Opinion: Trump And Immigration: When The Immigrants Are Family, It’s Different
Source: Silicon Bay Partners’ staff with assistance from ChatGPT
Photo: ChatGPT
The president has built much of his political identity around restricting immigration. But his own family story—and his businesses—tell a considerably more complicated tale.
Donald Trump has spent much of his political career warning Americans about the dangers of immigration. He has called illegal immigration a national crisis, promised mass deportations, restricted asylum and refugee admissions, tightened visa rules and repeatedly argued that immigrants take American jobs and drive down wages.
But there is an awkward wrinkle in that story.
Two of Trump’s three wives were immigrants. And his own businesses have repeatedly relied on immigrant labor—including workers who were in the country without legal status.
That doesn’t mean Trump’s marriages or business practices somehow invalidate his immigration arguments. It does, however, make the president’s increasingly sweeping hostility toward immigration—and particularly his efforts to restrict even some forms of legal immigration—a fascinating exercise in political contradiction.
The First Lady Was an Immigrant. So Was Wife No. 1.
Trump’s first wife, Ivana Trump, was born in what was then Czechoslovakia. She eventually made her way to North America and became a prominent businesswoman and fashion figure before marrying Trump in 1977.
His current wife, Melania Trump, was born and raised in Slovenia, then part of Yugoslavia. She moved to the United States to pursue a modeling career and eventually became a U.S. citizen. Her parents later immigrated to the United States and became citizens in 2018 through the family-based immigration system.
So, in the Trump family scrapbook, immigration isn’t exactly an obscure footnote.
It’s Mom and Wife.
And there’s another irony: Trump’s administration has sought to restrict the very family-based immigration system through which Melania’s parents ultimately became Americans.
That raises an obvious question:
If immigration is such a threat to America, how did two immigrant women end up playing such important roles in Donald Trump’s personal and professional life?
The answer, of course, is that Trump doesn’t necessarily oppose all immigration.
He opposes the immigration he believes is harmful—or politically unpopular. And there lies the distinction.
Legal Immigration Has Become Part of the Target
It is easy to assume Trump’s immigration crackdown is aimed exclusively at people who cross the border illegally.
It isn’t.
His administration has also made legal immigration substantially more difficult.
In September 2025, Trump imposed a $100,000 payment requirement on new H-1B petitions, targeting the visa program used by American companies to recruit highly skilled foreign workers. The administration argued that employers had abused the program and used foreign workers to suppress wages.
The administration has also tightened scrutiny of foreign professionals seeking work visas and green cards. The Washington Post reported that doctors, engineers, professors and other professionals have faced increased scrutiny, while some visa and green-card approvals have fallen.
And in January 2025, Trump suspended the U.S. refugee admissions program pending a review.
By 2026, the administration had also imposed sweeping visa restrictions affecting nationals of dozens of countries. The State Department said a January 2026 proclamation fully or partially suspended visa issuance and entry for nationals of 39 countries, along with people using certain Palestinian Authority travel documents.
So, the debate is no longer simply:
Legal immigrants vs. illegal immigrants.
It increasingly encompasses: Who gets to come here at all?
Then Came Birthright Citizenship
Perhaps Trump’s most dramatic immigration battle involves people who aren’t immigrants at all. They’re babies.
On his first day back in office in January 2025, Trump signed an executive order attempting to restrict birthright citizenship for certain children born in the United States to parents who were neither citizens nor permanent residents.
The administration argued that the 14th Amendment had been misunderstood. The courts disagreed.
On June 30, 2026, the Supreme Court struck down Trump’s attempt to broadly end birthright citizenship, reaffirming the constitutional guarantee for nearly everyone born on American soil.
You might think that would have been the end of the story. You would be underestimating Donald Trump.
Trump Comes Back With Plan B
On August 6, 2026—just weeks after the Supreme Court ruling—Trump signed two new executive orders aimed at narrowing birthright citizenship through more specific categories.
The new orders target children born to certain foreign diplomats and representatives of international organizations, people associated with designated terrorist organizations or classified as enemy aliens, and children involved in what the administration calls “birth tourism.”
The administration argues these are narrower measures that fit within the Supreme Court’s ruling. Immigration advocates and constitutional scholars aren’t convinced.
And that’s where Trump’s immigration philosophy gets particularly interesting. He isn’t simply trying to prevent people from entering America. He’s trying to redefine who gets to belong here.
The Birth-Tourism Argument
The administration has made birth tourism a particular target, arguing that foreign nationals shouldn’t be able to enter the United States temporarily, give birth and obtain U.S. citizenship for their children.
There is a legitimate policy debate here. But the broader constitutional question is enormous.
The 14th Amendment says: “All persons born or naturalized in the United States… are citizens of the United States.” For more than a century, that principle has been one of the defining features of American citizenship. Trump wants to carve out exceptions.
The courts have already made clear that the Constitution isn’t something a president can simply rewrite with a Sharpie and an executive-order pen. But Trump clearly isn’t finished trying.
Here’s Where the Labor Problem Gets Really Interesting
There’s another side to the immigration debate that doesn’t receive nearly as much attention at political rallies: Who is going to do the work?
America’s economy relies heavily on immigrant workers—not simply in Silicon Valley or university laboratories but in some of the most basic services Americans use every day.
Consider childcare. Approximately one in five childcare workers nationally is an immigrant, according to the American Immigration Council. In some metropolitan areas, the share is considerably higher. Take away a substantial portion of that workforce and the consequences don’t stop at the daycare center.
Parents can’t work.
Businesses lose employees.
Families may be forced to reduce hours or leave the workforce altogether.
And here’s the delicious irony:
You can’t deport the nanny at 7 a.m. and then complain that Mom isn’t at work by 8.
Farmers Have an Even Bigger Problem
Agriculture presents an even more obvious challenge.
American farmers have depended on immigrant labor for generations, particularly in labor-intensive crops that require workers to plant, pick and harvest by hand.
The USDA reports that the foreign-born farm workforce is aging, while fewer young immigrants are entering agriculture.
The legal H-2A agricultural-worker program has consequently become increasingly important as the supply of undocumented workers declines. Agricultural economists have warned that tightening labor markets and reduced immigration can make it harder for growers to find workers during harvest.
And that’s where Washington’s immigration policy runs headfirst into the produce aisle. Because Americans may be perfectly happy to say: “Send them home.”
Until they discover the strawberries are $9 a container.
And Then There Are the People Trump Hired
Perhaps the most glaring contradiction comes from Trump’s own businesses.
A Washington Post investigation found that undocumented immigrants had worked at more than 11 Trump properties, including golf clubs, hotels and the Trump Winery. Workers held jobs as housekeepers, waiters, groundskeepers, stonemasons and other employees.
At Trump National Golf Club Westchester, former undocumented workers said they were sometimes instructed to clock out and continue working, allegations the Trump Organization denied.
Trump’s company eventually fired undocumented workers after the issue became public and said it would use E-Verify to strengthen hiring compliance. But there’s another wrinkle.
Even as Trump has pursued an aggressive crackdown on immigration, the Trump Organization has continued using legal temporary foreign-worker programs. Forbes reported in 2025 that Trump businesses had sought at least 1,880 seasonal foreign workers through temporary visa programs since 2008, including workers for Mar-a-Lago, golf clubs and the Trump Winery.
So even Trump’s businesses demonstrate the distinction between rhetoric and labor-market reality. The resorts need workers. The workers need jobs. And the guests need somebody to clean the rooms.
So Why Is Trump So Hostile Toward Immigration?
Nobody can know another person’s private motivations with certainty. But politically, several explanations are apparent.
Immigration is a powerful political issue
Trump discovered early that immigration could energize voters who feel the country is changing too quickly. Illegal immigration became a centerpiece of his 2016 campaign, and the issue has remained central to his political identity.
The border wall became a symbol. Mass deportation became a promise. “America First” became the bumper sticker. And immigration became one of the clearest ways Trump could distinguish himself from Democrats and from Republicans he considered insufficiently aggressive.
Immigration provides an easy explanation for economic anxiety
When wages aren’t keeping up with inflation, housing is expensive and childcare costs a fortune, telling voters that foreigners are taking jobs is considerably simpler than explaining globalization, automation, housing shortages, corporate consolidation, demographic changes and decades of complicated economic policy.
It’s a politically convenient villain. And unlike inflation, the villain can be put on a bus.
Trump’s politics are fundamentally about control
Trump’s immigration agenda isn’t merely about the number of people entering the country. It’s about determining who belongs, who gets to stay and who gets to become American. That’s why birthright citizenship has become so important. If the government can narrow who automatically becomes a citizen at birth, it changes the meaning of American citizenship itself.
His supporters genuinely believe immigration threatens American workers
It’s also important not to caricature the other side. There are legitimate concerns about illegal immigration, border security, wage competition in certain labor markets and the cost of absorbing large numbers of newcomers. The argument isn’t completely fabricated. The question is whether the cure is worse than the disease.
The Great Immigration Contradiction
And that brings us back to Donald Trump.
His mother was an immigrant from Scotland. His first wife was an immigrant from Czechoslovakia.
His third wife was an immigrant from Slovenia. His businesses have employed immigrant workers—both legally and, according to extensive reporting, illegally. His resorts have sought thousands of foreign seasonal workers.
His administration says American agriculture needs legal immigrant labor. His businesses have needed it, too.
And yet his political movement increasingly treats immigration as something that must be reduced, restricted and controlled. That’s the contradiction at the heart of Trump’s immigration policy:
The country needs immigrants. His businesses have needed immigrants. His family includes immigrants. But politically, Trump has discovered that there is considerable power in telling Americans they should fear them. Perhaps the better question isn’t:
“Why does Donald Trump hate immigrants?” That’s too simplistic. The more interesting question is:
“Why does Donald Trump embrace immigration when it benefits him—and condemn it when it benefits his political opponents?” Because America has a funny relationship with immigration.
We want the nanny.
We want the farmworker.
We want the doctor.
We want the engineer.
We want the hotel housekeeper.
We want the construction worker.
We want the entrepreneur.
We want the person picking our strawberries.
We just don’t always want to admit that they’re immigrants.
And eventually, the arithmetic catches up with the politics.
You can deport people. You can close borders. You can restrict visas. You can rewrite regulations. But you can’t repeal the fact that somebody still has to pick the tomatoes, care for the children, clean the hotel rooms, mow the golf course and show up for work Monday morning.
And if America doesn’t have enough workers to do those jobs, the bill won’t disappear. It’ll simply arrive at the grocery store, the daycare center, the restaurant—and eventually, the ballot box.