
Republican Crackdown on Aid to Immigrants Would Hit U.S. Citizens
President Trump has vowed to end what he calls the 'waste of hard-earned taxpayer resources' by cutting off federal benefits for undocumented immigrants and ensuring that funding goes to American citizens in need.
Administration officials have said they would root out 'illegal aliens' who are living in federally-subsidized housing. The Agriculture Department has ordered states to enhance immigration verification practices used to determine eligibility for food stamps. And House Republicans just passed a tax bill that would limit certain immigrants from accessing Medicaid and Medicare, a popular tax credit for parents, and federal financial aid, among other benefits.
The actions amount to an aggressive attempt to curb immigrant families' use of safety net programs. Although Republicans say they want to remove incentives for people to enter the country illegally, unauthorized immigrants generally do not receive federal benefits given efforts to chip away at their eligibility.
Immigration experts and advocates for immigrant rights say the changes would instead largely be felt by children who are U.S. citizens but whose parents are undocumented or immigrants who are authorized to live in the United States, such as refugees and people granted asylum.
Twelve percent of American children, or about nine million people, are citizens with at least one noncitizen parent. Children with at least one immigrant parent are twice as likely to live in poverty than those with native-born parents, according to a 2022 report by researchers at the Boston University School of Social Work.
'In the name of wanting to take a harsh policy stance against immigrants, in many different ways the reality is that they're going to be punishing citizens and other immigrants that have been eligible in the past,' said Shelby Gonzales, the vice president for immigration policy at the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, a left-leaning think tank.
Some of the most substantial changes would come with the tax bill, a centerpiece of Mr. Trump's economic agenda that House Republicans narrowly passed on Thursday. If approved by the Senate, the package would boost the child tax credit to as much as $2,500, but limit its availability to parents with Social Security numbers.
Current law allows children who have Social Security numbers to receive the benefit, even if their parents have only individual taxpayer identification numbers, which are issued to noncitizens for the purpose of paying taxes.
The change would make roughly two million children with Social Security numbers no longer eligible for the benefit, according to an estimate from the Joint Committee on Taxation.
Some proponents of the change argue that the child tax credit currently allows undocumented immigrants to benefit from taxpayer money, and that such funding should be shut off even if their children are citizens.
'In the real world, the money is going to the unlawful alien parents, and they're not obligated to spend that money on the children,' said George Fishman, a senior legal fellow at the Center for Immigration Studies, a think tank that favors restricting immigration.
Others said the potential changes would undermine the well-being of children who are U.S. citizens in immigrant households. Families where someone doesn't have a Social Security number are already ineligible for the earned-income tax credit, which provides a significant boost to low-income households. Research has found that children who receive similar cash benefits go on to have better health, earn more and commit fewer crimes later in life.
'Going forward, they are the adults of this country,' said Dolores Acevedo-Garcia, a professor of social work at Boston University who studies immigrants. 'Do we want to disinvest in them now so that their education and health and everything deteriorates, and then we have to face that in a few years from now?'
The tax bill would also tighten eligibility for federal health insurance programs. Immigrants who are authorized to live in the United States but are not legal permanent residents would no longer qualify for Medicare unless they fall under certain exceptions. The package would also bar those immigrants from receiving subsidized health insurance on marketplaces set up by the Affordable Care Act. Those changes could affect refugees, immigrants granted asylumand people with temporary protected status. It would also deny access to marketplace plans entirely for people brought to the United States as children who are currently protected under the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals policy.
Some of those immigrants have a path to obtaining a green card, but not all of them do, such as foreigners granted immigration parole or temporary protected status.
The tax plan would also trim Medicaid expansion funding by 10 percentage points for states that use their own money to cover low-income undocumented immigrants, which could penalize 14 states that provide health coverage to children regardless of immigration status, according to KFF, a health policy research group.
States could choose to stop covering undocumented immigrants, and preserve their federal matching funds. Or they could keep that coverage and take the hit to their federal reimbursement, which would mean less money to go around for U.S. citizens who depend on Medicaid. Research has also found that people who don't have health insurance are more likely to rely on emergency rooms for preventable care. Hospitals must provide emergency care regardless of a patient's immigration status, which they can receive reimbursements for through emergency Medicaid.
'So they're going to need to look to other programs, or just cut the funding for undocumented immigrants, which is going to have an impact on everyone in that family, including citizen family members,' said Wendy Cervantes, the director of immigration at the Center for Law and Social Policy.
The bill would also end a requirement for states to provide Medicaid benefits to applicants during a grace period in which their immigration or citizenship status is being verified, which could deny coverage to those who don't have easy access to documents like a passport or birth certificate.
And the tax bill would cut off federal tuition assistance and food stamps for nearly all immigrants who are not citizens or permanent residents.
Alex Nowrasteh, the vice president for economic and social policy studies at the Cato Institute, a libertarian think tank, said he supported efforts to curtail immigrants' access to federal benefits. But he said the changes would not result in major budget savings, given that noncitizens receive just 3.5 percent of all welfare and entitlements.
'The budget deficit cannot be plugged by kicking noncitizens off welfare benefits,' Mr. Nowrasteh said. 'That being said, they should be removed because a dollar saved is a dollar saved, and that's good enough. I'd much rather they kick immigrants off welfare than kick immigrants out of the country.'
Although the tax bill is still working its way through Congress, many federal agencies are already trying to restrict undocumented immigrants from accessing programs. In March, the Housing and Urban Development Department said it would partner with the Homeland Security Department to ensure that federal housing programs were not benefiting undocumented immigrants over citizens. The Small Business Administration has barred lending to companies with any amount of investment from people without Social Security numbers, constraining credit for American-born entrepreneurs.
Many housing authority directors and housing policy experts expect the Trump administration to propose a rule that would ban families with any undocumented members from subsidized housing, even if their children are U.S. citizens and eligible for the benefit. The administration proposed a similar rule during Mr. Trump's first term but did not put it in place. The housing department found at the time that doing so could displace 55,000 children who were in the country legally, and that more than 108,000 people receiving assistance lived in a household with at least one undocumented member.
'Children in immigrant families, who are often U.S. citizens, would be harmed both by the threat of family separation and the risk that they may become homeless,' said Tanya Broder, a senior counsel at the National Immigration Law Center.
Other agencies that run benefit programs have reiterated that undocumented immigrants are not permitted to receive funding. The Labor Department sent a letter to states last month warning that they could lose federal funds if they allowed unauthorized immigrants to receive unemployment benefits. The Social Security Administration also expressed its 'full support' for Mr. Trump's efforts to ensure that undocumented immigrants did not receive Social Security benefits.
The Trump administration has also put pressure on Democratic states that aid undocumented immigrants, including starting an investigation into a California program that has provided cash assistance to some undocumented immigrants and revoking waivers to state colleges and universities that use federal money to provide some services to unauthorized immigrants.
The effort to target immigrants could create a chilling effect, making people hesitant to enroll for benefits over fears that their family members could be deported if they share their information with the government, said Valerie Lacarte, a senior policy analyst at the Migration Policy Institute.
'Even if you're eligible and you can get those benefits, you're also letting the state or agency know that there's an unauthorized immigrant in your household,' Ms. Lacarte said. 'The rhetoric essentially discourages people from using public benefits.'
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


CBS News
15 minutes ago
- CBS News
Bodycam video shows police shooting that killed man at South Side Chicago assisted living center
Newly released body camera video shows a deadly confrontation between Chicago police officers and a man with a knife at an assisted living facility in the South Side's Grand Crossing neighborhood. It all started around 2:50 a.m. Monday, May 6, when officers responded to a call responded to a call of a person with a butcher knife threatening residents inside Grand Regency of Jackson Park Supportive Living, at 1448 E. 75th St. Grand Regency of Jackson Park is advertised online as a program for adults between the ages of 22 and 64 with physical disabilities who need help maintaining their independence. Officers went to the unit where the man lived, and opened the door with a key when the man would not open the door himself. When the officers saw the man with a knife, they used Tasers. Police said when those Tasers were not effective, officers shot the man and killed him. The man, identified as 47-year-old Alfonzo Wright, died at the scene. None of the officers were hurt. A few hours later, police found another man, 58-year-old Keith Harding, stabbed to death in the same building. Police believe the suspect with the knife killed Harding before he was killed by police.

Business Insider
15 minutes ago
- Business Insider
Ukraine's game-changing drone attack is a wake-up call for vulnerable US airbases, particularly in the Pacific
Ukraine's shocking drone attack on the Russian bomber fleet and other strategic aircraft shows just how vulnerable US bases and planes, especially those in the Pacific, could be to a similar kind of attack by an adversary. The need to harden American airbases to protect US airpower assets has been an important topic of discussion for years now, particularly amid China's military rise and the significant expansion of its ballistic missile arsenal, but Ukraine's attack on Russia has reignited this discussion and fueled others. Operation Spiderweb saw Ukraine sneak more than one hundred drones into Russian territory and launch them near key airbases. The Ukrainians say they struck 41 Russian aircraft, including an unspecified number of strategic bombers. Ukraine says the damage it inflicted could exceed $7 billion. The operation was very unusual, raising key questions. US military leaders took note. For instance, Secretary of the Navy John Phelan and Army Chief of Staff Gen. Randy George observed this week that the attack indicated the need to adapt to the quickening speed of warfare. Spiderweb, Phelan said at an artificial intelligence defense conference this week, "was pretty prolific." The operation, George noted at the same event, showed that the US needed to be more agile and think further about acquiring more counter-drone systems. George also said the attack was another example of Ukraine's asymmetric advantage that's been demonstrated throughout the war, using relatively cheap drones to destroy expensive, exquisite Russian air power. It's something the US needs to be thinking about, too, he said. Military leaders and defense experts have long recognized the growing threats to US airbases and American airpower, particularly in the western Pacific, and the need to harden defenses there to prevent a strike from an adversary like China from taking out bombers and fighters before they get off the ground. But Ukraine's Operation Spiderweb, Tom Shugart, an adjunct senior fellow with the defense program at the Center for a New American Security, told Business Insider, "should be a wake-up call at the senior policymaker level and congressional level to pay attention. There is no sanctuary anymore." US airfield expansion and fortification efforts have been limited in recent years, troublingly so in the Pacific. Facilities are seriously lacking in passive defenses, like hardened aircraft shelters and sufficiently dispersed forces. The issue is especially glaring compared to China's consistent work over the past decade on building shelters to hide aircraft, adding runways, and increasing ramp areas. In a Hudson Institute report earlier this year, Shugart and Tim Walton, a senior fellow at Hudson's Center for Defense Concepts and Technology, said that this has created an imbalance. Should the US and China go to war, the latter would need fewer shots to suppress or destroy airfields used by the US and its allies and partners. China would have more capacity for sustaining its air operations. Shugart and Walton also said the rise of foreign drones flying over military bases demonstrated a need for the Pentagon to harden its airfields, especially key ones that house bombers. Ukraine's attack on Russia is expected to ignite important conversations about anti-drone defenses at bases, Mark Cancian, a senior advisor at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, told BI. The focus has been on missiles, but drones come with a different set of problems. To protect against drones, it isn't enough to fortify shelters. "You have to be careful about any openings," Cancian said, explaining that "you can't have a roof and then an open front because they'll just fly in." One solution he said may start to appear is a mesh structure or curtain for those openings. Ukraine's recent strike on Russian airpower could be just a glimpse of what such a future attack could look like, experts said. Sunday's attack, Walton told BI, "was in the form of quadcopters; in the future, it could be similar drones but with even greater autonomy, small, low-cost cruise missiles, or other weapons." The list of potential targets could grow, too. Spiderweb demonstrated something that military experts and planners have long understood: aircraft are vulnerable on the ground, and striking them before they can take off can severely limit a military's air power capabilities. But future strikes could be on ships in the accessible littorals, ground stations, air and missile defense sites, and so on. The lessons from this strike for the US Department of Defense, experts said, include understanding how an adversary could pull off a similar attack. Tim Robinson, a military aviation specialist at the UK'S Royal Aeronautical Society, said that in light of the attack, the West will have not only need to consider hardening their bases but also potentially build "more of them than you have aircraft" to either confuse the enemy or fill with decoys. As Congress meets with military leaders this week, and service budgets are determined, "members should ask how are US bases and other critical facilities defended against these threats today; how much funding is required to appropriate passive and active defenses; and how much of that funding is included in the fiscal year 2026 president's budget proposal," Walton said. There are also questions around whether Golden Dome, the Trump administration's plan to fulfill a Reagan-era vision for a major missile and air defense network, will incorporate any lessons from this attack. Some industry figures have said that the project, while it is primarily about missiles, can't overlook the drone threat. US military leaders are saying the same. Robinson said that "if you're an air force chief and you are not lying awake at night thinking about how to protect" yourself, then "you're going to lose the next war."


Newsweek
15 minutes ago
- Newsweek
Parts of Trump Coalition 'Disillusioned' as Musk Rips 'Big, Beautiful Bill'
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. Billionaire Elon Musk sharply rebuked President Donald Trump's "big, beautiful bill" this week, sparking both praise and backlash. An analyst told Newsweek that a slice of Trump's coalition is now getting "disillusioned" by him, and Musk is the most recent example. Why It Matters Musk was chosen by Trump to lead the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) during the president's first few months of his second term in office. Since his January inauguration, Trump has enacted sweeping cuts across the federal bureaucracy, mainly through executive orders and the creation of DOGE. The SpaceX CEO pushed for DOGE to gain access to the most sensitive and confidential information about American taxpayers, leading to a slew of lawsuits. Musk has also faced fierce backlash amid his drastic cuts to the budget, including thousands of federal jobs, and the dismantling of entire agencies. Amid the uproar, Tesla cars and property have been targeted and torched across the United States as protesters demonstrated against Musk's appointment as an unelected official. Photo-illustration by Newsweek/Getty What To Know The reconciliation bill, or the "big, beautiful bill" as Trump calls it, is a key avenue for Republicans to push forward the White House agenda following widespread GOP election victories in November. Key GOP holdouts in the House and Senate have voiced opposition to the bill over fears of raising the national debt, among other concerns. In a post to X, formerly Twitter, on Tuesday, Musk ripped the piece of legislation, saying, "I'm sorry, but I just can't stand it anymore. This massive, outrageous, pork-filled Congressional spending bill is a disgusting abomination. Shame on those who voted for it: you know you did wrong. You know it." The White House reacted to Musk's condemnation on Tuesday, as press secretary Karoline Leavitt said in part, "Look, the president already knows where Elon Musk stood on this bill. It doesn't change the president's opinion." In a new post to X on Wednesday, Musk doubled down: "A new spending bill should be drafted that doesn't massively grow the deficit and increase the debt ceiling by 5 TRILLION DOLLARS." The Republican infighting is a distinct turn from Musk's MAGA loyalty and near constant presence alongside the president during his second term. "Musk's attacking Trump's bill that the House passed highlights the conflict among Republicans, especially now in the Senate, over passage of this reconciliation bill purposefully designed to avoid needing 60 votes and a Democratic filibuster. If it does not pass the Senate or otherwise not make it to Trump's desk by the summer, it will at minimum greatly embarrass the Trump administration," Columbia political science professor Robert Y. Shapiro told Newsweek via email Tuesday. "This embarrassment also puts Republicans in the Senate and the House in a tough spot, since this could affect Republican control of the House and also even put control of the Senate in jeopardy. This is all currently the Senate responsibility. And Trump needs this control of Congress to pass legislation and to prevent a Democratic controlled House especially from starting investigations of his unconstitutional acts as president and also blatant corruption in using the presidency to enhance his family's and his wealth," Shapiro added. He also said that Musk's jab at the bill "may make this only marginally more difficult" for Trump, while noting that he still has his MAGA base backing him. On the other hand, D. Stephen Voss, political science professor at the University of Kentucky, told Newsweek via email, in part, on Wednesday: "Parts of the Trump coalition are becoming disillusioned with the way he's governing. Elon Musk's defection from the White House is just one high-profile example of the disillusionment with Trump being seen among right-leaning libertarian types, who are bothered by Trump's willingness to grow government and increase executive power." "But that's not the only slippage," Voss added. "Consider, for example, disillusionment with Trump being expressed by the Hispanic voters who put him over the top in 2024. As Trump's public support slips, that's going to turn into less Republican party unity in D.C. The increasingly noisy opposition to Trump might not stop him from getting some version of his omnibus budget bill, but either way, it will make it harder for him to govern in the months ahead." Tesla CEO Elon Musk and President Donald Trump field a question from reporters in the Oval Office of the White House on May 30 in Washington, D.C. (Photo by) Tesla CEO Elon Musk and President Donald Trump field a question from reporters in the Oval Office of the White House on May 30 in Washington, D.C. (Photo by) What People Are Saying Republican Representative Marjorie Taylor Greene of Georgia posted to X on Tuesday: "Do I like the price tag of the One Big Beautiful Bill? No. But we're still stuck with Biden's CR that funds tons of foreign aid and woke garbage at home and abroad. Passing the OBBB is a critical step toward delivering the America First MAGA mandate voters gave us in November." Greene added, "I'm focused on passing the @DOGE cuts that Elon and his team helped craft and I'm grateful he launched this effort." Republican Senator Mike Lee of Utah, responding to Musk on X Tuesday: "Federal spending has become excessive The resulting inflation harms Americans And weaponizes government The Senate can make this bill better It must now do so" Republican Senator Rand Paul of Kentucky, also on X Tuesday in response to Musk: "I agree with Elon. We have both seen the massive waste in government spending and we know another $5 trillion in debt is a huge mistake. We can and must do better." Trump, on Truth Social Tuesday: "Rand Paul has very little understanding of the BBB, especially the tremendous GROWTH that is coming. He loves voting "NO" on everything, he thinks it's good politics, but it's not. The BBB is a big WINNER!!!" What Happens Next Trump has handed down a deadline for Senate Republicans to get the bill passed and on his desk before July 4th. It is unclear if Republican senators will garner enough votes to get it done in roughly one month.