With Border Patrol apprehensions once again increasing this spring, Americans are expressing renewed concern over illegal immigration and the current situation at the U.S. border with Mexico.

The government receives negative ratings for how it has handled the situation at the border. About two-thirds of U.S. adults (68%) say that the government is doing a very (33%) or somewhat (35%) bad job of dealing with the increased number of people seeking asylum at the country’s southern border, while fewer than half as many (29%) say it is doing a very or somewhat good job.

The public is in broad agreement regarding some possible government actions for dealing with the situation at the border: Large majorities say it is very or somewhat important to increase available staff both to patrol and police the border and to quickly process unaccompanied minors. About half say each of these priorities is very important. Nearly as many (47%) say it is very important to reduce the number of people coming to the U.S. seeking asylum; another 32% say this is somewhat important.

While there are partisan differences on each of these three priorities, majorities of both Republicans and Republican-leaning independents and Democrats and Democratic leaners say it is very or somewhat important to reduce the number of asylum seekers and to increase staff for border patrols and processing unaccompanied minors.

However, there are wider divides on other goals: For example, Republicans (78%) are twice as likely as Democrats (39%) to say it is important to make it harder for asylum seekers to be granted legal status in the U.S.

And while 79% of Democrats say it is very or somewhat important to increase aid to Central American countries, where many asylum seekers come from, only 40% of Republicans say the same.

The survey, conducted April 5-11, 2021, among a nationally representative sample of 5,109 adults who are members of Pew Research Center’s American Trends Panel, also finds sizable partisan differences in evaluations of the government’s handling of the border situation.

However, majorities in both parties say the government has done a bad job of dealing with the influx of asylum seekers at the border: 86% of Republicans rate the government’s performance negatively, as do 56% of Democrats.

The public’s current evaluations of the government’s performance in dealing with the border situation are overall comparable to ratings two years ago, when the Trump administration faced an influx of children and families seeking asylum in the U.S. In August 2019, 33% said the government was doing well in dealing with the situation at the border. In contrast to today, however, in 2019 Republicans were far less critical of the government’s response than Democrats.

A separate national survey of Latinos in the United States, conducted in March of this year, found that Latinos also gave negative ratings to the government’s job in dealing with the increase in children and families seeking asylum; just 36% said the government was doing a very or somewhat good job.

The survey also finds that the share of adults who say undocumented immigrants who are now living in the U.S. should be allowed to stay in the country legally has decreased slightly over the past four years, with the decrease being driven by shifting attitudes among Republicans.

Nearly seven-in-ten adults (69%) now say that there should be a way for undocumented immigrants who are now living in the U.S. to stay in the country legally if certain requirements are met, down from 77% in March 2017.

Republicans are closely divided on this question, with about half (48%) saying that undocumented immigrants should be allowed to stay if certain requirements are met and about half (51%) saying they should not be allowed to stay. In March 2017, a majority of Republicans (61%) said that undocumented immigrants currently living in the U.S. should be allowed to stay.

A large majority of Democrats (86%) say that undocumented immigrants currently living in the U.S. should be allowed to stay if certain requirements are met. The share of Democrats who say this has essentially stayed the same in recent years.

Among the majority of adults who favor allowing undocumented immigrants to stay legally in the U.S., most say they should be eligible to apply for citizenship. Among the public overall, 42% say that undocumented immigrants who are currently living in the U.S. and meet certain requirements should be eligible to apply for U.S. citizenship; about a quarter (26%) say they should be eligible to apply for permanent residency but not for U.S. citizenship.

Among the 30% of adults who say that undocumented immigrants should not be allowed to stay in the country legally, a large majority also express support for a national deportation effort. A quarter of adults overall say that undocumented immigrants should not be allowed to stay in the country legally and that there should be a national law enforcement effort to deport them.

Comparatively few adults – just 5% – say that undocumented immigrants currently living in the U.S. should not be allowed to stay in the country legally but also say that there should not be a national effort to deport undocumented immigrants.

There are large partisan divisions on these questions: A majority of Democrats (56%) say that undocumented immigrants should be allowed to stay in the country legally and be eligible to apply for U.S. citizenship if they meet certain requirements, compared with about a quarter of Republicans (26%). Nearly half of Republicans (46%) – including a 53% majority of conservative Republicans – say undocumented immigrants should not be allowed to stay legally in the U.S. and there should be a national effort to deport undocumented immigrants; fewer than one-in-ten Democrats (7%) say this.

Public concern over illegal immigration fell sharply last year, as the coronavirus outbreak worsened in the U.S. Since June 2020, however, the share of Americans who say illegal immigration is a “very big” national problem has risen 20 percentage points, from 28% to 48%. The share currently citing illegal immigration as a major problem is similar to 2019 (43%) and 2018 (42%).

The increase in concern since 2020 has come among members of both parties, though as in recent years, Republicans are far more likely than Democrats to cite illegal immigration as a very big problem. Among Republicans, 72% say illegal immigration is a very big problem in the country today, compared with 43% in June 2020. Among Democrats, 29% now say this, compared with 15% in 2020. For more, see “Americans’ views of the problems facing the nation,” April 15, 2021.

Views about asylum seekers at the U.S.-Mexico border

Almost half of Americans (46%) today say they have heard a lot about the increase in the number of people seeking asylum at the U.S.-Mexico border, with Republicans and Republican-leaning independents more likely than Democrats and Democratic-leaning independents to say this (56% vs. 41%). In August 2019, Republicans were also more likely than Democrats to have reported hearing a lot about that increase, but the partisan gap was narrower than it is today (5 percentage points then, 15 percentage points now).

Overall, 42% of Democrats say that the U.S. government is doing either a very or somewhat good job dealing with the increased number of people seeking asylum at the U.S.-Mexico border, while 56% say it is doing a bad job. More than eight-in-ten Republicans say the government is doing a bad job; only 13% of Republicans rate the government’s performance positively.

But there are significant differences in these views within both partisan coalitions.

Roughly half of Black (49%) and Hispanic (47%) Democrats say the government is doing a good job with asylum seekers. By comparison, 36% of White Democrats say this. And while few Republicans rate the government’s performance positively, White Republicans are even less likely than Hispanic Republicans to do so (9% vs. 18% respectively).

Younger Republicans are more likely than their older counterparts to say the government has done a good job with those seeking asylum (27% of those under 35 say this, compared with just 11% of those 35-49 and just 7% of those 50 and older). Among Democrats, the pattern is reversed – while about half (49%) of Democrats 50 and older say the government has done a good job handling the asylum situation at the U.S.-Mexico border, that drops to 41% among those 35-49 and 33% among those under 35. As a result, there is virtually no partisan gap in these views among adults under 35, while there is a substantial partisan divide among older Americans.

Partisan priorities for the U.S.-Mexico border

While Republicans and Democrats differ in many respects in their priorities for the situation at the U.S.-Mexico border, there also are some shared priorities.

For example, clear majorities of both Democrats and Republicans say it is at least somewhat important both to increase staff and resources available to patrol and police the border and to process unaccompanied minors more quickly. However, Republicans are more likely than Democrats to consider an increase in resources for patrolling the border very important (68% vs. 42%, respectively), while Democrats are more likely than Republicans to say increased resources for processing unaccompanied minors is very important (66% vs. 37%).

Republicans are far more likely than Democrats to say it is important to reduce the number of asylum seekers, to make it harder to be granted asylum and to not allow people to seek asylum. For instance, while 78% of Republicans say it is at least somewhat important that the U.S. make it harder for asylum seekers to be granted legal status in the U.S., 39% of Democrats say the same. Similarly, seven-in-ten Republicans say it is at least somewhat important that the U.S. not allow people to seek asylum in the U.S., compared with just 35% of Democrats.

By contrast, Democrats (79%) are about twice as likely as Republicans (40%) to say that providing assistance to countries in places like Central America where many asylum seekers are coming from is at least somewhat important. And while majorities of both Democrats and Republicans say it is at least somewhat important to provide safe and sanitary conditions to asylum seekers once they arrive in the U.S., fully 91% of Democrats say this (including 60% who rate this as very important), compared with 61% of Republicans (23% say this is very important).

Overall, the public’s views of priorities for the southern border are similar to 2019, although the shares saying it is important to reduce the number of asylum seekers or to make it harder to seek asylum have increased, while the shares placing importance on providing safe and sanitary conditions for asylum seekers and on assistance to Central American countries have decreased.

Democrats are slightly more likely to now say that reducing the number of people coming to the U.S. to seek asylum is important than they were in 2019 (61% then, 68% now). GOP opinion on this question is little changed since 2019.

The share of Republicans saying that providing safe and sanitary conditions for asylum seekers in the U.S. is important has declined over this period (73% then, 61% now). As in 2019, about nine-in-ten Democrats (91%) say that providing safe and sanitary conditions for asylum seekers is at least somewhat important, although the share saying this is very important has dropped (71% then, 60% now).

The share of Americans saying it is at least somewhat important for the U.S. to provide assistance to countries in places like Central America where many asylum seekers are coming from has declined from 69% in 2019 to 61% today. While Democrats remain far more likely than Republicans to place importance on this, the decline occurs in both partisan groups.

Most say undocumented immigrants should be allowed to stay in the country legally, if certain requirements are met

Overall, 69% of adults say that undocumented immigrants should be allowed to stay in the country legally if certain requirements are met, including 42% who say they should be eligible to apply for U.S. citizenship (26% say they should be eligible to apply for permanent residency but not for citizenship). Three-in-ten say that undocumented immigrants should not be allowed to stay legally, including a quarter who say there should be a national effort to deport undocumented immigrants.

More than eight-in-ten Democrats – 83% of conservative and moderate Democrats and 90% of liberal Democrats – say there should be a way for undocumented immigrants who meet requirements to stay in the country legally. Support for a path to citizenship is higher among liberal Democrats than among conservatives and moderates: Two-thirds of liberal Democrats say undocumented immigrants who meet requirements should be eligible for citizenship, as do about half of conservative and moderate Democrats (48%).

Republicans are divided over whether undocumented immigrants should be eligible to stay in the country legally if they meet certain requirements (48% say they should, 51% say they should not), and there is an ideological divide within the GOP. Nearly six-in-ten conservative Republicans (59%) say that undocumented immigrants should not be allowed to stay in the country legally, with 53% saying there should be a national deportation effort. In contrast, about six-in-ten moderate and liberal Republicans (61%) say that undocumented immigrants should be allowed to stay if certain requirements are met (34% say this should include eligibility for citizenship, while 27% say it should include permanent residency but not citizenship).

Hispanic adults (84%) are more likely than Black (78%), Asian (68%) or White (64%) adults to say that undocumented immigrants should be allowed to stay in the country legally. About half (51%) of Hispanic adults, and a similar share of Black adults (47%), say that undocumented immigrants who meet certain requirements should be eligible to apply for citizenship. White (40%) and Asian (37%) adults are somewhat less likely to say this.

Hispanic Republicans are much more likely than White Republicans to say that there should be a way for undocumented immigrants who are now living in the U.S. to stay in the country legally if certain requirements are met. Nearly three-quarters of Hispanic Republicans (73%) say this, compared with 45% of White Republicans.

There also are age differences within the Republican Party: 62% of Republicans under 35 favor allowing undocumented immigrants to stay, compared with 46% of those ages 35 to 64 and 40% of Republicans 65 and older.

Among Democrats, while eight-in-ten or more across racial and ethnic groups say that undocumented immigrants should be allowed to stay in the country legally, this rises to roughly nine-in-ten among White (89%) and Hispanic (88%) Democrats.

This report is a collaborative effort based on the input and analysis of the following individuals:

Research team

Carroll Doherty, Director, Political Research
Jocelyn Kiley, Associate Director, Political Research
Baxter Oliphant, Senior Researcher
Andrew Daniller, Research Associate
Bradley Jones, Research Associate
Hannah Hartig, Research Associate
Amina Dunn, Research Analyst
Ted Van Green, Research Assistant
Vianney Gomez, Research Assistant

Communications and editorial

Nida Asheer, Communications Manager
Rachel Weisel, Senior Communications Manager
Carrie Blazina, Copy Editor

Graphic design and web publishing

Alissa Scheller, Information Graphics Designer
Reem Nadeem, Associate Digital Producer
Peter Bell, Design Director

Methodology

Andrew Mercer, Senior Research Methodologist
Nick Bertoni, Senior Panel Manager
Dorene Asare-Marfo, Research Methodologist
Arnold Lau, Research Analyst

The American Trends Panel survey methodology

Overview

The American Trends Panel (ATP), created by Pew Research Center, is a nationally representative panel of randomly selected U.S. adults. Panelists participate via self-administered web surveys. Panelists who do not have internet access at home are provided with a tablet and wireless internet connection. Interviews are conducted in both English and Spanish. The panel is being managed by Ipsos.

Data in this report is drawn from the panel wave conducted April 5 to April 11, 2021 and included oversamples of Asian, Black and Hispanic Americans. A total of 5,109 panelists responded out of 5,970 who were sampled, for a response rate of 86%. This does not include two panelists who were removed from the data due to extremely high rates of refusal or straightlining. The cumulative response rate accounting for nonresponse to the recruitment surveys and attrition is 4%. The break-off rate among panelists who logged on to the survey and completed at least one item is 2%. The margin of sampling error for the full sample of 5,109 respondents is plus or minus 2.1 percentage points.

Panel recruitment

The ATP was created in 2014, with the first cohort of panelists invited to join the panel at the end of a large, national, landline and cellphone random-digit-dial survey that was conducted in both English and Spanish. Two additional recruitments were conducted using the same method in 2015 and 2017, respectively. Across these three surveys, a total of 19,718 adults were invited to join the ATP, of whom 9,942 (50%) agreed to participate.

In August 2018, the ATP switched from telephone to address-based recruitment. Invitations were sent to a random, address-based sample of households selected from the U.S. Postal Service’s Delivery Sequence File. Two additional recruitments were conducted using the same method in 2019 and 2020, respectively. Across these three address-based recruitments, a total of 17,161 adults were invited to join the ATP, of whom 15,134 (88%) agreed to join the panel and completed an initial profile survey. In each household, the adult with the next birthday was asked to go online to complete a survey, at the end of which they were invited to join the panel. Of the 25,076 individuals who have ever joined the ATP, 13,537 remained active panelists and continued to receive survey invitations at the time this survey was conducted. The U.S. Postal Service’s Delivery Sequence File has been estimated to cover as much as 98% of the population, although some studies suggest that the coverage could be in the low 90% range.¹ The American Trends Panel never uses breakout routers or chains that direct respondents to additional surveys.

Sample design

The overall target population for this survey was non-institutionalized persons ages 18 and older, living in the U.S., including Alaska and Hawaii.

This study featured a stratified random sample from the ATP. The sample was allocated according to the following strata, in order: Asian Americans (including those who identify as Asian in combination with another race), Black Americans (including those who identify as Black in combination with another race), U.S.-born Hispanics, foreign-born Hispanics, tablet households,  high school education or less, not registered to vote, people ages 18 to 34, uses internet weekly or less, nonvolunteers, and all other categories not already falling into any of the above. The Asian, Black, U.S.-born and foreign-born Hispanic strata were oversampled relative to their share of the U.S. adult population. The remaining strata were sampled at rates designed to ensure that the share of respondents in each stratum is proportional to its share of the U.S. adult population to the greatest extent possible. Respondent weights are adjusted to account for differential probabilities of selection as described in the Weighting section below.

Questionnaire development and testing

The questionnaire was developed by Pew Research Center in consultation with Ipsos. The web program was rigorously tested on both PC and mobile devices by the Ipsos project management team and Pew Research Center researchers. The Ipsos project management team also populated test data, which was analyzed in SPSS to ensure the logic and randomizations were working as intended before launching the survey.

Incentives

All respondents were offered a post-paid incentive for their participation. Respondents could choose to receive the post-paid incentive in the form of a check or a gift code to Amazon.com or could choose to decline the incentive. Incentive amounts ranged from $5 to $20 depending on whether the respondent belongs to a part of the population that is harder or easier to reach. Differential incentive amounts were designed to increase panel survey participation among groups that traditionally have low survey response propensities.

Data collection protocol

The data collection field period for this survey was April 5 to April 11, 2021. Postcard notifications were mailed to all ATP panelists with a known residential address on April 5, 2021. 

On April 5 and April 6, invitations were sent out in two separate launches: Soft launch and Full launch. Sixty panelists were included in the soft launch, which began with an initial invitation sent on April 5, 2021. The ATP panelists chosen for the initial soft launch were known responders who had completed previous ATP surveys within one day of receiving their invitation. All remaining English- and Spanish-speaking panelists were included in the full launch and were sent an invitation on April 6, 2021.

All panelists with an email address received an email invitation and up to two email reminders if they did not respond to the survey. All ATP panelists that consented to SMS messages received an SMS invitation and up to two SMS reminders.

Data quality checks

To ensure high-quality data, the Center’s researchers performed data quality checks to identify any respondents showing clear patterns of satisficing. This includes checking for very high rates of leaving questions blank as well as always selecting the first or last answer presented. As a result of this checking, two ATP respondents were removed from the survey dataset prior to weighting and analysis.

Weighting

The ATP data was weighted in a multistep process that accounts for multiple stages of sampling and nonresponse that occur at different points in the survey process. First, each panelist begins with a base weight that reflects their probability of selection for their initial recruitment survey (and the probability of being invited to participate in the panel in cases where only a subsample of respondents were invited). The base weights for panelists recruited in different years are scaled to be proportionate to the effective sample size for all active panelists in their cohort. To correct for nonresponse to the initial recruitment surveys and gradual panel attrition, the base weights for all active panelists are calibrated to align with the population benchmarks identified in the accompanying table to create a full-panel weight.

For ATP waves in which only a subsample of panelists are invited to participate, a wave-specific base weight is created by adjusting the full-panel weights for subsampled panelists to account for any differential probabilities of selection for the particular panel wave. For waves in which all active panelists are invited to participate, the wave-specific base weight is identical to the full-panel weight.

In the final weighting step, the wave-specific base weights for panelists who completed the survey are again calibrated to match the population benchmarks specified above. These weights are trimmed (typically at about the 1st and 99th percentiles) to reduce the loss in precision stemming from variance in the weights. Sampling errors and test of statistical significance take into account the effect of weighting.

The following table shows the unweighted sample sizes and the error attributable to sampling that would be expected at the 95% level of confidence for different groups in the survey.

Sample sizes and sampling errors for other subgroups are available upon request. In addition to sampling error, one should bear in mind that question wording and practical difficulties in conducting surveys can introduce error or bias into the findings of opinion polls.

Dispositions and response rates