Joe Abraham, whose daughter Katie was killed in January 2025 by an individual who had previously been deported and re-entered the U.S. unlawfully, argues that the Biden-Harris administration presented a false choice regarding immigration. He contends that weakening immigration enforcement was portrayed as cost-free, with border security pitted against compassion.
Abraham shared that his parents immigrated legally in the early 1960s, believing in opportunity built on the rule of law, and did not see legality and compassion as competing values. He stated that advocating for stronger immigration enforcement does not equate to being anti-immigrant, contrary to what he has been told.
Polling data, according to Abraham, suggests that public support for legal immigration has not collapsed, but rather confidence in the government's willingness to enforce immigration laws has diminished. He described his daughter's death as a foreseeable consequence of policy choices that reduced cooperation with federal immigration authorities and failed to account for public safety risks.
He asserted that every public policy involves benefits, costs, and risks, and that honest leaders acknowledge them. Abraham believes that the administration distorted the immigration debate by framing enforcement as harmful and concerns about illegal immigration as a lack of compassion, thereby turning the rule of law into an antagonist and often dismissing families affected by policy failures.
The overwhelming majority of immigrants who come to America legally contribute positively to the nation, he noted. Abraham feels they deserve an immigration debate that clearly distinguishes between legal and illegal immigration and leaders who acknowledge the trade-offs inherent in public policy.
He concluded that by refusing to distinguish between legal and illegal immigration and by linking enforcement concerns to intolerance, the administration may have undermined public confidence in the immigration system itself. Abraham advocates for a lawful, orderly, and honest immigration system that acknowledges foreseeable trade-offs, which he believes is pro-immigrant, pro-rule of law, and essential for preserving both.