essay about immigrants coming to america

Home — Essay Samples — Social Issues — Immigration to America — How Immigration Changed America

How Immigration Changed America

• Categories: Immigration to America

About this sample

Words: 605 |

Published: Sep 12, 2023

Words: 605 | Page: 1 | 4 min read

Table of contents

The early waves of immigration, the melting pot and cultural fusion, economic growth and innovation, demographic changes and diversity, social and political changes.

Cite this Essay

Let us write you an essay from scratch

• 450+ experts on 30 subjects ready to help
• Custom essay delivered in as few as 3 hours

Get high-quality help

Dr. Karlyna PhD

Verified writer

• Expert in: Social Issues

+ 120 experts online

By clicking “Check Writers’ Offers”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy policy . We’ll occasionally send you promo and account related email

No need to pay just yet!

Related Essays

1 pages / 636 words

2 pages / 1093 words

1 pages / 669 words

2 pages / 1006 words

Remember! This is just a sample.

You can get your custom paper by one of our expert writers.

121 writers online

Still can’t find what you need?

Browse our vast selection of original essay samples, each expertly formatted and styled

Related Essays on Immigration to America

The question of what makes someone an American is a complex and multifaceted issue that has been debated and discussed for centuries. The United States of America is a diverse and dynamic country, comprised of individuals from [...]

Immigration has long been a contentious issue, with passionate debates on both sides. From economic impacts to cultural integration, the topic of immigration is multifaceted and complex. In this argumentative essay, we will [...]

Moving to America can be a life-changing experience filled with excitement, challenges, and opportunities. The decision to uproot oneself and start afresh in a new country is not one to be taken lightly, as it involves adjusting [...]

Have you ever wondered about the stories that lie within your own family history? The tales of triumph, tragedy, love, and loss that have shaped the lives of your ancestors and ultimately led to your own existence? Family [...]

Immigrants have moved to America for hundreds of years to find a better lifestyle and more opportunities for economic growth. America was known as the “Land of the Free, with open land, and freedom for all. Immigrants have [...]

The migration of immigrants and immigration is a topic that has sparked heated debates and discussions across the world. With the growing number of people leaving their home countries in search of better opportunities, as well [...]

Related Topics

By clicking “Send”, you agree to our Terms of service and Privacy statement . We will occasionally send you account related emails.

Where do you want us to send this sample?

By clicking “Continue”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy policy.

Be careful. This essay is not unique

This essay was donated by a student and is likely to have been used and submitted before

Download this Sample

Free samples may contain mistakes and not unique parts

Sorry, we could not paraphrase this essay. Our professional writers can rewrite it and get you a unique paper.

Please check your inbox.

We can write you a custom essay that will follow your exact instructions and meet the deadlines. Let's fix your grades together!

Get Your Personalized Essay in 3 Hours or Less!

We use cookies to personalyze your web-site experience. By continuing we’ll assume you board with our cookie policy .

• Instructions Followed To The Letter
• Deadlines Met At Every Stage
• Unique And Plagiarism Free

Sorry, we did not find any matching results.

We frequently add data and we're interested in what would be useful to people. If you have a specific recommendation, you can reach us at [email protected] .

We are in the process of adding data at the state and local level. Sign up on our mailing list here to be the first to know when it is available.

Search tips:

• Check your spelling

• Try other search terms

• Use fewer words

Why do immigrants come to the US?

Of all people legally immigrating to the US in 2021, about 42% came for work, 32% for school, and 23% for family.

Updated on Fri, November 17, 2023 by the USAFacts Team

People immigrate to the US to work, reunite with family, study, or seek personal safety. In 2021, 42% of the 1.5 million people who immigrated to the US came for work.

What reasons for immigration does the government track?

The US government generally allows legal immigration for five broad reasons : work , school , family, safety, and encouraging diversity.

People immigrating for work or school are often granted temporary entry rather than permanent residency. Immigration for family generally means the immigrant has a relative who is already in the US as a citizen, green card holder, or temporary visa holder with whom they want to be reunited with. Those who immigrate for safety are refugees or asylum-seekers. And finally, up to 50,000 immigrants obtain green cards annually through the Diversity Immigrant Visa Program lottery that grants entry to individuals from countries with low rates of immigration to the US.

How many immigrants came for each reason in 2021?

Of the 1.5 million people who immigrated to the US in 2021, about 42% came for work, 32% for school, and 23% for family. Nearly 2% were seeking safety, and about 0.9% were admitted on Diversity Immigrant Visas.

How have reasons for immigration evolved over the past 15 years?

Since 2006, work has consistently been the top reason people immigrate to the US, with the exception of 2013–2015 when immigration for work was equal to or slightly lower than for school.

School is usually the second most common reason for immigration except for 2018, when a higher percentage of people began immigrating for family reunification than education. In 2021 school again became the second most common reason.

Safety and diversity have consistently been the fourth and fifth most common reasons for immigration, respectively.

How do the reasons for immigration change depending on where people are immigrating from?

Of the 638,551 immigrants who came to the US for work in 2021, 61% came from North America. Immigrants from Asia represent the largest geographic cohort among the other four primary reasons for immigration: school (58%), family (45%), safety (34%), and encouraging diversity (33%).

In 2021, 74% of all immigrants came from Asia and North/Central America. Roughly 53% of Asian immigrants came from China and India, while nearly 80% of immigrants from North/Central America were from Mexico.

Get facts first

Unbiased, data-driven insights in your inbox each week

You are signed up for the facts!

Why do Chinese people immigrate to America?

School was the top reason Chinese people immigrated between 2006–2021; 19% of people who came to the US for school were from China, the highest percentage of any other country. The number of Chinese immigrants coming to the US for school peaked in 2015, growing 680% from 40,477 people in 2006 to 315,628 people in 2015.

Despite a sharp decrease after 2016, most Chinese immigrants continue to come to the US for school. Fewer than 57,000 Chinese immigrants have come to the US per year for work or family reasons since 2006, and those numbers hit record lows of 5,323 and 13,412 in 2021.

Why do Indian people immigrate to America?

The largest share of immigrants who came to be with family were from India, at 18% . But in 2021, more Indians immigrated for school than for family reunification. Work was the third most common reason.

Prior to 2021, most Indian immigrants came to the US for family and work, but those numbers have been decreasing. Fewer people came to the US from India for work (54,032 people) and family in 2021 (62,407) than in 2006 (117,189 and 81,045 people, respectively).

Meanwhile, the number of Indians immigrating for school increased by over 300% between 2020 and 2021, from 20,629 to 85,385.

Why do Mexican people immigrate to America?

In 2021, people from Mexico comprised the largest share of immigrants coming for work — 55% of all immigrants, or 351,586 people. Work has consistently been the top reason Mexican people immigrate to the US. Family and school have consistently been the second and third reasons.

More than double the number of people immigrated to the US for work from Mexico in 2021 (351,586 people) than in 2006 (168,619 people).

Where did this data come from?

There are multiple data sources because immigrants enter the US through multiple pathways. Data on visa admissions comes from the US State Department; we exclude people who come with visas for short-term tourism, cultural exchange, or visiting. Data on refugees and asylum-seekers comes from the Department of Homeland Security's (DHS) Yearbook of Immigration Statistics. Data on green cards comes from the DHS’s expanded lawful permanent resident tables.

Read more about where immigrants are moving in the US , and get the data directly in your inbox by signing up for our email newsletter .

Explore more of USAFacts

Related articles.

Population and society

Asylum in the United States: How the case backlog grew to hundreds of thousands

How many DACA recipients are there in the United States?

Immigration demographics: A look at the native and foreign-born populations

The Census has been asking about citizenship on and off for nearly 200 years

Related Data

Immigrant population

46.18 million

Visas granted

6.82 million

Unauthorized immigrant population

11.39 million

Data delivered to your inbox

Keep up with the latest data and most popular content.

SIGN UP FOR THE NEWSLETTER

The independent source for health policy research, polling, and news.

Understanding the U.S. Immigrant Experience: The 2023 KFF/LA Times Survey of Immigrants

Shannon Schumacher , Liz Hamel , Samantha Artiga , Drishti Pillai , Ashley Kirzinger , Audrey Kearney , Marley Presiado , Ana Gonzalez-Barrera , and Mollyann Brodie Published: Sep 17, 2023

• Methodology

Executive Summary

The Survey of Immigrants, conducted by KFF in partnership with the Los Angeles Times during Spring 2023, examines the diversity of the U.S. immigrant experience. It is the largest and most representative survey of immigrants living in the U.S. to date. With its sample size of 3,358 immigrant adults, the survey provides a deep understanding of immigrant experiences, reflecting their varied countries of origin and histories, citizenship and immigration statuses, racial and ethnic identities, and social and economic circumstances. KFF also conducted focus groups with immigrants from an array of backgrounds, which expand upon information from the survey (see Methodology for more details).

This report provides an overview of immigrants’ reasons for coming to the U.S.; their successes and challenges; their experiences at work, in their communities, in health care settings, and at home; as well as their outlook on the future. Recognizing the diversity within the immigrant population, the report examines variations in the experiences of different groups of immigrants, including by immigration status, income, race and ethnicity, English proficiency, and other factors. Given that this report includes a focus on experiences with discrimination and unfair treatment, data by race and ethnicity are often shown rather than by country of birth. A companion report provides information on immigrants’ health coverage, access to, and use of care, and further reports will provide additional details for other subgroups within the immigrant population, including more data by country of origin.

Key takeaways from this report include:

• Most immigrants – regardless of where they came from or how long they’ve been in the U.S. – say they came to the U.S. for more opportunities for themselves and their children. The predominant reasons immigrants say they came to the U.S. are for better work and educational opportunities, a better future for their children, and more rights and freedoms. Smaller but still sizeable shares cite other factors such as joining family members or escaping unsafe or violent conditions.
• Overall, a majority of immigrants say their financial situation (78%), educational opportunities (79%), employment situation (75%), and safety (65%) are better as a result of moving to the U.S. A large majority (77%) say their own standard of living is better than that of their parents, higher than the share of U.S.-born adults who say the same (51%) 1 ,and most (60%) believe their children’s standard of living will be better than theirs is now. Three in four immigrants say they would choose to come to the U.S. again if given the chance, and six in ten say they plan to stay in the U.S. However, about one in five (19%) say they want to move back to the country they were born in or to another country, while an additional one in five (21%) say they are not sure.
• Despite an improved situation relative to their countries of birth, many immigrants report facing serious challenges, including high levels of workplace and other discrimination, difficulties making ends meet, and confusion and fears related to U.S. immigration laws and policies. These challenges are more pronounced among some groups of immigrants, including those who live in lower-income households, Black and Hispanic immigrants, those who are likely undocumented, and those with limited English proficiency. Given the intersectional nature of these factors, some immigrants face compounding challenges across them.
• Most immigrants are employed, and about half of all working immigrants say they have experienced discrimination in the workplace, such as being given less pay or fewer opportunities for advancement than people born in the U.S., not being paid for all their hours worked, or being threatened or harassed . In addition, about a quarter of all immigrants, rising to three in ten of those with college degrees, say they are overqualified for their jobs, a potential indication that they had to take a step back in their careers when coming to the U.S. or lacked career advancement opportunities in the U.S.
• About a third (34%) of immigrants say they have been criticized or insulted for speaking a language other than English since moving to the U.S., and a similar share (33%) say they have been told they should “go back to where you came from.” About four in ten (38%) immigrants say they have ever received worse treatment than people born in the U.S. in a store or restaurant, in interactions with the police, or when buying or renting a home. Some immigrants also report being treated unfairly in health care settings. Among immigrants who have received health care in the U.S., one in four say they have been treated differently or unfairly by a doctor or other health care provider because of their racial or ethnic background, their accent or how well they speak English, or their insurance status or ability to pay for care.
• Immigrants who are Black or Hispanic report disproportionate levels of discrimination at work, in their communities, and in health care settings. Over half of employed Black (56%) and Hispanic (55%) immigrants say they have faced discrimination at work, and roughly half of college-educated Black (53%) and Hispanic (46%) immigrant workers say they are overqualified for their jobs. Nearly four in ten (38%) Black immigrants say they have been treated unfairly by the police and more than four in ten (45%) say they have been told to “go back to where you came from.” In addition, nearly four in ten (38%) Black immigrants say they have been treated differently or unfairly by a health care provider. Among Hispanic immigrants, four in ten (42%) say they have been criticized or insulted for speaking a language other than English.
• Even with high levels of employment, one third of immigrants report problems affording basic needs like food, housing, and health care. This share rises to four in ten among parents and about half of immigrants living in lower income households (those with annual incomes under $40,000). In addition, one in four lower income immigrants say they have difficulty paying their bills each month, while an additional 47% say they are “just able to pay their bills each month.”
• Among likely undocumented immigrants, seven in ten say they worry they or a family member may be detained or deported, and four in ten say they have avoided things such as talking to the police, applying for a job, or traveling because they didn’t want to draw attention to their or a family member’s immigration status . However, these concerns are not limited to those who are likely undocumented. Among all immigrants regardless of their own immigration status, nearly half (45%) say they don’t have enough information to understand how U.S. immigration laws affect them and their families, and one in four (26%) say they worry they or a family member could be detained or deported. Confusion and lack of information extend to public charge rules. About three quarters of all immigrants, rising to nine in ten among likely undocumented immigrants, say they are not sure whether use of public assistance for food, housing, or health care can affect an immigrant’s ability to get a green card or incorrectly believe that use of this assistance will negatively affect the ability to get a green card.
• About half of all immigrants have limited English proficiency, and about half among this group say they have faced language barriers in a variety of settings and interactions. About half (53%) of immigrants with limited English proficiency say that difficulty speaking or understanding English has ever made it hard for them to do at least one of the following: get health care services (31%); receive services in stores or restaurants (30%); get or keep a job (29%); apply for government financial help with food, housing, or health coverage (25%); report a crime or get help from the police (22%). In addition, one-quarter of parents with limited English proficiency say they have had difficulty communicating with their children’s school (24%). Working immigrants with limited English proficiency also are more likely to report workplace discrimination compared to those who speak English very well (55% vs. 41%).

Who Are U.S. Immigrants?

The KFF/LA Times Survey of Immigrants is a probability-based survey that is representative of the adult immigrant population in the U.S. based on known demographic data from federal surveys (see Methodology for more information on sampling and weighting). For the purposes of this project, immigrant adults are defined as individuals ages 18 and over who live in the U.S. but were born outside the U.S. or its territories.

According to 2021 federal data, immigrants make up 16% of the U.S. adult population (ages 18+). About four in ten immigrant adults identify as Hispanic (44%), over a quarter are Asian (27%), and smaller shares are White (17%), Black (8%), or report multiple races (3%). The top six countries of origin among adult immigrants in the U.S. are Mexico (24%), India (6%), China (5%), the Philippines (5%), El Salvador (3%), and Vietnam (3%) although immigrants hail from countries across the world.

The immigrant adult population largely mirrors the U.S.-born adult population in terms of gender. While similar shares of U.S.-born and immigrant adults have a college degree, immigrant adults are substantially more likely than U.S.-born adults to have less than a high school education. About four in ten (40%) immigrants are parents of a child under 18 living in their household, and a quarter (25%) of children in the U.S. have an immigrant parent.

Slightly less than half (47%) of immigrant adults report having limited English proficiency, meaning they speak English less than very well. Regardless of ability to speak English, a large majority (83%) of immigrants say they speak a language other than English at home, including about four in ten (43%) who speak Spanish at home.

A majority (55%) of U.S. adult immigrants are naturalized citizens. The remaining share are noncitizens, including lawfully present and undocumented immigrants. KFF analysis based on federal data estimates that 60% of noncitizens are lawfully present and 40% are undocumented. 2

See Appendix Table 1 for a table of key demographics about the U.S. adult immigrant population compared to the U.S.-born adult population.

Key Terms Used In This Report

Limited English Proficiency : Immigrants are classified as having Limited English Proficiency if they self-identify as speaking English less than “very well.”

Immigration Status: Immigrants are classified by their self-reported immigration status as follows:

• Naturalized Citizen : Immigrants who said they are a U.S. citizen.
• Green Card or Valid Visa : Immigrants who said they are not a U.S. citizen, but currently have a green card (lawful permanent status) or a valid work or student visa.
• Likely Undocumented Immigrant : Immigrants who said they are not a U.S. citizen and do not currently have a green card (lawful permanent status) or a valid work or student visa. These immigrants are classified as “likely undocumented” since they have not affirmatively identified themselves as undocumented.

Race and Ethnicity: Data are reported for four racial and ethnic categories: Hispanic, Black, Asian, and White based on respondents’ self-reported racial and ethnic identity. Persons of Hispanic origin may be of any race but are categorized as Hispanic for this analysis; other groups are non-Hispanic. Results for individuals in other groups are included in the total but not shown separately due to sample size restrictions. Given that this report includes a focus on experiences with discrimination and unfair treatment, we often show data by race and ethnicity rather than country of birth. Given variation of experiences within these broad racial and ethnic categories, further reports will provide additional details for subgroups within racial and ethnic groups, including more data by country of origin.

Educational Attainment: These data are based on the highest level of education completed in the U.S. and/or in other countries as self-reported by the respondent. The response categories offered were: did not graduate high school, high school graduate with a diploma, some college (including an associate degree), university degree (bachelor’s degree), and post-graduate degree (such as Master’s, PhD, MD, JD).

Country of Birth : “Country of birth” is classified based on respondents’ answer to the question “In what country were you born?” In some cases, countries are grouped into larger regions. See Appendix Table 2 for a list of regional groupings.

Why Do Immigrants Come to The U.S. And How Do They Feel About Their Life in the U.S.?

Immigrants cite both push and pull factors as reasons for coming to the U.S. For most immigrants, their major reasons for coming to the U.S. are aspirational, such as seeking better economic and job opportunities (75% say this is a major reason they came to the U.S.), a better future for their children (68%), and for better educational opportunities (62%). Half of immigrants say a major reason they or their family came to the U.S. was to have more rights and freedoms, including about three-quarters of immigrants from Central America (73%). Smaller but sizeable shares say other factors such as joining family members (42%) or escaping unsafe or violent conditions (31%) were major reasons they came. The share who cites escaping unsafe conditions as a major reason for coming to the U.S. rises to about half of likely undocumented immigrants (51%) and about six in ten (59%) immigrants from Central America.

In Their Own Words: Reasons for Coming to the U.S. from Focus Group Participants

Stories focus group participants told of why they came to the U.S. reflect the survey responses. While many pointed to economic and educational opportunities, some described leaving harsh economic and unsafe conditions in their home countries.

“I came to the U.S. hoping that my children will have better educational opportunity.” – 58-year-old Vietnamese immigrant woman in California

“[My husband] came here, and I followed him. So, he came, and I came with the kids afterwards…so we could have a better life. It’s not easy…we wanted to have…better opportunities for our children, for ourselves.” – 46-year-old Ghanian immigrant woman in New Jersey

“The thing is that there are more opportunities, and the standard of living is much better. We can make ends meet even through manual labor. That is not possible in Vietnam.” – 33-year-old Vietnamese immigrant man in Texas

“Then, my mom had to make a decision because the gangs took control of her place. They started asking for rent, extorting her life. If she didn’t pay the extortion, the rent, they were going to take me, or my siblings, or her. …since I was the oldest, she brought me, making the sacrifice of leaving behind my two siblings.” – 25-year-old Salvadorian immigrant man in California

“Actually, it wasn’t my decision to come. I left when I was 13 years old, fleeing from my country because I had a death threat, along with my eight-year-old sister. I didn’t want to come.” – 20-year-old Honduran immigrant woman in California

“Because of the earthquake, you know, I lost my house, and I wanted to go to a country with more opportunities and I came here.” – 30-year-old Haitian immigrant man in Florida

Most immigrants say moving to the U.S. has provided them more opportunities and improved their quality of life. When the survey asked immigrants to describe in their own words the best thing that has come from moving to the U.S., many similar themes arise: better opportunities, a better life in general, or a better future for their children are top mentions, as are education and work opportunities.

In Their Own Words: The Best Thing That Has Come From Moving To The U.S.

In a few words, what is the best thing that has come from you moving to the U.S.?

“Educational opportunities, economic opportunities, political and human rights, housing, food and basic needs, neighborhood safety, lower crime rates”- 28 year old Mexican immigrant woman in Nebraska

“Best education for my kids. Professional job. Healthy environment. Good system. The opportunities everywhere!” – 67-year-old Nepalese immigrant man in Maryland

“Better job, education, and economic opportunities” – 48-year-old Indian immigrant woman in North Carolina

“Education and improved quality of life in terms of obtaining basic needs” – 39-year-old Dominican immigrant woman in New Jersey

“Stability, freedom, better finance[s], having the opportunity to have a family” – 32-year-old Venezuelan immigrant man in New York

“Educational and employment opportunities for myself and my children” – 60-year-old Filipino immigrant woman in California

Most immigrants feel that moving to the U.S. has made them better off in terms of educational opportunities (79%), their financial situation (78%), their employment situation (75%), and their safety (65%). Safety stands out as an area where somewhat fewer –though still a majority–immigrants say they’re better off, particularly among White and Asian immigrants. A bare majority (54%) of Asian immigrants and fewer than half (42%) of White immigrants say their safety is better as a result of moving to the U.S., while about one in five in both groups (17% of Asian immigrants and 21% of White immigrants) say they are less safe as a result of coming to the U.S.

In Their Own Words: Safety Concerns In The U.S. From Focus Group Participants

In focus groups, some participants pointed to concerns about guns, drugs, and safety in the U.S., particularly in their children’s schools.

“Sometimes when you see on the television and they’re talking about shooting and these types of things. In Ghana we don’t have that—it’s safe, you walk around, you’re free.” – 38-year-old Ghanian immigrant woman in New Jersey

“I take my kids to school because, really, you have to go to school. But if I could have them at home and homeschool them, I’d do it. I wouldn’t let them go because I don’t feel safe anymore.” – 51-year-old Salvadorian immigrant man in California

“I’m from Mexico, and over there, you have to struggle to get a gun. Here, you can buy a gun like you’re buying candy at Walmart or somewhere.” – 37-year-old Mexican immigrant man in Texas

“Because in my children’s school, there are a lot of drugs found in its restrooms. …There is so much temptation for drugs here. It is not that safe.” – 49-year-old Vietnamese immigrant woman in Texas

Most immigrants say they are better off compared with their parents at their age, and most are optimistic about their children’s future. When asked about their standard of living, three quarters (77%) of immigrants say their standard of living is better than their parents’ was at their age. This is substantially higher than the share of U.S.-born adults who say the same (51%). Many expect an even better future for their children. Six in ten immigrants believe their children’s standard of living will be better than theirs is now, with much smaller shares saying they think it will be worse (13%) or about the same (17%). Most immigrant parents also have positive feelings about the education their children are receiving . About three in four (73%) immigrant parents rate their child’s school as either “excellent” (35%) or “good” (38%), with a further one-sixth (17%) saying the school is “fair,” and 3% give it a “poor” rating.

In Their Own Words: Hopes For Their Children’s Future From Focus Group Participants

In focus groups, many participants described hopes and dreams for their children’s futures, which often center on improved educational and job opportunities. Some pointed to sacrifices they were making in their own lives for the future benefit of the children.

“I am old, so I came here for my children. That is the thing– We must pay dearly for it when we first came here, but since then, we have seen that life here is wonderful.” – 59-year-old Vietnamese immigrant man in California

“I want my daughter to achieve what I couldn’t…I want her to be better, so she doesn’t have to go through what I went through” – 32-year-old Mexican immigrant woman in California

“…I will not change anything for my kids or for myself. I think it didn’t work out like I expected to do, but I don’t regret it because my kids have the better chance to have a better education system.” – 42-year-old Ghanian immigrant woman in California

“These children, they were born there; they have the opportunity; they get the opportunity, they go to school for free; they get food when they get food; they don’t have these problems. I can say yes, their lives are better than before the life I had.” – 48-year-old Haitian immigrant woman in Florida

How Are Immigrants Faring Economically?

Like many U.S. adults overall, immigrants’ biggest concerns relate to making ends meet: the economy, paying bills, and other financial concerns. When asked in the survey to name the biggest concern facing them and their families in their own words, about one-third of immigrants gave answers related to financial stability or other economic concerns. No other concern rose to the level of financial concerns, though other common concerns mentioned include health and medical issues, safety, work and employment issues, and immigration status.

In Their Own Words: Biggest Concerns Facing Immigrant Families Are Economic

In a few words, what is the biggest concern facing you and your family right now?

“Low income, hard to survive as day to day cost of living is going up” – 65 year old Colombian immigrant man in Texas

“There are a lot of expenses. Groceries and gas prices are at a high price. It gets overwhelming with all the bills and trying to save money in this economy right now.” – 50-year-old Pakistani immigrant man in California

“High prices for rents and new homes” – 55-year-old Congolese immigrant man in Florida

“Retirement– will I need to keep working until I die?” – 64-year-old Dutch immigrant man in Colorado

“Biggest concern is with the inflation. It’s hard to keep up with buying groceries, gas paying the bills paying the mortgage and trying to live paycheck to paycheck worrying about if you’re gonna be able to afford paying the next bill.” – 35-year-old Mexican immigrant man in Nevada

“The house payment. The interest. Everything is really expensive. The food and the university for my son.” – 51-year-old Mexican immigrant woman in California

One in three immigrants report difficulty paying for basic needs. About one in three immigrants (34%) say their household has fallen behind in paying for at least one of the following necessities in the past 12 months: utilities or other bills (22%), health care (20%), food (17%), or housing (17%). The share who reports problems paying for these necessities rises to about half among immigrants who have annual household incomes of less than $40,000 (47%). The shares who report facing these financial challenges are also larger among immigrants who are likely undocumented (51%), Black (50%), or Hispanic (43%), largely because they are more likely to be low income. Additionally, four in ten immigrant parents report problems paying for basic needs.

Beyond having trouble affording basic needs, a sizeable share of immigrants report they are just able to or have difficulties paying monthly bills. Nearly half (47%) of immigrants overall say they can pay their monthly bills and have money left over each month, while four in ten (37%) say they are just able to pay their bills and about one in six (15%) say they have difficulty paying their bills each month. Affordability of monthly bills varies widely by income as well as race and ethnicity. For example, only about a quarter (27%) of lower income immigrants say they have money left over after paying monthly bills compared with eight in ten (80%) of those with at least $90,000 in annual income. About six in ten immigrants who are White or Asian say they have money left over after paying their bills each month compared with four in ten Hispanic immigrants and one-third (32%) of Black immigrants, reflecting lower incomes among these groups.

Despite these financial struggles, close to half of immigrants say they send money to relatives or friends in their country of birth at least occasionally . Overall, about one in three (35%) immigrants say they send money occasionally or when they are able. Much smaller shares report sending either small (8%) or large (2%) shares of money on a regular basis, and overall, most immigrants (55%) do not send money to relatives or family outside the U.S.

Similar shares of immigrants report sending money to their birth country regardless of their own financial struggles. About half (49%) of those who have difficulty paying their bills each month say they send money at least occasionally, as do 44% of those who say they just pay their bills and the same share of those who have money left over after paying monthly bills. Two-thirds (65%) of Black immigrants say they send money to their birth country at least occasionally, while about half (52%) of Hispanic immigrants and four in ten Asian immigrants (42%) report sending money. A much smaller share (24%) of White immigrants say they send money to the country where they were born.

What Are Immigrants’ Experiences In The Workplace?

Two-thirds of immigrants say they are currently employed, including nearly seven in ten of those under age 30, about three quarters of those between the ages of 30-64, and a quarter of those ages 65 and over. The remaining third include a mix of students, retirees, homemakers, and few (6%) unemployed immigrants. A quarter of working immigrants say they are self-employed or the owner of a business, rising to one-third (34%) of White working immigrants and nearly three in ten (27%) Hispanic working immigrants. Jobs in construction, sales, health care, and production are the most commonly reported jobs among working immigrants. KFF analysis of federal data shows that immigrants are more likely to be employed in construction, agricultural, and service jobs than are U.S.-born citizen workers.

About a quarter of working immigrants feel they are overqualified for their job, rising to half of college-educated Black and Hispanic immigrants. A majority of working immigrants overall (68%) say they have the appropriate level of education and skills for their job, while about a quarter (27%) say they are overqualified, having more education and skills than the job requires. Just 4% say they are underqualified, having less education and skills than their job requires. In an indication that some immigrants are unable to obtain the same types of roles they were educated and trained for in the countries they came from, the share who feel overqualified for their current job rises to 31% among immigrants with college degrees. It is even higher among college-educated Black (53%) and Hispanic (46%) immigrants.

In Their Own Words: Work Experiences From Focus Group Participants

In focus groups, many immigrants expressed a desire to work and willingness to work in industries like construction, agriculture, and the service sector, which are often physically demanding. Some also described taking jobs that required less skills and education compared to those they held in their country of birth.

“We are the ones that work on the farms. We are the ones that cannot call out. We are the ones that even if our kids are sick, we can’t call our boss and say I can’t make it to work.” – 38-year-old Nigerian immigrant woman in New Jersey

“Yes, we have to put our effort in. It is more demanding. My hands and feet are sore. In exchange, I have a satisfactory level of income.” – 49-year-old Vietnamese immigrant woman in Texas

“…in Mexico, I was a preschool teacher. Being undocumented, obviously, you can’t work in the area you studied in, so now, I do cleaning.” – 36-year-old Mexican immigrant woman in Texas

“I used to work a white-collar job, now I do manual labor. My major used to hurt my mind, now it’s my arms and legs.” – 41-year-old Vietnamese immigrant woman in Texas

“My job entails picking up trash and cleaning toilets. I don’t like doing that. Who likes cleaning toilets? Who likes picking up other people’s trash, right? I don’t like it, but I’m in this job out of necessity.” – 20-year-old Honduran immigrant woman in California

“I only had [one] job back in Vietnam. Here I need to do four: a nanny, a maid, a house cleaner and a main job.” – 41-year-old Vietnamese immigrant woman in Texas

“The work in the field is hard. When it’s hot out, it gets up to 100 or 104. People work with grapes, so they pick the grapes. They work in the sun. There’s no air…. Snakes come out. Whatever comes out, you just keep picking with the machine. Snakes, mice, whatever. So, it’s hard. It’s hard.” – 32-year-old Mexican immigrant woman in California

Overall, about half of employed immigrants report working jobs that pay them by the hour (52%), one third say they are paid by salary (32%), and 15% report being paid by the job. However, these shares vary by income, immigration status, educational attainment, and race and ethnicity. Compared to immigrants with higher incomes, immigrants with lower incomes are more likely to be paid by the hour (63% of immigrants with annual household incomes of less than $40,000) or by the job (24%) than receive a salary (13%). Immigrants who are likely undocumented (30%) are about twice as likely as those with a green card or visa (14%) or naturalized citizens (12%) to report being paid by the job, and about half as likely to report being paid by salary (17%, 32%, and 36%, respectively). Immigrants with a college degree are more than three times as likely as those without a college degree to hold salaried jobs, (57% vs. 16%). Black and Hispanic immigrants are more likely to report working hourly jobs (69% and 60% respectively) than their White (42%) and Asian (40%) counterparts. Conversely, among those who are employed, almost half of Asian immigrants and more than four in ten White immigrants report being paid by salary compared with a quarter or fewer Black and Hispanic immigrants.

About half of working immigrants report experiencing discrimination at work. About half (47%) of all working immigrants say they have ever been treated differently or unfairly at work in at least one of five ways asked about on the survey, most commonly being given fewer opportunities for advancement (32%) and being paid less (29%) compared to people born in the U.S. About one in five working immigrants say they have not been paid for all their hours or overtime (22%) or have been given undesirable shifts or less control over their work hours than someone born in the U.S. doing the same job (17%). About one in ten (12%) say they have been harassed or threatened by someone in their workplace because they are an immigrant.

Highlighting the intersectional impacts of race, ethnicity, and immigration status, reports of workplace discrimination are higher among immigrant workers of color and likely undocumented immigrants. Majorities of Black (56%) and Hispanic (55%) immigrant workers report experiencing at least one form of workplace discrimination asked about. More than four in ten (44%) Asian immigrant workers also report experiencing workplace discrimination compared to three in ten (31%) White immigrant workers. About two-thirds (68%) of likely undocumented working immigrants report experiencing at least one form of unfair treatment in the workplace, with about half of this group saying they have been paid less or had fewer opportunities for advancement than people born in the U.S. for doing the same job. Undocumented immigrant workers often face even greater employment challenges due to lack of work authorization, which increases risk of potential workplace abuses, violations of wage and hour laws, and poor working as well as living conditions.

Limited English proficiency is also associated with higher levels of reported workplace discrimination. A majority (55%) of working immigrants who speak English less than very well (rising to 61% of Hispanic immigrants with limited English proficiency) report experiencing at least one form of workplace discrimination. In particular, immigrants with limited English proficiency are more likely than those who are English proficient to say they were given fewer opportunities for promotions or raises (38% vs. 27%) or were paid less than people born in the U.S. for doing the same job (34% vs. 24%).

Do Immigrants Feel Welcome In The U.S.?

Most immigrants feel welcome in their neighborhoods. Overall, two-thirds of immigrants say most people in their neighborhoods are welcoming to immigrants. Just 7% say people in their neighborhood are not welcoming, while one in four say they are “not sure” whether immigrants are welcome in their neighborhood. When it comes to the treatment of immigrants in the state in which they live, about six in ten immigrants say they feel people in their state are welcoming to immigrants, but 15% say their state is not welcoming and another one in four say they are “not sure.” When asked about whether they think most people are welcoming to immigrants outside of the state in which they live, about half (48%) of immigrants say they are “not sure” about this, which could reflect lack of experiences in other places.

Immigrants in Texas are much less likely than those in California to feel their state is welcoming to immigrants. Immigrants living in California and Texas, the two most populous states for immigrants, are about equally likely to say immigrants are welcome in their neighborhood. However, immigrants living in California are about 30 percentage points more likely than are immigrants living in Texas to say they feel people in their state are welcoming to immigrants (70% vs. 39%). Further, immigrants in Texas are more than three times as likely as those in California to say they feel their state is not welcoming to immigrants (31% vs. 8%).

What Are Immigrants’ Experiences With Discrimination And Unfair Treatment In The Community?

Despite feeling welcome in their neighborhoods, many immigrants report experiencing discrimination and unfair treatment in social and police interactions . About four in ten (38%) immigrants say they have ever received worse treatment than people born in the U.S. in at least one of the following places: in a store or restaurant (27%), in interactions with the police (21%), or when buying or renting a home (17%). In addition, about a third (34%) of immigrants say that since moving to the U.S., they have been criticized or insulted for speaking a language other than English, and a similar share (33%) say they have been told they should “go back to where you came from.”

Reports of discrimination and unfair treatment are more prevalent among people of color compared to White immigrants, illustrating the combined impacts of racism and anti-immigrant discrimination. For example, about one-third of immigrants who are Black (35%) or Hispanic (31%) and about a quarter (27%) of Asian immigrants say they have ever received worse treatment than people born in the U.S. in a store or restaurant, all higher than the share among White immigrants (16%). Notably, four in ten (38%) Black immigrants say they have ever received worse treatment than people born in the U.S. in interactions with the police, and almost half (45%) say they have been told they should “go back to where you came from.” Among Hispanic immigrants, about four in ten (42%) say they have been criticized or insulted for speaking a language other than English.

In Their Own Words: Experiences With Discrimination In The Community From Focus Group Participants

In focus groups, many immigrants shared their experiences with discrimination in the community.

“Sometimes, when you talk, the way some people will laugh. They’ll laugh at you, you say one word, they’ll be laughing, laughing, laughing. …I’m so very ashamed. I’m so ashamed, so you don’t want to talk.” – 46-year-old Ghanian immigrant woman in New Jersey

“I speak English, but obviously, I don’t speak it fluently. I have my accent, and you can tell that I’m Mexican. I’ve seen people make faces at me or whatnot.” – 37-year-old Mexican immigrant man in Texas

“We have our business around the corner. I left the house one day to go pick up my daughter, and my husband called me. There was a White guy yelling at my husband ‘Get out of my country.’ I said, ‘Tell him that it’s your country, too.’” – 36-year-old Mexican immigrant woman in California

“The guy was like…you guys should go back to your country. He used different words for us. Then he called the cops, and when the cops came, they didn’t listen to us. I was like, this is unfair. You could have listened to both sides.” – 38-year-old Nigerian immigrant woman in New Jersey

“But my son when he first came here, he did not know English. When he went to school, his classmates said, ‘You do not study well, you should go back to your country.’” – 54-year-old Vietnamese immigrant woman in California

One in four immigrants report being treated unfairly by a health care provider. In addition to discrimination at work and in community settings, a sizeable share of immigrants say they have been treated unfairly by a doctor or health care provider since coming to the U.S. Overall, among immigrants who have received health care in the U.S., one in four (rising to nearly four in ten Black immigrants) say they have been treated differently or unfairly by a doctor or other health care provider because of their racial or ethnic background, their accent or how well they speak English, or their insurance status or ability to pay for care. For more details about immigrants’ health and health care experiences, read the companion report here.

What Language Barriers Do Immigrants With Limited English Proficiency Face?

Over half of immigrants with limited English proficiency report language barriers in a variety of settings and interactions. Overall, about half of all immigrants have limited English proficiency, meaning they speak English less than very well. Among this group, about half (53%) say that difficulty speaking or understanding English has ever made it hard for them to do at least one of the following: receive services in stores or restaurants (30%); get health care services (31%); get or keep a job (29%); apply for government assistance with food, housing, or health coverage (25%); or get help from the police (22%).

Language barriers are amplified among those with lower levels of educational attainment as well as those with lower incomes. Among immigrants with limited English proficiency, those who do not have a college degree are more likely to report experiencing at least one of these difficulties than those who have a college degree (57% vs. 39%). Similarly, lower income immigrants (household incomes less than $40,000) with limited English proficiency are more likely to report facing language barriers compared to their counterparts with incomes of $90,000 or more (61% vs. 38%).

Immigrant parents with limited English proficiency also face challenges communicating with their children’s school or teacher. Among immigrant parents with limited English proficiency (52% of all immigrant parents), about one in four (24%) say difficulty speaking or understanding English has made it hard for them to communicate with their child’s school or teacher.

How Do Confusion And Worries About Immigration Laws And Status Affect Immigrants’ Daily Lives?

About seven in ten (69%) immigrants who are likely undocumented worry they or a family member may be detained or deported. However, worries about detention or deportation are not limited to those who are likely undocumented. About one in three immigrants who have a green card or other valid visa say they worry about this, as do about one in ten (12%) immigrants who are naturalized U.S. citizens.

Some immigrants report avoiding certain activities due to concerns about immigration status. Fourteen percent of immigrants overall, rising to 42% of those who are likely undocumented, say they have avoided things such as talking to the police, applying for a job, or traveling because they didn’t want to draw attention to their or a family member’s immigration status. In addition, 8% of all immigrants say they have avoided applying for a government program that helps pay for food, housing, or health care because of concerns about immigration status, including 27% of those who are likely undocumented.

More than four in ten (45%) immigrants overall say they don’t have enough information about U.S. immigration policy to understand how it affects them and their family. Lack of immigration-related knowledge is strongly related to one’s immigration status. Nearly seven in ten (69%) immigrants who are likely undocumented say they don’t have enough information, while immigrants with a valid green card or visa are split, with one half saying they have enough information and the other half saying they do not. Being a naturalized U.S. citizen doesn’t completely diminish immigrants’ confusion about U.S. immigration policy, as nearly four in ten (39%) immigrants who are naturalized citizens also say they don’t have enough information. Beyond immigration status, the groups who are more likely to say they do not have enough information to understand how immigration policy affects them and their families include immigrants with limited English proficiency, those who have been in the U.S. for fewer than five years, have lower household incomes, and/or have lower levels of education.

Across immigrants, there is a general lack of knowledge about public charge rules. Under longstanding U.S. policy, federal officials can deny an individual entry to the U.S. or adjustment to lawful permanent status (a green card) if they determine the individual is a “ public charge ” based on their likelihood of becoming primarily dependent on the government for subsistence. In 2019, the Trump Administration made changes to public charge policy that newly considered the use of previously excluded noncash assistance programs for health care, food, and housing in public charge determinations. This policy was rescinded by the Biden Administration in 2021, meaning that the use of noncash benefits, including assistance for health care, food, and housing, is not considered for public charge tests, except for long-term institutionalization at government expense. The survey suggests that many immigrants remain confused about public charge rules. Six in ten immigrants say they are “not sure” whether use of public programs that help pay for health care, housing or food can decrease one’s chances for green card approval and another 16% incorrectly believe this to be the case. Among immigrants who are likely undocumented, nine in ten are either unsure (68%) or incorrectly believe use of these types of public programs will decrease their chances for green card approval (22%).

What Are Immigrants Plans And Hopes For The Future?

Six in ten immigrants say they plan to stay in the U.S. However, about one in five immigrants say they want to move back to the country they were born in (12%) or to another country (7%), and about one in five (21%) say they are not sure. The desire to stay in the U.S. varies by immigration status as well as by race and ethnicity. Nearly two in three immigrants who are naturalized citizens say they plan to stay in the country, compared to about half of immigrants who have a green card or valid visa (54%) or immigrants who are likely undocumented (52%). Black immigrants are somewhat more likely than immigrants from other racial or ethnic backgrounds to say they plan to leave the U.S. (28%). This includes 17% who say they want to move back to their country of birth and 11% who say they want to move to a different country.

Three in four immigrants say they would choose to come to the U.S. again. Asked what they would do if given the chance to go back in time knowing what they know now, three in four immigrants (75%) say they would choose to come to the U.S. again, including large shares across ages, educational attainment, income, immigration status, and race and ethnicity. While most immigrants share this sentiment, overall, about one in ten (8%) immigrants say they would not choose to move to the U.S. and about one in five (17%) say they are not sure whether they would choose to move to the U.S.

In Their Own Words: Focus Group Participants Say They Would Choose To Come To The U.S. Again

In focus groups, many participants said that despite the challenges they face in the U.S., life is better here than in their country of birth. When asked whether they would choose to come again, many said yes and pointed to how they have more opportunities for themselves and their children to have a better standard of living.

“So I will not change anything for my kids or for myself. I think it didn’t work out like I expected to do but I don’t regret it because my kids have the better chance to have a better education system”-42-year-old Ghanian immigrant woman in California

“I can say from my experience, it was really hard. God made everything right now because I have my papers. But I agreed to stay here for my children, so that they have a better life tomorrow. Because home is worse.” – 48-year-old Haitian immigrant woman in Florida

“Of course, I would still come to America. When I compare my current state with that of my old neighbors, who are my age as well, this place is a far cry from it.” – 40-year-old Vietnamese immigrant man in Texas

“We’re happy because we have a better life, even though we always miss our homeland. But it’s better.” – 35-year-old Mexican immigrant man in California

“I can say that America gives me many options, many opportunities, so far I like it. The only thing I don’t like is how the bills are here, they come fast when you make a small amount of money many times it goes through the bill.” – 30-year-old Haitian immigrant man in Florida

Immigrants represent a significant and growing share of the U.S. population, contributing to their communities and to the nation’s culture and economy. Immigrants come to the U.S. largely seeking better opportunities and lives for themselves and their children, often leaving impoverished and sometimes dangerous conditions in their country of birth. For many, this dream has been realized despite ongoing challenges they face in the U.S.

Many immigrants recognize work as a key element to achieving their goals and are willing to fill physically demanding, lower paid jobs, for which some feel they are overqualified. Immigrants are disproportionately employed in agricultural, construction, and service jobs that are often essential for our nation’s infrastructure and operations.

Despite high rates of employment and, for many, an improved situation relative to their county of birth, many immigrants face serious challenges in the U.S. Finances are a top challenge and concern, with many having difficulty making ends meet and paying for basic needs. Moreover, although most immigrants feel welcome in their neighborhood, many face discrimination and unfair treatment on the job, in their communities, and while seeking health care. Fears of detention and deportation are a concern for immigrants across immigration statuses, sometimes affecting daily lives and interactions, particularly among those who are likely undocumented.

Some immigrants face more challenges than others, reflecting the diversity of the immigrant experience and the compounding impacts of intersectional factors such as immigration status, race and ethnicity, and income. Black and Hispanic immigrants, likely undocumented immigrants, immigrants with limited English proficiency, and lower income immigrants face disproportionate challenges given the impacts of racism, fears and uncertainties related to immigration status, language barriers, and financial challenges. Many immigrants lack sufficient information to understand how U.S. immigration laws and policies impact them and their families. This confusion and lack of certainty contributes to some immigrants avoiding accessing assistance programs that could ease financial challenges and facilitate access to health care for themselves and their children, who are often U.S.-born.

As the immigrant population in the U.S. continues to grow, recognizing their contributions and challenges of immigrants and addressing their diverse needs will be important for improving the nation’s overall health and economic prosperity.

• Racial Equity and Health Policy
• Race/Ethnicity
• Quality of Life
• TOPLINE & METHODOLOGY
• U.S.-BORN ADULT COMPARISON

Also of Interest

• Understanding the Diversity in the Asian Immigrant Experience in the U.S.: The 2023 KFF/LA Times Survey of Immigrants
• Health and Health Care Experiences of Immigrants: The 2023 KFF/LA Times Survey of Immigrants
• Political Preferences and Views on U.S. Immigration Policy Among Immigrants in the U.S.: A Snapshot from the 2023 KFF/LA Times Survey of Immigrants

Read our research on: Gun Policy | International Conflict | Election 2024

Regions & Countries

Key findings about u.s. immigrants.

View  interactive charts and  detailed tables  on U.S. immigrants.

Note: For our most recent estimates of unauthorized immigrants in the U.S.  click here .

The United States has more immigrants than any other country in the world . Today, more than 40 million people living in the U.S. were born in another country, accounting for about one-fifth of the world’s migrants. The population of immigrants is also very diverse, with just about every country in the world represented among U.S. immigrants.

Pew Research Center regularly publishes statistical portraits of the nation’s foreign-born population, which include historical trends since 1960 . Based on these portraits, here are answers to some key questions about the U.S. immigrant population.

How many people in the U.S. are immigrants?

The U.S. foreign-born population reached a record 44.8 million in 2018. Since 1965, when U.S. immigration laws replaced a national quota system , the number of immigrants living in the U.S. has more than quadrupled. Immigrants today account for 13.7% of the U.S. population, nearly triple the share (4.8%) in 1970. However, today’s immigrant share remains below the record 14.8% share in 1890, when 9.2 million immigrants lived in the U.S.

What is the legal status of immigrants in the U.S.?

Most immigrants (77%) are in the country legally, while almost a quarter are unauthorized, according to new Pew Research Center estimates based on census data adjusted for undercount . In 2017, 45% were naturalized U.S. citizens.

Some 27% of immigrants were permanent residents and 5% were temporary residents in 2017. Another 23% of all immigrants were unauthorized immigrants. From 1990 to 2007, the unauthorized immigrant population more than tripled in size – from 3.5 million to a record high of 12.2 million in 2007. By 2017, that number had declined by 1.7 million, or 14%. There were 10.5 million unauthorized immigrants in the U.S. in 2017, accounting for 3.2% of the nation’s population.

The decline in the unauthorized immigrant population is due largely to a fall in the number from Mexico – the single largest group of unauthorized immigrants in the U.S. Between 2007 and 2017, this group decreased by 2 million. Meanwhile, there was a rise in the number from Central America and Asia. 

Do all lawful immigrants choose to become U.S. citizens?

Not all lawful permanent residents choose to pursue U.S. citizenship. Those who wish to do so may apply after meeting certain requirements , including having lived in the U.S. for five years. In fiscal year 2019, about 800,000 immigrants applied for naturalization. The number of naturalization applications has climbed in recent years, though the annual totals remain below the 1.4 million applications filed in 2007.

Generally, most immigrants eligible for naturalization apply to become citizens. However, Mexican lawful immigrants have the lowest naturalization rate overall. Language and personal barriers, lack of interest and financial barriers are among the top reasons for choosing not to naturalize cited by Mexican-born green card holders, according to a 2015 Pew Research Center survey .

Where do immigrants come from?

Mexico is the top origin country of the U.S. immigrant population. In 2018, roughly 11.2 million immigrants living in the U.S. were from there, accounting for 25% of all U.S. immigrants. The next largest origin groups were those from China (6%), India (6%), the Philippines (4%) and El Salvador (3%).

By region of birth, immigrants from Asia combined accounted for 28% of all immigrants, close to the share of immigrants from Mexico (25%). Other regions make up smaller shares: Europe, Canada and other North America (13%), the Caribbean (10%), Central America (8%), South America (7%), the Middle East and North Africa (4%) and sub-Saharan Africa (5%).

Who is arriving today?

More than 1 million immigrants arrive in the U.S. each year. In 2018, the top country of origin for new immigrants coming into the U.S. was China, with 149,000 people, followed by India (129,000), Mexico (120,000) and the Philippines (46,000).

By race and ethnicity, more Asian immigrants than Hispanic immigrants have arrived in the U.S. in most years since 2009. Immigration from Latin America slowed following the Great Recession, particularly for Mexico, which has seen both decreasing flows into the United States and large flows back to Mexico in recent years.

Asians are projected to become the largest immigrant group in the U.S. by 2055, surpassing Hispanics. Pew Research Center estimates indicate that in 2065, those who identify as Asian will make up some 38% of all immigrants; as Hispanic, 31%; White, 20%; and Black, 9%.

Is the immigrant population growing?

New immigrant arrivals have fallen, mainly due to a decrease in the number of unauthorized immigrants coming to the U.S. The drop in the unauthorized immigrant population can primarily be attributed to more Mexican immigrants leaving the U.S. than coming in . 

Looking forward, immigrants and their descendants are projected to account for 88% of U.S. population growth through 2065 , assuming current immigration trends continue. In addition to new arrivals, U.S. births to immigrant parents will be important to future growth in the country’s population. In 2018, the percentage of women giving birth in the past year was higher among immigrants (7.5%) than among the U.S. born (5.7%). While U.S.-born women gave birth to more than 3 million children that year, immigrant women gave birth to about 760,000.

How many immigrants have come to the U.S. as refugees?

Since the creation of the federal Refugee Resettlement Program in 1980, about 3 million refugees have been resettled in the U.S. – more than any other country.

In fiscal 2019, a total of 30,000 refugees were resettled in the U.S. The largest origin group of refugees was the Democratic Republic of the Congo, followed by Burma (Myanmar), Ukraine, Eritrea and Afghanistan. Among all refugees admitted in fiscal year 2019, 4,900 are Muslims (16%) and 23,800 are Christians (79%). Texas, Washington, New York and California resettled more than a quarter of all refugees admitted in fiscal 2018.

Where do most U.S. immigrants live?

Nearly half (45%) of the nation’s immigrants live in just three states: California (24%), Texas (11%) and Florida (10%) . California had the largest immigrant population of any state in 2018, at 10.6 million. Texas, Florida and New York had more than 4 million immigrants each.

In terms of regions, about two-thirds of immigrants lived in the West (34%) and South (34%). Roughly one-fifth lived in the Northeast (21%) and 11% were in the Midwest.

In 2018, most immigrants lived in just 20 major metropolitan areas, with the largest populations in the New York, Los Angeles and Miami metro areas. These top 20 metro areas were home to 28.7 million immigrants, or 64% of the nation’s total foreign-born population. Most of the nation’s unauthorized immigrant population lived in these top metro areas as well.

How do immigrants compare with the U.S. population overall in education?

Immigrants in the U.S. as a whole have lower levels of education than the U.S.-born population. In 2018, immigrants were over three times as likely as the U.S. born to have not completed high school (27% vs. 8%). However, immigrants were just as likely as the U.S. born to have a bachelor’s degree or more (32% and 33%, respectively).

Educational attainment varies among the nation’s immigrant groups, particularly across immigrants from different regions of the world. Immigrants from Mexico and Central America are less likely to be high school graduates than the U.S. born (54% and 47%, respectively, do not have a high school diploma, vs. 8% of U.S. born). On the other hand, immigrants from every region except Mexico, the Caribbean and Central America were as likely as or more likely than U.S.-born residents to have a bachelor’s or advanced degree.

Among all immigrants, those from South Asia (71%) were the most likely to have a bachelor’s degree or more. Immigrants from Mexico (7%) and Central America (11%) were the least likely to have a bachelor’s or higher.

How many immigrants are working in the U.S.?

In 2017, about 29 million immigrants were working or looking for work in the U.S., making up some 17% of the total civilian labor force. Lawful immigrants made up the majority of the immigrant workforce, at 21.2 million. An additional 7.6 million immigrant workers are unauthorized immigrants , less than the total of the previous year and notably less than in 2007, when they were 8.2 million. They alone account for 4.6% of the civilian labor force, a dip from their peak of 5.4% in 2007. During the same period, the overall U.S. workforce grew, as did the number of U.S.-born workers and lawful immigrant workers.

Immigrants are projected to drive future growth in the U.S. working-age population through at least 2035. As the Baby Boom generation heads into retirement, immigrants and their children are expected to offset a decline in the working-age population by adding about 18 million people of working age between 2015 and 2035.

How well do immigrants speak English?

Among immigrants ages 5 and older in 2018, half (53%) are proficient English speakers – either speaking English very well (37%) or only speaking English at home (17%).

Immigrants from Mexico have the lowest rates of English proficiency (34%), followed by those from Central America (35%), East and Southeast Asia (50%) and South America (56%). Immigrants from Canada (96%), Oceania (82%), Europe (75%) and sub-Saharan Africa (74%) have the highest rates of English proficiency.  

The longer immigrants have lived in the U.S. , the greater the likelihood they are English proficient. Some 47% of immigrants living in the U.S. five years or less are proficient. By contrast, more than half (57%) of immigrants who have lived in the U.S. for 20 years or more are proficient English speakers.

Among immigrants ages 5 and older, Spanish is the most commonly spoken language . Some 42% of immigrants in the U.S. speak Spanish at home. The top five languages spoken at home among immigrants outside of Spanish are English only (17%), followed by Chinese (6%), Hindi (5%), Filipino/Tagalog (4%) and French (3%).

How many immigrants have been deported recently?

Around 337,000 immigrants were deported from the U.S. in fiscal 2018 , up since 2017. Overall, the Obama administration deported about 3 million immigrants between 2009 and 2016, a significantly higher number than the 2 million immigrants deported by the Bush administration between 2001 and 2008. In 2017, the Trump administration deported 295,000 immigrants, the lowest total since 2006.

Immigrants convicted of a crime made up the less than half of deportations in 2018, the most recent year for which statistics by criminal status are available. Of the 337,000 immigrants deported in 2018, some 44% had criminal convictions and 56% were not convicted of a crime. From 2001 to 2018, a majority (60%) of immigrants deported have not been convicted of a crime.

How many immigrant apprehensions take place at the U.S.-Mexico border?

The number of apprehensions at the U.S.-Mexico border has doubled from fiscal 2018 to fiscal 2019, from 396,579 in fiscal 2018 to 851,508 in fiscal 2019. Today, there are more apprehensions of non-Mexicans than Mexicans at the border. In fiscal 2019, apprehensions of Central Americans at the border exceeded those of Mexicans for the fourth consecutive year. The first time Mexicans did not make up the bulk of Border Patrol apprehensions was in 2014.

How do Americans view immigrants and immigration?

While immigration has been at the forefront of a national political debate, the U.S. public holds a range of views about immigrants living in the country. Overall, a majority of Americans have positive views about immigrants. About two-thirds of  Americans (66%) say immigrants strengthen the country “because of their hard work and talents,” while about a quarter (24%) say immigrants burden the country by taking jobs, housing and health care.

Yet these views vary starkly by political affiliation. Among Democrats and Democratic-leaning independents, 88% think immigrants strengthen the country with their hard work and talents, and just 8% say they are a burden. Among Republicans and Republican-leaning independents, 41% say immigrants strengthen the country, while 44% say they burden it.

Americans were divided on future levels of immigration. A quarter said legal immigration to the U.S. should be decreased (24%), while one-third (38%) said immigration should be kept at its present level and almost another third (32%) said immigration should be increased.

Note: This is an update of a post originally published May 3, 2017, and written by Gustavo López, a former research analyst focusing on Hispanics, immigration and demographics; and Kristen Bialik, a former research assistant.

CORRECTION (Sept. 21, 2020): An update to the methodology used to tabulate figures in the chart “Among new immigrant arrivals, Asians outnumber Hispanics” has changed all figures from 2001 and 2012. This new methodology has also allowed the inclusion of the figure from 2000. Furthermore, the earlier version of the chart incorrectly showed the  partial  year shares of Hispanic and Asian recent arrivals in 2015; the corrected  complete  year shares are 31% and 36%, respectively.

Sign up for our weekly newsletter

Fresh data delivered Saturday mornings

Key facts about U.S. immigration policies and Biden’s proposed changes

Most latinos say u.s. immigration system needs big changes, facts on u.s. immigrants, 2018, most popular.

About Pew Research Center Pew Research Center is a nonpartisan fact tank that informs the public about the issues, attitudes and trends shaping the world. It conducts public opinion polling, demographic research, media content analysis and other empirical social science research. Pew Research Center does not take policy positions. It is a subsidiary of The Pew Charitable Trusts .

The Integration of Immigrants into American Society (2015)

Chapter: summary.

The United States prides itself on being a nation of immigrants, and the nation has a long history of successfully absorbing people from across the globe. The successful integration of immigrants and their children contributes to economic vitality and to a vibrant and ever-changing culture. Americans have offered opportunities to immigrants and their children to better themselves and to be fully incorporated into U.S. society, and in exchange immigrants have become Americans —embracing an American identity and citizenship, protecting the United States through service in its military, fostering technological innovation, harvesting its crops, and enriching everything from the nation’s cuisine to its universities, music, and art.

2015 marked the 50th anniversary of the passage of the Immigration Act of 1965, which began the most recent period of mass immigration to the United States. This act abolished the restrictive quota system of the 1920s and opened up legal immigration to all the countries in the world, helping to set the stage for a dramatic increase in immigration from Asia, Africa, Latin America, and the Caribbean. At the same time, it limited the numbers of legal immigrants coming from countries in the Western Hemisphere, thus establishing restrictions on immigrants across the U.S. southern border and setting the stage for the rise in undocumented border crossers. Although the Immigration Act of 1965 exemplified the progressive ideals of the 1960s, the system it engendered may also hinder some immigrants’ and their descendants’ prospects for integration.

Today, the 41 million immigrants in the United States represent 13.1 percent of the U.S. population. The U.S.-born children of immigrants, the

second generation, represent another 37.1 million people, or 12 percent of the population. Thus, together the first and second generations account for one out of four members of the U.S. population. Whether they are successfully integrating is therefore a pressing and important question.

To address this question, the Panel on the Integration of Immigrants into American Society was charged with (1) summarizing what is known about how immigrants and their descendants are integrating into American society; (2) discussing the implications of this knowledge for informing various policy options; and (3) identifying any important gaps in existing knowledge and data availability. Another panel appointed under the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine will be publishing its final report later this year; that report will examine the economic and fiscal impacts of immigration and present projections of immigration and of related economic and fiscal trends in the future. That report will complement but does not overlap with this panel’s work on immigrant integration.

The panel defines integration as the process by which members of immigrant groups and host societies come to resemble one another. That process, which has both economic and sociocultural dimensions, begins with the immigrant generation and continues through the second generation and beyond. The process of integration depends upon the participation of immigrants and their descendants in major social institutions such as schools and the labor market, as well as their social acceptance by other Americans. Greater integration implies movement toward parity of critical life opportunities with the native-born American majority. Integration may make immigrants and their children better off and in a better position to fully contribute to their communities, which is no doubt a major objective for the immigrants themselves. If immigrants come to the United States with very little education and become more like native-born Americans by getting more education, they are considered more integrated. They are also considered better off, because more education improves their well-being. However, integration does not always improve well-being. For example, immigrants on average come to the United States with better health than native-born Americans, but as they integrate in other ways, they also become less healthy. Therefore, their well-being (as measured by health) declines. So, to the extent that available data allow, the panel measured two separate dimensions of change—integration and well-being. The first dimension, integration, speaks to whether immigrants and the native-born become more like one another; the second dimension, well-being, examines whether immigrants are better or worse off over time.

Integration is a two-way process: it happens both because immigrants experience change once they arrive and because native-born Americans change in response to immigration. The process of integration takes time, and the panel measured the process in two ways: for the first generation,

by examining what happens in the time since arrival; for the second and third generations—the children and grandchildren of immigrants—by comparisons across generations.

PATTERNS OF INTEGRATION

Overall, the panel found that current immigrants and their descendants are integrating into U.S. society. This report documents the course and extent of integration, and the report’s chapters draw 18 formal conclusions with regard to integration. Across all measurable outcomes, integration increases over time, with immigrants becoming more like the native-born with more time in the country, and with the second and third generations becoming more like other native-born Americans than their parents were.

For the outcomes of educational attainment, income, occupational distribution, living above the poverty line, residential integration, and language ability, immigrants also increase their well-being as they become more similar to the native-born and improve their situation over time. Still, the well-being of immigrants and their descendants is highly dependent on immigrant starting points and on the segment of American society—the racial and ethnic groups, the legal status, the social class, and the geographic area—into which they integrate. There are three notable outcomes where well-being declines as immigrants and their descendants converge with native-born Americans: health, crime, and the percentage of children growing up with two parents. We discuss these outcomes below.

Despite large differences in starting points among the first generation, there has been strong intergenerational progress in educational attainment. Second generation members of most contemporary immigrant groups meet or exceed the schooling level of typical third+ generation native-born Americans. This is true for both men and women.

However, this general picture masks important variations between and within groups. One difference from earlier waves of immigration is the large percentage of highly skilled immigrants now coming to the United States. More than a quarter of the foreign-born now has a college education or more, and they contribute a great deal to the U.S. scientific and technical workforce. These immigrants’ children also do exceptionally well educationally and typically attain the top tiers of the occupational distribution.

Other immigrants start with exceptionally low levels of education. This is particularly true for foreign-born Mexicans and Central Americans, who on average have less than 10 years of education. These immigrants’ children progress a great deal relative to their parents, with an average education of

more than 12 years, but they do not reach parity with the general population of native-born. This outcome mostly reflects the low levels of schooling, English proficiency, and other forms of human capital their parents bring to the United States.

Employment and Earnings

Immigrant men have higher employment rates than the second and higher generations. This employment advantage is especially dramatic among the least educated immigrants, who are much more likely to be employed than comparably educated native born men, indicating that they are filling an important niche in our economy. For second+ generation men, the trajectories vary by ethnicity and race. By this measure, Asian men are successfully integrating with the non-Hispanic white population, and Hispanic men are making gains once their lower education is taken into account. However, second generation blacks appear to be integrating with the general black native-born population, where higher education does not translate into higher employment rates. Among women the pattern is reversed, with a substantially lower employment rate for immigrants than for the native-born, but employment rates for second and higher generation women moving toward parity with the general native-born population, regardless of race.

Foreign-born workers’ earnings improve relative to the native-born the longer they reside in the United States. These overall patterns, however, are still shaped by racial and ethnic stratification. Earnings assimilation is considerably slower for Hispanic (predominantly Mexican) immigrants than for other immigrants. And although Asian immigrants and their descendants appear to do just as well as native-born whites, these comparisons become less favorable after controlling for education. Asian Americans’ schooling advantage can obscure the fact that, at least among men, they tend to earn somewhat less than third+ generation non-Hispanic whites with the same level of education.

Occupations

The occupational distributions of the first and second generations reveal a picture of intergenerational improvement similar to that for education and earnings. The groups concentrated in low-status occupations in the first generation improve their occupational position substantially in the second generation, although they do not reach parity with third+ generation Americans. Second generation children of immigrants from Mexico and Central America have made large leaps in occupational terms: 22 percent of second generation Mexican men and 31 percent of second generation

men from Central America in 2003-2013 were in professional or managerial positions. Like their foreign-born fathers, second generation men were overrepresented in service jobs, although they have largely left agricultural work. Second generation Mexican men were also less likely than their immigrant parents to take jobs in the informal sector and were more likely to receive health and retirement benefits through their employment. The occupational leap for second generation women for this period was even greater, and the gap separating them from later generation women narrowed greatly.

The robust representation of the first and second generations across the occupational spectrum in these analyses implies that the U.S. workforce has been welcoming immigrants and their children into higher-level jobs in recent decades. This pattern of workforce integration appears likely to continue as the baby boom cohorts complete their retirement over the next two decades.

Immigrants are more likely to be poor than the native-born, even though their labor force participation rates are higher and they work longer hours on average. The poverty rate for foreign-born persons was 18.4 percent in 2013, compared to 13.4 percent for the native-born. However, the poverty rate declined over generations, from over 18 percent for first generation adults (immigrants) to 13.6 percent in the second generation and 11.5 percent by the third+ generation. These overall patterns vary by race and ethnic group, with a troubling rise in poverty for the black second+ generations relative to the black first generation. The panel’s analysis also shows progress stalling among Asian Americans between the second and third generations. Overall, first generation Hispanics have the highest poverty rates, but there is much progress from the first to the second generation.

Residential Integration

Over time most immigrants and their descendants gradually become less segregated from the general population of native-born whites and more dispersed across regions, cities, communities, and neighborhoods. Earnings and occupation explain some but not all of the high levels of foreign-born segregation from other native-born residents. Length of residence also matters: recently arrived immigrants often choose to live in areas with other immigrants and thus have higher levels of residential segregation from native-born whites than immigrants who have been in the country for 10-20 years. Race plays an independent role—Asians are the least segregated

in metropolitan areas from native-born whites, followed by Hispanics and then black immigrants, who are the most segregated from native-born whites. New research also points to an independent effect of legal status, with the undocumented being more segregated than other immigrants.

Language diversity in the United States has grown as the immigrant population has increased and become more varied. Today, about 85 percent of the foreign-born population speaks a language other than English at home. The most prevalent language (other than English) is by far Spanish: 62 percent of all immigrants speak Spanish at home.

However, a more accurate measure of language integration is English-language proficiency, or how well people say they speak English. There is evidence that integration is happening as rapidly or faster now than it did for the earlier waves of mainly European immigrants in the 20th century. Today, many immigrants arrive already speaking English as a first or second language. Currently, about 50 percent of the foreign-born in surveys report they speak English “very well” or “well,” while less than 10 percent say they speak English “not at all.” There are significant differences in English proficiency by region and country of birth: immigrants from Latin America and the Caribbean generally report lower rates of English-language proficiency than immigrants from other regions, and they are most likely to say they speak English “not at all.”

The second+ generations are generally acquiring English and losing their ancestors’ language at roughly the same rates as their historical predecessors, with English monolingualism usually occurring within three generations. Spanish speakers and their descendants, however, appear to be acquiring English and losing Spanish more slowly than other immigrant groups. Yet even in the large Spanish-speaking concentration in Southern California, Mexican Americans’ transition to English dominance is all but complete by the third generation; only 4 percent still speak primarily Spanish at home, although 17 percent reported they can speak Spanish very well.

Despite the positive outlook for linguistic integration, the barriers to English proficiency, particularly for low-skilled, poorly educated, residentially segregated, and undocumented immigrant populations, are cause for concern. Funding for English-as a second-language classes has declined even as the population of English-language learners (ELL) has grown. The number of children who are ELL has grown substantially in recent decades, presenting challenges for many school systems. Since 1990, the school-age ELL population has grown at a much faster rate than the school-age population overall. Today, 9 percent of all students in the K-12 system are ELL. Their relative concentration varies widely by state and district. Overall

resources for education in English as a second language are limited for both adults and children.

Foreign-born immigrants have better infant, child, and adult health outcomes than the U.S.-born population in general and better outcomes than U.S.-born members of their ethnic group. In comparison with native-born Americans, the foreign-born are less likely to die from cardiovascular disease and all cancers combined; they experience fewer chronic health conditions, lower infant mortality rates, lower rates of obesity, and fewer functional limitations. Immigrants also have a lower prevalence of depression and of alcohol abuse.

Foreign-born immigrants live longer, too. They have a life expectancy of 80.0 years, 3.4 years more than the native-born population, and this immigrant advantage holds across all the major ethnoracial categories. Over time and generations, these advantages decline as their health status converges with the native-born.

Even though immigrants generally have better health than native-born Americans, they are disadvantaged when it comes to receiving health care to meet their preventive and medical health needs. The Affordable Care Act (ACA) seems likely to improve this situation for many poor immigrants, but undocumented immigrants are specifically excluded from all coverage under the ACA and are not entitled to any nonemergency care in U.S. hospitals.

Increased prevalence of immigrants is associated with lower crime rates—the opposite of what many Americans fear. Among men ages 18-39, the foreign-born are incarcerated at a rate that is one-fourth the rate for the native-born. Cities and neighborhoods with greater concentrations of immigrants have much lower rates of crime and violence than comparable nonimmigrant neighborhoods. This phenomenon is reflected not only across space but also over time. There is, however, evidence that crime rates for the second and third generation rise to more closely match the general population of native-born Americans. If this trend is confirmed, it may be an unwelcome aspect of integration.

Family Patterns

The panel’s analysis indicates that immigrant family-formation patterns change over time. Immigrant divorce rates and out-of-wedlock birth rates start out much lower than the rates for native-born Americans generally,

but over time and over generations these rates increase, while the likelihood of living in extended families with multiple generations under one roof declines. Thus immigrant children are much more likely to live in families with two parents than are third generation children. This is true overall and within all of the major ethnic and racial groups. Two-parent families provide children with a number of important advantages: they are associated with lower risks of poverty, more effective parenting practices, and lower levels of stress than are households with only one or no parents. The prevalence of two-parent families continues to be high for second generation children, but the percentage of children in two-parent families declines substantially between the second and third generations, converging toward the percentage for other native-born families. Since single-parent families are more likely to be impoverished, this is a disadvantage going forward.

CAUSES FOR CONCERN

The panel identified three causes for concern in the integration of immigrants: the role of legal status in slowing or blocking the integration of not just the undocumented but also their U.S.-citizen children; racial patterns in immigrant integration and the resulting racial stratification in the U.S. population; and the low percentage of immigrants who naturalize, compared with other major immigrant-receiving countries.

Legal Status

As the evidence examined by the panel made clear, an immigrant’s legal status is a key factor in that individual’s integration trajectory. Immigration statuses fall into four rough categories: permanent, temporary, discretionary, and undocumented. These statuses lie on a continuum of precariousness and security, with differences in the right to remain in the United States, rights to benefits and services from the government, ability to work, susceptibility to deportation, and ability to participate fully in the economic, political, social, and civic life of the nation. In recent decades, these statuses have multiplied due to changes in immigration policy, creating different paths and multiplying the roadblocks to integration into American society.

People often transition between different immigration statuses. Over half of those receiving lawful permanent resident (LPR) status in 2013 were already residing in the United States and adjusted their status to permanent from a visa that allowed them to work or study only temporarily in the United States. Many immigrants thus begin the process of integration into American society—working, sending their children to school, interacting with neighbors, and making friends—while living with a temporary status

that does not automatically put them on the path to LPR or citizenship. Likewise, some undocumented immigrants live here for decades with no legal status while putting down deep roots in American society. Currently, there are insufficient data on changes in the legal status of immigrants over time to measure the presumably large effects of those trajectories on the process of integration.

Since the mid-1990s, U.S. immigration policy has become more punitive toward the undocumented, and interior enforcement policies have attempted to prevent their employment and long-term residence in this country. An estimated 11.3 million (26%) of the foreign-born in the United States are undocumented. Their number rose rapidly from the 1990s through 2007, reaching a peak of 12.2 million, but then fell with the Great Recession in 2008 and a sharp decline in immigration from Mexico, plateauing at 11.3 million since then. Although undocumented immigrants come from all over the globe and one in ten undocumented immigrants come from Asia, more than three-quarters are from North and Central America. The majority of the undocumented residents in the United States today—about 52 percent—are from Mexico.

It is a political, not a scientific, question whether we should try to prevent the integration of the undocumented or provide a path to legalization, and thus not within this panel’s purview. However, the panel did find evidence that the current immigration policy has several effects on integration. First, it has only partially affected the integration of the undocumented, many of whom have lived in the United States for decades. The shift in recent years to a more intense regime of enforcement has not prevented the undocumented from working, but it has coincided with a reduction in their wages. Undocumented students are less likely than other immigrants to graduate from high school and enroll in college, undermining their long-term earnings capacity.

Second, the immigration impasse has led to a plethora of laws targeting the undocumented at local, state, and federal levels. These laws often contradict each other, creating variation in integration policies across the country. Some states and localities provide in-state college tuition for undocumented immigrants, some provide driver’s licenses, and some are declaring themselves to be sanctuary cities. In other localities, there are restrictive laws, such as prohibitions on renting housing to undocumented immigrants or aggressive local enforcement of federal immigration laws.

Finally, the current system includes restrictions on the receipt of public benefits, and those restrictions have created barriers to the successful integration of the U.S.-citizen children of the undocumented, even though, as citizens, it is in the country’s best interest that these children integrate successfully. Today, 5.2 million children in the United States reside with at least one undocumented immigrant parent. The vast majority of these

children—4.5 million—are U.S.-born citizens. Included in this total are almost 7 percent of students in kindergarten through high school (K-12), presenting important challenges for schools, including behavioral issues among these children. Policies designed to block the integration of undocumented immigrants or individuals with a temporary status can have the unintended effect of halting or hindering the integration of U.S. citizens and LPRs in mixed-status families. Laws are often designed to apply to individuals, but their effects ripple through households, families, and communities, with measurable long-term negative impacts on children who are lawful U.S. citizens.

The panel found that patterns of immigrant integration are shaped by race. Although there is evidence of integration and improvement in socioeconomic outcomes for blacks, Latinos, and Asians, their perceived race still matters, even after controlling for all their other characteristics. Black immigrants and their descendants are integrating with native-born non-Hispanic whites at the slowest rate. Asian immigrants and their descendants are integrating with native-born non-Hispanic whites most quickly, and Latinos are in between. The panel found some evidence of racial discrimination against Latinos and some evidence that their overall trajectories of integration are shaped more by the large numbers of undocumented in their group than by a process of racialization. At this time, it is not possible with the data available to the panel to definitively state whether Latinos are experiencing a pattern of racial exclusion or a pattern of steady progress that could lead to a declining significance of group boundaries. What can be reasonably concluded is that progress in reducing racial discrimination and disparities in socioeconomic outcomes in the United States will improve the outcomes for the native-born and immigrants alike.

Naturalization Rates

Birthright citizenship is one of the most powerful mechanisms of formal political and civic inclusion in the United States. Yet naturalization rates in the United States lag behind other countries that receive substantial numbers of immigrants. The overall level of citizenship among working-age immigrants (15-64 years old) who have been living in the United States for at least 10 years is 50 percent. After adjustments to account for the undocumented population in the United States, a group that is barred by law from citizenship, the naturalization rate among U.S. immigrants rises slightly but is still well below many European countries and far lower than other traditional receiving countries such as Australia and Canada. This

is surprising since the vast majority of immigrants, when surveyed, report wanting to become a U.S. citizen. Moderate levels of naturalization in the United States appear to stem not from immigrants’ lack of interest or even primarily from the bureaucratic process of applying for citizenship but from somewhere in the process by which individuals translate their motivation to naturalize into action. Further research is needed to clearly identify the barriers to naturalization. Low naturalization rates have important implications for political integration because the greatest barriers to immigrants’ political participation, especially participation in elections, are gaining citizenship and registering to vote after becoming a citizen.

EFFECT OF IMMIGRATION ON SOCIETY

Previous immigration from around the globe changed the United States. It is much more difficult to see and to measure the ways in which immigration is changing the country now because it is notoriously hard to measure cultural changes while they are occurring. It is also difficult because the United States is a very heterogeneous society already, and new immigration adds to that diversity. It is difficult to measure the society that immigrants are integrating into when the society itself does not remain static. The major way in which the panel outlines how immigration has affected American society is by documenting the growth in racial, ethnic, and religious diversity in the U.S. population, which has resulted in increased intergroup contact and the transformation of American communities and institutions. 1

In 1970, 83 percent of the U.S. population was non-Hispanic white; today, that proportion is about 62 percent, and immigration is responsible for much of that change, both directly through arrival of foreign-born immigrants and indirectly through the higher birth rates of immigrants and their children. Hispanics have grown from just over 4.5 percent of the total U.S. population in 1970 to about 17 percent today. Asians are currently the fastest-growing immigrant group in the country, as immigration from Mexico has declined; Asians represented less than 1 percent of the population in 1970 but are 6 percent today. Black immigration has also grown. In 1970, blacks were just 2.5 percent of the foreign-born; today, they are 9 percent of immigrants residing in the United States.

Ethnic and racial diversity resulting from immigration is no longer limited to a few states and cities that have histories of absorbing immigrants. Today, new immigrants are moving throughout the country, including into areas that have not witnessed a large influx of immigrants for centuries.

___________________

1 As discussed above, this report does not examine the effects of immigration on the U.S. economy. That is the charge of the other National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine panel.

This new pattern has changed the landscape of immigration. The states with the fastest growth rates of immigrant population today are primarily in the South. The presence of racial- and religious-minority immigrants in new localities and in nonmetropolitan areas raises new challenges of integration and incorporation for many communities and small towns that are unaccustomed to substantial minority and immigrant populations. At the same time, there are many localities in new destination areas that have adopted welcoming strategies to encourage immigrant workers and foster their integration into the community.

In urban areas across the country, immigrants and descendants have been “pioneer integrators” of previously all-white or all-black spaces. The result is that many neighborhoods are more diverse now than they have ever been, and the number of all-white census tracts has fallen. Yet racial segregation is still prevalent throughout the country, with blacks experiencing the most segregation from whites, followed by segregation of Hispanics and then Asians from the non-Hispanic white population.

While three-quarters of all immigrants are Christian, immigration is also bringing new religious diversity to the United States. Four percent of the foreign-born are Muslim, and although Muslim immigrants are doing better than the national average in education and income, they do report encountering high levels of prejudice and discrimination. Religious diversity is especially notable among Asian immigrants, with sizable numbers of Hindus, Buddhists, and those who do not identify with any religion. Participation in religious organizations helps immigrants and may shore up support for the religious organizations they support, even as native-born Americans’ religious affiliation declines.

Immigrants have also contributed enormously to America’s shifting patterns of racial and ethnic mixing in intimate and marital relationships. Marriages between the native-born and immigrants appear to have increased significantly over time. Today, about one of every seven new marriages is an interracial or interethnic marriage, more than twice the rate a generation ago. Perhaps as a result, the social and cultural boundaries between native-born and foreign-born populations in the United States are much less clearly defined than in the past. Moreover, second and third generation individuals from immigrant minority populations are far more likely to marry higher generation native-born partners than are their first generation counterparts. These intermarriages also contribute to the increase in mixed-race Americans.

An additional important effect of intermarriage is on family networks. A recent survey reported that more that 35 percent of Americans said that one of their “close” kin is of a different race. Integration of immigrants and their descendants is a major contributor to this large degree of intermixing. In the future, the lines between what Americans today think of as separate

ethnoracial groups may become much more blurred. Indeed, immigrants become Americans not just by integrating into our neighborhoods, schools, and workplaces, but also into our families. Very quickly, “they” become “us.”

THE NEED FOR BETTER DATA

The panel was handicapped in its work by the dearth of available longitudinal data to measure immigrant integration. This is a long-standing problem that has become increasingly critical as immigration to the United States has increased and as immigrants have become dispersed throughout the country. The panel made several specific recommendations for data collection that are outlined in detail in Chapter 10 . These include the following:

• That the federal government collect data on generational status by adding a question on birthplace of parents to the American Community Survey, in order to measure the integration of the second generation.
• That the Current Population Survey test and if possible add a question on legal statuses at entry or at present, leaving those in undocumented status to be identified by process of elimination, and that other major national surveys with large numbers of immigrants also add a question of this type to identify legal status.
• That any legislation to regularize immigrant status in the future for the undocumented include a component to survey those who apply and to follow them to understand the effects of legalization.
• That administrative data held by U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services on visa type be linked to census and other government data, as other countries have done, and that such data be made available to researchers in secure data enclaves. Such data would significantly help federal, state, and local officials understand and develop policies to improve the integration of immigrants into U.S. society.

This page intentionally left blank.

The United States prides itself on being a nation of immigrants, and the country has a long history of successfully absorbing people from across the globe. The integration of immigrants and their children contributes to our economic vitality and our vibrant and ever changing culture. We have offered opportunities to immigrants and their children to better themselves and to be fully incorporated into our society and in exchange immigrants have become Americans - embracing an American identity and citizenship, protecting our country through service in our military, fostering technological innovation, harvesting its crops, and enriching everything from the nation's cuisine to its universities, music, and art.

Today, the 41 million immigrants in the United States represent 13.1 percent of the U.S. population. The U.S.-born children of immigrants, the second generation, represent another 37.1 million people, or 12 percent of the population. Thus, together the first and second generations account for one out of four members of the U.S. population. Whether they are successfully integrating is therefore a pressing and important question. Are new immigrants and their children being well integrated into American society, within and across generations? Do current policies and practices facilitate their integration? How is American society being transformed by the millions of immigrants who have arrived in recent decades?

To answer these questions, this new report from the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine summarizes what we know about how immigrants and their descendants are integrating into American society in a range of areas such as education, occupations, health, and language.

READ FREE ONLINE

Welcome to OpenBook!

You're looking at OpenBook, NAP.edu's online reading room since 1999. Based on feedback from you, our users, we've made some improvements that make it easier than ever to read thousands of publications on our website.

Do you want to take a quick tour of the OpenBook's features?

Show this book's table of contents , where you can jump to any chapter by name.

...or use these buttons to go back to the previous chapter or skip to the next one.

Jump up to the previous page or down to the next one. Also, you can type in a page number and press Enter to go directly to that page in the book.

Switch between the Original Pages , where you can read the report as it appeared in print, and Text Pages for the web version, where you can highlight and search the text.

To search the entire text of this book, type in your search term here and press Enter .

Share a link to this book page on your preferred social network or via email.

View our suggested citation for this chapter.

Ready to take your reading offline? Click here to buy this book in print or download it as a free PDF, if available.

Get Email Updates

Do you enjoy reading reports from the Academies online for free ? Sign up for email notifications and we'll let you know about new publications in your areas of interest when they're released.

• Share full article

Advertisement

Supported by

Coming to America

By Sam Roberts

• May 31, 2018

In “Journeys: An American Story” (RosettaBooks), Andrew Tisch and Mary Skafidas have compiled 72 essays by immigrants or their descendants, some of whom are famous, like Michael R. Bloomberg, while others are everyday — albeit exceptional — Americans. The diverse tales, presented together, show how immigrants have built and strengthened the culture of New York and the country at-large.

Mr. Tisch, the co-chairman of the board of the Loews Corporation, decided to ask celebrities and acquaintances to recount immigration stories after researching his own family history in preparation for a speech at a swearing-in ceremony of new citizens. (He contributed an essay to the book, as did Ms. Skafidas).

Ms. Skafidas, Loews’ vice president of investor relations and corporate communications, was born in the United States and had Greek immigrant parents but didn’t speak English until she was 6; her aunt was undocumented.

Among the book’s featured raconteurs are Pete Gogolak, the former Giants place kicker who was 14 when he fled Hungary; Linda Hills, a great-granddaughter of Andrew Carnegie; Arlene and Alan Alda; and the executive Morris Sarnoff, who emigrated from Belarus with his brothers David and Lew and their mother after their father had worked for five years as a house painter in New York to earn enough for their passage.

Also, Tony Bennett, who was the first person in his family to be born in a hospital; and Elaine L. Chao, now the Transportation Secretary, who, speaking no English, struggled to understand the concept of Halloween in her third grade class in Queens.

John Zaccaro Jr., whose mother was Representative Geraldine A. Ferraro, the first woman nominated for vice president on a major party ticket, recalls that his grandmother couldn’t write her own name, but understood the value of education, especially for a daughter.

“If you educate a boy, you educate a boy alone,” she would say. “If you educate a girl, you educate a family.”

Among the most poignant essays are those by less recognizable figures, including the first Asian-American to be ordained as a rabbi in the United States; an oncology nurse from Ukraine (she observes that cancer “humbles the most powerful people”); a Harvard Business School graduate from Uganda; a Palestinian who left a home “where the daily struggles of life often bring out the worst human traits;” and an orphan from China who, adopted in the United States, said: “No, I wasn’t born here. No, I can’t become president. But I am nonetheless an American.”

“Journeys” is heavy on the authors’ orbit of friends and acquaintances, a fairly wide one, to be sure. Not surprisingly, the anthology focuses on the success stories, not the fewer failures. (Profits will be donated to the New-York Historical Society and the Statue of Liberty-Ellis Island Foundation.)

“We prefer to think of our country as a mosaic, tiles of many different colors and shapes which are indistinguishable from afar but quite distinctive the closer you get,” the authors write. But a mosaic is only as strong as its grout, they warn.

“After all, without the grout — our shared sense of ideology in democracy, opportunity, freedom of expression and equality — the mosaic would only be a pile of stones.”

The Migrant Crisis in New York City

The arrival of more than 100,000 migrants over the past year has become a crisis for the city’s shelter system, schools and budget..

The Crisis, Explained: Why are large numbers of migrants coming to New York City? And how is the city responding? Here is what to know .

Debit Cards For Migrants: New York City officials are moving ahead with a contentious plan to give migrant families debit cards for food and baby supplies, with the first cards being distributed  to a small handful of new arrivals.

Missing School to Work : Migrant children selling candy during school hours can frequently be seen in the subway. The situation breaks several laws and rules, but whose job is it to do something about it ?

A Growing Group: Amid the influx of people from Latin America, thousands of Chinese migrants  have also made their way to New York City, with many crossing into the United States through the southern border.

A Struggling Relocation Effort: A $25 million program designed to resettle 1,250 migrant families across New York State is floundering, having moved only about 170 households  and barely easing the burden on the city’s shelter system.

A Plan Under Fire: A pilot program in New York City to give 500 migrant families with children debit cards to help them pay for food and baby supplies became an easy target for right-wing critics. Here’s what to know .

• IPR Intranet

INSTITUTE FOR POLICY RESEARCH

U.s. immigration: rhetoric and reality.

IPR experts' findings illuminate how the two can differ, with some counterintuitive results

Get all our news

Subscribe to newsletter

I think quantitative work is really important because it allows us to paint a more complete, holistic picture of the history of immigration.”

Elisa Jácome IPR economist

The daughter of an immigrant holds a flag at her mother's naturalization ceremony in 2019.

Even before the United States was founded, Benjamin Franklin worried about the number of Germans “swarming” into the colony of Pennsylvania in 1751, accusing them of “herding together [to] establish their Language and Manners to the Exclusion of ours.” More than two centuries later, we hear echoes of this same rhetoric, such as in the 2016 presidential campaign when then-candidate Donald Trump exhorted , “This is a country where we speak English!”

In comparing the two, one has to wonder: Have opinions about immigration changed at all over the course of American history—and how does such rhetoric stack up to reality?

Using the latest quantitative methods paired with archival and historical data, IPR faculty experts are examining key aspects of immigrants’ integration into American society, uncovering some unexpected answers to these century-old questions.

Do More Immigrants Bring Crime?

Do immigrants hurt the economy, do immigrants fail to assimilate, quantitative methods and immigration studies.

Nearly half of Americans polled in June thought immigrants to the U.S. are making crime worse—and this belief is not new.

Elisa J ácome , an IPR economist, and her colleagues delved into 150 years of census records to ask, were immigrants ever more likely to commit crimes than those born in the U.S.? Are today’s immigrants more likely to be criminals than those in the past? To find out, she and her colleagues analyzed incarceration rates over time.

They established that between 1870 and 2020, incarceration rates for immigrants were lower than for U.S.-born men. Since 1960, the gap between the two groups has widened. Today, immigrants are 60% less likely to be incarcerated than all U.S.-born men, and 30% less likely to be incarcerated than White U.S.-born men.

The verdict: Immigrants are not more crime-prone than their U.S.-born counterparts. And first-generation immigrants are doing better overall—not just in terms of incarceration rates—than are U.S.-born men, especially among those with lower levels of education. Overall, immigrant men are more likely to be working than U.S.-born men with similar education backgrounds, Jácome explains. They are also more likely to be married and to be living with children.

Previous economic studies have shown that structural changes like globalization and technological change have had more negative effects on less-educated U.S.-born men.

“It appears that immigrants might have found a way to remain relatively shielded from or to better withstand these shocks,” she said.

What makes immigrants different? Jácome says that’s next on her research agenda, but that some possible explanations are that they possess certain positive traits, like ambition or grit, or that they are more mobile and relocate more readily for work.

That immigrants take jobs from U.S.-born people is a well-known, persistent, and seemingly logical opinion. Those who endorse it believe that if jobs are scarce, immigrants will take whatever employment is available at lower wages.

Members of Congress have expressed this view since the 1880s when mass immigration to the U.S. began, as computational linguist and IPR associate Rob Voigt and his fellow researchers find in a recent study. The speaker’s political party and the immigrant group’s home country have changed over time, but the concern about immigrant labor has continued across the last 140 years.

Chinese immigrants were framed as threatening in the 19th century; today, Mexican immigrants are the people categorized by words like “crime,” “labor,” and “legality,” once applied to the Chinese.

Voigt and his colleagues’ research shows that since World War II, overall political speech about immigration has become more positive than in the past. However, he points out, Mexican immigrants today, like the Chinese over a century ago, are special targets and specially contentious.

“There are political actors who can make use of the idea that all of our problems can be blamed on this one group,” Voigt said. “Mexican immigration contemporarily fills a similar kind of social role” as the Chinese did from 1880–1920.

But does the rhetoric reflect today’s reality?

Strategy professor and IPR associate Benjamin Jones and his colleagues studied immigrants as both employees and as entrepreneurs. They examined how often immigrants started companies between 2005 and 2010, the number of jobs the firms created, and then compared them to firms created by U.S.-born entrepreneurs. Results indicate that immigrants are far more likely to start companies and that they create more jobs than they take.

“Ironically, the result is exactly the opposite of the usual narrative. It seems like immigrants actually improve the economic outcomes for native-born workers, ” Jones told Kellogg Insight.

Jácome takes a longer view of immigrant economic activity in the U.S., examining the economic success of immigrants and their children over the last 140 years. She and her colleagues compare the earnings of the sons of immigrants, or the second generation, to the earnings of sons of U.S.-born men.

But do such data live up to the oft-told “immigrant story,” as Jácome says, of parents coming to the U.S. to offer their children a brighter future?

Jácome says that to have a comprehensive understanding of immigrant assimilation, it is important to also uncover the success of the children of immigrants. She and her colleagues find that the second generation of immigrants, from nearly every country, whose parents started in the bottom of the income distribution when they arrived in the U.S. are more likely to move up the socioeconomic ladder than the children of U.S.-born people.

“Historically, immigrants tended to go to areas in the U.S. that had more opportunities,” Jácome explained. “It's unclear whether they were going there to maximize their own opportunities or whether they were choosing locations that would be good for their children.”

Due to data limitations, Jácome and her colleagues are unsure if more recent immigrants’ children are succeeding because of their willingness to locate where the economic opportunity beckons. But she believes that choice of location is still key.

Today, as well as throughout U.S. history, critics and members of the public have descried the failure, or even refusal, of immigrants to assimilate into American culture. Certain groups come under special suspicion. In the late 19th century, it was the Chinese. In the early 21st century, it is Mexicans. Muslims and people from the Middle East and North Africa, two groups often erroneously lumped together, are also viewed as different and possibly dangerous.

According to research by IPR political scientist Tabitha Bonilla , immigrants—who otherwise would be considered assimilated when judged by markers such as how well they speak English or their education—are seen as permanent outsiders due to their religion or race. Bonilla and her co-author conclude that Muslims are seen as a “monolithic group” whatever their ethnic origins, and all may be seen with suspicion and discriminated against as such.

What do we know about immigrant assimilation? One measure is how well they come to speak English. In new research, Voigt and his colleagues examine how much and how well immigrants and refugees in the early 20th century spoke their new language.

Using recorded oral history interviews of Ellis Island immigrants who arrived between 1893 and 1957, the researchers analyzed their vocabulary in English, syntax, how fast they spoke, and their “accentedness,” or the accuracy and fluency of their speech. They also determined, through painstaking hand-coding, who was a refugee fleeing violence or persecution and who was an immigrant coming for economic reasons or because they had family in the U.S.

They find that refugees fleeing persecution attained higher levels of English by the end of their lives than immigrants who arrived for economic reasons or to join family. This suggests that refugees are especially motivated to learn English as they cannot return to their homeland. The researchers note the level of assimilation as measured by how well they came to speak English had nothing to do with government refugee assistance policies—as they did not exist at the time. Rather, the U.S. culture the refugees entered at the time enabled their assimilation.

 “Even in this period where there is not official government support for folks as refugees,” Voigt said, that refugees could learn English as well as they did shows that “day-to-day social conditions” helped to enable assimilation.

Understanding the reality of immigration’s effects on the U.S. and the effects of the U.S. on immigrants and refugees increasingly relies on collecting and analyzing vast amounts of data. IPR scholars are pushing the boundaries of quantitative analysis in their studies of these topics.

Both Jácome and Voigt deploy large datasets in their studies of immigration and see quantitative methods as key to their work, but they are not the only IPR faculty doing so.

IPR associate Joseph Ferrie , an economic historian, pioneered work on immigrant economic life using longitudinal data from censuses, passenger ship records, tax lists, and city directories. His overview of immigration in American economic history details how immigration changed the U.S., and the U.S. changed immigrants, from the 1600s to the present day.

IPR sociologist Julia Behrman is charting new quantitative data availability, measurements, and investigations of immigration to the U.S. and other countries, as well as immigration policies. Her work points to how scholarship can inform policy by identifying the intended and unintended effects of immigration policies and enforcement.

Using data from waves of the General Social Survey conducted 2006–18, Behrman finds that Hispanic immigrants living in states with the most punitive limitations on immigration report a larger ideal family size than the non-Hispanic White residents of those states. Her analysis suggests that these results may be largely driven by undocumented immigrants. The threat of harsh immigration policies and the vulnerability immigrants feel in response are possible causes of the higher ideal family size—which may differ from the actual number of children in a family.

“Quantitative analysis allows us to compare ideal family sizes of respondents living in very different immigration policy contexts,” Behrman said. “At the same time, use of nationally representative data allows for generalizability, thus providing a fuller understanding of how representative the trends we see are.“

In his work, Voigt says, he is using such computational methods to understand how small-scale and personal attitudes and decision making, as well as interactions between people, might become larger patterns that researchers can measure.

People have strong feelings and stubborn attitudes about immigration, and quantitative analysis can cut through that, Jácome said.

“In my work with these co-authors, the goal has been to understand how patterns have changed over time, in particular, because there is this sort of nostalgia for the old immigrant groups in the U.S. and this notion that immigrants today are very different,” Jácome said. “I think quantitative work is really important because it allows us to paint a more complete, holistic picture of the history of immigration.”

Julia Behrman is assistant professor of sociology and an IPR fellow. Tabitha Bonilla is associate professor of human development and social policy and an IPR fellow. Joseph Ferrie is professor of economics and an IPR associate. Elisa Jácome is assistant professor of economics and an IPR fellow. Benjamin Jones is Gordon and Llura Gund Family Professor of Entrepreneurship and an IPR associate. Rob Voigt is assistant professor of linguistics and an IPR associate.

Photo credit: iStock

Published: November 28, 2023.

Related Research Stories

Elizabeth Tipton to Become a 2024 AERA Fellow

Reckoning with the Impossible

New IPR Research: January 2024

Opinion | What motivates immigrants like me to come to…

Share this:.

• Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)
• Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window)
• Click to share on Reddit (Opens in new window)
• Click to print (Opens in new window)
• Opinion Columns
• Guest Commentary
• Letters to the Editor
• Editorial Board
• Endorsements

Opinion | What motivates immigrants like me to come to America?

This Thursday, I’ll be getting together with family to celebrate Thanksgiving for only the sixth time. I had never celebrated this holiday before 2017, because I’m an immigrant and I wasn’t fortunate to live in America until then.

It’s been a hard road to get here. I left everything behind in my home country of Argentina. To make it through the legal immigration system, like others before me and since, I had to jump through rings of fire. So why did I go through all this trouble?

Some politicians and commentators paint the motivation of immigrants as nefarious: they claim we want to destroy America, we want to turn it into a version of some of the awful places we escaped. But the exact opposite is true of me. I didn’t come here because I hate America and want to see it burn, I came here because I value America immensely and I want to see it fully live up to its founding principles.

I love America for its core, founding ideals; ideals that are universally inspiring and reflected in the freedoms we enjoy. Life, liberty, the pursuit of happiness—these ideas recognize every person’s right to pursue their values, to live and work according to their own judgment and rise to the extent that their work and ability will permit. These are also reflected in the ambitious American spirit—the innovation, the eagerness to work, produce and build. This drive brought to life some of the greatest scientific and technological innovations (from the internet to the first successful organ transplant), and the most important political document in the history of mankind: the Declaration of Independence.

Such is the power of these values and ideas that there are “Americans in spirit” all over the world who have never set foot here. I personally admired these ideas long before I was allowed to move here. I longed for and tried to live by these values, despite growing up in a Latin American culture hostile to individualism. My home country’s culture leaned increasingly towards socialism and authoritarianism—with the catastrophic material and spiritual consequences that are typical of leftist regimes. Despite this cultural influence, I felt attracted to American ideals more than the ones from my own country.

Looking at America from afar, I felt that that was the place where I belonged, and that being born elsewhere was an accident I needed to rectify. I am infinitely fortunate and grateful I was able to do so, because my life in America is beyond what I could’ve ever imagined six years ago. I came here with one goal in mind: to build a better life for myself by working hard in a career that I love—a dream that was getting more and more out of reach at home. I’ve only been here six years, but I’ve already accomplished these goals and more. I’ve reached a standard of living and a degree of happiness I hadn’t experienced before. I have immense hope for the future—a future that I cannot imagine being able to reach elsewhere.

I am not an outlier, however. For generations, immigrants have come to America from all over the world in search of the same opportunities to build their lives here, to start businesses, to innovate. They’ve brought with them their ideas, drive and their love for this country’s virtues. They’ve revitalized this country. Andrew Carnegie, Ayn Rand, Sergei Brin—these are just a few examples of immigrants who have greatly influenced America.

While I’ve had to overcome many obstacles to live here, and while I disagree with the un-American, anti-individualist views and policies of today’s political leaders, I never became disenchanted with the idea of America. I’ve always kept in mind that America’s foundational ideals are essentially good, and this is what always kept me pushing and fighting for this country to live up to the promises in the Declaration. I often wish some native-born Americans would see America through the eyes of immigrants like me.

This Thanksgiving, as we go around the table with my extended family sharing what each of us is grateful for, I’ll say the exact same thing I’ve said the previous five times: this year, as every other year since 2017, I am most grateful to be living in America.

Agustina Vergara Cid is an associate fellow at the Ayn Rand Institute. You can follow her on Twitter @agustinavcid

• Newsroom Guidelines
• Report an Error

More in Opinion

Opinion | Vince Fong: The Legislature is gearing up to approve a budget plan based on gimmicks and phony cuts

Opinion | Orange County’s streetcar struggles serve as a warning to surrounding communities

Opinion | Is ‘Havana Syndrome’ Russian aggression or another media conspiracy theory?

Opinion | Don’t stall accessibility: Senate Bill 915 will bring AVs to a halt for Californians

• History Classics
• Your Profile
• Find History on Facebook (Opens in a new window)
• Find History on Twitter (Opens in a new window)
• Find History on YouTube (Opens in a new window)
• Find History on Instagram (Opens in a new window)
• Find History on TikTok (Opens in a new window)
• This Day In History
• History Podcasts
• History Vault

U.S. Immigration Timeline

By: History.com Editors

Updated: August 23, 2022 | Original: December 21, 2018

The United States has long been considered a nation of immigrants, but attitudes toward new immigrants by those who came before have vacillated over the years between welcoming and exclusionary. Thousands of years before Europeans began crossing the vast Atlantic by ship and settling en masse, the first immigrants arrived in North America from Asia. They were Native American ancestors who crossed a narrow spit of land connecting Asia to North America at least 20,000 years ago, during the last Ice Age .

By the early 1600s, communities of European immigrants dotted the Eastern seaboard, including the Spanish in Florida, the British in New England and Virginia, the Dutch in New York, and the Swedes in Delaware. Some, including the Pilgrims and Puritans, came for religious freedom. Many sought greater economic opportunities. Still others, including hundreds of thousands of enslaved Africans, arrived in America against their will.

Below are the events that have shaped the turbulent history of immigration in the United States since its birth.

White People of 'Good Character' Granted Citizenship

January 1776: Thomas Paine publishes a pamphlet, “ Common Sense ,” that argues for American independence. Most colonists consider themselves Britons, but Paine makes the case for a new American. “Europe, and not England, is the parent country of America. This new world hath been the asylum for the persecuted lovers of civil and religious liberty from every part of Europe,” he writes.

March 1790: Congress passes the first law about who should be granted U.S. citizenship. The Naturalization Act of 1790 allows any free white person of “good character,” who has been living in the United States for two years or longer, to apply for citizenship. Without citizenship, nonwhite residents are denied basic constitutional protections, including the right to vote, own property, or testify in court.

August 1790: The first U.S. census takes place. The English are the largest ethnic group among the 3.9 million people counted, though nearly one in five Americans are of African heritage.

Irish Immigrant Wave

1815: Peace is re-established between the United States and Britain after the War of 1812 . Immigration from Western Europe turns from a trickle into a gush, which causes a shift in the demographics of the United States. This first major wave of immigration lasts until the Civil War .

Between 1820 and 1860, the Irish —many of them Catholic—account for an estimated one-third of all immigrants to the United States. Some 5 million German immigrants also come to the United States, many of them making their way to the Midwest to buy farms or settle in cities including Milwaukee, St. Louis and Cincinnati.

1819: Many of newcomers arrive sick or dying from their long journey across the Atlantic in cramped conditions. The immigrants overwhelm major port cities, including New York City , Boston , Philadelphia and Charleston. In response, the United States passes the Steerage Act of 1819 requiring better conditions on ships arriving to the country. The Act also calls for ship captains to submit demographic information on passengers, creating the first federal records on the ethnic composition of immigrants to the United States.

1849: America’s first anti-immigrant political party, the Know-Nothing Party forms, as a backlash to the increasing number of German and Irish immigrants settling in the United States.

1875: Following the Civil War, some states passed their own immigration laws. In 1875 the Supreme Court declares that it’s the responsibility of the federal government to make and enforce immigration laws.

Chinese Exclusion Act 

1880: As America begins a rapid period of industrialization and urbanization, a second immigration boom begins. Between 1880 and 1920, more than 20 million immigrants arrive. The majority are from Southern, Eastern and Central Europe, including 4 million Italians and 2 million Jews . Many of them settle in major U.S. cities and work in factories.

1882: The Chinese Exclusion Act passes, which bars Chinese immigrants from entering the United States. Beginning in the 1850s, a steady flow of Chinese workers had immigrated to America.

They worked in the gold mines,and garment factories, built railroads and took agricultural jobs. Anti-Chinese sentiment grew as Chinese laborers became successful in America. Although Chinese immigrants make up only 0.002 percent of the United States population, white workers blame them for low wages.

The 1882 Act is the first in American history to place broad restrictions on certain immigrant groups.

1891: The Immigration Act of 1891 further excludes who can enter the United States, barring the immigration of polygamists, people convicted of certain crimes, and the sick or diseased. The Act also created a federal office of immigration to coordinate immigration enforcement and a corps of immigration inspectors stationed at principle ports of entry.

Ellis Island Opens

January 1892 : Ellis Island , the United States’ first immigration station, opens in New York Harbor. The first immigrant processed is Annie Moore, a teenager from County Cork in Ireland. More than 12 million immigrants would enter the United States through Ellis Island between 1892 and 1954.

1907 : U.S. immigration peaks, with 1.3 million people entering the country through Ellis Island alone.

Photos: Immigration at Ellis Island

February 1907: Amid prejudices in California that an influx of Japanese workers would cost white workers farming jobs and depress wages, the United States and Japan sign the Gentlemen’s Agreement. Japan agrees to limit Japanese emigration to the United States to certain categories of business and professional men. In return, President Theodore Roosevelt urges San Francisco to end the segregation of Japanese students from white students in San Francisco schools.

1910: An estimated three-quarters of New York City’s population consists of new immigrants and first-generation Americans.

New Restrictions at Start of WWI

1917: Xenophobia reaches new highs on the eve of American involvement in World War I . The Immigration Act of 1917 establishes a literacy requirement for immigrants entering the country and halts immigration from most Asian countries.

May 1924: The Immigration Act of 1924 limits the number of immigrants allowed into the United States yearly through nationality quotas. Under the new quota system, the United States issues immigration visas to 2 percent of the total number of people of each nationality in the United States at the 1890 census. The law favors immigration from Northern and Western European countries. Just three countries, Great Britain, Ireland and Germany account for 70 percent of all available visas. Immigration from Southern, Central and Eastern Europe was limited. The Act completely excludes immigrants from Asia, aside from the Philippines, at the time an American colony.

1924 : In the wake of the numerical limits established by the 1924 law, illegal immigration to the United States increases. The U.S. Border Patrol is established to crack down on illegal immigrants crossing the Mexican and Canadian borders into the United States. Many of these early border crossers were Chinese and other Asian immigrants, who had been barred from entering legally.

Mexicans Fill Labor Shortages During WWII

1942: Labor shortages during World War II prompt the United States and Mexico to form the Bracero Program , which allows Mexican agricultural workers to enter the United States temporarily. The program lasts until 1964.

1948: The United States passes the nation’s first refugee and resettlement law to deal with the influx of Europeans seeking permanent residence in the United States after World War II.

1952: The McCarran-Walter Act formally ends the exclusion of Asian immigrants to the United States.

1956-1957 : The United States admits roughly 38,000 immigrants from Hungary after a failed uprising against the Soviet Union . They were among the first Cold War refugees. The United States would admit over 3 million refugees during the Cold War.

1960-1962 : Roughly 14,000 unaccompanied children flee Fidel Castro ’s Cuba and come to the United States as part of a secret, anti-Communism program called Operation Peter Pan.

Quota System Ends

1965: The Immigration and Nationality Act overhauls the American immigration system. The Act ends the national origin quotas enacted in the 1920s which favored some racial and ethnic groups over others.

The quota system is replaced with a seven-category preference system emphasizing family reunification and skilled immigrants. Upon signing the new bill, President Lyndon B. Johnson , called the old immigration system “un-American,” and said the new bill would correct a “cruel and enduring wrong in the conduct of the American Nation.”

Over the next five years, immigration from war-torn regions of Asia, including Vietnam and Cambodia , would more than quadruple. Family reunification became a driving force in U.S. immigration.

April-October 1980 : During the Mariel boatlift , roughly 125,000 Cuban refugees make a dangerous sea crossing in overcrowded boats to arrive on the Florida shore seeking political asylum.

Amnesty to Undocumented Immigrants

1986: President Ronald Reagan signs into law the Simpson-Mazzoli Act, which grants amnesty to more than 3 million immigrants living illegally in the United States.

2001 : U.S. Senators Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) and Orrin Hatch (R-Utah) propose the first Development, Relief and Education of Alien Minors (DREAM) Act, which would provide a pathway to legal status for Dreamers, undocumented immigrants brought to the United States illegally by their parents as children. The bill—and subsequent iterations of it—don’t pass.

2012 : President Barack Obama signs Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) which temporarily shields some Dreamers from deportation, but doesn’t provide a path to citizenship.

2017: President Donald Trump issues two executive orders aimed at curtailing travel and immigration from six majority Muslim countries (Chad, Iran, Libya, Syria, Yemen, Somalia) as well as North Korea and Venezuela. Both of these so-called Muslim travel bans are challenged in state and federal courts.

2018: In April 2018, the travel restrictions on Chad are lifted. In June 2018, the U.S. Supreme Court uphold a third version of the travel ban on the remaining seven countries.

Immigration Timeline, The Statue of Liberty-Ellis Island Foundation . LBJ on Immigration, LBJ Presidential Library . The Nation's Immigration Laws, 1920 to Today, Pew Research Center . 1986: Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986, Library of Congress .

Sign up for Inside History

Get HISTORY’s most fascinating stories delivered to your inbox three times a week.

By submitting your information, you agree to receive emails from HISTORY and A+E Networks. You can opt out at any time. You must be 16 years or older and a resident of the United States.

More details : Privacy Notice | Terms of Use | Contact Us

• Social Issues

Immigrants Coming to America Essay Example

Presently, in America, we are at a national division in terms of race and nationality. Primarily, our President bashing and demeaning immigrants. In minority communities and abroad, Black Lives Matter protests at the entrance of police departments demanding that police brutality comes to an end. At Planned Parenthoods, nationally, there are “pro-life” demonstrators rallying with the suggestion that abortion is against God. And all over the country, our workers are picketing for better pay because minimum wage is not enough to live on anymore. Equality is the observation of equal distribution of all things in a society, this includes but is not limited to opportunity, income, social status and education.

Equality is a value that America impasses on, but isn’t very exemplary in demonstration. In the American society, we see our citizens separated by class, income, health care, housing, and employment. We witness marginalization and prejudice amongst those of different backgrounds, and this sometimes fuels violence among us. In February 2012, George Zimmerman, local neighborhood watch captain, made a 911 call to report a suspicious person. When instructed to remain in his vehicle, he disregarded and in a turn of unfortunate events, ended up shooting 17-year-old Trayvon Martin, a young black boy who had been walking in the neighborhood with a hoodie on, he was the “suspicious person.” Zimmerman had shot and killed Trayvon Martin with the notion that he acted in self-defense.

Trayvon Martin is one of many faces from colored communities that have perished at the hands of another and have not received any justice from our justice system. The controversy of police brutality and systematic racism has been an apparent topic for colored communities all through America’s history, from Martin Luther King Jr. to Malcom X, to Roy Wilkins. America hones on equality as a value that we uphold, but it was only in 1964 that minorities were enabled the ability to be treated as equal in public places without being discriminated against. It is professed that there is prejudice against minorities and that this prejudice is in our justice system, educational system, and our workforce.

It is a cycle essentially; racially disparities in schools are reason for expenditures being reciprocated accordingly, causing the educational value of minorities to be hindered, and unequal access to knowledge sets these people back steps that their lighter counterparts have already taken. These undereducated POC are not able to afford college, (likewise their caretakers, worsening the cycle) and thus are limited to jobs that offer minimum wage and put them at the bottom of the social classes, and unable to get any higher. When things like this are built into the system, it’s hard to dig your way out, especially when it’s perceived as just how things are. This inequality causes violence among our communities, as exemplified with numerous cases of police brutality against POC (people of color.) Our morals as a society shouldn’t perceive POC to be a threat at glance, but this bias has been ingrained into the minds of many. 

Any act of travel to a foreign country with the intent of staying, is immigration, and immigrants, (among them the darker tone immigrants) are one of the most controversial ideas in America under the Trump presidency. Immigrants come to the U.S. in search of a better life from natural disaster, persecution and government misguided approaches to social advancement. Immigration is a large role in America’s history, pertaining to Ellis Island and the millions of people that immigrated here in search of a better life. During many times in history large immigration has occurred, and every time the U.S. gladly accepted them because it was the only humane option. But, when a national leader begins to target this body of millions of people, insisting that they steal jobs, are rapists and criminals, we, as Americans get fitted under a blanket that assumes that we do not acknowledge these people in the same light. That they are not equal to us.

When immigrants suddenly become prey to radical nativists who strut in Nazi propaganda and tell immigrants to go back home, it becomes a problem of safety for these people. But, regardless of their struggles and yearning for a better life, we hold them to no certain respect that is due to them, as people. Immigrants, regardless of where they are immigrating from, should be held in the same respect as one would have for an inborn American who was born on American soil. They shouldn’t be degraded nationally by someone who is a national leader, mistreated for using government aid, or be deprived in anything that the inborn American has the means to. 

It is a fact that white women are paid 20 cents less to white man’s dollar, and that colored women are paid 53 percent of the white man’s dollar. This inequality, called the gender pay gap, are one of many insights, nationally, that men and women are addressing as gender inequality.  Women should be able to receive the same pay as her male counterpart, likewise, women and men of color should subsume the same pay as their white counterparts in the workforce. But gender inequality is not limited to the pay gap, it includes other facets to our society like promiscuity, sexual assault, education, and behavior. Rape culture, a sociological concept where rape is pervasive and normalized due to societal attitudes about gender and sexuality.

This state of mind allows countless acts of violence to occur and countless acts of re-victimization of victims to materialize, as well. This is where the feminist objective is introduced; to grasp all people of all genders, sexualities and abled or disabled to be equal. Women and men should be recognized likewise, in all aspects of life., Men should be able to express their feelings, and show emotion in the same manner as women, and women should be able to express feelings without judgment of overreacting or being a drama queen. Women should be able to engage in sexual activity just as actively as men and not be shamed for it, or be called improper. Women shouldn’t have to be re-victimized in a courtroom for their sexual assault, and men should feel safe speaking out about their sexual assault experience without backlash, and it should also be recognized that men can be victims of domestic violence, too. When there is inequality among all those: men, women, transgenders, cis men and women, gender fluid men and women, abled and disabled, when there is an imbalance among how they are treated and held in regard to others, there is a culture built around it that we, as a society find hard to step out of. 

Humans have the tendency to devise things into categories: race, immigration status, education level, income, social class, and other subsets of these categories. But these aren’t the values that America claims to honor. Americans shouldn’t be valued by what their pay is, where they live (or don’t live), who they love, what color their skin is, how they show emotion, or do what they choose to do with their bodies. People shouldn’t be devised into these categories and then further given due consideration from these categories. Mothers shouldn’t be judged because they’re making minimum wage, live in government housing, receive state welfare, or aren’t married to their children’s father. Fathers shouldn’t be judged because they show emotion, take care of their children (stay at home fathers), or choose to be single. All these categories, are humans, and humans are all equal, inconsiderate of color, status, income, sexual orientation, and life choices. And all people should see to it that they treat people with likewise respect of anyone who may be in power. Regardless what the system incorporates into our norms, as living, breathing, human beings, we should behold the power in ourselves to treat everyone around us as equal. We should feel abided, by humanity, to hold each other in the same light, irrespective of all classifications. 

Related Samples

• Who Should Decide it? Legalizing Marijuana Persuasive Essay Example
• Historical Points of Education Issue Due to Racism Essay Example
• Reflective Essay Example on The American Dream
• The Victims of Human Trafficking Essay Example
• Sex Education Role in the Teenage Pregnancy Essay Sample
• Society’s Perception of a Perfect Image is Just a Label. A Stereotype Essay Example
• Social Media Cyber Bullying Essay Example
• Feminism in Frozen II (Essay Sample)
• The Civil Rights Activist Rosa Parks Essay Example
• Essay on Slavery and Racism in the Book “The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn”

Didn't find the perfect sample?

You can order a custom paper by our expert writers

Records confirm Trump’s mother-in-law came to U.S. through process he derided

Melania Trump sponsored her mother to immigrate to the United States through a family-based process that former president Donald Trump aggressively sought to end, according to federal immigration records released Monday.

The records detail for the first time the full path that the former first lady’s mother, Amalija Knavs, followed from Slovenia to the United States — and how the Trump administration’s policies would have made that far more difficult for others. Knavs died in January at age 78.

Trump is the likely Republican candidate for president in the 2024 race against President Biden , a Democrat. The Trump campaign declined to comment through a spokeswoman.

Melania Trump used a legal pathway that her husband and his top advisers had repeatedly disparaged as “chain migration,” the right of U.S. citizens to bring their parents to the United States.

Federal law since 1965 has said U.S. citizens may apply to bring minor children and parents to join them in the United States without having to wait a long time for a visa. Citizens may sponsor siblings and adult children, but they typically wait longer for visas.

During his presidency, Trump endorsed a bill called the Raise Act that would have limited priority sponsorship to the spouses and minor children of U.S. citizens, taking parents off the fast-track list.

“The Democrats have been told, and fully understand, that there can be no DACA without the desperately needed WALL at the Southern Border and an END to the horrible Chain Migration & ridiculous Lottery System of Immigration etc.,” Trump tweeted on Dec. 29, 2017. “We must protect our Country at all cost!”

Trump favored implementing a Canadian-style point-based merit system to prioritize skilled workers, which also could have affected Knavs.

On her 2009 immigrant visa application, Knavs said she graduated from high school in 1964 and attended the College for Fashion Design in Slovenia until 1966, though it did not say whether she obtained a diploma. She married in 1967.

By the time Knavs applied for an immigrant visa, records show she was fluent in Slovenian but “learning English.” Her citizenship application says she retired in 1998.

Michael Wildes, Knavs’s immigration lawyer, declined to comment on her immigration file in a telephone interview Monday, saying such records are typically confidential. The Washington Post requested the records from the Department of Homeland Security after Knavs’s death, when privacy protections are diminished.

The 165-page immigration file released Monday is heavily redacted in some parts, but it confirms that Knavs was sponsored by an adult child for a green card, and it lists the financial sponsor of the parent as “Melania Trump.”

Wildes, a Democrat, praised family-based immigration as part of a long tradition in the United States and called Trump’s criticism of that system “some of the silly politics of the day.”

He said that the Knavses “reveled in becoming citizens in this country” and that Melania Trump wanted to ensure that her parents were “taken care of” and that they could travel freely to the United States to care for the Trumps’ son, Barron.

Wildes has said that Melania Trump arrived in the United States from Slovenia in 1996 for modeling work and obtained a green card around 2001 based on her “extraordinary ability” as a model.

Records show that Knavs was a regular visitor to the United States after her daughter moved to this country and became a permanent resident.

Melania Trump married Donald Trump in 2005 and had their son the following year. She said she also became a citizen in 2006.

She applied to sponsor her mother for legal permanent residency, known as a green card, in 2008, the records show, and signed an affidavit the following year pledging to support her mother financially.

Knavs became a legal permanent resident, one step before U.S. citizenship, on March 16, 2010.

Green-card holders may apply for U.S. citizenship after five years. But records show Knavs waited longer.

She applied in August 2017, a few months after Trump took office and as he was criticizing “chain migration.”

In May 2018, Knavs appeared in New York for an interview and citizenship test, which involves questions in English and a test on U.S. civics. She correctly answered questions such as the name of the U.S. national anthem (“The Star-Spangled Banner”) and the ocean on the west coast of the United States (Pacific).

Asked “What is the ‘rule of law?’” she gave no answer.

Wildes has said the family received no special treatment. Records show Knavs filled out a citizenship application, answering questions about whether she was associated with the Communist Party (no) and whether she would bear arms to defend the United States (yes). She paid the $725 application fee and said she was living at the time in Trump Tower in New York.

Knavs took the oath of citizenship with her husband, Viktor — whose immigration records are not public — on Aug. 9, 2018, in New York, shortly after one of the worst debacles of Trump’s presidency, when his administration separated migrant parents from their children at the southern border without a plan to reunite them.

Melania Trump garnered attention in June 2018 for visiting a children’s shelter on the border wearing a green jacket with a message on the back reading, “I really don’t care, do u?”

Wildes had earlier confirmed that Viktor and Amalija Knavs, as well as their other daughter, Ines, who is Barron’s godmother, came to the United States legally with Melania Trump’s help, according to “The Art of Her Deal,” a biography of Melania Trump by Post reporter Mary Jordan.