Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

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

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.

Sign up for The Fulcrum newsletter

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

While Pledging To Clean Up Toxic Chemicals, EPA Guts Hundreds of Environmental Grants

EPA Administrator Zeldin speaks with reporters on Long Island, NY.

Courtesy EPA via Flickr.

While Pledging To Clean Up Toxic Chemicals, EPA Guts Hundreds of Environmental Grants

WASHINGTON – The Trump administration promised to combat toxic “forever chemicals,” while conversely canceling nearly 800 grants aimed at addressing environmental injustices, including in communities plagued with PFAS contamination.

In a court filing, the Environmental Protection Agency revealed for the first time that it intends to cancel 781 environmental justice grants, nearly double what had previously been disclosed.

Keep ReadingShow less
Policy Changes Could Derail Michigan’s Clean Energy Goals

New clean energy manufacturing plants, including for EV batteries, solar panels, and wind turbines, are being built across states like Michigan, Georgia, and Ohio.

Steve/Adobe Stock

Policy Changes Could Derail Michigan’s Clean Energy Goals

In recent years, Michigan has been aggressive in its approach to clean energy: It’s invested millions of dollars in renewable energy infrastructure, created training programs for jobs in the electric vehicle industry, and set a goal of moving the state to 100% carbon neutrality by 2050.

Gov. Gretchen Whitmer and other state officials aim to make the Great Lakes State a leader in clean energy manufacturing by bringing jobs and investments to local communities while also tackling pollution, which continues to wreak havoc on the environment.

Now Michigan’s clean energy efforts have seemingly hit a wall of uncertainty as President Donald Trump’s administration takes ongoing actions to roll back federal climate regulations.

“We’ve seen nothing less than an unprecedented, all-out assault on our environment and our democracy,” said Bentley Johnson, the Michigan League of Conservation Voters’ federal government affairs director.

The clean energy sector has grown rapidly in the United States since President Joe Biden signed the Inflation Reduction Act in 2022. Congress appropriated $370 billion under the IRA, and White House officials at the time touted it as the country’s largest investment in clean energy.

According to Climate Power, a national public relations and advocacy organization dedicated to climate justice, Michigan was the No. 1 state in the nation in 2024 in its number of clean energy projects; from 2022-2024, the state announced 74 projects totalling over 26,000 jobs and roughly $27 billion in federal funding.

Trump has long been critical of the country’s climate initiatives and development of clean energy technology. He’s previously made false claims that climate change is a hoax and wind turbines cause cancer. Since taking office again in January, Trump has tried to pause IRA funding and signed an executive order to boost coal production.

Additionally, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Lee Zeldin announced in March that the agency had canceled more than 400 environmental justice grants to be used to improve air and water quality in disadvantaged communities. Senate Democrats, who released a full list of the canceled grants, accused the EPA of illegally terminating the contracts, through which funds were appropriated by Congress under the IRA. Of those 400 grants, 15 were allocated for projects in Michigan, including one to restore housing units in Kalamazoo and another to transform Detroit area food pantries and soup kitchens into emergency shelters for those in need.

Johnson said the federal government reversing course on the allotted funding has left community groups who were set to receive it in the lurch.

“That just seems wrong, to take away these public benefits that there was already an agreement — Congress has already appropriated or committed to spending this, to handing this money out, and the rug is being pulled out from under them,” Johnson said.

Climate Power has tracked clean energy projects across the country totaling $56.3 billion in projected funding and over 50,000 potential jobs that have been stalled or canceled since Trump was elected in November. Michigan accounts for seven of those projects, including Nel Hydrogen’s plans to build an electrolyzer manufacturing facility in Plymouth.

Nel Hydrogen announced an indefinite delay in the construction of its Plymouth factory in February 2025. Wilhelm Flinder, the company’s head of investor relations, communications, and marketing, cited uncertainty regarding the IRA’s tax credits for clean hydrogen production as a factor in the company’s decision, according to reporting by Hometownlife.com. The facility was expected to invest $400 million in the local community and to create over 500 people when it started production.

“America is losing nearly a thousand jobs a day because of Trump’s war against cheaper, faster, and cleaner energy. Congressional Republicans have a choice: get in line with Trump’s job-killing energy agenda or take a stand to protect jobs and lower costs for American families,” Climate Power executive director Lori Lodes said in a March statement.

Opposition groups make misleading claims about the benefits of renewable energy, such as the reliability of wind or solar energy and the land used for clean energy projects, in order to stir up public distrust, Johnson said.

In support of its clean energy goals, the state fronted some of its own taxpayer dollars for several projects to complement the federal IRA money. Johnson said the strategy was initially successful, but with sudden shifts in federal policies, it’s potentially become a risk, because the state would be unable to foot the bill entirely on its own.

The state still has its self-imposed clean energy goals to reach in 25 years, but whether it will meet that deadline is hard to predict, Johnson said. Michigan’s clean energy laws are still in place and, despite Trump’s efforts, the IRA remains intact for now.

“Thanks to the combination — I like to call it a one-two punch of the state-passed Clean Energy and Jobs Act … and the Inflation Reduction Act, with the two of those intact — as long as we don’t weaken it — and then the combination of the private sector and technological advancement, we can absolutely still make it,” Johnson said. “It is still going to be tough, even if there wasn’t a single rollback.”

Sign up for The Fulcrum newsletter

Keep ReadingShow less
A Missed Opportunity

Broken speech bubbles.

Getty Images, MirageC

A Missed Opportunity

en español

In a disappointing turn of events, Connecticut has chosen to follow the precedent set by President Donald Trump’s English-Only Executive Order, effectively disregarding the federal mandates of Title VI of the 1964 Civil Rights Act.

Keep ReadingShow less
World Vaccine Congress Washington Tackles Anti-Vaccine Rhetoric in U.S. Politics

The World Vaccine Congress Washington is held at the Walter E. Washington Convention Center, April 23, 2025

(Erin Drumm/Medill New Service)

World Vaccine Congress Washington Tackles Anti-Vaccine Rhetoric in U.S. Politics

WASHINGTON—A vaccine policy expert challenged attendees of the World Vaccine Congress Washington to imagine a deadly disease spreading in various places around the country. We have the tools to stop it, but lawmakers were instead debating whether or not to use them.

In fact, that describes what is currently happening across the United States, according to Rehka Lakshmanan, M.H.A.

Keep ReadingShow less