Immigration in 2026: What the Data Reveal about American Attitudes
Omnibites are bite-sized insights from the AmeriSpeak Omnibus, NORC’s fast, affordable way to tap into nationally representative public opinion.
March 2026
In a tumultuous political environment, American’s views surrounding immigration tell a complex story.
Policy changes in the United States have put a spotlight on immigration and immigration enforcement. We asked a broad, representative sample of Americans what they thought about related topics to dig deeper into public opinion on the issues.
Most U.S. adults support a legal pathway for undocumented immigrants.
Most U.S. adults support some type of legal pathway for immigrants living in the country without authorization, whether that’s an opportunity to earn citizenship or obtain permanent residency.
- When looking at all adults, a legal pathway (citizenship or permanent residency) is widely supported.
- Majorities of Democrats and many independents favor a pathway to citizenship.
- Among Republicans, responses are more varied and include higher levels of support for deportation.
Findings are drawn from our AmeriSpeak Omnibus survey, which offers a streamlined, cost-effective solution for obtaining high-quality, nationally representative data.
Americans hold mixed views on immigration's effects
Perceptions of positive and negative impacts vary, with notable differences across economic, cultural, community, and safety outcomes.
Most U.S. adults prefer a legal resolution for immigrants living in the country without authorization—whether that’s an opportunity to earn citizenship or obtain permanent residency. These pathways typically involve steps like paying taxes, passing background checks, demonstrating continuous residence, or meeting civics or English requirements. Across the five areas measured of immigration’s impact, views range widely—roughly a threefold difference between the most positive and least positive assessments.
The sizable share selecting “no effect” or “don’t know” across these areas highlights the complexity of the topic and how challenging it can be for people to gauge immigration’s influence.
Public ratings of ICE's enforcement actions skew negative
Americans tend to view Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) as having a negative impact in several areas of life, including public safety, community trust in law enforcement, and rights such as free speech and protest. Across nearly all issues measured, views of ICE’s impact are more negative than positive.
- The public’s views of ICE’s impact are negative for community trust in law enforcement, public safety, and local economic conditions.
- In most areas, fewer than one-third of adults report a positive impact.
- Perceptions vary depending on the area evaluated, with more negative views reported for community‑level and rights‑related impacts
Assessments of ICE’s Impact on Enforcing the Nation’s Immigration Laws Differ by Party.
Positive ratings are a minority view outside the Republican base.
Confidence in Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) is modest, even when Americans evaluate the agency on its core responsibility: enforcing the nation’s immigration laws. Only about one in three adults say ICE is having a positive impact in this area, and more than half say the agency has no impact or a negative impact on the work it is specifically tasked to do.
This finding suggests a fundamental challenge: many Americans do not see ICE as effective in carrying out its primary mission.
Republicans are the group most likely to view ICE’s efforts to enforce immigration laws favorably, with roughly two‑thirds rating the agency’s impact as positive. By contrast, Democrats are overwhelmingly negative in their assessments, and independents lean more negative than positive. These patterns help explain why national confidence remains modest despite strong support from one side of the political spectrum.
A Minority of U.S. Adults Think Federal Control of Local Police in Cities Is Acceptable
Support for federal immigration enforcement varies widely, yet takeovers of local police remain broadly rejected.
When asked about different types of federal involvement in large cities, Americans express consistently low acceptance of one action in particular: the federal government taking control of local police departments.
Other actions, such as deploying the U.S. military or National Guard to support local police or assist with deportation efforts, receive more mixed reactions, but none garner broad public approval.
These findings show a clear takeaway: across a range of scenarios, Americans are least comfortable with federal takeovers of local law enforcement.
Methodology
A poll of 1,073 American adults was conducted between February 6-8, 2026, using the AmeriSpeak® Omnibus, a bi-monthly multi-client survey using the AmeriSpeak panel, NORC’s probability-based panel that is designed to be representative of the U.S. household population. The margin of error is +/- 4.0 percentage points at the 95 percent confidence level, including the design effect. View the full methodology in the Transparency Report.
Findings are drawn from our AmeriSpeak Omnibus survey, which offers a streamlined, cost-effective solution for obtaining high-quality, nationally representative data. The Omnibus provides a nationally representative snapshot of U.S. adults, sourced directly from the AmeriSpeak panel. Households are selected randomly through NORC’s National Sample Frame, known for its industry-leading coverage. This frame encompasses over 97 percent of U.S. households, ensuring that all segments are well represented. AmeriSpeak goes the extra mile in recruitment, using a combination of U.S. mail notifications, NORC telephone interviewers, and in-person field staff.
Get in touch with our team and find out how our Omnibus—or any of our other survey options—can meet your research needs.
AmeriSpeak OmniBites
Bite-sized insights from the AmeriSpeak Omnibus. The Omnibus is a fast, affordable way to tap into nationally representative public opinion.
About AmeriSpeak
Funded and operated by NORC at the University of Chicago, AmeriSpeak® is a probability-based panel designed to be representative of the US household population. Randomly selected US households are sampled using area probability and address-based sampling, with a known, non-zero probability of selection from the NORC National Sample Frame. These sampled households are then contacted by US mail, telephone, and field interviewers (face to face). The panel provides sample coverage of approximately 97 percent of the U.S. household population. Those excluded from the sample include people with P.O. Box only addresses, some addresses not listed in the USPS Delivery Sequence File, and some newly constructed dwellings. While most AmeriSpeak households participate in surveys by web, non-internet households can participate in AmeriSpeak surveys by telephone. Households without conventional internet access but having web access via smartphones are allowed to participate in AmeriSpeak surveys by web. AmeriSpeak panelists participate in NORC studies or studies conducted by NORC on behalf of governmental agencies, academic researchers, and media and commercial organizations.
For more information, email AmeriSpeak-BD@norc.org or visit AmeriSpeak.norc.org.
About NORC at the University of Chicago
NORC at the University of Chicago conducts research and analysis that decision-makers trust. As a nonpartisan research organization and a pioneer in measuring and understanding the world, we have studied almost every aspect of the human experience and every major news event for more than eight decades. Today, we partner with government, corporate, and nonprofit clients around the world to provide the objectivity and expertise necessary to inform the critical decisions facing society.
Contact: For more information, please email press@norc.org or call (877) 832-0392.
