Kamala Harris has gone from immigration reformer to border hawk. What’s next?

By Sam Rosenthal / Truthout

In June 2021, Kamala Harris made her first foreign trip as vice president, to Mexico and Guatemala. During a press conference with then-Guatemalan President Alejandro Giammattei, she warned Guatemalans and others considering entering the United States without proper documentation: “Do not come. Do not come. The United States will continue to enforce our laws and secure our borders. … If you come to our border, you will be turned away.”

The comments quickly made headlines. After four years of anti-immigrant vitriol from former President Donald Trump, many immigration advocates had hoped for a return to a more open approach to U.S. immigration policy. Trump’s first term had been one flashpoint after another for many working on immigration reform. His 2016 campaign leaned heavily on his promise to build a wall along the southern border, and his demonization of immigrants became — and remains — a hallmark of his campaign speeches. Harris’s comments, with their harsh, uncompromising tone, caused whiplash. In a quick soundbite, Harris had suddenly become the face of the new administration’s approach to immigration.

Harris’s comments were a precursor to the aggressive efforts President Joe Biden’s administration would soon make to curb the number of Central American migrants coming through Mexico. Immigration consistently ranks first among American voters, and Democrats worry the party is seen as “weak” on the issue. Panicked by those polls and perpetually irritated by Republicans who advocate even tougher border policies, Biden and his advisers have worked hard to appear tough on immigration. In fact, during his presidency, Biden has remained on track to meet or exceed the number of deportations Trump oversaw while in office.

Harris, however, would not become the face of the day-to-day machinations of deportations and border policing. Instead, Biden’s team had tasked her with anchoring a strategy they’d dubbed the “Root Causes” approach. Under the Biden administration, this policy was aimed at addressing the underlying causes of social instability in three Central American countries that, when the strategy was launched, had some of the highest rates of asylum claims and undocumented immigration at their southern borders: El Salvador, Guatemala and Honduras. The strategy was largely diplomatic in nature, with the U.S. using its global position to use a mix of humanitarian aid and political pressure to encourage leaders in those countries to stem the tide of emigration at home.

So far, the strategy has had a mixed track record at best. Critics have pointed to the difficulties of applying a one-size-fits-all approach to three countries with strikingly different political and social configurations, as well as to unexpected increases in migration from other countries not targeted by the strategy, most notably Venezuela. As immigration across the southern border declines in 2024, the Democratic Party has struggled to come up with a coherent policy response. Meanwhile, Harris has made no attempt to position herself in a way where she could credibly take credit for any change in undocumented immigration.

This is partly because Harris has never fully embraced her role in leading the Root Causes initiative. From the moment she was appointed to lead the strategy, Harris was at pains to ensure that she would not be seen as responsible for the administration’s overarching immigration policy. The Root Causes strategy was a focused, diplomatic effort, not a panacea designed to solve all of America’s immigration problems. Harris appeared ambivalent about her mandate as the figurehead of the Central American engagement strategy, and was criticized for her infrequent travel to the region and her deprioritization of that part of her portfolio as vice president.

Her uneven approach to immigration policy as vice president suggests she might consider the issue less important if she were to win the presidential election in November. Her record as a senator, prosecutor and U.S. presidential candidate, however, suggests otherwise.

As a prosecutor in California, first as San Francisco’s district attorney and then as California’s attorney general, Harris was generally seen as a supporter of immigrant rights. She publicly opposed efforts by Republicans in Congress to more aggressively profile and target law enforcement for suspected undocumented immigrants. She also defended San Francisco’s sanctuary city ordinance, even in the face of intense public scrutiny and Republican-led opposition during the early days of the Trump administration.

As a U.S. senator — a position she was elected to in 2016 — Harris has continued to take positions on immigration that have placed her at the progressive end of the political spectrum in Congress, often to the left of most of her Democratic colleagues. Her first speech in the Senate, which drew heavily on her background as the daughter of immigrant parents, was a defense of immigration. Her speech was also an attack on the Trump administration, which had recently unveiled a series of draconian anti-immigrant policies, including the so-called Muslim ban and a policy aimed at separating families detained while crossing the southern border.

Harris’s advocacy for immigrant rights in the Senate went beyond lip service. In 2019, she introduced a bill that would have redirected funding from Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) to the Justice Department and other federal agencies tasked with resettling refugees and combating human trafficking. The bill would also have placed significant restrictions on ICE’s ability to use information obtained from unaccompanied children to prosecute other individuals who may be in the U.S. without documentation.

Harris was also critical of ICE more broadly, saying: NBCKasie Hunt of ‘s in 2018 that there was a need to “critically reexamine ICE … and the way it’s been run. … We probably need to think about starting over (with ICE).” Tellingly, Harris’ comments came at a time when ICE was under intense scrutiny, spurred on by the Abolish ICE movement. Her comments were a shrewd nod to the movement, while her legislative approach reflected a much more tepid, reform-oriented approach to fixing the agency’s many problems.

Harris pushed her positions on immigration reform amid the outrage that followed the Trump administration’s implementation of some of the most restrictive border measures ever enacted by a U.S. president. Her progressive approach to immigration reform continued into her campaign for the Democratic Party’s 2020 presidential nomination. During a presidential debate, she aligned herself with her rivals by agreeing that her proposed health care plan would provide coverage for undocumented immigrants. She also called for decriminalization of border crossings, a significantly more progressive stance than Democratic Party orthodoxy during the 2020 primary.

If there’s one through-line that defines Harris’s approach to immigration policy, it’s that her positions have often been a direct response to the political moment. When Trump touted his hardline approach to immigration, Harris sought to stand out, first as California’s attorney general and then as California’s junior senator, by vocally supporting immigrant rights, whether they came to the U.S. legally or not. As vice president, she has softened her stance considerably, from the infamous “don’t come” press conference to her support for a failed bipartisan border security bill that was criticized by progressives for adopting right-wing immigration proposals.

As she tries to define and distinguish her immigration policies from Biden’s, the current political moment puts Harris in a difficult position. Undocumented immigration is a major concern for voters — stoked by racist, right-wing fear-mongering by politicians and the media — and a slim majority now appear to favor mass deportations. Conscious of the likelihood that Trump will want to dominate the immigration issue heading into November, Harris and her advisers have tried to get ahead of her opponent.

But beating Trump at his own game could prove difficult for Harris. She has pledged to be tough on immigration, touting her support for the Border Security Act, which, among other things, would have increased funding for border patrols and detention facilities. She also points out that as California’s attorney general, she prosecuted “transnational gangs, drug cartels and human traffickers who entered the country illegally.” While Harris’ advisers are betting that enforcement-focused talk will convince voters she can be trusted on border security, Harris also risks alienating progressives and immigration reform activists.

Whether these policies will become reality if Harris wins the presidency remains to be seen. Biden began his presidency promising a softer approach to immigration, but took a harder line as illegal immigration rose in the early years of his term. With a track record of tailoring her approach to immigration to the political moment, Harris may also find herself chasing history rather than making it.

Share this story and help us expand our network!

You can also donate via PayPal or subscribe to our Patreon.