Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

Support for Mass Deportation Drops Well Below Half as People Consider Other Options

News

Support for Mass Deportation Drops Well Below Half as People Consider Other Options

Sharon Aguilera, 27, from Indiana, gathers with protestors on Highland Avenue in National City, San Diego County, on January 31, 2025, to demonstrate against anti-immigrant policies towards Mexicans living and working in the US and San Diego.

(Photo by Carlos Moreno/NurPhoto via Getty Images)

Polling on what to do with undocumented immigrants in the US has found seemingly contradictory results. When mass deportation is asked about by itself, some polls have found slight majority support. But that is not Americans’ preferred solution. When given another option – a path to citizenship – a substantially larger majority chooses that over mass deportation. Also, as people get more information about both options, support for mass deportation drops – to as low as a one-in-four.

Americans are clearly concerned about the number of undocumented immigrants, and when the only option they are given to address that problem is mass deportation, a majority may go along with it. For example, a September 2024 poll, which asked whether they favor “the mass deportation of undocumented immigrants,” found a small majority of 54% support. ( Ipsos/Scripps News) A more recent poll that asked the same question found the public divided 49% to 49%. ( NPR/PBS News/Marist, January 2025)


But asked whether they favor, “allowing immigrants living in the U.S. illegally the chance to become U.S. citizens if they meet certain requirements over a period of time,” a much larger majority of 70% were in support. ( Gallup, June 2024)

What is most relevant is what Americans say when they are given both options and asked which they prefer – which more accurately reflects the reality of the policy landscape. Given both options, majorities consistently prefer a path to citizenship over mass deportation. An October 2024 poll found just 33% support “deporting all people living in the U.S. illegally,” while 67% preferred “developing a plan to allow some people living in the U.S. illegally to become legal residents.” ( SSRS/CNN) Similar results have been found by the Public Religion Research Institute since 2013.

Even without both options being presented, providing more information about mass deportation reduces support to the below half. An August 2024 poll asked whether they would support “deporting immigrants who are living in the United States illegally back to their home countries even if they have lived here for a number of years, have jobs and no criminal record” – which accurately describes the majority of undocumented immigrants – and found just 45% in support and 55% opposed. ( Marquette University)

When people are given detailed information about both policy options and allowed to deliberate on arguments for and against each, support for mass deportation drops even further. An October 2024 survey by the Program for Public Consultation (PPC) provided respondents with a detailed briefing about undocumented immigrants and current deportation efforts, provided them descriptions of the mass deportation and path to citizenship policy proposals, and had them evaluate arguments for and against each. Finally, asked whether they prefer mass deportation, a path to citizenship with certain requirements, or neither option, just a quarter chose mass deportation (26%), including just 40% of Republicans. Overall, a bipartisan majority did not prefer mass deportation – instead choosing a path to citizenship (58%) or neither (11%) – including 58% of Republicans and 85% of Democrats. ( PPC, October 2024)

The overall drop in support for mass deportation as people are given more options and more information is driven primarily by Republicans, whose support goes from nearly nine-in-ten to just four-in-ten. When asked about mass deportation by itself, with no details about the policy, the Ipsos/Scripps poll found 86% of Republicans in favor. When given both options, but still no details about each policy, the SSRS/CNN poll found just half of Republicans prefer mass deportation rather than a path to citizenship (52% to 48%, statistically divided). In the more comprehensive PPC survey, just 40% of Republicans supported mass deportation. Among Trump voters, it was just 41%.

The underlying attitudes towards each policy help explain the public’s preferences. In the PPC survey, people evaluated arguments for and against both options before making their final choice. The arguments favoring mass deportation were found convincing by majorities overall, which explains the support for that policy when presented as the sole option. The arguments that these people are breaking our immigration laws, using public services, and lowering wages resonate with many Americans. However, the arguments against mass deportation and for a path to citizenship – that they are integral to our economy, and most have been living here peacefully for over a decade – did much better. Thus, when asked to choose, that is why a path to citizenship is the preferred choice.

Public opinion on mass deportation, it turns out, is quite clear when the question being asked is how the public most prefers to address undocumented immigrants. When people are given more information about the options available, the details of mass deportation, and given the opportunity to think through the options, support for mass deportation as the preferred solution drops well below half, overall and among Republicans.

Steven Kull is the program director of the Program for Public Consultation. Evan Charles Lewitus is a research analyst at Voice of the People.


Read More

How Trump turned a January 6 death into the politics of ‘protecting women’

A memorial for Ashli Babbitt sits near the US Capitol during a Day of Remembrance and Action on the one year anniversary of the January 6, 2021 insurrection.

(John Lamparski/NurPhoto/AP)

How Trump turned a January 6 death into the politics of ‘protecting women’

In the wake of the insurrection at the Capitol on January 6, 2021, President Donald Trump quickly took up the cause of a 35-year-old veteran named Ashli Babbitt.

“Who killed Ashli Babbitt?” he asked in a one-sentence statement on July 1, 2021.

Keep ReadingShow less
Gerrymandering Test the Boundaries of Fair Representation in 2026

Supreme Court, Allen v. Milligan Illegal Congressional Voting Map

Gerrymandering Test the Boundaries of Fair Representation in 2026

A wave of redistricting battles in early 2026 is reshaping the political map ahead of the midterm elections and intensifying long‑running fights over gerrymandering and democratic representation.

In California, a three‑judge federal panel on January 15 upheld the state’s new congressional districts created under Proposition 50, ruling 2–1 that the map—expected to strengthen Democratic advantages in several competitive seats—could be used in the 2026 elections. The following day, a separate federal court dismissed a Republican lawsuit arguing that the maps were unconstitutional, clearing the way for the state’s redistricting overhaul to stand. In Virginia, Democratic lawmakers have advanced a constitutional amendment that would allow mid‑decade redistricting, a move they describe as a response to aggressive Republican map‑drawing in other states; some legislators have openly discussed the possibility of a congressional map that could yield 10 Democratic‑leaning seats out of 11. In Missouri, the secretary of state has acknowledged in court that ballot language for a referendum on the state’s congressional map could mislead voters, a key development in ongoing litigation over the fairness of the state’s redistricting process. And in Utah, a state judge has ordered a new congressional map that includes one Democratic‑leaning district after years of litigation over the legislature’s earlier plan, prompting strong objections from Republican lawmakers who argue the court exceeded its authority.

Keep ReadingShow less
New Year’s Resolutions for Congress – and the Country

Speaker of the House Mike Johnson (R-LA) (L) and Rep. August Pfluger (R-TX) lead a group of fellow Republicans through Statuary Hall on the way to a news conference on the 28th day of the federal government shutdown at the U.S. Capitol on October 28, 2025 in Washington, DC.

Getty Images, Chip Somodevilla

New Year’s Resolutions for Congress – and the Country

Every January 1st, many Americans face their failings and resolve to do better by making New Year’s Resolutions. Wouldn’t it be delightful if Congress would do the same? According to Gallup, half of all Americans currently have very little confidence in Congress. And while confidence in our government institutions is shrinking across the board, Congress is near rock bottom. With that in mind, here is a list of resolutions Congress could make and keep, which would help to rebuild public trust in Congress and our government institutions. Let’s start with:

1 – Working for the American people. We elect our senators and representatives to work on our behalf – not on their behalf or on behalf of the wealthiest donors, but on our behalf. There are many issues on which a large majority of Americans agree but Congress can’t. Congress should resolve to address those issues.

Keep ReadingShow less
Two groups of glass figures. One red, one blue.

Congressional paralysis is no longer accidental. Polarization has reshaped incentives, hollowed out Congress, and shifted power to the executive.

Getty Images, Andrii Yalanskyi

How Congress Lost Its Capacity to Act and How to Get It Back

In late 2025, Congress fumbled the Affordable Care Act, failing to move a modest stabilization bill through its own procedures and leaving insurers and families facing renewed uncertainty. As the Congressional Budget Office has warned in multiple analyses over the past decade, policy uncertainty increases premiums and reduces insurer participation (see, for example: https://www.cbo.gov/publication/61734). I examined this episode in an earlier Fulcrum article, “Governing by Breakdown: The Cost of Congressional Paralysis,” as a case study in congressional paralysis and leadership failure. The deeper problem, however, runs beyond any single deadline or decision and into the incentives and procedures that now structure congressional authority. Polarization has become so embedded in America’s governing institutions themselves that it shapes how power is exercised and why even routine governance now breaks down.

From Episode to System

The ACA episode wasn’t an anomaly but a symptom. Recent scholarship suggests it reflects a broader structural shift in how Congress operates. In a 2025 academic article available on the Social Science Research Network (SSRN), political scientist Dmitrii Lebedev reaches a stark conclusion about the current Congress, noting that the 118th Congress enacted fewer major laws than any in the modern era despite facing multiple time-sensitive policy deadlines (https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=5346916). Drawing on legislative data, he finds that dysfunction is no longer best understood as partisan gridlock alone. Instead, Congress increasingly exhibits a breakdown of institutional capacity within the governing majority itself. Leadership avoidance, procedural delay, and the erosion of governing norms have become routine features of legislative life rather than temporary responses to crisis.

Keep ReadingShow less