In trying to win the public relations battle over the shutdown, Republicans have argued that the Democrats’ budget would grant health benefits to illegal immigrants. “That’s false,” NPR says. “This is false,” according to the Associated Press. “False,” declares Snopes.
The fact-checkers are wrong. The Republican claim is not amenable to a true-or-false “fact check” because it rests on a defensible opinion of who counts as an illegal immigrant. Furthermore, experts at organizations that count illegal immigrants use essentially the same definition of illegal that Republicans are employing in this debate.
JOHNSON AND ARIZONA DEMOCRATIC SENATORS SPAR OVER SWEARING IN ADELITA GRIJALVA
Immigration status may sound like a straightforward concept, but some noncitizens living in the United States without a valid visa nonetheless have been granted limited protections from deportation. They have “impermanent, precarious statuses,” in the words of the Pew Research Center. Examples include those with temporary protected status, Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals, parole, and open asylum claims.
While most illegal immigrants cannot directly access federal health benefits, in some cases, those with TPS or similar protection from deportation can do so. The One Big Beautiful Bill Act sunsets much of that access, but the Democrats’ proposed budget would restore it. Therefore, the claim that congressional Democrats want to give public health benefits to illegal immigrants is true, assuming that special statuses such as TPS and parole do not convert illegal immigrants into legal ones.
Should we assume that? Again, there is no objective answer because “illegal immigrant” does not have a formal definition in law. An informed opinion is still valuable, however. When the Center for Immigration Studies estimates the size of the illegal population in the U.S., we include those with limited protections from deportation, such as TPS-holders and parolees. In doing this, we are hardly alone. To our knowledge, every major organization that estimates the size of the illegal (or unauthorized or undocumented) population does the same. Here are some direct quotes from their methods statements.
Department of Homeland Security:
“Persons who are beneficiaries of Temporary Protected Status (TPS), Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA), or other forms of prosecutorial discretion … are included among the estimates of the unauthorized population …. Individuals who were paroled into the United States are considered to be unauthorized immigrants until they are admitted or otherwise acquire immigration status.”
“Many immigrants included in Pew Research Center’s estimate of ‘unauthorized’ immigrants have specific immigration statuses that protect them from deportation …. They are included in the Center’s estimate of 14 million unauthorized immigrants. These protected immigrants account for about 40% of our 2023 national estimate. Although these immigrants may be protected from deportation, their status could change if immigration policy shifts.” The Pew researchers go on to specify that TPS, DACA, parole, and others are included.
“Most unauthorized immigrants remain out of status, but some are able to either obtain a temporary status or a short-term reprieve from deportation. MPI’s estimates of the unauthorized immigrant population include several such groups: Recipients of Temporary Protected Status (TPS) or Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA), humanitarian parolees, recipients of deferred action other than DACA (such as those waiting in line for a U visa or Special Immigrant Juvenile Status [SIJS]), as well as asylum seekers with pending asylum applications. While the term unauthorized is an imperfect descriptor for noncitizens whom the U.S. government has granted the right of temporary stay, MPI includes these populations given their lack of a visa or other durable legal status, as well as the impermanence of statuses that could be revoked.”
“The [undocumented] estimates include a large number of noncitizens — likely well over a million — that are not immediately deportable but are not authorized to remain here permanently. The latter group includes DACA recipients, those with TPS (Temporary Protected Status), and asylum applicants that eventually will be granted legal permanent resident status.”
DEMOCRATS TARGETING SUSAN COLLINS’S SENATE SEAT EYE TRUMP TARIFFS AS WEAK SPOT
It is not surprising that the experts at these organizations have chosen to categorize noncitizens with limited protections as illegal immigrants rather than legal ones. After all, the legal immigration system established by Congress allocates visas that govern the terms of a noncitizen’s stay. When noncitizens present in the United States do not have a valid visa at all, it seems reasonable to consider them illegal, regardless of whether Congress has allowed authorities to defer their deportation.
In any case, some fact-checkers tackling the budget dispute do not grasp the subtleties related to the definition of an illegal immigrant. Others acknowledge the existence of noncitizens with limited protections but insist such migrants are considered “lawfully present.” In fact, aliens who are “lawfully present” can also be “inadmissible” at the same time. The strange and contradictory labels that float around in immigration law are not a substitute for thinking through the question of who should be considered an illegal immigrant. There is no perfect answer, but experts at nonpartisan organizations have coalesced around a reasonable one, and it implicitly supports the Republican position on the budget. Will any fact-checkers notice?
Jason Richwine is a resident scholar at the Center for Immigration Studies.
