The Best Political Argument for More Immigration Restrictions Just Failed

Alex Nowrasteh and his colleagues have spent a lot of time addressing the arguments raised by those who favor further restricting legal immigration to the United States. Their research on terrorism, crime, economic, fiscal, welfare consumption, and culture addresses specific arguments against liberalized immigration.

All those fit into a bigger strategy based on theories of why people are opposed to immigration. They are the understandable fear of border and immigration chaos, security concerns, and the untrue belief that the legal immigration system isn’t restrictive. Those concerns all explain much of the sharp move in public opinion toward immigration restrictionism in the run-up to the 2024 election that many of us saw rising years ago.

Political Concerns Over Immigration:

• Republican politicians worry about immigrants becoming permanent Democratic voters.
• The “Demographics as Destiny” theory—often linked to conspiracy theories—suggests increased immigration benefits Democrats long-term.

Shifts in Political Reality:

• 2024 election showed a high percentage of Hispanic voters (46%) supporting Trump, challenging the belief that demographic changes guarantee Democratic dominance.
• Past predictions of inevitable Democratic gains due to immigration have proven inaccurate, with more balanced Hispanic voting patterns emerging.

California’s Nativist Impact:

• Anti-immigration politics in 1990s California, including Proposition 187, pushed the state toward Democratic dominance.
• However, this shift wasn’t replicated nationally; states like Arizona, Texas, and Florida with strict immigration laws have not experienced similar GOP declines.

Assimilation and Party Affiliation:

• Immigrants and their descendants are assimilating well and show diverse political opinions, not uniformly favoring Democrats.
• Ethnic and racial identities are fluid, weakening assumptions about permanent voting blocks based on ethnicity.

Current Perspective:

• The GOP’s anti-immigration stance has not had the expected negative impact on their performance.
• The author now believes that immigrant assimilation into American politics suggests that immigration is less of a political wedge than previously assumed.

Read the full analysis: here

If you would like to speak with Justin, please let us know:

Josh Grossman
Cato Institute
Executive Dir. Communications & Marketing
pr@​cato.​org