Month: May 2026

Global low birthrates: the ultimate victory of liberal democracy?

Mexico’s and Tunisia’s birth rates are below those of the United States, which has been below replacement rate for decades. What is going on? Is the evidence suggesting that liberal democratic ideals of how one lives one’s life have spread throughout the world?

The Financial Times has looked at the sharp decline in birth rates in most countries. It finds a common thread in how people especially women anticipate how their adult lives will evolve. Parenthood has lost much of its old social force. Today, adulthood is more often defined by education, career, autonomy, consumption, and self-development. Young people, especially women, may want children in theory but delay them while trying to secure “personhood” — identity, status, financial independence, and control over life choices.

Childlessness is no longer stigmatizing. Traditional ordinary family life feels less attainable or less attractive. Community structures that once made pairing, marriage, and childrearing socially expected have weakened. The result: not just postponed parenthood, but a growing acceptance of childlessness.

The article also points to the influence of social media. “ In country after country the birth rate plunged after the introduction of smartphones, no matter what the previous trend was. The younger the age group, the more pronounced the downturn — a mirror image of smartphone usage patterns. Melissa Kearney, professor of economics at the University of Notre Dame, says it is “quite plausible that the modern digital media environment has had profound effects on society that have led to a decline in romantic coupling”.

The FT touches on but does not pursue in the factor of declining roles of traditional social associated life, such as religion, and the rise of new associated life that is linked to self-advancement – higher education and urban work. These lines of analysis are found in a research article which the FT draws on. The article says that “the decline in fertility likely reflects a complex mix of changing norms around work, parenting, gender roles, and leisure consistent with our cohort-based conceptual framework.”

Here is what liberal democracy means to the individual, framed in an American context: People strive to enlarge their minds, express their own convictions, and resist passive conformity. Society becomes more inclusive and tolerant, as consumer society opens up visions of equality of conditions, it creates more room for more persons to express themselves more fully.

Impact of deportations on American workers

Has deportation of unauthorized persons made a positive impact on legal worker hiring and wages? Two studies conclude that the impact on native American workers is mixed, and sometimes adverse.  There is no evidence that native workers are getting a lot more jobs and a lot higher pay.

A February paper used a model which assumed that half of unauthorized workers would leave the workforce. It concluded overall that mass deportation gives native workers a small short-run wage bump, but lowers average native real wages in the long run.

In the short run, the capital stock is fixed. With fewer workers using the same capital, the model estimates very small short-term gains.  But it also predicts that more labor-saving capital will be invested.  That would reduce wages in a small way. Again,, this is the results of a model, not actual experience.

But native wages rise where (1) unauthorized workers are heavily concentrated and (2) where natives can substitute into those jobs. In some states, native farming/forestry wages rise much more: California 7.17%, South Carolina 6.69%, and Oregon 6.55%.  the model used an estimate that 35% of farm workers are unauthorized.

The paper: Cravino, Javier, Andrei A. Levchenko, Francesc Ortega, and Nitya Pandalai-Nayar. “The Economic Impact of Mass Deportations.” NBER Working Paper No. 34790, National Bureau of Economic Research, February 2026.

A May paper looked at actual labor market behavior. In areas with large increases in ICE arrests, unauthorized employment fell, but U.S.-born workers did not step into those jobs.  The researchers looked at the complementarity of work in construction – that is, the effect of total employment say in residential construction when one labor component (common laborers, roofers, etc.) that are heaving – foreign-born fall short.  The researcher estimated that native construction workers with high school or less experienced a 3% decline in affected areas. The Washington Post summarized this paper as for every six unauthorized male workers displaced, one native worker with a high school degree or less also lost a job. They estimated job losses for native workers in farming, construction, and manufacturing.

The paper: Elizabeth Cox and Chloe N. East, “Labor Market Impacts of ICE Activity in Trump 2.0,” NBER Working Paper No. 35129, May 2026.

 

Pro-deportation sentiment and “sovereignty”

Why does mass deportation remain popular? Here are some polling results and a speculation of what the Trump administration may be politically astute to push the myth of non-citizens voting.  Psychologically, many older Americans likely think that foreign-born persons are effectively “voting”, at least figuratively in how we live.

Recent polls (April and May) show continued support for Trump’s deportation campaign, which the White House says is targeted at all unauthorized persons. An April Pew poll showed that those who say that deportation has gone too far edged about 50% — yet that confirms that even after Minneapolis the deportation effort gets support. In fact, the Pew poll shows that the share of Republicans who say that Trump has do too little rose from 16% in October 2026 to 28% in April 2026.

The majority of white respondents are supportive of Trump’s policy.  Black (69%), Hispanic (65%) and Asian (58%) adults are more likely than White adults (45%) to say that deportation has gone to far.

The voting fraud issue

52% of Republicans say they are concerned that some ineligible people will be allowed to vote in November (link unavailable).

It is useful to see how the myth of non-citizens voting (and unauthorized persons in particular) has been concocted by the administration and MAGA on the foundation of a real, persistent and persuasive concern that immigration overall waters down the sovereignty of American citizens, if sovereignty is taken as a psychological state that can be seized by the visible presence of foreign-born.  A hallmark event of sovereignty is voting.  If you don’t have foreign-born peers your imagination can run wild about voting abuse.

In a 2022 survey, 43% of all Americans aged 18-29 report a friendship network with some racial or ethnic  diversity, but that percentage drops among older Americans to 37% of Americans aged 30-49, 32% of Americans aged 50-64, and 24% of Americans aged 65 or older. This means that relatively few mature white Americans have no way through social networks to discern how foreign-born persons behave. I expect mature white Americans outside traditional immigrant-rich cities grew up with essentially zero peer contact with foreign-born persons.

Thus, psychologically, many older Americans think that foreign-born persons are effectively “voting”, at least figuratively in how we live.

 

 

 

 

Apellate court bars one element in strategy to kill asylum program

The appellate court of DC has barred the Trump administration from a strategy to effectively wipe out the asylum program for many new applicants. In a nutshell: executive branch must use the removal and asylum procedures Congress enacted; it cannot replace them by presidential proclamation and agency guidance.

In Refugee and Immigrant Center for Education and Legal Services, et al. v. Markwayne Mullin, Secretary of DHS, the D.C. Circuit ruled on April 24 that the government’s power to suspend entry under certain statutory provisions does not include a power to create new removal procedures for people already inside the United States.

President Trump’s Proclamation 10888, issued on January 20, 2025, described the southern-border situation as an “invasion” and sought to suspend entry for people crossing the southern border outside a “designated port of entry” and also for certain people entering at ports without sufficient documents. DHS guidance created a new procedure called “Direct Repatriation.”  The court ruled this illegal. The court emphasized the language in immigration law saying that any person who is physically present in the United States or who arrives in the United States may apply for asylum “irrespective” of status and “whether or not” they arrived at a designated port.

Other initiatives to cut the asylum program:

work authorization A February 2026 proposed rule would change employment authorization for people with pending asylum applications by extending the waiting period to apply for a work permit to 365 days.  there is a multiyear backlog in immigration court asylum hearings.

More intensive screening, vetting, and prioritization of asylum-related applications. The February proposal also says USCIS could prioritize asylum adjudication when derogatory information appears during review of a work-authorization application.

Replacement of judges. More than 100 immigration judges have been terminated or pressured to resign from the approximately 750 serving  judges. In several high-profile cases, judges were fired immediately after ruling against the administration, including two judges who dismissed deportation cases involving pro-Palestinian student activists. The administration has appointed 143 new judges to replace those removed, including many former immigration prosecutors from the Department of Homeland Security and military attorneys. During training sessions for new judges in October 2025, top immigration court leaders instructed recruits that asylum “should be granted only in rare circumstances”. Former immigration judge Jeremiah Johnson characterized the changes as “a dismantling of the court system.”