What is the Midwest's role in the great immigration debate?
It seemed unlikely to Genna Buhr that U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents would raid the public library she directs in East Peoria, Illinois — population 22,012 — but she warned her staff anyway.
"ICE can enter the library to look for people in areas of the building open to the general public, just as any person or officer of the law can enter the library to look for someone in public areas," Buhr emailed staffers on Jan. 31.
"If an officer presents you with any kind of legal document, get me."
But Tazewell County, home to East Peoria, had barely more than 3,000 immigrants pre-pandemic — naturalized citizens, green card holders, temporary visa holders, refugees, asylees, and yes, undocumented immigrants, according to analyses of census datasets by the American Immigration Council.
This doesn't mean undocumented immigrants aren't an issue in Midwestern states such as Illinois, Indiana, Missouri, Michigan and Wisconsin. It doesn't mean there are no concentrations of them in specific industries in cities and towns. Like most other states, the highest concentrations of undocumented immigrants in Midwestern states are in urban centers where "sanctuary" policies may offer a perception of welcoming and protection from immigration enforcement.
Chicago, the nation's third-largest city, is the one most people know.
The city is the target of a lawsuit from President Donald Trump's administration alleging that its 40-year-old sanctuary city policy hinders the federal government's enforcement of immigration laws. The administration also is suing Illinois and Cook County over their sanctuary law and policies.
There is no legal definition of a 'sanctuary city,' but according to Global Refuge, a Maryland-based non-profit that helps immigrants and refugees, it is a term often assigned to a municipality or community 'with a policy, written or unwritten, that discourages local law enforcement from reporting the immigration status of individuals unless it involves investigation of a serious crime.'
Washington, D.C.-based think tank the Center for Immigration Studies (CIS), which supports less immigration and more enforcement, listed Illinois as the only Midwestern state among 13 it calls sanctuary states.
In testimony before a congressional committee on March 5, Chicago Mayor Brandon Johnson acknowledged Chicago's Welcoming City Ordinance and a companion state law, known as the Illinois TRUST Act, that he said do 'not permit our local law enforcement" to cooperate with ICE.
'With a criminal warrant, our city and state will cooperate. But without a criminal warrant, our local law enforcement focuses' on fighting local crime, Johnson said.
Johnson told the congressional committee that sanctuary policies promote public safety.
'When there is trust between residents and police, undocumented immigrants come forward to report crimes and provide information to solve crime,' he said.
But congressional Republicans argue that sanctuary city policies violate the U.S. Constitution's supremacy clause, which holds that federal law trumps state laws. One of them pressed the Democratic Chicago mayor on how much money the city has spent managing the 50,000-plus migrants who have arrived there since 2022. Johnson said it accounted for about 1% of the city's budget over four years.
Chicago's 2025 budget amounts to more than $17 billion. One percent of that is $170 million.
The legal wrangling over enforcement against undocumented immigrants in Chicago could continue throughout Trump's term.
Chicago attorneys with the National Immigrant Justice Center and ACLU of Illinois filed a motion in U.S. District Court in March accusing the U.S. Department of Homeland Security and ICE of violating immigration law and the constitutional rights of at least 22 people who were arrested and detained in the Midwest since January.
But Chicago is an outlier in the Midwest, albeit the largest one.
"The Midwest is the least affected region by immigration generally and illegal immigration specifically," said Steven A. Camarota, director of research for CIS. "All the research shows that outside of Illinois, there aren't that many illegal immigrants in the Midwest."
A new CIS analysis of U.S. Census Bureau raw data through February indicates the Midwest accounts for the smallest share of the nation's foreign-born population, which CIS said includes both immigrants who are lawfully present and those who are undocumented. The Midwest's share was 11.9%. The South had the highest share at 37.4% and also the fastest rate of growth since 1990.
"Of course, there's always more uncertainty about estimating illegal immigrants," Camarota said. "But since illegal immigrants live with legal immigrants all the time, as a generalized statement, where there's lots of legal immigrants, there's lots of illegal immigrants, too. Because illegal immigrants come often from the same countries as legal immigrants. Or vice versa."
The uncertainty illustrates an issue confronting researchers, activists and others seeking data about undocumented immigrants: Ideological differences between research and policy analysis organizations mean their competing data sets require context.
Two numbers speak volumes: As of March 2025, the Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR) estimates about 18.6 million undocumented immigrants reside in the United States. The American Immigration Council's number: 11.8 million.
One reason for the difference may be that the Council's number is based on the 2023 American Community Survey (ACS) one-year sample. FAIR argues the ACS data dramatically undercount the foreign-born population, including undocumented immigrants.
Another explanation: FAIR asserts many groups part of what it calls the "open-borders lobby" misclassify Temporary Protected Status (TPS) recipients, Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) beneficiaries and other immigrant subsets as being in the United States legally.
"It is important to note that 'legal status' is not the same as 'lawful presence,'" stated FAIR's March report. "For example, recipients of deferred action, deferred enforced departure, Temporary Protected Status (TPS), or parole do not have legal status. These programs (some of which are authorized by statute and some of which are not) do not give illegal aliens visas or green cards. They merely defer deportation for a period of time."
The American Immigration Council codes a list of foreign-born individuals as legal U.S. residents, including individuals "working in occupations where immigrants are likely to be on H-1B or other visas, including computer scientists, professors, engineers, and life scientists" and "international students residing in the United States on temporary visas."
Both leading research organizations make their sympathies clear.
The American Immigration Council works with the American Immigration Lawyers Association, it says, "to increase access to legal counsel by leveraging a nationwide network of volunteers and training lawyers to vigorously defend immigrants facing removal."
The Council's "Map the Impact" page offers national and state-by-state estimates of taxes paid by immigrants, their spending power and the number of immigrant entrepreneurs. The page does not mention costs, but the Council did publish a report last year on "the cost of immigration enforcement and border security," saying hundreds of billions had been spent in lieu of "a more balanced approach that provides the resources necessary to build a functional humanitarian protection system while balancing security interests."
FAIR? It "seeks to reduce overall immigration to a more normal level," the organization states, to "allow America to manage growth, address environmental concerns, and maintain a high quality of life."
In an 85-page study released in March 2023, FAIR asserted that federal, state and local taxes paid by undocumented immigrants — more than $31 billion, by the study's count — were far outstripped by such costs as education, healthcare, justice enforcement and welfare programs, which it pegged at more than $182 billion.
The American Immigration Council's estimate of total taxes paid by undocumented immigrants — $89.8 billion based on 2023 ACS data — is about $60 billion off FAIR's number.
"While politicians continue to debate what to do about illegal immigration, millions of undocumented immigrants are working across the country, contributing billions of dollars to the U.S. economy," the Council states.
Everyone in the country pays some sales tax and user fees. CIS acknowledges undocumented immigrants have high rates of work and do pay some taxes, including income and payroll taxes — but argues that those tax payments are low given their low education levels. It can be argued that renters pay property taxes indirectly with their rent.
"They do contribute greatly to taxes, the undocumented," said the American Immigration Council's senior data scientist, Dr. Steven Hubbard. "They often are not receiving those benefits. They don't get Social Security, they don't get Medicaid, they don't get Medicare. So they are often paying into these programs while they are not receiving those full benefits."
Camarota, who takes an opposing view, conceded that nearly all undocumented immigrants are blocked from receiving Social Security and Medicare, so the taxes they pay do constitute a net benefit to both programs.
"However, the positive effect on these programs would become negative if (undocumented immigrants) were legalized and allowed to receive benefits," Camarota said in testimony before a congressional committee last year. "This is because both programs have progressive benefit structures that give lower-earning and shorter-career workers a greater return on their contributions."
However out of date and disputed their numbers may be, FAIR's 2023 report and 2023 data provided by the American Immigration Council do provide estimates of undocumented immigrants for each state:
FAIR estimates Illinois has the nation's sixth-highest estimated population of undocumented immigrants at 628,000; the Council's number is 527,400.
FAIR puts Michigan at 185,000; the Council's number is 110,700.
FAIR's number for Indiana is 154,000; the Council's number is 122,400.
FAIR puts Wisconsin at 111,000; the Council's number is 93,000.
FAIR pegs Missouri's count at 77,000; the Council's number is 67,900.
They may both be wrong about Missouri, or their data aren't as current as the state's. Announcing last year that he was filing suit to "prohibit Obamacare from funding illegal immigrants," Missouri Attorney General Andrew Bailey estimated there were 77,000 to 104,000 undocumented immigrants living in the state, costing taxpayers between $342 million and $462 million annually.
No matter which organization's data you parse through, the numbers of undocumented immigrants in Illinois, Indiana, Missouri, Wisconsin and Michigan together don't equal those posted by California or Texas. Why? The easy answer is that no Midwestern state shares a border with Mexico.
But there's more to it than that, said CIS's Camarota.
"The simple answer is job growth," he said. "The Midwest, because of the structure of its economy and other things, just experienced less job growth than most parts of the country.
"It was an area most dependent on manufacturing in the last 50 years and, as manufacturing declined as a share of U.S. GDP (gross domestic product), especially the share of employment — employment growth in the Midwest was not zero. It's not nothing. It just lagged the other regions."
According to the U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA), manufacturing as a percentage of GDP nationally shrunk from 16.1% in 1997 to 10.2% in 2023. Midwestern states saw similar drops, with Michigan dropping nine percentage points and Wisconsin dropping eight, according to state-by-state BEA data.
Year-to-year data paints much the same picture.
National Business Capital, a New York State-based national fintech lending platform for business owners, ranked Indiana 50th in the nation in 2023, with "the worst prospect for job growth" in 2024. Michigan ranked 48th and Missouri 44th. It's the most recent data the organization has.
The conflicts over immigration data, academic as they seem, only hint at the ferocity over immigration policy that roils the Midwest.
This article originally appeared on Evansville Courier & Press: What is the Midwest's role in the great immigration debate?
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Hamilton Spectator
10 minutes ago
- Hamilton Spectator
What to know about inspections of Iran's nuclear program by the IAEA ahead of a key board vote
VIENNA (AP) — Iran's nuclear program remains a top focus for inspectors from the International Atomic Energy Agency, particularly as any possible deal between Tehran and the United States over the program would likely rely on the agency long known as the United Nations' nuclear watchdog. This week, Western nations will push for a measure at the IAEA's Board of Governors censuring Iran over its noncompliance with inspectors, pushing the matter before the U.N. Security Council. Barring any deal with Washington, Iran then could face what's known as 'snapback' — the reimposition of all U.N. sanctions on it originally lifted by Tehran's 2015 nuclear deal with world powers, if one of its Western parties declares the Islamic Republic is out of compliance with it. All this sets the stage for a renewed confrontation with Iran as the Mideast remains inflamed by Israel's war on Hamas in the Gaza Strip . And the IAEA's work in any case will make the Vienna-based agency a key player. Here's more to know about the IAEA, its inspections of Iran and the deals — and dangers — at play. Atoms for peace The IAEA was created in 1957. The idea for it grew out of a 1953 speech given by U.S. President Dwight D. Eisenhower at the U.N., in which he urged the creation of an agency to monitor the world's nuclear stockpiles to ensure that 'the miraculous inventiveness of man shall not be dedicated to his death, but consecrated to his life.' Broadly speaking, the agency verifies the reported stockpiles of member nations. Those nations are divided into three categories. The vast majority are nations with so-called 'comprehensive safeguards agreements' with the IAEA, states without nuclear weapons that allow IAE monitoring over all nuclear material and activities. Then there's the 'voluntary offer agreements' with the world's original nuclear weapons states — China, France, Russia, the United Kingdom and the U.S. — typically for civilian sites. Finally, the IAEA has 'item-specific agreements' with India, Israel and Pakistan — nuclear-armed countries that haven't signed the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty. That treaty has countries agree not to build or obtain nuclear weapons. North Korea, which is also nuclear armed, said it has withdrawn from the treaty, though that's disputed by some experts. The collapse of Iran's 2015 nuclear deal Iran's 2015 nuclear deal with world powers, negotiated under then-President Barack Obama, allowed Iran to enrich uranium to 3.67% — enough to fuel a nuclear power plant but far below the threshold of 90% needed for weapons-grade uranium. It also drastically reduced Iran's stockpile of uranium, limited its use of centrifuges and relied on the IAEA to oversee Tehran's compliance through additional oversight. But President Donald Trump in his first term in 2018 unilaterally withdrew America from the accord , insisting it wasn't tough enough and didn't address Iran's missile program or its support for militant groups in the wider Mideast. That set in motion years of tensions, including attacks at sea and on land . Iran now enriches up to 60%, a short, technical step away from weapons-grade levels. It also has enough of a stockpile to build multiple nuclear bombs, should it choose to do so. Iran has long insisted its nuclear program is for peaceful purposes, but the IAEA, Western intelligence agencies and others say Tehran had an organized weapons program up until 2003. IAEA inspections and Iran Under the 2015 deal, Iran agreed to allow the IAEA even greater access to its nuclear program. That included permanently installing cameras and sensors at nuclear sites. Those cameras, inside of metal housings sprayed with a special blue paint that shows any attempt to tamper with it, took still images of sensitive sites. Other devices, known as online enrichment monitors, measured the uranium enrichment level at Iran's Natanz nuclear facility. The IAEA also regularly sent inspectors into Iranian sites to conduct surveys, sometimes collecting environmental samples with cotton clothes and swabs that would be tested at IAEA labs back in Austria. Others monitor Iranian sites via satellite images. In the years since Trump's 2018 decision, Iran has limited IAEA inspections and stopped the agency from accessing camera footage . It's also removed cameras . At one point, Iran accused an IAEA inspector of testing positive for explosive nitrates , something the agency disputed. The IAEA has engaged in years of negotiations with Iran to restore full access for its inspectors. While Tehran hasn't granted that, it also hasn't entirely thrown inspectors out. Analysts view this as part of Iran's wider strategy to use its nuclear program as a bargaining chip with the West. What happens next Iran and the U.S. have gone through five rounds of negotiations over a possible deal, with talks mediated by the sultanate of Oman . Iran appears poised to reject an American proposal over a deal this week, potentially as soon as Tuesday. Without a deal with the U.S., Iran's long-ailing economy could enter a freefall that could worsen the simmering unrest at home. Israel or the U.S. might carry out long-threatened airstrikes targeting Iranian nuclear facilities. Experts fear Tehran in response could decide to fully end its cooperation with the IAEA, abandon the the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty and rush toward a bomb. If a deal is reached — or at least a tentative understanding between the two sides — that likely will take the pressure off for an immediate military strike by the U.S. Gulf Arab states, which opposed Obama's negotiations with Iran in 2015, now welcome the talks under Trump. Any agreement would require the IAEA's inspectors to verify Iran's compliance. But Israel, which has struck at Iranian-backed militants across the region, remains a wildcard on what it could do. Last year, it carried out its first military airstrikes on Iran — and has warned it is willing to take action alone to target Tehran's program, like it has in the past in Iraq in 1981 or Syria in 2007. ___ Associated Press writer Stephanie Liechtenstein contributed to this report. ___ The Associated Press receives support for nuclear security coverage from the Carnegie Corporation of New York and Outrider Foundation . The AP is solely responsible for all content. ___ Additional AP coverage of the nuclear landscape: Error! Sorry, there was an error processing your request. There was a problem with the recaptcha. Please try again. You may unsubscribe at any time. By signing up, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy . This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google privacy policy and terms of service apply. Want more of the latest from us? Sign up for more at our newsletter page .
Yahoo
13 minutes ago
- Yahoo
'Loaded weapon': editors decry Hungary bill targeting media
The Hungarian government's decision to delay a vote on a controversial bill which penalises "foreign-funded" media and NGOs does not mean that the danger to freedom of the press is over, top editors warn. The government is still committed to a "campaign to shut down, destroy or discredit certain media outlets, NGOs or people", Peter Uj, editor-in-chief of news site 444, told AFP. Critics say the bill, which they compare to Russia's foreign agent legislation, is the latest attempt by nationalist Prime Minister Viktor Orban to tighten his control over the central European country of 9.5 million people since his return to power in 2010. Tens of thousands have protested against the bill in Budapest, with another rally to take place on Tuesday. The European Commission has also called on Hungary to withdraw the draft, while representatives of more than 80 media outlets from 22 countries -- including Britain's The Guardian and France's Liberation -- have slammed it. The bill was introduced last month and a vote was scheduled for this week, but the ruling coalition last week put it off, saying that debate would continue in the autumn and that it wanted to review "substantive comments received" from "serious organisations" other than those protesting. - 'Devious' - The legislation would blacklist organisations that "threaten the sovereignty of Hungary by using foreign funding to influence public life". Any kind of support from non-Hungarian citizens, EU funds, or even advertising revenues from companies based abroad constitutes foreign funding, according to commonly accepted legal interpretations. Blacklisted groups would need permission to receive foreign funds. They would also be barred from receiving donations through a Hungarian income tax contribution scheme, an important source of revenue for non-profits. The legal changes could affect any independent Hungarian media outlets, with 444, internet TV Partizan and news site Telex explicitly targeted. Partizan editor-in-chief Marton Gulyas, 39, described the new bill as "devious". "The law would create economic tools to make it impossible for listed organisations to function," he told AFP. The online channel, which was founded in 2018 and has a staff of 70, was the top beneficiary last year of the income tax contribution scheme, receiving more than one million euros ($1.1 million) from over 35,000 supporters. Gulyas rejected the notion that Partizan is "foreign-funded", stressing that the channel had only applied for EU-based grants in the past two years. "Hungary has been a part of the European Union since 2004. There are no borders or customs, yet this money is now being treated as if there could be some kind of criminality involved," he said. - 'Will not back down' - Telex editor-in-chief Tamas Nemet, 44, said that advertising and reader support make up 92 percent of the outlet's revenue. "But the law would now make those unviable" through various legal hurdles and administrative burdens, according to Nemet. One of Hungary's most popular news sources with a staff of around 100, Telex was established in 2021, after Nemet and his colleagues resigned en masse from the country's then-top news site, over alleged political interference. "We can see quite clearly what those in power want, the weapon is loaded and on the table," he said, adding that the "truth cannot be banned". "We will not back down," he said, vowing to "overcome whatever they come up with to hinder our operations". Orban says the law is needed to fight the alleged spread of foreign interference and disinformation. Uj of 444, along with his colleagues from Telex and Partizan, described the bill as "absurd" and "a political weapon designed to keep independent media in constant fear and to take us out". He decried rules "worded in such a way they are impossible to comply with". The 53-year-old Uj and colleagues set up the news site in 2013. It employs about 35 journalists and has broken several stories, including a child abuse pardon scandal, which last year led to the resignation of then-president Katalin Novak, a key Orban ally. AFP partners with its sister site Lakmusz for fact-checking. ros/jza/gv/bc
Yahoo
13 minutes ago
- Yahoo
CNN Correspondent Detained By LAPD, Camera Crew Arrested
CNN National Correspondent Jason Carroll, who has been reporting on the unrest in Los Angeles for the past few days, found himself a part of the story tonight when he was detained and briefly questioned by Police in Los Angeles. During a live shot, Carroll is heard telling police his name and then seen being walked away with his hands behind his back. More from Deadline Jon Stewart Weighs In On L.A. Protests, Says Trump Is Escalating To Distract From Elon Musk's Epstein Accusation: "Petty And Petulant Man-Babies" Trump Sending Marines To L.A. To Respond To ICE Protests; POTUS Also Plans To Deploy Additional 2,000 Guard Troops, Gavin Newsom Says - Update BET Awards Set To Go On Amid LA Protests Against Immigration Raids A police officer is then heard saying, 'We're letting you go. You can't come back. If you come back, you will be arrested.' Carroll is heard to say, 'Ok.' You can see the scene below. CNN later reported that, while Carroll was released, two members of his camera crew were arrested. Carroll described the scene to Laura Coates back in the studio: 'I was walking over to the officer, tried to explain who I was, who I was with. He said, I'd like you to turn around. I turned around, I put my hands behind my back. They did not put me in zip ties, but they did grab both my hands as I was escorted over to the side, they said, you are being detained.' Carroll is not the first member of the press to get caught between police and protesters. On Sunday, Lauren Tomasi, the U.S. correspondent for Australia's 9News, appeared to be shot by a rubber bullet while reporting on the immigration protests. Nick Stern, a British news photographer, reportedly needed emergency surgery over the weekend after sustaining a leg wound during the clashes. A coalition of 27 press and civil liberties advocacy groups wrote to U.S. Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem today 'to express alarm that federal officers may have violated the First Amendment rights of journalists covering recent protests and unrest related to immigration enforcement in the Los Angeles area.' The coalition, led by the Los Angeles Press Club, First Amendment Coalition and Freedom of the Press Foundation, further wrote that 'The press plays an essential role in our democracy as the public's eyes and ears. The timely reporting of breaking news is necessary to provide the public with complete information, especially about controversial events. 'A number of reports suggest that federal officers have indiscriminately used force or deployed munitions such as tear gas or pepper balls that caused significant injuries to journalists. In some cases, federal officers appear to have deliberately targeted journalists who were doing nothing more than their job covering the news.' The LA Press Club referred to at least 24 'documented' instances of journalists being targeted by law enforcement while covering the protests in Los Angeles between June 6-8, and multiple media workers report having been shot by police with less-than-lethal munitions. Those journalists included Southern California News Group's Ryanne Mena, freelance journalists Anthony Cabassa and Sean Beckner-Carmitchel, The Southlander's Ben Camacho, British photojournalist Nick Stern, and LA Taco's Lexis Olivier-Ray. City News Service contributed to this report. Best of Deadline Sean 'Diddy' Combs Sex-Trafficking Trial Updates: Cassie Ventura's Testimony, $10M Hotel Settlement, Drugs, Violence, & The Feds A Full Timeline Of Blake Lively & Justin Baldoni's 'It Ends With Us' Feud In Court, Online & In The Media Where To Watch All The 'John Wick' Movies: Streamers That Have All Four Films
