The migration crisis at the southern border could shape the 2024 election, according to a leading British weekly. It argues that President Biden faces a test that could keep Donald Trump from returning to the White House if he can address the border pressure effectively. The Economist notes that the issue remains central to American politics and deserves close attention as voters decide the nation’s next leadership path.
Back in 2016, Trump rode a wave of discontent about the border, promising to restore order and claiming illegal crossings had reached a record pace. Those assumptions about the scale of illegal immigration were challenged at the time, yet the topic continued to dominate political debate. The weekly argues that the situation has evolved since then and that the crisis is now more acute than in the past.
It points out that while the pandemic did dampen travel for a period, restrictions lifted and migration surged again once normal movement resumed in 2021. The cumulative migrant flow since then has grown far larger than before the lockdown, reshaping the domestic political landscape.
Immigration levels exceed major city populations
As Biden assumed office, public opinion reflected mixed sentiments about Trump-era immigration policies. The aggressive family-separation measures previously associated with those policies alienated many voters and shifted sympathy toward newcomers. Yet, the Economist observes that since 2021, more than 3.1 million newcomers have entered the United States, a total that surpasses the population of Chicago. The shift in policy during 2022, aimed at tightening entry rules for asylum seekers, has been cited as part of the administration’s recalibration rather than a straightforward reversal of immigration priorities. [Economist]
What may go unseen by many watchers is that Biden has adopted some of the same entry constraints that defined the prior administration. His reluctance to concede on controversial concessions has shaped public perception, with polls showing lingering confidence in Republicans on immigration reform, according to the weekly analysis. This remains a meaningful political edge for the GOP in the current climate. [Economist]
“Biden should view this as a potential opening.”
Analysts describe a link between border policy and broader aid debates, noting that Republican leadership in the House has tied new funding for Ukraine to immigration concessions. The Biden team regards supporting Ukraine as strategically vital, even amid domestic migration concerns. The Economist argues that Biden could treat the border challenge as a strategic opportunity to refine policy proposals and build bipartisan support that could stabilize the political equation. [Economist]
The report highlights the friction surrounding proposals from the House majority, including measures that would allow the indefinite detention of migrant families. Democrats argue that those demands are aimed more at obstructing Ukraine aid negotiations than at genuine immigration reform, and they see the tactic as a bluff used by Trump supporters to pressure the administration. [Economist]
According to the Economist, Biden should call this bluff, roll up his sleeves, and pursue a practical path to resolve border issues. A credible, humane, and effective plan could bolster his electoral prospects by reducing volatility on a topic that deeply animates voters. [Economist]
Meanwhile, reports from Politico, citing Republican senators, indicate that Trump is urging lawmakers to resist a bipartisan immigration deal, intent on making border politics the centerpiece of his campaign. The story underscores the persistent polarization around the issue and the high stakes involved in future legislative moves. [Politico]
The broader context includes ongoing debate over how best to balance border security with asylum traditions, humanitarian concerns, and economic realities. The country watches as lawmakers weigh the trade-offs and voters decide who they trust to manage a policy arena that touches families, communities, and national security. [Economist; Politico]