Poll Indicates Growing Public Disapproval of Immigration and Customs Enforcement
A recent Harvard/Harris public opinion poll has unveiled that two-thirds of Americans now express disapproval of Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE). This significant shift in public sentiment is raising alarms among taxpayers and individuals concerned about neighborhood safety across the United States.
Political Rhetoric and Media Influence on Public Perception
The poll, conducted shortly after the shooting of anti-ICE activist Alex Pretti in Minneapolis, Minnesota, suggests that Democratic political rhetoric and misleading media reports are driving this change in American attitudes. A majority of voters initially supported President Donald Trump's efforts to enforce immigration laws, but the current climate indicates a reversal in public opinion.
Democrats in Congress are actively attempting to restrict ICE funding, which critics argue could undermine the agency's ability to perform its core functions. This political maneuvering is occurring against a backdrop of increasing public scrutiny and debate over immigration policies.
Impact on Crime Rates and Public Safety
Data from New York City reveals that individuals without legal status commit crimes at a rate three times higher than legal residents. For instance, last week, New York police apprehended four armed criminals, aged 18 to 20, who had robbed a couple on West 47th Street. Notably, three of these individuals were already subjects of ICE detainers, highlighting the intersection of immigration enforcement and criminal activity.
If efforts to hamstring ICE succeed, proponents of stricter enforcement warn that taxpayers could face increased risks, either from criminal activities or from the financial burden of welfare benefits consumed by those without legal status. An estimated 61% of households headed by individuals without legal status utilized federal welfare benefits in 2024, including programs like SNAP, Medicaid, and Head Start.
State-Level Opposition and Federal Response
Several state governors have taken strong stances against ICE. Virginia Governor Abigail Spanberger has ordered the dissolution of state law enforcement partnerships with the agency, while Illinois Governor JB Pritzker advocates for its abolition. Connecticut Governor Ned Lamont has publicly told ICE to "go home," and New York Governor Kathy Hochul introduced legislation to limit local police cooperation, labeling ICE as a "rogue federal agency."
In contrast, ICE Acting Director Todd Lyons testified to Congress on February 10 that over 60% of individuals arrested by ICE in the past year had pending criminal charges or convictions. This statistic underscores the agency's role in targeting individuals with criminal backgrounds, amid a surge in violent crime during former President Joe Biden's tenure and an unprecedented influx of illegal aliens.
Financial Implications and Policy Debates
Unless ICE deports a substantial number of those who entered unlawfully, overstayed visas, or were paroled during the Biden presidency, these migrants are projected to cost America $1.5 trillion over their lifetimes. According to the Manhattan Institute, immigrants aged 18 to 24 without a high school diploma represent the highest cost, consuming an average of $332,000 in lifetime welfare and health benefits per individual.
In New York City, Mayor Zohran Mamdani recently announced that approximately 31,000 migrants relying on the city's shelter system can stay indefinitely, at an estimated cost of $270 per day per family. This decision reverses former Mayor Eric Adams' 60-day limit, implemented to curb taxpayer expenses. Mamdani also barred ICE from accessing records of public benefit users, citing concerns about immigrant fears in applying for services like child care.
Call for Balanced Enforcement and Public Awareness
Betsy McCaughey, a former lieutenant-governor of New York State, argues that allowing ICE to perform its duties is essential for public safety and fiscal responsibility. She emphasizes that the agency's core mission is vital, and manufactured hysteria should not detract from its importance. As debates over immigration enforcement intensify, the need for a balanced approach that addresses both security concerns and humanitarian considerations remains a critical issue for policymakers and the public alike.
