from The Internationalist and International Institutions and Global Governance Program

Trump’s Latest Immigration Restrictions Are Ill-Advised—and Un-American

After being deported from the United States, Mexican immigrants cast shadows on a National Institute of Migration (INM) building in Ciudad Juarez, Mexico, on April 21, 2020.
After being deported from the United States, Mexican immigrants cast shadows on a National Institute of Migration (INM) building in Ciudad Juarez, Mexico, on April 21, 2020. Jose Luis Gonzalez/Reuters

Immigration benefits the United States while hewing to the nation's founding principles. 

April 27, 2020

After being deported from the United States, Mexican immigrants cast shadows on a National Institute of Migration (INM) building in Ciudad Juarez, Mexico, on April 21, 2020.
After being deported from the United States, Mexican immigrants cast shadows on a National Institute of Migration (INM) building in Ciudad Juarez, Mexico, on April 21, 2020. Jose Luis Gonzalez/Reuters
Blog Post
Blog posts represent the views of CFR fellows and staff and not those of CFR, which takes no institutional positions.

In my weekly column for World Politics Review, I argue that U.S. President Donald J. Trump's recent immigration restrictions are more about politics than public health.

Late on the night of April 20, President Donald Trump abruptly announced on Twitter that he would “temporarily suspend immigration to the United States” as the toll from the coronavirus pandemic continued to rise. Trump cast the decision as a response to COVID-19 and its economic devastation—“In light of the attack from the Invisible Enemy, as well as the need to protect the jobs of our GREAT American Citizens,” as he tweeted. The move, which caught his own administration off guard, elicited fevered commentary over his legal authority to do so, and its potential economic costs. After an outcry from business leaders, Trump retreated somewhat: His executive order signed on April 22 halted only new green cards, not guest worker programs, and would be reviewed after 60 days. If made permanent, the ban would reduce U.S. immigration by an estimated 30 percent.

More on:

Immigration and Migration

Coronavirus

Public Health Threats and Pandemics

Donald Trump

Globalization

It’s clear that public health played little role in the president’s decision. More than 600,000 Americans had already contracted the coronavirus—a third of all reported global infections—suggesting immigration would have negligible impact on the virus’s spread in the country. As always, Trump’s motivations were political. The pandemic was yet another opportunity to rile up his nationalist, populist base in the name of “America First.” It would also advance a core objective of nativists in his administration, not least senior adviser Stephen Miller: preserving the nation’s ethnic and racial composition, to ensure the continued societal dominance of its white population.

Read the full World Politics Review article here.

More on:

Immigration and Migration

Coronavirus

Public Health Threats and Pandemics

Donald Trump

Globalization

Creative Commons
Creative Commons: Some rights reserved.
Close
This work is licensed under Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0) License.
View License Detail
Close