Invasion: The Role of Rhetoric in Shaping Immigration Policy

by Clara Zimban

“Over the last four years, the United States has endured a large-scale invasion at an unprecedented level.” – President Donald Trump

Since his return to office in January 2025, quotes like these have accompanied Trump’s national security briefings and executive orders. Statements that have become rhetorical anchors for his sweeping immigration crackdown.

While it is true that the U.S. recorded historically high numbers of migrant encounters at the southern border—surpassing two million annually in 2022 and 2023, this framing reflects key statistical distortions. Around 40% of these cases between 2021 and 2023 were immediately expelled under Title 42—a pandemic-era public health order that allowed border agents to remove migrants without formal processing (CBD.gov). Because Title 42 carried no legal penalties for repeat crossings, it also likely contributed to inflated encounter numbers, according to the Pew Research Center (Pew Research Center).

More significant than the statistics, however, is the language used to frame them. In Trump’s public addresses and executive actions, migrants are repeatedly described as “dangerous,” “criminal,” and “illegitimate.” Labels like “illegal aliens” and “invaders” reduce humanitarian and geopolitical factors to militarized binaries. The concept of migrant becomes dehumanized as an entity threatening the security, safety and welfare of the nation, therefore justifying extraordinary measures.

Since his return, Trump launched the most expansive immigration enforcement campaign since the post-9/11 era, issuing over 180 immigration-related executive actions within his first 100 days, a sixfold increase from the same period in his first term (Pierce). The new strategy taps into federal and military resources, state and local law enforcement, and archaic wartime laws (Brennan Center for Justice).

The term “invasion” is the centerpiece of this strategy. In U.S. law, the term is reserved for armed incursion by hostile foreign powers, not unauthorized border crossings. Courts have repeatedly rejected attempts to classify immigration as an invasion in order to invoke state war powers (Cheney). Political scientist Cas Mudde, a leading scholar of political extremism, explained in an interview that this rhetoric is rooted in nativist ideology: the belief that the state should be reserved exclusively for members of a native in-group, and that outsiders—whether people, cultures, or ideas—are inherently threatening.

“States have almost always responded in an authoritarian and nativist way to foreign threats,” Mudde acknowledged. “But nativism is much more prominent than it was in the last couple of decades.”

A Parallel Shift in the UK

The United States is not alone in this new turn in rhetoric and policy. Across the Atlantic, the United Kingdom has adopted a similar posture toward immigration. In 2023, the British Parliament passed the Illegal Migration Act, a landmark law mandating the detention and removal of individuals arriving in the UK via unauthorized routes, such as small boat crossings. The Act bars migrants from seeking asylum in the UK, regardless of their eligibility under international law (legislation.gov.uk).

Building on the foundations laid by this Act, Keir Starmer’s government unveiled one of the most sweeping overhauls of immigration policy in decades in May 2025, involving stiffer immigration policies, including reduced entry pathways with increased mechanisms for surveillance and enforcement (HM Government).

Sheekeba Nasimi, Legal and Development Manager of the Afghanistan and Central Asian Association (ACAA) in London, explained to Kinsman how this hostile policy environment is reshaping not only the legal landscape but also the daily life of asylum seekers and migrants.

“Recent policy changes, especially the Illegal Migration Act, have introduced legal uncertainty and heightened fear,” Nasimi said. She describes how frontline organizations like ACAA are left to fill the gaps created by diminishing statutory support. “When national policy withdraws, community action steps forward—but this level of support is not sustainable without investment.”

The association has expanded legal clinics and outreach services available to refugees, particularly those housed in temporary accommodations.

“One young Afghan woman spent months in a hotel, isolated, and struggling with her mental health,” Nasimi recalled. “With community support, she was able to secure legal aid, find a host family, and eventually begin giving back by volunteering to help others.”

While such stories highlight resilience, they also point to the emotional toll of the UK’s immigration policies. Nasimi notes that many experience “a deep sense of uncertainty” with the trauma of displacement, compounded by long delays and unclear outcomes. “It’s the sense of being in limbo that often causes the most distress,” she said.

The new immigration framework formalizes this uncertainty through a structure that requires migrants to ‘earn’ their settlement and citizenship. The qualifying period for permanent residency is set to increase to ten years, having a new points-based pathway that will tie immigration status to measurable economic contribution. Meanwhile, adult dependents of visa holders will now face English language requirements, and the government will place caps and time limits on lower-skilled workers allowed in under “temporary shortage” roles.

Anti-immigration sentiments in the U.S. and Europe are leading to more restrictive immigration policies, driven by growing support for right-wing or far-right parties. Taken together, these changes can lead us to think that a transnational discourse on immigration is shaping global policy. But Mudde insists that this simultaneity of anti-immigration measures is mainly informed by age-old local and national traditions. “In this ultra-connected time, many politicians copy each other’s language,” he told Kinsman, “but that doesn’t mean that they have a coordinated or even similar agenda or ideology.”

Still, the resonance between countries suggests that rhetoric matters, not just in how immigration policy is justified, but in how societies perceive who belongs—and who does not.

Against increasingly polarized discourses on immigration, Nasimi emphasizes the importance of humanizing narratives and reviving a shared instinct for compassion that often gets lost in political rhetoric. “Behind every statistic is a person, with a story, a family, and the potential to contribute. Policy should reflect that humanity.”

Brennan Center for Justice. “The Alien Enemies Act, Explained.” Brennan Center for Justice, 14 Oct. 2020, www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/alien-enemies-act-explained. Accessed 11 June 2025.

Cheney, Kyle. “Another Judge Skewers Trump’s Use of Alien Enemies Act for Deportations to El Salvador.” Politico, 6 May 2025, www.politico.com/news/2025/05/06/trump-alien-enemies-act-court-ruling-00331487. Accessed 11 June 2025.

“Illegal Migration Act 2023.” legislation.gov.uk, The National Archives, 20 July 2023, www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2023/37/contents. Accessed 11 June 2025.

HM Government. Restoring Control over the Immigration System: White Paper. GOV.UK, 5 May 2025, www.gov.uk/government/publications/restoring-control-over-the-immigration-system-white-paper. Accessed 11 June 2025.

Krogstad, Jens Manuel, and John Gramlich. “Key Facts About Title 42, the Pandemic Policy That Has Reshaped Immigration Enforcement at U.S.-Mexico Border.” Pew Research Center, 27 Apr. 2022, www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2022/04/27/key-facts-about-title-42-the-pandemic-policy-that-has-reshaped-immigration-enforcement-at-u-s-mexico-border/. Accessed 11 June 2025.

Pierce, Sarah. “Trump 2.0 on Immigration: The First 100 Days.” Migration Policy Institute, 7 May 2025, www.migrationpolicy.org/article/trump-2-immigration-first-100-days. Accessed 11 June 2025.

U.S. Customs and Border Protection. “Title 8 and Title 42 Statistics.” CBP.gov, U.S. Department of Homeland Security, www.cbp.gov/newsroom/stats/cbp-enforcement-statistics/title-8-and-title-42-statistics. Accessed 11 June 2025.

---

Clara Zimban is a French writer and aspiring journalist of Guadeloupean descent. Currently studying Politics and International Relations at the University of Bristol, she explores the intersections of culture and politics in her work. Passionate about storytelling and global affairs, she contributes to various online publications and local news outlets in France and beyond. Through her writing, Clara seeks to amplify diverse perspectives and engage in critical discussions on society, identity, and governance. With a sharp analytical voice and a deep curiosity for world affairs, she is carving her path as a dynamic and insightful journalist.