‘What’s next for migrants?’: The fight for immigration reform after Trump’s midterm defeat

The midterm elections changed who held power in Washington. Democrats won control of Congress and captured governorships in important states, including Texas. The result weakened Trump’s support in both chambers and created a new opening for legislation. Immigration reform had been stalled while Trump promoted enforcement and rejected amnesty.

Before the election, Trump repeatedly said there would be “no amnesty for illegals.” After Democrats’ strong showing, he said he was willing to sit down and work with them on immigration. His softer tone encouraged advocates who had spent years organizing for legal status and an end to raids.

The opportunity was political, not yet a settled policy. Francisco Moreno warned Democrats not to repeat Barack Obama’s failure to pass reform. Advocates began discussing renewed street protests and broader legalization, while the approaching anniversary of Reagan’s 1986 amnesty gave their campaign a powerful historical reference.

Immigration reform means changing immigration laws and policies. In this article’s context, it mainly means creating legal status for undocumented immigrants who have built lives in the United States. Legalization matters because it can let people live and work openly, seek better jobs, and potentially pursue permanent residency and citizenship.

Legalization is different from deportation. Deportation is the government’s removal of a person from the country. Temporary protection is narrower: it may shield someone from removal or allow a limited period of lawful stay, but it does not automatically provide permanent residency or citizenship. These distinctions determine how secure a person’s future can be.

The article highlights Reagan’s 1986 law as an example of legalization. It granted qualifying immigrants legal status, opened a route to permanent residency, and eventually allowed citizenship. Advocates now want a broader solution for more than 10 million undocumented immigrants targeted by the Trump administration.

Immigrant advocates are seeking a major change in the government’s approach. They want an end to immigration raids and legal status for more than 10 million undocumented immigrants. Their goal is not simply to pause enforcement. It is to let people who have established lives in the United States live and work with greater security.

The proposed change would use legalization as its central mechanism. Legal status can open a route to permanent residency and eventually citizenship, as Reagan’s 1986 law did for qualifying immigrants. Advocates argue that this kind of recognition can help people work legally, earn more, buy homes, start businesses, and educate their children.

The current effort is still political rather than completed policy. After Democrats took control of Congress, advocates discussed returning to the streets and pressing lawmakers. Francisco Moreno urged Democrats not to repeat Obama’s unfulfilled promise, while Trump’s weakened position raised hopes for compromise.

Immigration policy is shared across the federal government. Congress writes and changes immigration laws, including laws that create legalization programs. The president leads the executive branch and sets enforcement priorities, while federal agencies implement those decisions. This division explains why election results can reshape both legislation and enforcement.

In practical terms, Congress could debate and pass a legalization measure. The president could support, negotiate, sign, or veto legislation and direct how existing rules are enforced. ICE, the Immigration and Customs Enforcement agency, conducts many federal immigration enforcement operations, including raids and arrests. The article refers to the raids and deportations associated with the Trump administration.

The midterm result changed the balance between these actors. Democrats gained control of Congress, while Trump remained president and said he was open to discussions. That created a possible compromise, but advocates still had to persuade lawmakers and confront an enforcement system they wanted stopped.

The article identifies more than 10 million undocumented immigrants as potential beneficiaries of a new legalization effort. That population is far larger than the nearly three million people who received legal status under Reagan’s 1986 amnesty. A modern program would therefore operate on a substantially broader scale.

The comparison also shows the historical importance of the earlier law. The Immigration Reform and Control Act gave legal status to people who had lived continuously in the United States before January 1, 1982. It created a pathway toward permanent residency and eventually citizenship. Migrants of Mexican origin were its main beneficiaries.

The proposed effort remained uncertain after the midterms. Advocates saw Democratic control of Congress and Trump’s weaker position as an opening, not a guarantee. They planned renewed public pressure, including protests against raids, while seeking a legal solution for the much larger undocumented population.

On November 6, 1986, Ronald Reagan signed the Immigration Reform and Control Act. The law granted legal status to qualifying undocumented immigrants and opened a pathway to permanent residency, followed eventually by citizenship. It was a major federal legalization program during a very different political climate.

The main qualification described in the article was continuous residence in the United States since before January 1, 1982. Migrants of Mexican origin were the largest beneficiary group because they were the country’s biggest immigrant population. The law ultimately legalized nearly three million people, allowing them to live and work with legal recognition.

The law remains central to today’s debate because advocates view it as a possible model. Its anniversary arrives as Democrats control Congress and Trump faces weaker political support. Advocates want a new program, but one that would address more than 10 million undocumented immigrants and end raids.

Legal status changed immigrants’ economic lives after the 1986 reform. Studies cited in the article found that incomes for workers who gained legal status rose by an average of 15% by 1992. Educational attainment also improved. Four in 10 Mexicans who obtained green cards moved into better-paying jobs.

The mechanism is greater security and access. Legal recognition can make it easier to work openly, pursue better-paid employment, invest in education, buy a home, and start a business. Women saw especially large gains: their earnings increased by 21% in the study cited. These changes also helped families send children to college.

The article links those individual gains to the wider economy. Immigrants contribute $1.6 trillion to U.S. gross domestic product. Advocates therefore argue that legalization is not only humanitarian. It can help millions produce more, earn more, and participate more fully in economic life.