Why It Matters for America’s Immigration Debate in 2025
By Richard T. Herman, Immigration Attorney
On Wednesday, Vice President JD Vance delivered remarks at the University of Mississippi, addressing the topic of U.S. immigration policy. President JD Vance advocated for a significant reduction in legal immigration during a public event organized by Turning Point USA at the university, emphasizing his stance on immigration reform.
Quick Answer:
Vice President JD Vance, during his presentation Wednesday at the University of Mississippi, called for a sharp decrease in legal immigration, highlighting his position at the event organized by Turning Point USA.
At a Glance
Quick Answer:
During a Turning Point USA campus event at the University of Mississippi on October 29, 2025, Vice President JD Vance declared that the United States must “get the overall numbers [of immigrants] way, way down.” He specifically called for a significant reduction in legal immigration. His remarks—directed at legal immigration—signal a dramatic policy shift in the Trump-Vance administration and mark the most forceful public argument yet for reducing lawful immigration channels.
I. The Setting: Turning Point and the Message of Restriction
At a packed auditorium in Oxford, Mississippi, the Turning Point USA “This Is the Turning Point” campus tour brought Vice President JD Vance before an audience of college students eager for cultural and political confrontation. Vance spoke forcefully during the event, emphasizing his strong stance on immigration.
According to AP News, Vance told the crowd:
“We have to get the overall numbers way, way down.”
Vance advocated a slowdown in legal immigration, emphasizing the need to reduce the pace of admissions.
He went further—arguing that America should admit “far less than what we’ve been accepting.” When pressed, he declined to provide an exact target, but his remarks about the need for a slowdown in legal immigration drew cheers from an audience that has embraced Turning Point USA’s populist, Christian-nationalist rhetoric.
Fast Fact
Legal immigration accounts for over 1 million green cards issued each year, according to U.S. Department of Homeland Security data.
II. Who Is JD Vance — and Why His Words Matter
Vice President JD Vance, once known for his memoir Hillbilly Elegy, rose from Appalachian roots to become one of the most influential voices of the Trump era. His rhetoric blends economic nationalism, populist resentment, and traditionalist social values. During his time in the Senate, Vance focused heavily on border security and enforcement rather than expanding legal immigration pathways. When asked about specific reductions, Vance declined to provide a firm number for legal immigration cuts.
As vice president, Vance now represents not just populist grievance but executive power. His statements have policy implications—signaling that the Trump-Vance administration may move beyond border enforcement to target legal immigration streams, including employment-based and family-based visas.
Expert Tip
“When a vice president frames legal immigration as a threat to social cohesion, it sets the groundwork for new forms of restrictionism that could reshape who can come to America—and who feels welcome here.”— Richard T. Herman, Herman Legal Group
Framing legal immigration in this way can have significant social consequences, impacting not only newcomers but also the broader society by influencing social cohesion and the overall fabric of American communities.
III. What Vance Said — and Why It Resonates
During the Q&A, Vance responded to a student’s challenge by saying America needs time “to cohere a little bit” before admitting more newcomers. Some have raised concerns that admitting too many people at once could challenge social cohesion.
He tied his stance to assimilation, implying that large immigration flows dilute “a common identity.” He emphasized the importance of fostering a sense of unity among all residents.
“You’ve got to allow your own society to cohere… for all the newcomers — the ones who are going to stay — to assimilate into American culture.”
Vance’s phrasing echoes early 20th-century restrictionists who used “assimilation” as a pretext for racial quotas.
Important Note
Vance’s argument repackages a 100-year-old debate—from the 1924 National Origins Act to the 2025 restrictionist revival.
The idea that America must pause immigration to “protect cohesion” has historically been used to exclude Southern and Eastern Europeans, Asians, and Latin Americans.
IV. The Broader Political Context: Trump-Vance 2025 and Beyond
Vance’s message fits neatly into President Donald Trump’s broader 2025 immigration agenda, which now targets legal immigration alongside unauthorized entry. Vance has also advocated for a shift toward a merit-based immigration system that prioritizes immigrants based on skills and qualifications over family connections. His comments contribute to a heated national debate on immigration and fuel political divides, with the administration calling for a slowdown in legal immigration as a means to preserve national identity and social cohesion.
Under the administration’s new proposals:
- Family-based immigration categories could face additional caps, with a particular focus on limiting additional immigration to maintain societal cohesion.
- Employment-based visas like H-1B and EB-2 may see heightened scrutiny, potentially impacting legal immigrants seeking to enter through these channels.
- Refugee admissions remain at historically low levels, and critics say a merit-based immigration system could disadvantage refugees.
Trump has framed this as “protecting American workers.” Vance adds a new cultural dimension—arguing that “identity” and “cohesion” are at stake.
Key Insight
Trump’s first term targeted illegal immigration.
The second term, shaped by Vance, is now targeting legal pathways—using “assimilation” and “identity” as the justification.
V. How Legal Immigration Actually Works — At a Glance
Legal immigration is not an open floodgate—it’s a tightly controlled system governed by numerical caps and detailed eligibility criteria.
According to USCIS, green cards are issued in the following main categories:
| Category | Approx. Share | Example |
|---|---|---|
| Family-based | 65% | Spouses, parents, children of U.S. citizens |
| Employment-based | 15% | H-1B workers, researchers, physicians |
| Refugees/asylees | 10% | Humanitarian protection |
| Diversity Lottery | 5% | Applicants from underrepresented countries |
Fast Fact:
Family sponsorships drive most U.S. immigration, not “open borders.” Even with all categories combined, immigration remains below post-WWII highs.
There is ongoing debate among policymakers and experts about what constitutes the optimal number of legal immigrants to admit each year.
VI. Assimilation: What Research Actually Shows
Vance’s core claim—that the U.S. needs to slow immigration to let society “cohere”—contradicts decades of empirical research.
Studies by the Pew Research Center and the Migration Policy Institute show that:
- Second-generation immigrants overwhelmingly speak English fluently.
- Naturalization rates are at record highs.
- Immigrants’ children achieve education and income levels similar to or higher than U.S.-born peers.
Expert Commentary:
“Immigrants aren’t undermining cohesion—they’re rebuilding it. In cities like Cleveland and Columbus, immigrants revitalize neighborhoods, launch small businesses, and fill essential jobs.”
— Richard T. Herman
VII. The Turning Point Factor: From Campus Politics to National Power
Turning Point USA, founded by the organization’s slain founder Charlie Kirk, has become one of the most influential youth conservative movements in America. At a leading turning point for the movement, Kirk’s widow Erika Kirk made one of her first public appearances since her husband’s death, introducing Vance and calling her appearance a “spiritual reclaiming of territory.”
During her public appearances, Erika Kirk has sought to inspire conservative students. Wearing a white “Freedom” shirt like the one her husband wore during a significant event, Erika Kirk told the crowd:
“If you’re worried about losing a friend—I lost my friend. I lost my best friend.”
She reflected on Kirk’s love for visiting campuses and promoting conservative values, emphasizing his passion for visiting universities to engage with students. Her words fused martyrdom with movement politics—turning immigration and national identity into moral battles, and encouraging young Christian conservatives to courageously fight for their beliefs.
Need to Know:
Turning Point’s revival under Erika Kirk adds a religious veneer to immigration restrictionism, positioning it as a defense of “Christian America” against multiculturalism.
VIII. The Economic Consequences of Restricting Legal Immigration
While Vance argues that reduced immigration will strengthen social fabric, economists say it could cripple key industries already struggling with worker shortages. Reduced immigration could exacerbate existing labor shortages in agriculture, construction, hospitality, and healthcare sectors due to an aging workforce and declining birth rates.
- The Cato Institute warns that restricting legal immigration would shrink GDP growth by up to 1% annually.
- The National Bureau of Economic Research finds that immigrant workers increase productivity and wage growth for native-born Americans.
- Sectors like healthcare, manufacturing, and technology—critical to Ohio’s economy—depend heavily on immigrant labor. Reducing the number of immigrant workers could contribute to higher inflation due to decreased labor supply.
Expert Tip
“In Cleveland and Columbus, employers are already facing acute talent shortages. Cutting legal immigration would make it harder for hospitals, tech firms, and universities to compete globally.”
— Richard T. Herman, Herman Legal Group
IX. Cleveland & Columbus: How Local Immigrant Communities Are Affected
Ohio offers a microcosm of America’s immigration debate.
Immigrants make up just 5% of the state’s population, yet contribute disproportionately to healthcare, education, and small business creation. Forty-five percent of Fortune 500 companies were founded by immigrants or their children, underscoring the critical role of immigration in driving economic success. Immigrants also launch new companies at twice the rate of native-born Americans, and reducing immigration could suppress innovation.
According to the American Immigration Council:
- Immigrants in Ohio paid $6.4 billion in taxes in 2024.
- They own 38,000 small businesses statewide.
In Cleveland, resettled refugees have revived entire neighborhoods.
In Columbus, international students and tech professionals fuel the state’s innovation corridor.
Fast Fact:
Columbus consistently ranks among the Top 10 Most Welcoming Cities for Immigrants.
Law Firm Comparison: Navigating Complex Policy Shifts
As policies evolve, families and employers need trusted legal guidance.
| Law Firm | Notable Focus | Service Area |
|---|---|---|
| Herman Legal Group | 30+ years in family & employment immigration; multilingual team; national reputation for advocacy | Cleveland, Columbus, nationwide |
| Margaret Wong & Associates | Removal defense and asylum cases | Cleveland, Columbus |
| Sarmiento Immigration Law Firm | Employment-based and family petitions | Columbus, OH |
| Shihab Burke Immigration Law Group | Corporate immigration | Dublin, OH |
Practice Pointer:
Families facing uncertainty should consult reputable attorneys early. For a consultation, visit Herman Legal Group – Book Consultation.
X. The Cultural Politics Behind the Message
Vance’s speech also reflects a broader ideological shift: immigration is no longer just a policy issue—it’s a proxy for identity.
Recent debates over immigration and executive authority have played out most visibly in democratic led cities, where the use of the national guard has sparked concerns about the expansion of government power. For example, Trump’s exercise of executive authority, including Trump’s deployment of the National Guard to certain cities, became a flashpoint for political conflict and raised questions about the use of federal force against political enemies.
These actions are often contrasted with the approach of Biden’s administration, which has taken a different stance on both immigration enforcement and the limits of executive power. The rhetoric and policy responses in these contexts are shaped by ongoing battles between opposing parties and their political enemies, highlighting the deep partisan divides. Decisions made today regarding the use of government authority and immigration policy could set important precedents, influencing how a future president might wield power in similar situations.
By invoking assimilation and social cohesion, Vance channels anxieties about demographic change, cultural pluralism, and religious identity. This mirrors similar movements in Europe that fuse nationalism with anti-immigration sentiment.
But America’s strength, as history shows, lies in pluralism, not purity.
Key Insight:
“We’ve heard this before—from the Chinese Exclusion Act to the 1924 quotas. Every generation is told America can’t absorb more newcomers. Every generation is proven wrong.” — Richard T. Herman
XI. What Comes Next: Legal and Policy Implications
If the Trump-Vance administration follows through, we could see:
- New executive orders tightening visa quotas;
- Delays in green card processing;
- Heightened scrutiny of asylum and humanitarian programs;
- Expansion of “public charge” criteria for adjustment of status;
- Increased visa denials under vague “national interest” standards;
- Potential travel bans enacted in 2025 by the Trump administration could limit immigration from specific regions.
Recent legal controversies have also centered on the handling of classified documents, with allegations of illegally keeping classified documents by high-profile figures drawing national attention and sparking debates over executive power and legal accountability. In addition, the administration has emphasized the importance of avoiding unnecessary foreign conflicts and prioritizing the avoidance of American deaths in foreign policy decisions. This approach includes the use of military pressure in international affairs, such as strikes on boats involved in transporting drugs and actions targeting Iranian nuclear facilities.
Immigration lawyers are preparing for a new era of legal battles. Groups like the American Immigration Lawyers Association (AILA) are expected to challenge restrictive measures in federal court.
XII. The Human Dimension
Behind the political theater, millions of families live in uncertainty—waiting for petitions, reunifications, and work permits.
For them, rhetoric like Vance’s isn’t abstract—it’s personal.
It affects whether a spouse joins their family, a student starts their career, or a refugee finds safety.
As an immigration attorney, I’ve seen the consequences firsthand: families torn apart by visa delays, careers disrupted, and communities left in limbo.
Essential Info
The Trump-Vance administration’s call to reduce legal immigration would reach beyond the undocumented. It could reshape the very definition of who gets to be American.
Key Takeaways
- JD Vance’s speech at the University of Mississippi marks a sharp escalation in anti-immigration rhetoric—targeting even legal pathways.
- The Trump-Vance administration appears poised to pursue broader cuts in immigration levels, citing “assimilation” and “cohesion.”
- Experts and economists warn that such cuts could harm America’s economic competitiveness and moral leadership. Declining immigration significantly impacts GDP growth, accounting for 93% of the projected reduction in a 2025 baseline scenario according to the Dallas Federal Reserve.
- Cleveland and Columbus stand as examples of immigrant-driven renewal and resilience.
- Families and employers should seek experienced counsel—like Herman Legal Group—to navigate the coming policy shifts.
