America's Immigration Future Is a Binary Choice, So the Right Must Embrace Mass Deportations and a Non-Creedal View of American Identity
Source: John Daniel Davidson. "America’s Future Is Either Mass Immigration Or Mass Deportations." October 29, 2026. thefederalist.com
The Gist
The author says the US will either have mass immigration or mass deportations, depending on who is in power, and Democrats clearly favor the former. He argues that Republicans must accept strict enforcement, even against sympathetic people like a conservative Christian visa overstayer, and drop the idea that anyone who embraces American ideals can become American. In his view, American identity is built over generations with low immigration.
Conclusion
Conservatives must accept strict immigration enforcement (including deporting visa overstayers, a near-moratorium on immigration, and a closed border) and abandon the creedal or propositional view of American identity, because without this they cannot offer a coherent case against the left's mass-immigration agenda.
Premises
- Democrats are committed to mass immigration, open borders, non-enforcement, and a halt to deportations whenever they regain power, so the left's policy is effectively fixed.
- Because the parties' positions are polarized, the country will have either mass immigration or mass deportations depending on which party holds power, with no stable middle ground.
- The case of Samuel Sey, a visa overstayer who was sympathetically defended by self-styled hawkish conservatives, shows that many on the right are not committed to mass deportations when enforcement affects people they see as cultural allies.
- This squishiness stems from a creedal or propositional view of American identity (anyone can become American by embracing the founding ideas), which makes enforcement against sympathetic individuals seem unjust.
- No foreigner has a right to become an American, and the burden is on advocates of immigration to show that admitting people benefits America, not just the individual.
- After decades of effectively open borders and mass legal and illegal immigration, the immigration system is corrupt and failing, and, as in 1924, a long pause on immigration is needed so assimilation can occur.
- American identity is forged across generations under conditions of minimal immigration, and cannot be acquired simply by adopting an ideology.
Assumptions
- The binary of mass immigration versus mass deportations is exhaustive; no durable moderate or compromise policy is possible.
- Reactions to one case (Sey) are representative of broader conservative attitudes toward deportation.
- The creedal view of American identity is what logically drives opposition to strict enforcement.
- Current immigration levels are destroying the country, and the 1924 restriction is a successful precedent applicable today.
- Strict enforcement should apply equally regardless of an individual's religion, politics, or cultural affinity.
- A coherent right-wing position requires a consensus on identity, and that consensus must be non-creedal.
- Sympathy for an individual case necessarily indicates opposition to deportation as policy.