, Japan, Israel and Germany, opinions are split on the impact of immigrants on crime. In four other countries where views were mixed, substantial shares refused to choose either of the two statements offered – Italy (26%), Hungary (17%), Poland (15%) and Russia (14%).

In countries where majorities see immigrants as a strength, majorities also tend to say immigrants are not more to blame for crime. Notable exceptions are Germany and Sweden, where majorities say that immigrants strengthen their countries, but pluralities of adults say that immigrants carry more responsibility for crime.

Immigrants and terrorism

Publics across top migrant destination countries are split on whether or not immigrants increase the risk of terrorism in their countries.

In six countries, majorities believe immigrants do not increase the risk of terrorism in the host country. These include all surveyed countries in North America (Mexico, Canada and the U.S.), as well as South Africa and Japan. Publics in France and Spain, two European countries that were not at the center of the 2015 refugee crisis, also hold this view.

By contrast, majorities in seven European nations – Hungary, Greece, Italy, Sweden, Russia, Germany and the Netherlands – believe immigrants increase the risk of terrorism in their countries.

Views on the topic are divided in the UK, Australia and Israel. In Poland, half (52%) of the public says immigrants increase the risk of terrorism, while 28% say they do not increase the risk of terrorism. But a substantial share in Poland (19%) also refused to respond one way or the other.

CORRECTION (May 2, 2019): The original data for South Africa was incorrect in the chart, “Majorities in many European migrant destinations think immigrants increase risk of terrorism.” These numbers have been switched to correctly show that 32% of South Africans say immigrants do not increase the risk of terrorism and 62% say immigrants increase the risk of terrorism.

Majorities in many countries think immigrants in the country illegally should be deported

Majorities in most immigrant destination countries surveyed support the deportation of people who are in their countries illegally.

In seven of the 10 EU countries surveyed, majorities support the deportation of immigrants living in their country illegally. In 2007, between 1.7 million and 3.2 million unauthorized, or irregular, migrants were estimated to be living in the 10 EU countries surveyed. The number of asylum seeker applications has increased following the 2015 refugee surge. Since then, the number of rejected asylum applications has increased substantially. Many of these rejected asylum seekers may continue to reside illegally in Europe.

Similarly, majorities in Russia, South Africa, Australia and Japan also support deporting immigrants living in those countries illegally.

In the U.S., public opinion is divided on the issue. About half (46%) of the public supports deporting immigrants residing there illegally, while the other half (47%) opposes their deportation. 2 The Center estimates 10.7 million unauthorized immigrants lived in the U.S. in 2016, which represented less than a quarter (23.7%) of the U.S. immigrant population. The number of unauthorized immigrants in the U.S. has been falling since 2007 and is now at levels last seen in 2004.

In Mexico, fewer than half (43%) say they support the deportation of immigrants living there illegally. In recent years, Mexico has experienced an increasing number of migrants entering the country without authorization from Guatemala, Honduras and El Salvador. Mexico has historically been a migrant-sending country: About 12 million people born in Mexico live outside the country, nearly all in the U.S. Among those in the U.S., nearly half are unauthorized immigrants.

In most countries surveyed, those on the right of the ideological spectrum are more likely to support deportation. Similarly, older people in several countries surveyed are more likely to support the deportation of immigrants living illegally in their countries (See Appendix B ).

Immigrants are foreign-born individuals living outside their country of birth, regardless of their citizenship. Refugees and asylum seekers are a subgroup within this broader population. The terms “immigrants” and “migrants” are used interchangeably in this report.

The terms “ asylum seekers ,” “ asylum applicants ” and “ refugees ”  are used interchangeably throughout this report and refer to individuals who have applied for asylum. Seeking asylum does not mean applicants will necessarily be permitted to stay in the country where they have submitted an application.

“ European Union ” in this report refers to the 28 nation-states that form the European Union (EU). At the time of the Pew Research Center’s Spring 2018 global survey, the UK was still part of the European Union.

• The survey question was not asked in other countries in 2014. ↩
• When the Center asked about this issue in the U.S. in a different way, a significantly lower share – 20% – said “undocumented immigrants should not be allowed to stay in the country legally,” while a large majority (79%) said “there should be a way for them to stay in the country legally, if certain requirements are met.” ↩

Sign up for our weekly newsletter

Fresh data delivery Saturday mornings

Sign up for The Briefing

Weekly updates on the world of news & information

• Immigration & Migration
• Immigration Attitudes

The Religious Composition of the World’s Migrants

Religious composition of the world’s migrants, 1990-2020, how the origins of america’s immigrants have changed since 1850, what the data says about immigrants in the u.s., facts on u.s. immigrants, 2018, most popular, report materials.

• Summary of findings: (French | Français)
• Summary of findings: (German | Deutsch)
• Summary of findings: (Italian | Italiano)
• Summary of findings: (Japanese)
• Summary of findings: (Spanish | Español)
• Spring 2018 Survey Data

901 E St. NW, Suite 300 Washington, DC 20004 USA (+1) 202-419-4300 | Main (+1) 202-857-8562 | Fax (+1) 202-419-4372 |  Media Inquiries

Research Topics

• Email Newsletters

ABOUT PEW RESEARCH CENTER  Pew Research Center is a nonpartisan, nonadvocacy fact tank that informs the public about the issues, attitudes and trends shaping the world. It does not take policy positions. The Center conducts public opinion polling, demographic research, computational social science research and other data-driven research. Pew Research Center is a subsidiary of The Pew Charitable Trusts , its primary funder.

© 2024 Pew Research Center

Immigration Issues in the United States Essay

• To find inspiration for your paper and overcome writer’s block
• As a source of information (ensure proper referencing)
• As a template for you assignment

Introduction

National concerns, self-identity, benefits of immigration, discussion and recommendations.

Immigration is a vital context of the American Dream and national identity. However, the outdated immigration system and globalization trends have led to a shift in perception of immigration as white nationalism is on the rise. There are socio-political concerns about the impact of immigration on self-identity and security of the United States. This report seeks to investigate these fears and compare them to the benefits for the country to determine if immigration should be curbed. A discussion is held regarding the perceptions and realities of international migration and its principles from a political and ethical perspective. Recommendations are then provided regarding reform of the national immigration system.

Immigration is the foundation of the United States as a country. It was built on the labor, ideas, and cultural melting pot of immigrants coming to the US in the hopes of achieving the American dream, finding a new life, and establishing a home for their families. This report seeks to investigate whether the United States should be defined as a nation of immigrants or should it take extensive efforts to curb foreign entry into the country. The United States has built its self-identity on immigration and its extraordinary socio-economic and technological progress depends on it, but in the realities of an unstable global society, measures should be taken to ensure neutrality and competence in immigration policy.

The US has one of the largest immigrant populations in the world, exceeding 40 million individuals, which is around 14% of the total population (Migration Policy Institute, 2019). In recent years, there has been a rise in nationalism which places the blame on the nation’s socio-economic issues on immigration and challenging the concept of the US self-identity. There is an overwhelming public debate and policymakers are commonly unable to reach an agreement on immigration due to the complexity of economic, security, and humanitarian concerns.

From an economic standpoint, anti-immigration critics consider immigrants to be taking away jobs and creating a strain on public services funded by taxes. Security is being challenged as a significant amount of violence and drug crime is attributed to immigrants, particularly those illegally entering the country. The current Trump administration was elected and continues to gather massive support on its strong anti-immigration policies, particularly targeting Muslim and Hispanic migrants for security purposes (Felter & Renwick, 2018).

The words of an identity crisis are unheard of in other parts of the world where everyone is classified based on their characteristics, family, or religion. Mukherjeee (1997) recalls “The concept itself — of a person not knowing who he or she is — was unimaginable in our hierarchical, classification-obsessed society” (par. 6). However, the United States and many countries in Europe have been or becoming increasingly culturally pluralistic and diverse.

As a result of populations and cultures intertwining, influences and opinions coming from many directions, and new generations being born into varied mixed backgrounds, identity is becoming lost. Some regions are experiencing violence, instability, and lack of direction due to immigration and pluralism (Chua, 2007). This is concerning for the core white population of the United States, not just due to the concern about the loss of control and privilege, but also the prolonged effect immigration has on national stability, value system, and institutions.

Immigration has been studied for centuries, and in the United States, it has been a vital part of cultural and economic development. First, it is considered to be almost universally by experts to be an economic driver to the country by contributing to demographic growth, human capital, talent acquisition, and innovation. If the immigrant flow is managed flexibly and efficiently, it can generate U.S. economic growth at times of relative stagnation.

A restrictive policy is detrimental as the legislation limits legal work-related immigration among highly-educated scientists and engineers as well as the less educated labor force in construction and agriculture that few core Americans would participate in (Orrenius, 2016). The mobility, specialization, and motivational drive of immigrants have proven continuously to be a significant economic benefit.

In terms of self-identity and national culture, immigration holds various benefits as well. It introduces new customs, beliefs, and ideas into the general folklore and traditions of the nation. Many of the things that are considered innately American have their origins from immigrants bringing these aspects into the country for centuries and celebrating them in local communities. Immigrants are also known for their rich and active culture and civic lives as they participate in the American democratic process and local communities, allowing for the establishment of international and tolerant networks.

Furthermore, it is important to consider that migrants often link together, and a healthy immigration base in the country that actively engages in the aspects described above ensures that incoming immigrants are more likely to do so and less willing to participate in radical or criminal activity (McCarthy, 2018).

In a modern liberal society, free movement is considered to be an inalienable right, which if limited would provide a precedent for limitation of other human rights. However, these rights are realistically only observed within country borders. International migration is often done to improve lives and those of their families; therefore, instilling a system of migration control would be coercion, that has historically and will continue to produce violence at the borders. This not only applies to border checkpoints and building the “Wall”, but various aspects such as measures that peaceful migrants attempt to gain entry into the country and threats that they face once settled down, for both legal and illegal aliens (Waldinger, 2018).

The reality is that there is no country without borders, and although such boundaries do imply discrimination, it is necessary to protect U.S. citizens. In a world where the number of immigrants exceeds the capacity of a country to take them in, choices must be made regarding admissions criteria of whom the country would be willing to accept as residents. This remains to be the primary socio-political debate from which the U.S. society will never find an escape. However, should be considered that immigration serves as both, a source for international integration and national fragmentation (Waldinger, 2018).

In the context of immigration, with its threats and benefits, it is evident that the immigration system requires comprehensive and intelligible reform. In her essay, Chua (2007) suggests, “if the U.S. immigration system is to reflect and further our ethnically neutral identity, it must itself be ethnically neutral, offering equal opportunity to [all]” (p. 3). Based on the discussion earlier, there should be more concrete criteria that would allow for a modern rules-based approach to immigration.

Most Americans support legal immigration and accept it as part of the American social contract despite the highly emotional nature of it. Historically, there have always been regulations in place regarding nationality and family ties, with very few people being able to afford passage to the United States. These rules were relaxed in the late 20th century, and it is ultimately left to the voters whether a new system should be re-established again.

The U.S. should bring forward incentives for immigration that were present in the past while laying down harsh penalties for violations of the law by individuals and companies. The aspects of immigration that are commonly exploited such as birthright tourism should be eliminated. Meanwhile, incentives such as professional opportunities under a legal status and safety if following proper refugee procedures would help establish a competent system (Gray, 2019). Although there would be challenges and undoubtedly, debate, the system eventually will balance out if a non-ideological and politically correct approach is taken to reforming it.

Immigration is a critical issue in the current political agenda. There are legitimate national concerns regarding security and national identity. However, immigration brings tremendous benefits economically, socially, and culturally, allowing to form a unique melting pot that promotes inclusivity and tolerance while driving forward economic growth and innovation. Nevertheless, the United States had been built on immigration and it should not be curbed significantly, but rather strong measures taken in policy reform to incentivize legal and dedicated immigrants while eliminating those seeking to use it for enrichment or illegal purposes.

Chua, A. (2007). The right road for America? Washington Post. Web.

Felter, C., & Renwick, D. (2018). The U.S. immigration debate . Web.

Gray, M. W. (2019). America’s immigration policy needs an overhaul . National Interest. Web.

McCarthy, J. (2018). 5 ways immigration enhances a country’s culture . Global Citizen . Web.

Migration Policy Institute. (2019). Frequently requested statistics on immigrants and immigration in the United States . Web.

Mukherjee, B. (1997). American dreamer . Mother Jones . Web.

Orrenius, P. (2016). Benefits of immigration outweigh the costs . The Catalyst, 2 . Web.

Waldinger, R. (2018). Immigration and the election of Donald Trump: Why the sociology of migration left us unprepared … And why we should not have been surprised. Ethnic and Racial Studies, 41 (8), 1411-1426. Web.

• New Waves of Immigration to the United States
• The History of Korean American Immigration Experience
• The Impact of the Social Environment on Self-Identity
• Migration Patterns: American Immigration
• Policy Brief for Reducing Irregular Labor Migrants in Switzerland
• Immigrants in the US: Studying Public Attitudes
• Oral History: The True Story of an Immigrant Woman
• Coverage of Immigrants in the Israeli Media
• Travel and New Land: Immigration Experience
• "Modernity Here and Now" Analysis
• Chicago (A-D)
• Chicago (N-B)

IvyPanda. (2021, June 8). Immigration Issues in the United States. https://ivypanda.com/essays/immigration-issues-in-the-united-states/

"Immigration Issues in the United States." IvyPanda , 8 June 2021, ivypanda.com/essays/immigration-issues-in-the-united-states/.

IvyPanda . (2021) 'Immigration Issues in the United States'. 8 June.

IvyPanda . 2021. "Immigration Issues in the United States." June 8, 2021. https://ivypanda.com/essays/immigration-issues-in-the-united-states/.

1. IvyPanda . "Immigration Issues in the United States." June 8, 2021. https://ivypanda.com/essays/immigration-issues-in-the-united-states/.

Bibliography

IvyPanda . "Immigration Issues in the United States." June 8, 2021. https://ivypanda.com/essays/immigration-issues-in-the-united-states/.

24/7 writing help on your phone

To install StudyMoose App tap and then “Add to Home Screen”

Exploring Diverse Perspectives on Immigration: An Opinion Essay

Save to my list

Remove from my list

Understanding Immigration

The Economic Perspective

The social and cultural perspective, the security and political perspective, your opinion and conclusion.

• Migration Policy Institute - A research organization that provides valuable data and analysis on immigration trends.
• Pew Research Center - Immigration - Offers in-depth reports and statistics on immigration issues.
• UNHCR (United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees) - Provides information on refugees and asylum seekers worldwide.
• Brookings Institution - Immigration Facts and Policy - A collection of research and policy analysis on immigration matters.
• Frequently Requested Statistics on Immigrants and Immigration - Useful immigration statistics from the Migration Policy Institute.
• Cato Institute - Immigration - Features research papers and articles that offer libertarian perspectives on immigration policy.
• Heritage Foundation - Immigration - Provides conservative viewpoints on immigration issues.
• National Immigration Forum - Offers advocacy, research, and policy analysis on immigration reform.

Exploring Diverse Perspectives on Immigration: An Opinion Essay. (2023, Dec 19). Retrieved from https://studymoose.com/exploring-diverse-perspectives-on-immigration-an-opinion-essay-essay

"Exploring Diverse Perspectives on Immigration: An Opinion Essay." StudyMoose , 19 Dec 2023, https://studymoose.com/exploring-diverse-perspectives-on-immigration-an-opinion-essay-essay

StudyMoose. (2023). Exploring Diverse Perspectives on Immigration: An Opinion Essay . [Online]. Available at: https://studymoose.com/exploring-diverse-perspectives-on-immigration-an-opinion-essay-essay [Accessed: 11 Sep. 2024]

"Exploring Diverse Perspectives on Immigration: An Opinion Essay." StudyMoose, Dec 19, 2023. Accessed September 11, 2024. https://studymoose.com/exploring-diverse-perspectives-on-immigration-an-opinion-essay-essay

"Exploring Diverse Perspectives on Immigration: An Opinion Essay," StudyMoose , 19-Dec-2023. [Online]. Available: https://studymoose.com/exploring-diverse-perspectives-on-immigration-an-opinion-essay-essay. [Accessed: 11-Sep-2024]

StudyMoose. (2023). Exploring Diverse Perspectives on Immigration: An Opinion Essay . [Online]. Available at: https://studymoose.com/exploring-diverse-perspectives-on-immigration-an-opinion-essay-essay [Accessed: 11-Sep-2024]

• Exploring Diverse Perspectives on Racism: An Analysis of Public Opinion Pages: 4 (1001 words)
• The Immigration Debate: A Study of Diverse Perspectives Pages: 4 (1004 words)
• Exploring Diverse Historian Perspectives: Investigative Plan Pages: 5 (1363 words)
• Exploring Diverse Perspectives on Gender, Sexuality, and Pop Culture Pages: 5 (1394 words)
• Exploring Happiness: Diverse Perspectives and Practical Strategies Pages: 3 (849 words)
• Exploring Psychological Abnormality: Diverse Perspectives Pages: 4 (932 words)
• Navigating the Digital Frontier: Exploring Diverse Perspectives on Technology in Contemporary Society Pages: 3 (807 words)
• Challenging Perspectives on Same-Sex Marriage: An Opinion Essay Pages: 5 (1286 words)
• The Uniform Debate: Navigating Perspectives in the School Uniform Opinion Essay Pages: 3 (724 words)
• Navigating the Impact of Social Media on Public Discourse: An In-Depth Analysis of Diverse Perspectives and Influences Pages: 2 (576 words)

👋 Hi! I’m your smart assistant Amy!

Don’t know where to start? Type your requirements and I’ll connect you to an academic expert within 3 minutes.

Free IELTS lessons signup

• Academic practice
• General practice
• Task 1 Academic
• Task 1 General
• Task 2 (essay)

IELTS band 9 essay: immigration

Here you can find advice how to structure IELTS essay and IELTS model answer for immigration topic. Question type: reasons and consequences .

Here is the question card:

Immigration has a major impact on the society.

What are the main reasons of immigration?

To what consequences can it lead?

To write a band 9 essay you should first of all choose your arguments to answer the questions from the topic. You don't have to find some complicated ideas. Remember: you won't be judged upon the quality of your thoughts, you will be judged upon the quality of your writing. So even simple, but well-written arguments can often give you a band 9 writing .

• Reasons why people immigrate
• Results of immigration

Some of the possible arguments :

• Reasons of immigration :
• People want to live in a safe country
• People search better jobs with higher salaries
• People escape from wars/disasters
• Results of immigration :
• People’s expectations come true / don’t come true
• Immigrants face other difficulties
• Countries of destination have to give money to support refugees
• Overpopulation

How to structure my answer?

Of course, there are a lot of ways to organise this essay. But here is one possible way of structuring the answer to produce a band 9 essay :

Introduction : simply rephrase the topic and say what this essay is about. When your essay question asks you about reasons/consequences or causes/solutions, you shouldn’t try to describe all that in your introduction. Instead, state that you’ll describe them later in your essay.

Body paragraphs :

• paragraph 1: main reasons of immigration
• paragraph 2: main consequences of immigration

Conclusion : sum up the ideas from body paragraphs and briefly give your opinion.

Band 9 essay sample (immigration)

Immigration has a significant impact on the contemporary society. Each year, more and more people from all over the world decide to leave their home countries and move to another place. This essay will examine the reasons and the consequences of immigration.

In my view, the main reason of immigration is a strong desire of better life quality and safe future. A lot of people from so-called Third World move to developed countries in search of better employment opportunities, and therefore, higher incomes. Moreover, living in a wealthy country implies living in a country with stable economy, so risks of losing their savings also lessen. For example, labour migration from Mexico to the USA is caused by these facts. Other reasons that force whole families to cross borders are wars and various cultural conflicts in their homeland. Many people migrate, seeking security and safe future for their children. For instance, most of the refugees who arrived in the European Union were escaping from wars.

However, sometimes immigration causes more problems than it solves, resulting in negative consequences for both immigrants and their countries of destination. First of all, most of the refugees can’t find jobs because of the lack of language skills and difficulties in adaptation. That’s why the countries have to run various refugee assistance programs to help those people. But disproportionate burden of maintaining the immigrants leads to tension in the society. Secondly, not all of the refugees receive proper asylum, food and medical care. So they are at risk even after crossing the border. Finally, even highly qualified specialists, who seek better employment, often don’t get what they are looking for.

In conclusion, I think that people immigrate to have better life prospects. However, life after immigration may not always meet people’s expectations. So it’s very important to consider all the possible outcomes and decide whether leaving your homeland is worth it.

(315 words)

Useful vocabulary

better employment opportunities – opportunity to find a better job

burden of maintaining immigrants – difficulties in helping immigrants faced by the governments

country with stable economy – rich and safe country

to cross the border – immigrate

labour migration – when people migrate to find better jobs

refugee – person who is forced to leave his birth place because of war

refugee assistance programs – when the government gives to the refugees asylum and food

to seek better employment – look for better job

Third World – developing countries

to meet expectations – if something doesn’t meet your expectations, it’s not as good as you have thought

32+ Argumentative Essays Topics on Immigration with Prompts [+ Essay Outline]

• Dr. Wilson MN
• August 1, 2022
• Essay Topics and Ideas , Nursing

There are a lot of immigration issues that people are passionate about. If you care about the immigration and want to make a difference, then you should consider writing an argumentative essay on one of these topics. Here are some ideas on Argumentative Essays Topics on Immigration to get you started:

What You'll Learn

Interesting Topics On Migration

• Different Perspectives on Immigration Reform Essay Prompt: Over the past few years, people have moved to the United States for various reasons. Some have moved to the United States to reunite with their families, work, or look for safety.
• Arguments on Why Immigration Should be Stopped Essay Prompt: Immigration can be defined as the movement of an individual from one’s country of origin to set up new and permanent residence in another country. Immigration has been a pertinent issue in most countries, especially the United States.
• Effects of Immigration Essay Prompt: Immigration is moving from one place to another in order to live and work in that place. The history of immigration dates back to thousands of years ago when the first Africans arrived in Egypt.
• How does racism impact the way we view Immigration? Essay Prompt: In recent years, views of immigration in the United States have shifted with many Americans perceiving immigrants as a source of national prosperity, rather than an eminent burden. (Interesting Topics on Migration)
• Immigration, Essay Prompt: Consider any issues such as how to deal with illegal immigrants, how to encourage new, productive immigrants, cost of illegal immigrants.

As you continue,  thestudycorp.com  has the top and most qualified writers to help with any of your assignments. All you need to do is  place an order  with us . Select a Argumentative Essays Topics on Immigration and we will write the essau for you.

Argumentative Essay Ideas On Immigration with Prompts

• What Role Should The State Of Texas Play In The Immigration Policy
• No One Is Safe.’ How Trump’s Immigration Policy Is Splitting Families Apart Essay Prompt: In the past, people who immigrated to the US illegally and had criminal records were some of the most targeted, but now the Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) can pick up family members and separate them from their families.
• The economic impact of Immigration on the US economy Essay Prompt: Immigration has a significant impact on the United States economy. Immigration has enhanced economic development and has small to no effects on employment and wages for native-born workers.
• Describe Immigration Laws And Potential Illegal Immigrants
• Essay Prompt: You explore your position on the topic of immigration laws. Select an immigration law for this Discussion and consider whether or not that law is justifiable.
• The bad impact of Immigration on the U.S. economy. Essay Essay Prompt: Immigration is a hotly debated topic in the United States, especially in political circles. Over the years, millions of people have immigrated to the United States from all parts of the world and it has become a melting pot of cultures. (Interesting Topics on Migration)
• Impact of Immigration on American Cities Essay Prompt: The issue of immigration is a sensitive national topic in the United States. The topic’s sensitivity is fueled by several misconceptions about immigration and its impact on the United States. (Argumentative Essay Ideas On Immigration)
• Research Assignment on Enforcement of Immigration Laws Essay Prompt: Explain at least one challenge related to enforcing the laws at the state level. Provide an insight you had about the effectiveness of enforcement of laws. A Research Project On Migration.

Further read on Creative Synthesis Essay Topics & Ideas in 2022

If you care about immigration and want to make a difference, then you should consider writing an argumentative essay on one of these topics . Here are some ideas on Argumentative Essays Topics on Immigration to get you started:

Immigration Research Paper Topics

• Immigration is Good to America: Immigration Makes Americans Less Isolated Globally Essay Prompt: Incorporate analysis of the reading and somebody’s personal experience to make a clear and precise argumentative essay on immigration.
• Republican Party Restrictions on Immigration Law Essay Essay Prompt: The US president Donald Trump is from the Republican Party with the decision made following the policies of the party. Republican Party has a strong stand on restrictions on immigrants which have caused unrest to blacks and minority groups in the US.
• Discuss one specific issue position from either the Democratic or Republican parties’ platforms, indicating whether you agree or disagree.
• Why The United States Should Adopt An Open Immigration Policy Essay Prompt: Two Viewpoints explaining why Immigration Must Be Restricted to Protect American Americans Against Terrorists and why the United States Should Adopt an Open Immigration Policy.
• Liberal Critique And Reform Of Immigration Policy Essay Prompt: Immigration reforms have remained fundamental similar to civil rights and desegregation throughout the history of the united states (US). In the past centuries, immigration reforms have been greatly influenced by the civil rights movement. As noted, the civil rights movement was about winning full and…
• Immigration, Pluralism, and Amalgamation Essay Prompt: The world has significantly transformed into a global village mainly due to technological advancement that has made almost every part of the world accessible. Consequently, migration has become a common aspect of modern life. These changes have prompted different countries to establish immigration policies…
• Essay Prompt: In the current interconnected world, global migration has turned out to be a reality that affects approximately all countries across the world. With advanced modern means of transport, people find it easier, cheaper and more convenient to move from one nation to another searching for employment.
• How to Strengthen America’s National Security
• Essay Prompt: Enhancing border control and enforcement of immigration laws are the two primary ideas that can effectively manage the problem of illegal immigration in the US. (Interesting Topics on Migration)
• Immigration Policy Impact on Economic, Security & Humanitarian Policy Essay Prompt: The current immigration policy has a far-reaching impact on humanitarian, security, and economic aspects. For instance, Migrant Protection Protocols by former President Trump prevents the imprisonment of asylum seekers, especially women and children, until the hearing of their case.
• Should American Citizenship be a Birthright? Research Paper Essay Prompt: The belief that everybody born in American soil becomes subject to the jurisdiction, hence citizens of the United States was included in the Constitution in 1868, in the 14th amendment.

These are just a few examples of Argumentative Essays Topics on Immigration. If you can find a topic that is relevant to your audience and that you are passionate about, you will be well on your way to writing a great argumentative essay.

Bonus essay outline for your Argumentative Essay On Immigration

Start by filling this short order form order.studyinghq.com

And then follow the progressive flow. 

Having an issue, chat with us here

Cathy, CS. 

New Concept ? Let a subject expert write your paper for You​

Yet to start your paper have a subject expert write for you now, test our paper writing service for less, already began delegate the remaining part to our professional writers.

📕 Studying HQ

Typically replies within minutes

Hey! 👋 Need help with an assignment?

🟢 Online | Privacy policy

WhatsApp us

• A Beginner’s Guide to IELTS
• Common Grammar Mistakes [for IELTS Writing Candidates]

Writing Correction Service

• Free IELTS Resources
• Practice Speaking Test

Select Page

Immigration Topic [IELTS Writing Task 2]

Posted by David S. Wills | Aug 6, 2018 | IELTS Tips , Writing | 0

Today we’re going to look at a typical IELTS writing task 2 question about immigration. I will show you how to analyze the question , generate ideas and examples, structure your essay, and then finally write it. This question type is “discuss both views” but remember that the topic of immigration could be addressed in various ways for IELTS writing task 2.

Analyze the Question

Here is the question we will answer today:

Some people claim that immigrants should adopt the local culture when immigrating to a new country. While others think that they can establish a minority community instead. Discuss both views and give your opinion.

Let’s look first at some of the key words that can help us to understand what we should do:

• immigrants – people who have moved to a new country
• immigrating – the process of moving to a new country
• adopt – to begin to use something
• minority – meaning less than half; a small proportion of something

So what is this question about?

It is about whether or not immigrants should adopt the local culture or establish a minority community.

What do you need to do?

You need to (1) discuss both views and (2) give your opinion.

Choosing the Right Language

By now you have read the question and should be familiar with its meaning. You should have already noted down useful vocabulary from the question that you may want to use in your essay.

Remember: Don’t copy from the question. You can use some words or a short phrase, but don’t repeat the question in your essay.

Changing Word Form

• immigrant/immigrating -> immigration
• culture -> cultural
• adopt -> adoption

Think of Synonyms

It is also very important to have some synonyms handy to avoid repetition. It also makes your writing look much better to have a few carefully chosen synonyms for key words in the question.

• immigrants -> new arrivals/ newcomers
• local -> native/ regional
• establish -> create/ set up

A word I think is really, really useful for the topic of immigration and culture is “assimilate” or “assimilation”. This means the same as “adopt the local culture”.

And Don’t Forget Antonyms

Everyone knows that you need to be good with synonyms to do well in IELTS, but it also helps to know a few antonyms, too. (Antonym means the opposite of synonym.)

• minority -> majority
• adopt -> reject
• immigrating -> emigrating

By the way, it’s really useful to have a good dictionary or thesaurus for this sort of thing.

Generating Useful Ideas and Examples

When writing an IELTS writing task 2 essay, you need to be able to explore complex topics in an intelligent manner. As such, you need to be able to generate useful ideas and examples to use in your essay. It shows logical thought and will impress the examiner.

The first step is to fully understand the question. You cannot begin planning an answer until you fully comprehend the task. Go back to step one if you are unsure.

Next, you need to brainstorm . Brainstorming means thinking of lots of ideas. You can quickly think about or note down any ideas related to the question.

Here are my notes on the above question:

For – good for local culture (multiculturalism)

– makes life easier

– more job opportunities

– people will trust you more

– learn more about new country

Against – safer

– preserve traditions and language

– scary to mix

– fear of other people

– fosters strong sense of identity

If we look at the above list, we can clearly see some good ideas, and some bad ones. There are also some that would be easy to write about and some that would not be easy to write about.

When choosing ideas for your essay, ask yourself whether you (1) know enough about the subject and (2) have the language to describe it.

Pick just your very best ideas and then think of how to explain them. Can you cite examples, or give details? You must be able to elaborate in order to write a fully-developed paragraph.

Remember: It is better to describe one thing in detail than four things briefly. This is because it shows your ability to construct arguments and usual transitional phrases.

Here are some of my ideas from above, with the worst ones removed:

Developing Your Ideas

From the remaining two ideas in favour of adopting the local culture, I would probably choose to write about job opportunities .

But what could I say about job opportunities? What are some ideas relevant to immigration and culture?

• I could explain that assimilation to the local culture would increase job opportunities.
• This would then result in better quality of living for the immigrant.
• It would also be beneficial to society and the economy.
• I could then give a real or hypothetical example.

Learning to structure an IELTS writing task 2 essay is really easy. It have lots of articles on this topic here:

• IELTS Writing Task 2 Essay Structures
• Selecting Ideas and Structuring an Essay [IELTS Writing Task 2]
• Structuring an IELTS Task 2 Essay
• How to Structure a Paragraph
• IELTS Writing: Should I Write 4 or 5 Paragraphs?

You should be able to master the basics of essay structure in under a day. Just follow these instructions:

• Analyze the question
• Choose 4 or 5 paragraph structure 
• Generate several good ideas
• Decide on the order of your ideas
• Make notes on the content of each paragraph
• Write the essay

In the above sections, I have outlined steps 1-3, and now I will show you my notes, which make up steps 3-4.

Introduction – paraphrase question essay outline Para #1 – in favour of assimilation main argument: job opportunity explain Para #2 – in favour of minority community main argument: preserve traditions and language explain Conclusion – state my position and review para 1-2

Here’s a useful video about structuring IELTS essays

Sample answer.

Here is my sample answer to the above question about immigration.

As the world population grows and people become increasingly mobile, people are divided over the extent to which immigrants should attempt to assimilate into the local culture. This essay will look at the main argument from each side of the debate, and then suggest that a compromise is needed, wherein immigrants both assimilate and form a strong community. The people who argue in favour of immigrants assimilating into the local culture often point out that it increases the number of job opportunities available to the newcomers. Immigrants often find it difficult to find a job when they move to a new country, but by becoming part of the wider community, they open themselves to more possibilities. The immigrant will be able to improve his quality of life, as well as to contribute to the economy, so there are clear benefits from both the perspective of the immigrant and the local society. On the other hand, the people who think immigrants should form minority communities point to the preservation of cultural traditions and language. They believe that adopting the local culture would cause a loss of the immigrants’ original language and culture. Indeed, this is something that has happened all around the world, and it is not hard to find a Little Italy or Chinatown far from Italy or China. Therefore, it makes sense that immigrants form tight-knit communities in their new countries. In conclusion, it is clear that a balance needs to be sought between these two approaches to immigration, and so neither is entirely correct. Without assimilating into the local culture, immigrants may find it difficult to get ahead in life, but if they become completely immersed in the new culture, they might forget their roots and their language may disappear.

A Final Note

If you have followed my instructions above, you should have a pretty good essay!

Remember to leave a few minutes for editing at the end. Here’s a good checklist:

• Have I spelled all the words correctly?
• Is my grammar correct?
• Did I stray off-topic in any paragraph?
• Is my position clear from beginning to end?
• Did I completely answer the question?

If you are struggling with #2, you can pick up a FREE copy of my grammar textbook :

About The Author

David S. Wills

David S. Wills is the author of Scientologist! William S. Burroughs and the 'Weird Cult' and the founder/editor of Beatdom literary journal. He lives and works in rural Cambodia and loves to travel. He has worked as an IELTS tutor since 2010, has completed both TEFL and CELTA courses, and has a certificate from Cambridge for Teaching Writing. David has worked in many different countries, and for several years designed a writing course for the University of Worcester. In 2018, he wrote the popular IELTS handbook, Grammar for IELTS Writing and he has since written two other books about IELTS. His other IELTS website is called IELTS Teaching.

Related Posts

How to Write Informal Letters for IELTS

January 4, 2021

What Are the Common Mistakes when Taking IELTS?

February 5, 2018

Is IELTS Fair?

November 17, 2018

How to Pass the IELTS Listening

June 17, 2017

Leave a reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed .

Download my IELTS Books

Recent Posts

• Commas and Time Phrases
• Ambition and Success: Sample IELTS Essay
• Do the Advantages Outweigh the Disadvantages? – Advice About This Question Type
• Exams vs Continual Assessement [Model Essay]
• British vs American Spelling

Recent Comments

• David S. Wills on Writing Correction Service
• raquel on Writing Correction Service
• Lesson Plans
• Model Essays
• TED Video Lessons
• Weekly Roundup

50 Latest Immigration IELTS Topics

• Unlimited Task 1 checks Get all the feedback you need to keep improving your charts and letters.
• Unlimited Task 2 checks Practice and perfect your skills with essays.
• Personalized suggestions Know how to boost your score.
• Detailed mistakes analysis Get instant feedback. Spot every mistake.
• Topic ideas generator Get topic-specific ideas to enhance your writing.
• Vocabulary helper Get the right words for any topic.
• Progress tracking Track your writing improvements.

• Manage Account
• Best in DFW
• Life & Loss In Dallas
• Things to Do
• Public Notices
• Help Center

McCloskey: Can Harris and Trump get serious about immigration policy?

Introducing “beyond talking points,” an american middle podcast.

Contributing Columnist

1:30 AM on Sep 10, 2024 CDT

The presidential race is a toss-up, and some have suggested that the election will come down to policy. I hope that’s true.

The Trump and Harris campaigns need to get serious on policy fast. Voters too. Our country faces big challenges that won’t be solved with talking points designed to win your vote and not much else.

That’s why during the next nine weeks until the election, I am partnering with The Dallas Morning News to host Beyond Talking Points: An American Middle Podcast where we will sort through what the campaigns are promising and what America really needs.

We are starting with immigration. For nearly half a century, Gallup has asked American voters their opinion about the biggest challenge facing the country. This year, immigration tops the charts.

Get smart opinions on the topics North Texans care about.

By signing up you agree to our  Terms of Service  and  Privacy Policy

Depending on whom you talk to and where you get your news, immigration is the reason Americans’ wages are low and our economy is resilient, or it’s a national security threat and a source of our national strength. It’s the reason you are voting for Trump or the reason you never would.

The campaigns have their flash-in-the-pan, finger-in-the-air talking points ready. On Trump’s campaign website, the first two issues are, and I quote “1) Seal the border and stop the migrant invasion, 2) Carry out the largest deportation operation in American history.”

We know less about Harris. But in her DNC acceptance speech, she promised to “bring back the bipartisan border security bill that [Donald Trump] killed.”

What lies beyond the talking points is less clear. For example, there’s confusion as to whether Trump’s “mass deportation” is an empty slogan (like Mexico paying for the border wall, which it did not) or more or less a continuance of existing U.S. policy to deport felons and continue apprehensions at the border.

Or if “mass deportation” is actually what it sounds like: militarized, door-to-door raids of largely Hispanic communities where many immigrants have children who are citizens, have been living here peacefully for decades, and are suddenly rounded up in buses or sent to detention camps or dropped off in a different country, maybe one they are not even from.

This would result in an economic shock, not to mention a humanitarian crisis. On this, we’ve had our first deposit: More than 1,000 children remain separated from their parents following the atrocious parent-child separation at the border during the Trump administration.

Confusion also abounds with Harris. After all, not so long ago, as vice president, she was on record claiming the “border is secure” as border crossings surged to unprecedented levels following the pandemic. Harris’ eventual visit to the border as vice president came without any major change in the administration’s policy until this summer.

Arguably those disadvantaged by immigration’s economic effects are less-educated white men, who, according to the progressive handbook, are people of privilege, not victims. Who can blame them if they don’t trust Harris’ sudden change of heart.

Immigration is an issue that doesn’t lend itself to talking points or to easy solutions. Just ask Congress, which keeps coming up with comprehensive bipartisan immigration deals only to have them not get over the line. The last time we had comprehensive immigration reform was during the Reagan administration.

But it doesn’t mean that a serious policy solution on immigration is out of reach. In our first podcast episode I’m in conversation with campaign veteran adviser and economist Madeline Zavodny, whose interest in immigration began during her stint in Texas.

We talk about the pros and cons of both candidates’ approaches to immigration, what’s behind the recent surge at our southern border, the impact of immigration on domestic jobs and violent crime, what drives her crazy about campaign talking points (her answer may surprise you). We also talk about what public policy changes would help to address the complicated challenge of immigration in a country as big and diverse as ours.

Serious, comprehensive immigration reform needs to address three things. The first is border security. A country cannot be secure without border control. In every comprehensive immigration deal over the last two decades, this is the first plank often with triggers before the legal system is addressed. It’s not just the southern border, it’s also our visa entry and exit points, it’s drones, it’s personnel, it’s defining the levels at which point it’s “secured.” In my mind, there’s no question that Republicans have taken this part more seriously, which is why Harris is playing catch-up.

The second is legal immigration. What are the channels in the U.S. to enter legally? How are visas distributed (by skills or family connections)? How many are offered? How can we ensure that U.S. workers are not harmed by immigration? I tend to be of the belief that we should operate with a more skills-based system akin to Canada and that immigrants at all skill levels tend to benefit the economy — especially in the face of an aging population and a declining fertility rate in America.

The third bucket is the undocumented population already in the U.S. There are 11 million of them. Most comprehensive immigration plans offer a path to some type of legal status for them, sometimes with fines, fees or back taxes, sometimes toward citizenship or sometimes another lesser legal status, but still one out of the shadows. While America is allegedly warming up to the idea of mass deportation, I can think of a few things worse. The Trail of Tears and Japanese internment were popular until they were horrifying and something for which to atone.

America needs an immigration plan that addresses all three parts, akin to what was in the Gang of Eight bipartisan bill a decade ago. Only then can we secure the border, establish a sensible economic pathway for those to come legally and contribute to our country, and hold our heads high with our neighbors and friends for balancing justice and compassion.

Immigration is a complicated policy problem to solve, not a population to slander and scapegoat. Candidates need a plan beyond talking points, and voters need to understand the issue other than just taking a candidate’s word for it.

That’s what we will seek to bring you each week as we tackle the biggest issues facing the country. I believe that a more informed electorate can better hold both parties to account. Maybe this election can be about policy after all.

A new episode of Beyond Talking Points: An American Middle Podcast will drop every Tuesday from Sept. 10 to Nov. 5. Listen at dallasnews.com/elections-24-podcast or on any major podcast platform.

We welcome your thoughts in a letter to the editor. See the guidelines and submit your letter here . If you have problems with the form, you can submit via email at [email protected]

Abby McCloskey , Contributing Columnist . Abby McCloskey is the founder of McCloskey Policy consulting firm, a former U.S. Senate staffer, and policy director for two presidential campaigns. Her essays have appeared in The Wall Street Journal, The Washington Post, National Affairs, Politico, The Dispatch, The Hill, Forbes, and National Review.

The Point Conversations and insights about the moment.

• Share full article

David Firestone

Deputy Editor, the Editorial Board

Over 90 Minutes, Trump Descended to His True Self

For the first 10 minutes or so of Tuesday night’s debate, it looked as though the restrained version of Donald Trump might have shown up in Philadelphia, the one who learned his lesson from his failure to curb his impulses in the 2020 debates with Joe Biden. He stayed silent while Kamala Harris ripped up his economic plan, which she correctly noted was based on a tax cut for the wealthy and a sales tax on all imported goods. When it was his turn to respond, he accurately pointed out that the Biden administration had made no attempt to end the tariffs he imposed on China.

But it didn’t last, and no one who has watched Trump over the past decade thought it could. Within minutes, he descended from a discussion of tariffs into a description of immigrants — one he returned to over and over again during the evening — that could only be described as a form of nativist hysteria.

“They are taking over the towns,” he said. “They’re taking over buildings. They’re going in violently. These are the people that she and Biden let into our country. And they’re destroying our country. They are dangerous. They’re at the highest level of criminality, and we have to get them out. We have to get them out fast.”

This was the level of delusion that Harris and her campaign had clearly hoped Trump would demonstrate to voters, and it just got worse from there. “They’re eating the dogs,” he said, referring to Haitian immigrants in Springfield, Ohio — a particularly heinous calumny that began on social media and was spread by his running mate, JD Vance. “The people that came in, they’re eating the cats. They’re eating — they’re eating the pets of the people that live there.” When the moderator David Muir pointed out that local officials had seen nothing of the kind, Trump said he heard about it on television.

Throughout the evening, in moments just like that, Harris was able to do something that Biden had failed to do when he was campaigning for re-election: push Trump in ways that exposed his spattering of lies and wild fantasies.

This was even true about the frightening attempt on Trump’s life. There has been no evidence that it was politically motivated, but that didn’t stop Trump from claiming it was. “I probably took a bullet to the head because of the things that they say about me,” he said, referring to his false claim that the indictments against him were evidence of “weaponizing” the justice system.

And asked about his role in undermining the democratic process, he said it was actually Harris who had done so, by usurping Biden’s role atop the ticket. “You talk about a threat to democracy — he got 14 million votes, and they threw him out of office. And you know what? I’ll give you a little secret. He hates her. He can’t stand her. But he got 14 million votes. They threw him out. She got zero votes.”

The debate was an unqualified success for Harris not just because she was able to define herself and her plans but also because she was able to push a few buttons and let Trump show off his truest self.

Editorial Board Member

On Abortion, Trump Floundered in Fantasy Land

When running for office after taking away the reproductive freedoms of roughly half the American public, the best thing to do may simply be to lie about what you have done.

That was the political calculus made by Donald Trump during Tuesday night’s debate. His bald and outrageous lies about abortion and his role in overturning Roe v. Wade were fantastical, even for him. There’s lying, and then there’s the world of fairy tales, and he chose the latter.

Trump said Roe v. Wade had “torn our country apart” and that “every legal scholar, every Democrat, every Republican, liberal, conservative” wanted the issue to be sent back to the states.

This is a lie. A majority of Americans supported the protections for abortion under Roe and still do.

He accused Democrats of supporting killing babies. “In other words, we’ll execute the baby,” he said. This is another lie, and one of the ABC News moderators, Linsey Davis, called him on it. He accused Harris’s running mate, Gov. Tim Walz, of saying “execution after birth” is “absolutely fine.” This, too, is a lie.

Trump misled those who were watching the debate, saying he believes in “exceptions for rape, incest and the life of the mother.” Yet it is thanks to Trump that states have been able to enact abortion bans that include no such exceptions.

Vice President Kamala Harris, rightly, pointed out that a majority of Americans believe in a woman’s right to make decisions about her own body and pointed out the pain that has been caused so many women in Republican-led states since the Supreme Court’s decision.

Abortion bans are a losing issue for Republicans, and Trump did nothing to change that.

Advertisement

Patrick Healy

Deputy Opinion Editor

I’m Hearing Huge Relief From Democrats Over Harris’s Debate Performance

Within the first half-hour of the debate between Kamala Harris and Donald Trump, I heard from four veteran Democratic presidential campaign officials, and all of them had the same reaction to Harris: a strong and confident performance that often put Trump on the defensive, with the potential to win the face-off as he sputtered over abortion rights and students loans.

Harris went on offense from the start, as she strode across the stage to Trump’s podium and reached out, shook his hand and introduced herself. Her performance was — in pretty much every way — a total contrast to President Biden’s in the June debate, and if Trump had a playbook to win the debate, it wasn’t clear as he scrambled to fight back against her attacks over the economy, tariffs, in vitro fertilization and China.

Trump’s go-to line — “another lie” — probably pleased many in his MAGA base, but I’m skeptical it was persuasive for many undecided and swing voters. That’s because a lot of those voters have told The Times that they are tired of Trump’s complaining when they want to hear specifics about what he would do in office.

Time and again, Harris laid the bait, and Trump took it. “People start leaving his rallies early out of exhaustion and boredom,” Harris said at one point. When the ABC moderators tried to ask Trump about immigration, he said, “First let me respond to the rallies.” But Harris also found ways to send Trump off on tangents, like when he pushed the lie that migrants in Ohio are killing pets for food. The moderators fact-checked him, but he wouldn’t let it go. And then Harris lowered the boom.

“Talk about extreme,” she said, laughing.

The Democratic strategists were struck by how much Harris owned Trump, who raised his voice more and more as the debate unfolded. They saw her as strong but likable and substantive on the issues. As for Republicans, one Trump ally argued that the former president spoke with confidence and strength and that many voters would still be unforgiving of Harris over the Biden-era economy.

The first 20 to 25 minutes of a debate are often the most important part: America is a country with a short attention span where first impressions count, where politicians try to set the tone and tempo of a debate from the start, and you can often tell quickly if someone will have an off night. Trump is often at his most disciplined (relatively speaking) at the start of a debate; as time goes on, he tends to meander in his answers and get snappish.

In this case, though, whatever discipline Trump had fell away pretty quickly in the face of a Harris onslaught. If she came under pressure, it was from the ABC moderators who pressed her on her changes in policy positions like on fracking. But I’m skeptical that the pressure from a moderator’s question will break through to voters like the pressure that Harris subjected Trump to on abortion and his proposed tax cuts for the wealthy.

Michelle Cottle

Opinion Writer

Trump Is Provoking a Congressional Fight He Can’t Win

Donald Trump took time out from his pre-debate “ policy time ” on Tuesday to stick his out-of-joint nose into Congress’s fight over funding the government:

“If Republicans in the House, and Senate, don’t get absolute assurances on Election Security, THEY SHOULD, IN NO WAY, SHAPE, OR FORM, GO FORWARD WITH A CONTINUING RESOLUTION ON THE BUDGET,” he raved on Truth Social . “THE DEMOCRATS ARE TRYING TO ‘STUFF’ VOTER REGISTRATIONS WITH ILLEGAL ALIENS. DON’T LET IT HAPPEN — CLOSE IT DOWN!!!”

Such feistiness! Love to see it. Especially since the former president must know, or at least suspect, that he is spitting into the wind — shrieking at his minions to go hard on a poison-pill measure that has less chance of becoming law this season than JD Vance has of winding up the new V.P. of the Cat Fanciers’ Association . (The poison pill is a measure to require proof of citizenship to vote, even though the law already forbids noncitizens from voting, and Republicans have never shown any evidence that this is a problem.)

Then again, it’s not totally unreasonable for Trump to expect Republican lawmakers to blindly do his bidding. I mean, earlier this year, they tanked a serious bipartisan bill on what is ostensibly one of the party’s top priorities — border security — because Trump told them that doing so was in his electoral interests. Why not then force a government shutdown in pursuit of a measure that would cast further doubt on the integrity of our election system?

I’ll tell you why not. Because a government shutdown in the final stretch of a tick-tight, high-stakes election cycle would be political madness — especially if it looked as though the shutdown occurred not because of substantive disagreements over spending but because Trump was bullying his congressional team into indulging his delusions about election fraud. Again.

MAGA die-hards might be jazzed. The rest of the electorate, not so much.

Republican lawmakers may be loath to upset their nominee, but they value nothing above their own political fortunes. Most of them aren’t stupid enough to sign up for this kind of self-immolation.

Alicia P.Q. Wittmeyer and Rachel Louise Snyder

3 Questions: When Women Kill Their Abusers

Alicia Wittmeyer, Opinion Special Projects Editor: You’ve written about domestic violence for years. For your latest essay , how did you end up focusing on the legal consequences for women who kill their abusers?

Rachel Louise Snyder, Contributing Opinion Writer: When I was writing my book “ No Visible Bruises ” I heard over and over how we didn’t know the number of women who were in prison for killing someone who was abusing them. I found this startling; this seemed like such a basic statistic. After I spoke about this at Stanford Law School in 2020, the executive directors of the Criminal Justice Center — Debbie Mukamal and David Sklansky — pushed for a large-scale survey of women in prison for homicide, which became the basis for the piece.

Wittmeyer: What was it like being in a prison as a proctor instead of a journalist?

Snyder: It was so humbling. Debbie made me go through training about not harming people while you’re talking with them and, honestly, I think it’s forever changed the way I interact with people. For example, when I do these incredibly intense interviews now, I never get off the phone with someone without asking what their plan is to take care of themselves. Will they call a friend? Go to church?

Doing this in person mattered. Formerly incarcerated women who were our consultants said that inmates get surveyed ad nauseam, especially through the mail: all these faceless, nameless people asking for the worst moment of their lives. Stanford ensured that clergy and/or a social worker was available on survey days so that the women would have some emotional support.

Wittmeyer: I know the researchers hope to eventually expand their survey to every state in the country. Ambitious, important — daunting! Any sense of the states that might be next on their list?

Snyder: To some extent, it depends on where we get permission — getting permission to do in-person research is a whole complicated process that, in our case, took nearly two years (in part, because of Covid).

California, Florida and Texas contain a huge percentage of the women who are incarcerated for homicide nationwide. But Texas is complicated because its facilities are smaller, and a survey would require visiting more of them, so just logistically it’s difficult. There are states with certain laws that make them potentially interesting to us, like Oklahoma and Illinois, for example. But it costs money to do this kind of research, and no one wants to fund it, honestly.

As a society, we don’t like messy victims. The anti-domestic violence advocacy world prioritized resources for victims who don’t get convicted of committing crimes. Incarcerated women simply don’t have a ton of people on the outside really advocating for them among potential donors. So, in part, the next state will depend on who is willing to fund this research.

Jamelle Bouie

Opinion Columnist

JD Vance’s Outrageous Smear of Haitian Immigrants

Attracted by job opportunities around Springfield, Ohio, thousands of Haitian immigrants have migrated to the area in search of a better life. And while there have been real tensions — especially after a recent arrival caused a school bus crash that killed one child and injured 23 others — it is also true that the new Haitian community has revitalized a town that was on the path to terminal decline.

For every problem — the migrants have overwhelmed key city services — there are also opportunities for both newcomers and longtime residents. As my newsroom colleague Miriam Jordan detailed in a recent article, Springfield is a microcosm for all that is good, and difficult, about immigration.

Part of this story is a furious backlash. Some of it is ordinary and even understandable resentment, and some of it emanates from the ugliest corners of American life. Last month, for example, an armed neo-Nazi group marched through Springfield denouncing Haitian immigrants in a display reminiscent of the deadly “ Unite the Right ” riot in Charlottesville, Va., in 2017.

A responsible leader would use the situation in Springfield — the anger and acrimony from some, as well as the decency and generosity from others — as an opportunity to try to bring people together and come, as much as possible, to a mutual understanding. A leader would see it as a chance to do democracy, to bring people together as equals so that they can figure out how to live together.

Senator JD Vance of Ohio is not that responsible leader.

Faced with troubles and tensions that could, under the wrong circumstances, escalate into outright violence, Vance fanned the flames.

In July, during a Senate committee hearing, Vance referred to Springfield as an example of how “high illegal immigration levels under the Biden administration” have raised housing costs, a highly contested assertion that rests on the false claim that the new Haitian residents of Springfield are undocumented. (The vast majority have legal residency under the Temporary Protected Status program.)

On Monday, Vance shared the outrageously false claim that Haitian immigrants in Springfield were abducting and eating their neighbor’s pets. “Reports now show that people have had their pets abducted and eaten by people who shouldn’t be in this country,” wrote Vance on X . “Where is our border czar?”

Vance was amplifying a lie that has its origins in a viral, and entirely fabricated, social media post spread by a Malaysia-based right-wing influencer . Springfield authorities say there are “no credible reports or specific claims of pets being harmed, injured or abused by individuals within the immigrant community.” The Trump campaign has not provided evidence to support the claim.

On Tuesday, Vance conceded that the smears may “turn out to be false” but urged his followers to continue spreading the lie.

Vance entered the political scene as a literary wunderkind of sorts. In highlighting this claim and spreading it to his followers on social media, he has shown that these days, he’s little more than a petty demagogue — the junior partner to another, even pettier demagogue.

The charge that a foreign people steal and eat pets is a classic attack meant to dehumanize its targets and legitimize persecution and removal. This is important to note because it comes just days after Donald Trump warned that the mass expulsion of immigrants from the United States — the centerpiece of his second-term agenda — will be a “ bloody story .”

JD Vance, it seems, is playing his part.

Kamala Harris Could Be in Trouble

In 20 years of covering presidential politics, I never saw a run of buoyant campaign rallies, boffo fund-raising, ecstatic social media and rank-and-file rapture for a candidate like Kamala Harris had in July and August, capped off by her Democratic convention speech. The next day, I sounded a note of caution about how joy is not a strategy , an argument that some readers disagreed with and some colleagues saw differently .

But a week after her speech, on Aug. 29, Harris faced her first real test — and, I’ve come to conclude, she fumbled it badly.

Her appearance that night on CNN — her first and only major interview since President Biden dropped out — was a missed opportunity: Harris gave canned or vague answers about why she had changed big positions from her 2020 campaign, she didn’t explain persuasively how she would lower the cost of living, and she responded blandly about what she would do on Day 1 as president. But most of all, I think, she didn’t leave strong positive impressions on undecided voters and lukewarm independents and Democrats.

The CNN interview looms large for me in part because Harris is running against a man who is unfit for office , who did enormous damage to the nation as president, who frequently veers into incoherence and lies in his news conferences and interviews — and yet who, for all that , is tied with Harris in leading polls .

Something seems to have happened in the past couple of weeks. As my newsroom colleague Nate Cohn wrote on Sunday: “Is Kamala Harris’s surge beginning to ebb?” CNN was one interview, not a trend, but I think it was revealing that a joy-driven campaign takes you only so far.

I checked in recently with our Times Opinion panel of young, undecided voters, which we are tracking through Election Day. Most in this group of 14 voters praised Harris’s convention speech; five said it made them more likely to vote for her . By contrast, seven said her answers on CNN made them less likely to vote for her.

“Harris did a poor job of explaining how she would ease inflation,” said Laura, a 20-year-old legal intern in Maryland, who was one of those less likely to support Harris after the interview. Lillian, a 27-year-old Virginian who gave Harris strong marks for her convention speech, could not come up with one positive takeaway from the interview.

For most in our group, Tuesday’s debate is critical in choosing a candidate. They want a better handle on who she is; they want stronger answers that build trust in her.

Big tent-pole events have an outsize impact in a tight race. The debate is one of Harris’s best chances to win over the doubters and undecideds and energize her momentum against Trump. No debate has ever felt more important.

Jeneen Interlandi

Sex Trafficking Is Not a Hoax, Even if the Conspiracies Usually Are

Tim Ballard, the former Homeland Security agent who started a global anti-sex-trafficking nonprofit group that became the subject of a hit movie and made him an international superhero, is facing extremely credible charges of sexual predation and assault. His entire apparatus — Operation Underground Railroad, which claimed to conduct undercover rescue operations across the world — appears to be a grim ruse designed only to help Ballard (and possibly others) get access to and abuse women and children.

The charges, laid out in a searing New York Times investigation by Mike Baker on Monday, are as horrific as they are heartbreaking: Not only did the operation not rescue anyone, but by using loads of money to entice possible traffickers, Ballard’s scam actually helped create a market for more trafficking than might otherwise have occurred.

The revelations make Operation Underground Railroad just one more in a long roster of false heroes and false narratives to populate the national sex trafficking discourse. The sheer volume of such stories — from Somaly Mam to Pizzagate — make it tempting to assume that the entire issue is a mere boogeyman, that sex trafficking really happens only in the heads of QAnon’s most fervent loyalists.

But that would be a mistake.

Here’s a true story: By the time he was caught by a cross-border task force this past April, a Florida pharmacist, Stefan Andres Correa , had traveled to Medellín, Colombia, 45 times in two years — to rape girls as young as 9. He paid a sex trafficker $75 to procure the children and according to court records offered $75 extra plus an iPhone to at least one of the girls “if she behaved.” The case captured headlines in the United States and Colombia for its egregiousness, but officials in both countries say that it was not an anomaly.

As The Wall Street Journal has reported , the rise of work-anywhere digital nomads triggered by the pandemic and the growing perception of Medellín as a city that is finally safe for tourists have conspired to touch off a boom in child sex trafficking. The operation that led to Correa’s arrest turned up perpetrators from Florida to Ohio as well as some 250 underage victims, fewer than 100 of whom have been found and brought to safety so far.

The investigators working to track down the rest are up against dozens of crime syndicates — including an offshoot of the original Medellín cartel — and a slew of modern tools (Airbnb, digital encryption, cryptocurrency) that have made traffickers exceedingly difficult to apprehend.

They are also up against a profound blind spot. Encouraged by exploitative politicians like Donald Trump, Americans routinely work themselves up into a frenzy over the moral character of people entering their country. (Murderers! Sex traffickers! Bad hombres!) They pay considerably less attention to the havoc their countrymen bring to other nations when they leave here.

This is never more true than during election season. In the coming weeks, as anti-immigration rhetoric reaches its familiar fever pitch, voters and politicians alike will wring their hands anew over the type and number of people seeking to penetrate the United States’ southern border. They should bear in mind that an untold number of American men are flocking in the opposite direction, to commit exactly the kind of heinous acts they are most terrified of.

Editorial Board Member, reporting from Raleigh, N.C.

The Lonely Anger of Democratic Women in North Carolina

On the campaign trail here in Raleigh, N.C., Gwen Walz and Doug Emhoff turned on the charm on Monday afternoon.

Walz, in a peppy Midwestern lilt, encouraged Democrats to bake cookies for the volunteers at the phone bank for her husband, Tim Walz, and Kamala Harris. “We need treats!” she said. “And the next night, go in and make the calls yourself.”

Emhoff, the second gentleman, joked that he and Harris had resorted to going for a walk on the tarmac recently to try to spend some quality time together. “Aw,” several women cooed at the event, in Raleigh’s City Market.

The crowd of some 200 Democrats — largely women — received Gwen Walz and Emhoff warmly. But many of them were also in a fighting kind of mood.

“Meow!” one woman cried out at the mention of JD Vance, a reference to his whining that “childless cat ladies” were running America. The Democrats inside the City Market roared, and their strong feelings were no surprise.

A day earlier, a secret audio tape was made public in which Mark Robinson, North Carolina’s Republican candidate for governor, vowed to ban abortions. They are already banned after 12 weeks in the state, thanks to the Republican supermajority that controls the General Assembly.

If only Americans considering staying home on Election Day could talk to North Carolina voters, whose lives have already been significantly affected by Trumpism.

Many Democrats here said they come from communities — and sometimes even families — in which they are far outnumbered by Republicans. “My ex-husband is voting for Trump,” Michelle Miles, 49, told me. “He’s always been controlling.”

Andrea Woodin, the secretary of the Franklin County Democrats, said she and her son, who is transgender, faced social ostracism for expressing their political views publicly.

“People yell at me from across the street,” Woodin said, adding that she home-schools her son for his safety.

In Southern battleground states like North Carolina, being a Democrat — or even just a woman — can take fortitude.

Thomas L. Friedman

The 23 Words Harris Needs to Say to Win

“Joe and I got a lot of things right, but we got some things wrong, too — and here is what I have learned.”

For my money, uttering those 23 words, or something like them, is the key for Kamala Harris to win Tuesday’s debate against Donald Trump — and the election.

Utter them, and she will hugely improve her chances to win more of the undecided voters in this tight race. Fail to utter them or continue to disguise her policy shifts with the incoherent statement she used in the CNN interview — that while her positions might have changed on fracking and immigration, “ my values have not changed ” — and she will struggle.

Madam V.P., if you say your positions have changed but your values haven’t, what does that even mean? And what should we expect from your presidency — your values or your actions? Our latest poll shows too many voters still don’t know.

It’s OK to say: “I learned a lot as vice president. I’m proud of our record of putting America on a sustainable path to a clean energy future. It will make us more secure and more prosperous. But I also see that we can’t get there overnight. For reasons of both economic security and national security, we need an all-of-the-above energy strategy right now. So you can trust that in a Harris presidency, America will continue to lead the world in exploiting our oil and gas advantages but we will do it in the cleanest way possible while making the transition as fast as possible.”

It’s OK to say: “President Biden and I inherited a cruel Trump border policy that included separating parents from their children. Maybe, out of an excess of compassion, we rolled it back too far. But we learned from it — we learned that only comprehensive, bipartisan immigration reform can give us the solution we need, controlling illegal immigration — while continuing to be a beacon for legal immigration. So our administration sat down with one of the most conservative Republicans in the Senate, James Lankford of Oklahoma, and hammered out a bipartisan immigration bill that would have done just that. And what did Trump do? He ordered Republicans to kill it, so he could keep exploiting immigration as a wedge issue. And you’re asking me if I’ve flip-flopped?”

Politicians always underestimate how much voters (and the news media) respect a leader who can say, “We didn’t get this quite right the first time, and I’m going to fix it” — something Trump can never, ever do. As James Carville recently put it in a Times Opinion guest essay, “A leader who can openly admit a change in her understanding would feel like a breath of spring air for a lot of voters.”

Katherine Miller

Opinion Writer and Editor

Which Trump Will Be on the Debate Stage With Harris?

Every Monday morning on The Point, we start the week with a tipsheet on the latest in the presidential campaign. Here’s what we’re looking at this week:

It’s debate week. Presidential debates are sometimes explosive and shape the terrain of elections (like the one in June, or that first Biden-Trump debate in 2020). And sometimes they are intense, but except for a single moment that becomes a shorthand for a candidate’s appeal or limitations, they fade quickly from memory. Tuesday night’s debate may be the only one between Kamala Harris and Donald Trump, who will meet for the first time. Will it change or harden how people view one or both of them, or will we be back where we began again this time next week?

As much as Harris’s newness and questions about her have shaped the last month, in the last week, Trump has called a news conference to revisit years-old sexual misconduct allegations against him and attack the women who lodged them, and posted at length about arresting various people if 2024 is like 2020, when he lost. That’s how Trump is, but is that how he’s going to be on the debate stage? More subdued, as he was in June, or more aggressive, as he was in 2020?

Last week, Trump’s meandering answer to a question about child-care costs wasn’t the first time he’s been asked about that in a public setting — he was basically asked the same question at the June debate and replied about something unrelated. The first debate ended up being consumed by President Biden’s awful performance and questions about his presidency, and voters’ expectations of Trump can seem fairly baked in, but not always. How he is on Tuesday could also shape the next few weeks in big ways.

On Sunday, the latest Times/Siena poll hit and, with Harris down a couple of points, there’s been some nervousness about choices her campaign has made in substance and strategy, though it’s hard to know anything certain in a race this close. On Tuesday, one of the more complex things she has to deal with is Biden’s presidency, which has often not been popular, but from which she hasn’t distanced herself too much, and can’t significantly do so anyway, since she’s a part of it.

Theoretically, the debate will force the issue a little bit, since debates tend to deal with the economic and foreign policy issues of the moment. But it’s often hard to know whether voters are looking for specific policies or a sense of command. Sounding decisive and clear about why she’s making decisions a certain way might be just as important on a debate stage as how she approaches some policy issues or broader questions.

After the debate, Harris will attend the 9/11 memorial in New York on Wednesday, and Trump may as well; Harris will spend the rest of the week in the battleground states. But even though Trump’s public persona can overwhelm everything, by the end of Tuesday night, there really might be a clear contrast between them on subjects like the courts, gun control, artificial intelligence and NATO.

Jonathan Alter

Contributing Opinion Writer

Delaying Trump’s Sentence May Mean a Stiffer Penalty if He Loses

While sitting in the courtroom last spring for all 23 days of Donald Trump’s New York felony trial on charges of business fraud, I was skeptical that he would ever be imprisoned for his crimes. But I now believe that if he loses in November, he’s very likely to do time in a New York State prison, alone in a special wing secured by the Secret Service. Ironically, the justice that was delayed on Friday could be justice enhanced in the future.

If Justice Juan Merchan — an exceptionally wise jurist — had stuck to his Sept. 18 schedule, it’s hard to see how he could have sentenced a possible future president to anything more than probation. If he sentenced Trump to prison, it would have seemed highly political, even if it wasn’t, and would have probably helped Trump. And Merchan knows that if Trump wins, any decision to incarcerate the president-elect would almost certainly be viewed as impractical by a higher court.

But if Kamala Harris wins, the judge — who is clearly fed up with Trump’s shenanigans — will be free of political pressure and can impose an appropriately stiff sentence. In a letter and order Friday in which he delayed sentencing until after the election, Merchan said of the jury: “Their verdict must be respected and addressed in a manner that is not diluted by the enormity of the upcoming presidential election.” When he sentences Trump on Nov. 26, he will respect that jury. Undiluted.

I understand why supporters of the rule of law are disappointed by those political calculations. Ideally, politics should not enter into legal wrangling. In practice, though, the Justice Department has longstanding guidelines preventing prosecutions within 90 days of a federal election. Merchan has two good reasons for applying that standard to sentencing at the state level.

The first is that the district attorney, Alvin Bragg, decided in August to take no position on the sentencing delays. Bragg was trying to shield himself from political fallout, and Merchan was doing the same. His decision will be better received — even by Republicans — after the election.

The other complicating factor is that Merchan, like U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan in the federal election interference case, is still moving forward with his ruling on the impact of this summer’s Supreme Court decision on presidential immunity. On Nov. 12, Merchan will probably rule that the jury that convicted Trump on 34 counts heard plenty of convincing evidence unrelated to Trump’s official duties as president and won’t throw out the verdict.

This will clear the way for sentencing, but if he had done it on the original date, Sept. 16, it would have been only two days before sentencing — not enough time for Trump’s defense lawyers to appeal. Depriving them of that time might have been grounds for reversal.

Instead, if Trump loses, we now have a clear path to prison time. Legal experts tell me Merchan has been scrupulous and thus Trump’s appeals are unlikely to prevail.

Democrats had hoped that a prison sentence would have kept Trump’s criminal conviction front and center going into the election. But Harris, a former prosecutor, can do that without the judge. The delay avoids a MAGA backlash that would have helped Trump narrow the gap in money and momentum.

Voters were always going to be the ultimate jurors. If they do their job properly, Trump may well end up in a prison jumpsuit.

Jonathan Alter is the author of a forthcoming book on the trial: “American Reckoning: Inside Trump’s Trial — and My Own.”

Jessica Grose

Trump’s Child Care Plan Is Nonsensical

On Thursday at the Economic Club of New York, former President Donald Trump was asked a question about whether he would commit to making child care more affordable. In a two-minute response , he offered a pile of nonsense. Here’s a brief snippet that honestly I didn’t even know how to punctuate properly:

We had Senator Marco Rubio and my daughter Ivanka was so impactful on that issue. It’s a very important issue. But I think, when you talk about the kind of numbers that I’m talking about, that, because the child care is child care, couldn’t, you know, it’s something you have to have it in this country, you have to have it. But when you talk about those numbers compared to the kind of numbers that I’m talking about by taxing foreign nations at levels that they’re not used to, but they’ll get used to it very quickly and it’s not going to stop them doing business with us.

Apparently, what he’s saying here is that he would make child care more affordable by raising tariffs on imports, though he did not explain how that would work.

Trump’s running mate, JD Vance, also answered a question about child care expenses this week, from the conservative media founder Charlie Kirk. While Vance originally suggested that extended family should help care for children — an answer that left much to be desired — he elaborated on X , outlining a more substantive, realistic set of policies.

Credit where it’s due: I think a $5,000 child tax credit, which Vance has endorsed , is a good idea. It’s worth noting, however, that Vance skipped a recent vote for a bill that would have expanded the child tax credit , so, his commitment to the policy is questionable.

His other argument, about there being a “broken educational pathway” that makes it difficult for young people to become child care providers, is more complicated. Licensing requirements vary by state, and some states have negligible formal requirements for child care workers . At the least, there should certainly be some kind of formal training in early childhood development and basic safety, including CPR.

It is a positive sign, overall, that child care is an issue that’s front and center — new polling from the First Five Years Fund shows that 89 percent of voters “want candidates to have a plan or policies ready to help working parents afford high-quality child care.” Vance is at least engaging with real-world policy — a bare minimum for a serious candidate — while Trump is off in La La Land with Marco and Ivanka. It’s an understatement to say this isn’t a priority for him, and it probably wouldn’t be in a second Trump term.

The Storm Clouds Gathering Over New York’s City Hall

For nearly a year, Mayor Eric Adams of New York has mostly swatted away questions about the flurry of federal investigations surrounding him.

On Thursday, however, the news that federal agents had seized the phones of several top Adams officials changed everything. The action suggests that there are now three investigations into officials of Adams’s campaign or administration by the United States attorney for the Southern District of New York.

One appears to focus on the city’s police commissioner, Edward Caban. Federal officials have seized his phone.

Of interest to federal investigators in a separate investigation is the deputy mayor for public safety, Philip Banks; First Deputy Mayor Sheena Wright; and her partner David Banks, the city’s schools chancellor and a brother of Philip Banks. Federal investigators have also searched the home of a third Banks brother, Terence Banks, who is a consultant.

In a previously known case, the U.S. attorney’s office is investigating whether Adams or his campaign aides accepted illegal foreign donations from Turkish officials in exchange for special favors at City Hall.

None of these officials has been charged with a crime, and seizure of a phone is far from a criminal accusation. But this is not business as usual in New York’s government. Federal investigators had examined former Mayor Bill de Blasio’s fund-raising activities but cleared him of criminal wrongdoing. They never seized his phone, something federal investigators did in Adams’s case. The last time the city faced the possibility of a looming scandal this great was arguably in 1986, when several officials in the administration of Mayor Ed Koch were convicted or forced to resign amid a bribery scheme involving parking violations.

New York deserves an explanation from Adams, something more than the simplistic “stay focused” he has offered as a response. He has yet to describe how his administration can properly serve the city while its core leadership is under severe federal scrutiny.

Two of the officials involved — the schools chancellor and the police commissioner — oversee the most essential parts of New York City government, including the education of nearly a million children. The public needs assurances that city government will continue to function despite the investigations, and in its best interest.

The gathering clouds over Adams’s City Hall are now too ominous to ignore.

Paul Krugman

The Fed Needs to Pull the Plane Up

Pull up, pull up!

Friday morning’s employment report was highly anticipated; many people thought it would make the difference between a quarter-point and a half-point interest rate cut at the Federal Reserve’s next meeting .

In the event, the report was meh — a soft but not disastrous reading on employment but no further rise in unemployment. In themselves, these numbers pretty much let economic analysts believe whatever they want to believe.

But the August report was only one of five major releases since last Friday, and the combined message of these reports was: Cut, cut, cut, cut, cut.

Last Friday we got the latest numbers on the Fed’s preferred measure of inflation. It’s running slightly above 2 percent, the target rate, but we know that this small overshoot largely reflects measured housing costs , which are a lagging indicator.

On Wednesday we got two reports. One, on job openings , showed a labor market that is continuing to weaken and is now a bit looser than it was before the pandemic. The other was the Beige Book , an informal survey by regional Federal Reserve banks, which showed a weakening economy with low inflation.

And on Thursday we got data on productivity and unit labor costs . Labor costs tend to be the stickiest, hardest-to-cure piece of inflation, but they’re up only 0.4 percent over the past year, thanks to muted wage growth and high productivity growth.

Put these five reports together, and they tell us two things.

First, we’ve won the war on inflation — and we did it without a recession or a large rise in unemployment. The pessimists and prophets of stagflation were completely wrong.

Second, the Biden boom — and yes, it was a boom, with remarkable growth in both G.D.P. and employment — is losing steam. Things had to level off eventually, but the deceleration is striking. The Fed has been trying to steer between two risks: the risk of cutting too fast and reigniting inflation and the risk of cutting too slowly and allowing the economy to slide into recession. Well, the balance of risks has clearly shifted: There’s now much more danger of doing too little than of doing too much.

So the Fed should do the full half-point cut. We’ve achieved our soft landing; don’t ruin it by moving too slowly to pull the plane’s nose up.

Sarah Wildman

Opinion Staff Editor

The Indelible Work of One Hostage’s Mother

Over this last terrible weekend, as the Goldberg-Polin family buried their son and brother, Hersh, in Jerusalem, 330 days after his abduction by Hamas into Gaza, I thought of the efforts of his mother, Rachel Goldberg, to make Hersh a presence for audiences the world over, bringing us into her home. We knew his soccer team, his love of music and atlases and world travel. We learned of his dry, sarcastic humor, how he was witty without being mean. How he was kind. We knew the family and saw ourselves in their story.

The intensity of public mourning for Hersh is a testament to both mother and child, both connected and disconnected from the reality of being the grieving parent. The exceptional work that Ms. Goldberg did to make Hersh personify a family’s suffering is a window into the depth of responsibility we all feel to our children, outside of politics, of nationality, of identity. The sense that we are in control, that we can fix things for our kids, that we must. It is connected, in this case, to a sense of Jewish community. But it is also connected to personality — Ms. Goldberg’s; that of her husband, Jon Polin; and Hersh’s. It’s connected to our sense of self.

Watching Ms. Goldberg pursue her son’s freedom, and that of all the hostages, day after day after day, I long felt that there was something akin to the cancer parent in pursuit of an elusive cure. The idea that the sheer force of will as a mother can change the story line. Ms. Goldberg put that struggle before the world, cut herself open for all of us, insisted that the world invest as much as she did in her son’s return.

During our very first conversation, on Oct. 11, Ms. Goldberg told me the story she would go on to tell leaders the world over — about her son and his capture, the joy he brought her, the joy she wanted to regain. At the end, she stopped me suddenly; she wanted to say she had read my articles about Orli, the daughter I lost to cancer six months earlier. “I feel for you and the experiences that you’ve walked through,” she said that day, five days into her son’s captivity, as Hersh’s life and hers hung in the balance. “And I just wanted to mention, you know, one day, we could be friends waiting to happen.”

Not everyone can summon that kind of empathy and that kind of will. Certainly not in that kind of moment. As Douglas Emhoff, the second gentleman, said in remarks Monday night at a vigil in Washington for the hostages: “I don’t know that I would be as strong as Rachel and Jon if I were in their shoes. But right now, we all need to find that strength.”

The Big Problems With Trump’s Latest Economic Plan

Donald Trump’s latest economic idea, unveiled Thursday, is that he wants the United States to have a sovereign wealth fund “to invest in great national endeavors for the benefit of all of the American people.” But there are some big problems with this vision.

One is that a sovereign wealth fund — a government-controlled investment vehicle — is more than a little socialist. That’s not on message for Trump, who also said Thursday that his opponent, Vice President Kamala Harris, “embraces Marxism, communism and fascism.”

Another problem for Trump is that it’s not at all clear where the federal government would get enough money to build a big fund. (He, of course, wants the world’s biggest.)

The world’s biggest sovereign wealth funds are controlled by countries that built their funds with money from massive trade surpluses: Norway, China, Abu Dhabi, Saudi Arabia and Kuwait.

Trump said the money for the fund would come from the high tariffs he wants to impose on America’s trading partners and “other intelligent things,” which he didn’t specify.

“Other countries have wealth funds,” Trump said. “We have nothing.”

He said he envisioned the fund investing in highways, airports, manufacturing hubs, defense capabilities and medical research. That sounds like a step or two beyond anything the Biden administration has done on industrial policy.

More important, Americans might not be thrilled that tariffs — essentially sales taxes on imported goods — are going into what might seem like a slush fund. Trump didn’t talk about who would control the fund; the Constitution says no funds can be spent out of the Treasury except by congressional appropriation.

Trump told the Economic Club of New York audience that he would talk over his ideas with John Paulson, a billionaire investor who sat on the dais with him. When I asked Paulson about that afterward, he said he didn’t hear Trump mention him but did support the creation of a sovereign wealth fund.

Jesse Wegman

To Judge Chutkan, Trump Is a Defendant, Not a Presidential Candidate

“Chutzpah” is an indispensable Yiddish word. It translates roughly as “gall” or “nerve,” but it is illustrated most accurately by the parable of the man who murders his parents and then throws himself on the mercy of the court because he is an orphan.

That was all I could think of as I followed Donald Trump’s lawyers on Thursday morning, throwing their client on the mercy of the Federal District Court in Washington, where he is being prosecuted for multiple crimes related to the Capitol insurrection he incited on Jan. 6, 2021.

Thursday’s hearing, before U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan, was being held to determine next steps in the case after the Supreme Court’s shocking ruling in July granting broad presidential immunity for almost all official acts. Having refiled the four-count indictment against Trump to comply with that ruling, prosecutors were eager to move ahead and file briefs on the question of which of Trump’s acts on and around Jan. 6 count as official. But John Lauro, on the defense team, insisted that any forward motion in the case would be “enormously prejudicial” to the former president, given the “sensitive” pre-election period the nation is in. “There’s something unseemly about a rush to judgment,” he said.

Forgive me for spitting out my glass of milk, but are you kidding me? Babies have been conceived and born in the time since the Jan. 6 case last achieved any forward motion. That was back in December 2023, when Trump stopped the case in its tracks by appealing on the ground of presidential immunity. It was and is an absurd claim, devoid of any historical or constitutional support, and yet with the help of the Supreme Court’s right-wing supermajority, half of which he put on the bench, Trump managed to drag out litigation over the matter until July, when he won a more sweeping victory than anyone, including his own lawyers, expected.

Now that the delay has put this stage of the case just a few weeks before the election, he is arguing, in effect, that he should be immune even from due process, lest voters learn more about his efforts to overturn his loss in the 2020 election before they cast their ballots in 2024.

Chutkan was having none of it and made it clear there would be no special privileges for a presidential candidate. When Lauro said, “We’re talking about the presidency of the United States,” the judge responded, “I’m not talking about the presidency; I’m talking about a four-count indictment.”

Good for her. If anyone is politicizing this prosecution, it’s Trump, who considers gaming the legal system as his birthright.

This trial should have started and finished months ago, giving the American people a verdict in one of the most consequential prosecutions in the nation’s history. Instead, Chutkan is left to clean up the mess the Supreme Court, at Trump’s request, left her.

Zeynep Tufekci

Mosquitoes Suck, as Do the Diseases They Carry

Anthony Fauci recently disclosed that he was hospitalized after catching the dreaded mosquito-borne West Nile virus, telling Stat News , “I really felt like I’d been hit by a truck.”

Well, mosquitoes suck. And mosquito-borne illnesses — malaria, yellow fever — have long sucked for humanity. Cases of eastern equine encephalitis, another mosquito-borne illness, have recently popped up in Massachusetts. Some outdoor events in high-risk areas, such as Oktoberfest celebrations in Vermont, are being canceled.

Mosquito-borne diseases like these are widening their range partly because of climate change, but they’re still relatively rare in the United States.

This wasn’t always the case. Yellow fever, for example, caused multiple major epidemics in the United States , changing the course of history. But advances in science led to better understanding of its transmission and the development of a vaccine, as well as a public health response to eradicate mosquitoes in urban areas. The United States hasn’t had a major yellow fever outbreak since the one in New Orleans in 1905. And that history also points to what Americans need to do now, when faced with other mosquito-borne illnesses: We need a widespread public health response to eradicate mosquitoes in more densely populated areas and to place a renewed focus on developing new vaccines.

In addition, the best individual defenses are to use nets and screens to keep mosquitoes from entering indoors, to properly cover up as much as possible when outside — stuff those hiking pants into socks! — and to use a proper insect repellent. In many studies, DEET, Picaridin and PMD top lists of effectiveness.

I personally stick with DEET — it’s been around the longest, and thus is most studied. Yes, DEET has an unpleasant odor at first, but I’d rather smell that than contract a mosquito- or tick-borne illness, like Lyme. ( Picaridin seems like a good alternative, too, and lacks the odor.)

With time, I do truly hope that we will develop new vaccines. It’s easy to forget what it took for past successes against terrible illnesses, but the price of public health is constant vigilance.

Here’s Why Stock Indexes Sank on Tuesday

When the stock market has a bad day, as it did on Tuesday, experts come out of the woodwork to explain why “stocks fell.” A big move in the major stock indexes seems to require a big macroeconomic explanation, such as worries about economic growth.

In fact, by my calculation, more than a quarter of the decline in the S&P 500 stock index on Tuesday was caused by concerns about a single company, Nvidia, which supplies chips for artificial intelligence and other uses.

Nvidia lost $279 billion in market value on Tuesday, which was the biggest dollar loss for one company in one day in market history. Its sharp drop wasn’t mainly because of economic jitters. Traders seemed to be reacting to a report by Bloomberg that the Justice Department sent the company a subpoena as part of an investigation into whether it violated antitrust laws.

Looking slightly more broadly at Tuesday’s bad day, more than half of the S&P 500’s decline was accounted for by eight tech stocks. Aside from Nvidia, they were Apple, Microsoft, Amazon, Meta Platforms (the parent of Facebook), Broadcom, and two classes of shares in Alphabet (the parent of Google).

The “stocks fell” story about Tuesday is complicated by the performance of Berkshire Hathaway, among the 10 most valuable companies in the S&P 500. Its shares bucked the trend and rose fractionally (0.2 percent). Berkshire Hathaway, Warren Buffett’s company, does own a lot of Apple stock, but otherwise, it’s light on tech. Its holdings include Geico and Burlington Northern.

There are legitimate reasons to worry that economic weakness will hurt corporate profits and cause stock prices to fall from their elevated valuations. But that doesn’t seem to be primarily what happened on Tuesday.

Serge Schmemann

The Far Right Threatens the Unity of Germany, and the West

Historical memory is bound to shape the first reaction to the powerful showing of a far-right party in two German state elections on Sunday. Nonetheless, there is nothing specifically German in the appeal of populism and extremism, especially among populations confused and threatened by a complex, unstable and vaguely threatening world. It’s endemic in the former Soviet satellites, but familiar, too, in the most venerable democracies.

It was populism and extremism that won in Sunday’s elections in the neighboring states of Thuringia and Saxony, both in what was formerly East Germany. The Alternative for Germany (AfD), an anti-immigrant, anti-Islam, anti-European Union party that has been formally branded extremist in both states, came in first in Thuringia and second in Saxony, while a strange left-conservative populist hybrid, the Sahra Wagenknecht Alliance, known by its German initials, B.S.W., and named after the former Communist who formed it a few months ago, came in third in both.

That raises some problems, and many questions.

The immediate problem will be how to form governments in the two states. B.S.W., like every other party, has declared that it will not join in any coalition with AfD, so the center-right Christian Democratic Union, the only mainstream party to make a respectable showing in either state, will probably have to try to form coalition governments with B.S.W. and other left-wing parties. It won’t be easy.

One immediate question is what the results might mean for Germany’s critical support for Ukraine. Though at opposite ends of the political spectrum, AfD and B.S.W. have almost indistinguishable positions on the resentments they feed on, including immigration and Ukraine. Both are friendly to Russia and against supporting Ukraine. German foreign policy is shaped by the federal government, which is not likely to reduce Germany’s military or political support for Ukraine anytime soon. But a signal has been sent.

The rapid rise of the AfD in eastern Germany also raises inevitable anxieties born of history: Is Nazism coming back? The leader of the AfD, Björn Höcke, has not helped with his repeated use of Nazi rhetoric in his speeches, and many Germans have demanded that AfD be banned.

Another question, though, is whether extremism and populism are unique to Germany. Many former East European populations — those of Poland and Hungary come to mind — still nurture a resentment over the perception that they are somehow second-class members of Western society, that their way of life is threatened by alien social norms imposed by a distant European Union and by alien immigrants. And populism is hardly unfamiliar in Western democracies like France, Britain, and thanks to the MAGA movement, the United States.

In eastern Germany, that sense is intensified by the fact that the West is the same country. Thuringia was one of the states most devastated by the collapse of industries that followed the reunification of Germany, and though its economy has rebounded somewhat, it still suffers from a westward exodus, especially of young women. The AfD party successfully targeted young men with messages like: “Real men stand on the far right. Real men are patriots. That’s the way to find a girlfriend!”

Trump’s Misleading Attempt to Make Harris Responsible for Inflation

A new TV ad from Donald Trump’s campaign shows how desperate he is to tie Kamala Harris to President Biden’s economic policies, and how far he is willing to stretch the truth to make that point to voters who just aren’t buying it.

The ad, titled “The Debate We’ve All Been Waiting For: Harris vs. Harris,” shows Harris talking on a TV screen about high prices.

“Everyday prices are too high,” she says. “Food, rent, gas, back-to-school clothes.”

Then, on another TV screen beside the first one, she says, “That’s called Bidenomics.”

This goes on a few times, with Harris talking about the price of ground beef and housing, skillfully edited with a clip of her saying, “Bidenomics is working,” as if part of the same sentence.

FLASH: Multiple presidential campaign ads have run nationally on ABC during Clemson-Georgia so far including this Trump campaign spot -- pic.twitter.com/ppChtCkjwq — Medium Buying (@MediumBuying) August 31, 2024

But of course these remarks were not made at the same event, or even in the same year. She was talking about the high prices caused by the pandemic at an event last month in Raleigh, N.C. , where she acknowledged the financial pressure of inflation on middle-class families and unveiled an economic plan to address it.

The clips about Bidenomics were from a speech in Washington in August of 2023, where she was promoting the good news from the monthly jobs report that had come out that day. The full context of her remarks :

And as today’s jobs numbers make clear: Bidenomics is working. Last month, we created 187,000 new jobs. That means today — yeah, go ahead and clap. I don’t want to step on the applause. That means, today, 187,000 more Americans are able to go to work, to provide for their family and invest in their future. Today’s numbers reflect the point that President Biden has made many times: America’s economy is strong and experiencing stable and steady growth. In fact, since we took office, we have created more than 13 million new jobs. In two and a half years, we have created more jobs — more new jobs than any other administration has created in four.

Harris, now running her own campaign, won’t be using the word Bidenomics anymore; it will be uttered only by Republicans, trying to blame her for the post-pandemic rise in prices. That hasn’t been very successful so far. As a recent Washington Post poll shows , only about a third of Americans believe she had significant influence on Biden’s economic policies.

But Republicans won’t be mentioning the 15 million jobs created during the Biden administration, the robust stock market or the dwindling remains of inflation. Instead, following the standard Trump method, they will just issue a series of misleading, distorted ads.

In Harris’s Ads, Project 2025 Is No Longer a Joke

Every week on The Point, we kick things off with a tipsheet on the latest in the presidential campaign. Here’s what we’re looking at this week:

Donald Trump will speak to the Fraternal Order of Police board of trustees on Friday in North Carolina, then hold a rally near Wausau, Wis., on Saturday. Tim Walz will be in Pennsylvania on Wednesday and Thursday. After a fairly busy Labor Day weekend, Kamala Harris’s plans are so far light for the week — but presumably both she and Trump will be prepping for next week’s debate.

On Thursday, Judge Tanya Chutkan will hold a status hearing in the federal Jan. 6 case, in which Trump is still charged with four felony counts, after a variety of filings from both Trump’s team and prosecutors last week. We might find out more about what, if anything, will happen with the case before the election.

Just to give you a sense of how soon the election is in a world of absentee and early voting: In North Carolina, officials will begin mailing absentee ballots on Friday. That’s basically the earliest that happens, but over the next few weeks, more and more states will mail out absentee ballots or open early-voting locations.

One thing, tonally, that came up during the Democratic convention was the shift toward more jokes about Trump versus the very solemn and dark approach often taken by President Biden. That sometimes created jarring swings in tones, particularly during the nightly segments on Project 2025, which often were delivered pretty ironically. A specific policy agenda like Project 2025 can be either a serious problem or an object of joking derision for critics, but it’s harder for it to be both at the same time from the same person. On television, however, the Harris campaign is running a dark, non-joking ad about Project 2025 with a vintage voice-over that feels like something from the 1990s or 2000s.

As we get closer to the election, it can be hard to keep up with what to read. Here’s some informative reporting from the past week worth checking out: Jazmine Ulloa of The Times drove around Pennsylvania looking for Nikki Haley voters and interviewed them about their diverging plans for the fall. David Weigel of Semafor took a look at the Trump campaign’s strategy in embracing Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and Tulsi Gabbard. There was a great article by Richard Rubin of The Wall Street Journal on what Harris’s tax plans would actually mean.

Gail Collins

Whale Beheading, Bear Carcass Dumping and Trump Boosting, Oh My!

Our presidential folklore is awash with animal stories. Remember Franklin Roosevelt’s dog Fala? No? Well, it was a while ago. President Biden is a big dog lover, but his pets were exiled to Delaware after multiple biting episodes. Jill Biden brought in a cat to fill the void.

Kamala Harris has been photographed cuddling puppies, but if there’s going to be any Republican animal stories during the campaign this fall, chances are they’re going to be sort of unpleasant. Donald Trump doesn’t like animals — naturally, since they draw attention from him. And now he’s got a new supporter who’s famous for his run-ins with their corpses.

Yeah, Robert F. Kennedy Jr. once allegedly chain-sawed the head off a dead whale on a beach, bungee-corded it to the roof of his car and drove it five hours to the family home. Some years ago, Kennedy’s daughter Kick Kennedy called the episode “the rankest thing on the planet.”

People, does that remind you of anything? Back when Mitt Romney was running against Barack Obama, his son once told the story about a family vacation in which Romney put Seamus, their pet Irish setter, in a roof crate for a 12-hour drive to Canada. Apparently, Seamus weathered the trip fine, but the presidential campaign in 2012 was very boring . As a diversion, I decided to try to see how many times I could mention the story before Election Day. Diligent readers counted around 80 mentions.

How would you compare the whale incident with that? Does it make you miss Romney? Yes, he was boring, but we’ve certainly learned how much worse a candidate can be. Don’t forget: Kennedy also dumped a dead bear cub in Central Park. His explanation was that he’d found it on the side of a road and decided to take it home to refrigerate its meat. Then, upon realizing that he was late to a steakhouse dinner, he changed his mind and left the carcass in the park, creating a stir he called “amusing.”

Kennedy, you may remember, says he once suffered from memory issues because of a dead worm in his brain. He’s now supporting Trump for president, and Trump might even consider giving an administration job to his new pal.

No further comments seem necessary. Just remember that whale.

Frank Bruni

Why Kamala Harris Might Just Win North Carolina

When Vice President Kamala Harris started talking policy with a heavily promoted speech about voters’ top concern — the economy — where do you suppose she did it?

My home state, North Carolina. And my governor, Roy Cooper, was the Democrat chosen to introduce her on the climactic final night of the party’s convention.

But then Donald Trump stages a rally in North Carolina seemingly every other week — often enough that I’m terrified he’ll build and start hanging out at some Tar Heel analogue of Mar-a-Lago. He’s fixated on this place.

For good reason. North Carolina has 16 Electoral College votes — the same as Georgia, one more than Michigan and only one fewer than Ohio. And they appear to be in play. On Tuesday, the Cook Political Report moved North Carolina into the tossup category .

The state hasn’t voted Democratic in a presidential election since 2008, when Barack Obama won, but Joe Biden lost here in 2020 by only about 75,000 votes, or under 1.4 percentage points.

And 2024 is different. Political analysts here tell me that they’re struck by the burst of energy for the Harris campaign and its significant investment in the state, where, according to the Pew Research Center, about 23 percent of eligible voters are Black, in contrast to 14 percent nationally. They haven’t seen anything like it since 2008.

Additionally, Michael Bitzer, a professor of politics and history at Catawba College in Salisbury, N.C., noted that in the Republican presidential primary here, Nikki Haley received hefty percentages of the votes in urban counties even though her campaign by then was a lost cause. That suggests a potent anti-Trump sentiment among moderate Republicans and independents.

There’s yet another distinctive dynamic this time around. The slate of Republican candidates for statewide office is MAGA fury through and through. Lt. Gov. Mark Robinson, the Republican nominee for governor, is a firebrand with a history of misogynistic, homophobic, antisemitic and altogether deranged remarks . Michele Morrow, the Republican nominee for superintendent of public instruction, has suggested that Cooper, Biden, Obama, Hillary Clinton and Anthony Fauci should be executed for treason — and that Obama’s killing should be televised.

Asher Hildebrand, a fellow professor at Duke University’s School of Public Policy, said that while that extremism probably won’t “push too many voters to the polls for Harris, it very well might keep some Trump voters home.”

And in an election potentially decided by one measly percentage point, such disaffection absolutely could turn North Carolina blue.