In the Press: The Numbers Don't Add Up
Our comments to the media about the latest immigration news
1. Cartel labels, not new threats, drove the border watchlist spike
On Thursday, in the Washington Examiner, Anna Giaritelli reported that CBP “is on track to encounter more than 12,000 known or suspected terrorists” at the border this year — 16 times the highest annual total under Biden.
David Bier, director of immigration studies at the libertarian Cato Institute in Washington, said related CBP data do not show an uptick in criminal arrests. “It is worth noting that the [FBI terrorist watch list] for ports of entry includes U.S. citizens, so it’s not even a reflection of migration at all.”
2. A green card memo told a million applicants to go home first
On Monday, in the International Business Times, Francis Miñoza reported that a new USCIS memo meant legal immigrants already in the U.S. “must return” to their home countries to pursue permanent residency, a shift that could affect roughly one million pending applicants.
David Bier, director of immigration studies at the Cato Institute, described the change on X as “the most anti-legal immigration administration in U.S. history,” warning it could separate families and disrupt careers.
3. Trump’s housing math didn’t hold up
On Tuesday, in AOL, Joseph Zeballos-Roig reported that the Dallas Fed working paper attributed “30% of the rise in residential home prices” to illegal immigration — a distinct claim from Trump’s blanket 30% figure.
“US population growth has never been lower. It is only because of supply constraints that population growth increases prices,” David Bier, the director of immigration studies at the libertarian-leaning Cato Institute, wrote on X. “It isn’t immigration causing the price increase. It’s the short-run supply constraint, as the paper itself says.”
4. The 100-mile zone where the Fourth Amendment didn't apply
On Thursday, in Alternet, Thom Hartmann wrote that more than 213 million Americans lived inside a 100-mile border band that researchers had dubbed the “Constitution-free zone.”
That zone, first drawn by a federal regulation back in 1953, swallows 10 entire states and cities like New York and Los Angeles, and the libertarians at the Cato Institute, who are nobody’s idea of open-borders radicals, call it the “Constitution-free zone” and have gone to the trouble of mapping the checkpoints one by one.
5. Immigrants used less welfare than natives
On Tuesday, in WebProNews, Dave Ritchie reported that “immigrants consume 24 percent less in welfare and entitlement benefits per capita than native-born Americans,” per fresh Cato Institute analysis.
Cato researchers put it plainly: “Immigrants are less likely to enter the welfare system, less likely to remain on welfare for long periods, and less likely to age into the most expensive entitlement programs.”