As the child of immigrants, Vice President Kamala Harris brings a deeply personal perspective to one of the nation’s most urgent issues: immigration. With Election Day fast approaching, immigration remains a divisive and pressing topic. Recent data reveals a significant drop in illegal border crossings, with September marking the lowest numbers of President Biden’s administration, according to the Department of Homeland Security. However, calls for comprehensive immigration reform continue to grow, and Harris has taken center stage as both an advocate for diplomatic solutions and a target for her opponents.

In her role, Harris has led diplomatic efforts to address the root causes of migration from Central America’s Northern Triangle — Guatemala, Honduras, and El Salvador — aiming to improve conditions and reduce the pressures driving people to leave. Despite these efforts, former President Donald Trump has consistently mischaracterized her role, calling her the administration's "border czar." Recently, during a September 10 presidential debate, Trump amplified false rumors that Haitian immigrants in Ohio were eating pets, "In Springfield, they're eating the dogs, the people that came in," Trump claimed. "They're eating the cats. They're eating the pets of the people that live there. This is what's happening in our country, and it's a shame." Such statements spread fear, dehumanize immigrant communities, and hinder productive dialogue on meaningful reform.

Earlier this year, bipartisan legislation to overhaul the immigration system was introduced, offering a pathway to progress. However, despite efforts from both sides, the proposal failed in Congress after Trump urged Republicans to oppose it. Frustrated by the political gridlock, Harris commented, “We need Congress to be able to act to fix the problem.” This statement reflects her commitment to a legislative approach that can more effectively address both humanitarian needs and border security, underscoring the limitations of executive action alone.

In its first year, the Biden-Harris administration signed nearly 300 executive orders on immigration, outpacing any recent administration. These actions span humanitarian protection, legal immigration, and interior and border enforcement. The Migration Policy Institute notes that Biden’s initiatives have outpaced his predecessor's, but criticism persists. Immigrant rights advocates feel that the administration has moved too slowly in dismantling Trump-era policies, while conservatives continue to push for stricter border controls.

Harris has also been candid about the dangers of irregular migration. During her first international vice-president trip, she met with Guatemalan President Alejandro Giammattei and addressed would-be migrants directly: “Do not come.” Harris emphasized that those attempting illegal entry “will be turned back” while stressing that the United States is working to address the conditions driving migration. She encouraged legal, safe pathways to ensure that migration can occur orderly and humanely.

Trump’s approach, however, relies on hardline policies, including a proposed mass deportation plan that could affect an estimated 20 million people, separating families and increasing risks for Latino communities. Advocacy groups warn that such policies could revive the trauma caused by family separations during his first administration, a policy that was abandoned after widespread public outcry.

The last significant immigration reform, the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986, aimed to address similar issues by making it illegal to hire undocumented workers while providing a pathway to citizenship for those who had entered before 1982. Nearly 40 years later, as the nation faces critical immigration challenges once again, the choice between comprehensive reform and a return to regressive policies has become stark. 

With November’s election just days away, the future of America’s immigration policy hangs in the balance, offering the possibility of a more inclusive approach or a revival of divisive, punitive measures.