Immigration tactics motivated voters, near and far from southern border
By JAZMINE ULLOA
Alongside the flowers, placards and other mementos placed at memorial sites honoring people killed by federal immigration agents in Houston, Minneapolis, and Biddeford, Maine, a new tribute appeared this week: “I Voted” stickers.
Immigration and the Trump administration’s confrontational enforcement campaign emerged as one of the most divisive and emotionally charged issues driving voters to the polls, according to interviews with dozens of voters before and after Election Day.
Yet unlike in the election cycles since President Donald Trump’s campaign in 2016, the conversation was no longer an abstract debate about chaos at the southern border.
Aggressive federal operations in cities, suburban neighborhoods and rural job sites across America disrupted morning commutes, grocery runs and daily routines, turning workplaces, residential streets and civic buildings into sites of volatile encounters.
“Saying he was going to secure the border is one of the reasons Trump got elected,” said Peter Polos, 73, a physician from Basking Ridge, New Jersey, who cast his ballot for the Democrat in a battleground House race in his home state. “But he didn’t say he was going to secure the border by knocking people down in the street, throwing them in a car, and taking them away.”
Democrats counted the Trump administration’s approach to immigration among the top issues that fueled their seismic victories across the country. Beneath those electoral gains, political strategists and pollsters from both parties suggested the shift had less to do with the Democrats’ vision for immigration policy and instead was a referendum on the administration’s aggressive enforcement tactics.
“It was a clear rebuke of Republican immigration politics, of the cruelty, of the disdain for brown skin,” said Julián Castro, a former Obama official and former mayor of San Antonio.
High-profile and sometimes deadly incidents brought the administration’s enforcement methods into sharp focus.
In Minnesota, where the Trump administration carried out Operation Metro Surge in January, federal agents clashed with bystanders near schools, detained residents with lawful status, and shot and killed Renee Good and Alex Pretti, two U.S. citizens and Minneapolis residents who were protesting immigration raids.
In North Carolina, Chase Sardeson, 23, an apprentice electrician in Raleigh who is an independent, recalled living in Charlotte when federal agents in Operation Charlotte’s Web fanned across immigrant enclaves in tactical gear. Salvadoran restaurants shut their doors, and street vendors selling mangoes abandoned their usual posts.
“I work in construction. I’ve worked with immigrants my entire working life,” Sardeson said, explaining why immigration was one of his top election issues. “These are some of the hardest-working guys I’ve ever met. They work three jobs to support a family.”
On Tuesday, Democrats won all statewide offices in Minnesota — including closely followed races for governor, the U.S. Senate and attorney general — and majorities in both state legislative chambers. In North Carolina, former Gov. Roy Cooper, a Democrat, flipped a Senate seat.
Heavily Hispanic counties along the border and across the country shifted dramatically back toward Democrats, particularly in Texas. In 2024, Trump won Zapata County in South Texas by 22 percentage points. On Tuesday, James Talarico, the Democratic candidate for the U.S. Senate, won by 41 points.
The politics of immigration have changed significantly over the past decade. During Trump’s first term, more Americans tended to view the issue more favorably in a backlash against his restrictive measures and separations of families at the southwestern border.
The trend reversed sharply during the Biden administration, when illegal border crossings reached record highs and Republican governors Greg Abbott of Texas and Ron DeSantis of Florida shuttled migrants to liberal cities. By 2024, a majority of Americans, including a growing number of working-class Latinos, favored decreased immigration and stricter enforcement.
Stephanie Valencia, the president of Equis, a research group focused on understanding the Latino electorate, said Democrats were now facing a “probationary period.” The Trump administration’s dragnet had cracked open a wide lane for Democrats, she said, but that the party would have to deliver on the issue and no longer avoid it.
“Both Biden and Trump got a piece of immigration wrong,” she said. “Voters have been clear on what they want: They want order, security and fairness.”
Trump and Republicans traded blame for their losses, splitting over Trump’s tariff policies and his decision to lead the country into an unpopular war in Iran that drove up prices. But there was little reckoning over the White House approach to federal immigration enforcement and policy.
Across the country, many Republicans remained steadfast in their support for Trump and his mass deportation campaign, describing the border closures and deportations as a long-overdue restoration of law, order and economic fairness.
“These individuals knew the risks, they knew that what they were doing was wrong,” said Daniel Johnson, 50, a property manager in Orlando, Florida. “So, it stinks. I do feel for them. It is sad, but I mean, it’s the rules that when you break the rules, there’s consequences.”
Yet Democrats, independents and even some GOP faithful saw federal overreach in what they described as indiscriminate enforcement, mistaken detentions, racial profiling and demonization of immigrants. The increase in arrests fueled anxieties not only among naturalized immigrants, but also among U.S. citizens who worried they might be perceived as being in the country unlawfully because of their appearance or accent.
Chuck Rocha, whose Latino-owned consulting firm consulted in 25 congressional races in Michigan, New York, Pennsylvania and across the Sunbelt, argued the shift on the issue did not merely happen organically.
Instead, a multimillion-dollar bilingual paid media strategy led by House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries targeted Latino voters, slamming Republicans on ICE overreach, high costs and corruption. Like many analysts, Rocha drew some parallels between the Democratic breakthrough in Texas to California’s watershed fight in the 1990s over a series of anti-immigrant propositions that helped flip the state blue.
But while that moment shattered Republican viability in California, this one was more nuanced. “These voters are not wed to the Democratic Party,” he said.
