Investigating the Immigration Policies and Discourses of Barack Obama and Donald Trump
Creators: Alzubaidi, Abdullah Sinan
Publisher: name: University of Alberta Library
Year: 2024

<p>This dissertation examines whether, and if so, how, the policies and discourses of former American presidents Barack Obama and Donald Trump were similar or different on immigration. For many reasons, both faced a need to act on and discuss immigration. They include the fact that immigration is important to America, an absence of comprehensive reform produced by the executive and legislative branches, and the growth in prominence and stature of the presidency after World War II. Also, a president’s policies and discourses influence other leaders, which is vital given we live in an epoch where immigration can be a politicized issue. Studying the Obama and Trump presidencies is necessary partly because both promised as candidates that they would enact comprehensive immigration reform if elected. Also, there are divergent assessments in academia and the media on whether the Democrat was a different president on immigration than the Republican.<br>
This dissertation asks three questions: 1) Did Obama and Trump use immigration policy instruments similarly or differently? 2) What was the nature of the interactions between Obama and Trump and both Congress and the Supreme Court over immigration policy? 3) Were the immigration discourse techniques of Obama and Trump similar or different? <br>
To answer these questions, I employ a methodological strategy using quantitative/qualitative content analysis, computational text analysis, and distant/close reading. A theoretical framework underpins the analysis, stressing the relevance of the unilateral presidency in relation to policy and framing theory for understanding discourse.<br>
The findings show that Obama and Trump’s immigration pursuits were driven by them instituting unilateral policies, admission/enforcement decisions, and deploying discourse. They also reveal similarities and differences in their immigration record, rebuking some writers who argue they entirely differed. Regarding the similarities in their use of policy instruments, both presidents prevented large numbers of refugees from arriving in the U.S. and rebuked granting asylum status to many. Also, their enforcement regime was intense as they apprehended and removed a large number of noncitizens. A key difference, though, was that Trump issued more executive orders and proclamations to engender policy changes.<br>
Both presidents, interacting with the legislative and judicial branches, allowed several pieces of legislation to become law. Notably, all the ones they signed into law constituted minor reforms to the immigration system. Neither Obama nor Trump could get comprehensive reform through Congress. Also, the conservative-leaning Supreme Court had a mixed reaction to the leaders’ regulations towards immigrants/noncitizens, allowing some to remain but also constraining others (especially Republican Trump). A major contrast was when Trump vetoed two pieces of legislation that Congress passed.<br>
In relation to discourse, there were several similarities in techniques. Obama and Trump both used the conflict frame in their press remarks to attack others hindering their ability to act on immigration. Both presidents also were not successful in their use of diverse frames in formal speeches to get Congress to support comprehensive reform. Moreover, the leaders embedded the explanatory frame into their press releases to state their intentions to eliminate immigration policies that presidents before them had enacted.<br>
There were also notable differences in discourse. Obama used the social inclusion frame in solo conferences late in his presidency to stress that he would continue to fight for DREAMers impacted by his DACA/DAPA policies. Trump used the social exclusion frame in such discourse, as well as press exchanges, addresses, and press releases, to promote keeping immigrants (especially from the Middle East) out of America. Trump’s language was right-wing, exclusionary, and populist in nature, mirroring previous Republican leaders. Finally, Obama used the morality frame in state speeches and addresses to stress that his administration supported taking in refugees and believed others should do so. However, the number of refugee arrivals under Obama differed from his preachings.<br>
The implications of the analysis underscore that two seemingly different presidents (Obama and Trump), to some, relied heavily on unilateral policy actions and discourse to lead on immigration since the legislative and judicial branches impinged on their respective agendas. With Trump running for re-election in 2024, the potential for him to return to the White House to build on his immigration record is, therefore, quite real.</p>