In one of his clearer moments during the only debate of the 2024 election cycle between Donald Trump and Joe Biden, the sitting president asserted that he would be tougher on border control than his predecessor. Biden criticized Trump for the failure of a “bipartisan border deal” that would have increased Border Patrol funding and curtailed access to asylum. Biden accused Trump of urging Republican colleagues not to support the deal, prioritizing his political interests. Biden and senior congressional Democrats had spent months negotiating and making concessions to conservatives in an attempt to demonstrate control over the southern border. However, the far-right faction refused to grant Biden an immigration victory.
This debate performance marked a stark contrast from Biden’s stance during the 2020 debates, where he condemned Trump for his harsh immigration policies, including separating migrant families and deporting asylum seekers. However, Biden’s more recent statements suggested an attempt to continue Trump’s border policies, but he blamed Trump for the legislative deadlock.
Biden’s statements quickly became overshadowed by concerns over his poor debate performance and his declining health, leading him to withdraw from the race and pass his campaign responsibilities to Vice President Kamala Harris. Biden’s rightward shift on immigration, which began months before the debate, illustrated a broader trend within the Democratic Party, reflecting an alignment closer to Republican views on border control.
Trump, campaigning for a return to the White House, adopted an even more hardline stance against immigrants, declaring intentions for mass deportations and characterizing immigrants as detrimental to the country’s welfare. The Republican National Convention echoed these sentiments with strong anti-immigrant rhetoric.
This shift in immigration policy represents a departure from the GOP’s post-2012 election analysis, which recommended a more inclusive approach to attract Latino voters. Even Trump, initially critical of Romney’s harsh immigration policy, later capitalized on anti-immigrant sentiment with his 2016 campaign promises of border walls and stringent deportation measures. Trump’s immigration policies were largely shaped by a network of think tanks, nonprofits, and advocacy groups built by John Tanton, an influential figure in the immigration restriction movement.
Tanton, a Michigan ophthalmologist, founded numerous anti-immigration groups, including FAIR, CIS, and NumbersUSA, beginning in the late 20th century. Tanton’s advocacy was rooted in concerns about population growth and environmental sustainability, which he linked to immigration. Over the years, these groups have significantly influenced the national conversation on immigration, pushing restrictive policies from the fringes to the mainstream.
Despite various legislative setbacks, Tanton’s strategy of grassroots activism and influencing local politics proved effective. Anti-immigration ordinances passed in multiple states, eventually shaping national policy debates. Tanton’s organizations also played a pivotal role in obstructing federal immigration reform efforts in the mid-2000s, leveraging a network of supporters to pressure lawmakers.
Figures like Kris Kobach emerged as key proponents of these policies, drafting and defending numerous anti-immigrant laws. Although many of these laws faced legal challenges, the persistent efforts underscored the growing influence of Tanton’s movement.
Stephen Miller, a protégé of Sessions, further advanced these restrictive policies within Trump’s administration, translating campaign rhetoric into actionable policies. These included stringent immigration enforcement measures and controversial actions like family separations at the border.
Biden’s presidency initially brought hope for a more humane immigration approach. However, under sustained pressure from Republicans and a narrative framing immigration as a crisis, Biden’s administration adopted more conservative immigration policies.
Vice President Kamala Harris’s campaign continues to emphasize strong border measures, reflecting a significant shift in the Democratic Party’s approach to immigration. Public opinion has also moved towards favoring reduced immigration, influenced by ongoing campaigns from organizations rooted in Tanton’s legacy.
Project 2025, an initiative by the Heritage Foundation, aims to further tighten immigration controls under a potential Trump presidency, proposing drastic reductions in legal immigration. This aligns with Tanton’s long-term vision, emphasizing the power of public fears and anxieties to drive policy changes. Although Tanton did not live to see today’s political climate, his influence is evident in the current bipartisan consensus on strict immigration controls.