A recent analysis by the Center for Immigration Studies reveals that households headed by illegal immigrants access welfare benefits at significantly higher rates than those headed by U.S.-born citizens.
This is according to data from the 2022 Survey of Income and Program Participation.
The report, published in December 2023, provides detailed insights into welfare usage patterns across different demographic groups.
The comprehensive study found that 54 percent of households headed by immigrants used one or more major welfare programs, compared to 39 percent for households headed by U.S.-born citizens.
This represents a 15 percentage point difference between the two groups.
The disparity becomes even more pronounced when examining non-citizen households specifically, which showed a 59 percent usage rate, indicating that legal status plays a role in welfare utilization patterns.
The data indicates that immigrant-headed households demonstrate particularly high utilization across multiple benefit categories when compared to their U.S.-born counterparts.
Food program usage reached 36 percent among immigrant households, compared to 25 percent for U.S.-born households, representing an 11 percentage point gap.
Medicaid usage followed a similar pattern, with 37 percent of immigrant households participating versus 25 percent of U.S.-born households, showing a 12 percentage point difference.
The Earned Income Tax Credit also showed higher usage among immigrant households at 16 percent, compared to 12 percent for U.S.-born households, though this gap was smaller at 4 percentage points.
Employment data reveals that 94 percent of immigrant households include at least one worker, compared to 73 percent for U.S.-born households.
This suggests that welfare usage among immigrant households occurs alongside active workforce participation rather than in lieu of employment.
The Center for Immigration Studies emphasized that the welfare access results from legitimate eligibility pathways rather than fraudulent claims or system abuse.
The organization’s researchers noted that current laws and regulations create multiple avenues for immigrant families to access benefits legally.
The report noted that “illegal immigrants can receive welfare on behalf of U.S.-born children, and illegal immigrant children can receive school lunch/breakfast and WIC directly.”
Several states have expanded Medicaid coverage to include some illegal immigrants, both adults and children, while others provide SNAP benefits through state-funded programs.
Work authorization programs including DACA, TPS and certain asylum applications enable millions of illegal immigrants to receive the Earned Income Tax Credit.
These policy decisions at state and federal levels have created a complex web of eligibility requirements that vary by location and immigration status.
Even when excluding lower-cost programs such as school meals, the welfare usage gap remains substantial and concerning to policy analysts.
The study found that 46 percent of immigrant households still utilized welfare benefits, compared to 33 percent of U.S.-born households, representing a 13 percentage point difference.
Concurrent with these findings, several Democratic officials face serious legal consequences for allegedly interfering with federal immigration enforcement operations.
The arrests represent a significant escalation in tensions between local officials and federal immigration authorities under the current administration’s enforcement priorities.
Rep. LaMonica McIver (D-NY) was arrested for obstructing ICE agents during an operation targeting illegal immigrants with criminal records.
McIver faces a three-count federal indictment related to the incident at a federal immigration detention center.
If convicted, she could face a maximum penalty of 17 years in prison for charges including obstruction of justice.
In Wisconsin, Superior Court Judge Hannah Dugan received felony charges for attempting to prevent the arrest of an illegal immigrant convicted of drug trafficking.
The case has drawn significant attention due to Dugan’s position as a sitting judge and the unusual nature of judicial interference with federal law enforcement operations.
Dugan was indicted on May 13 on charges of concealing a person from arrest and obstruction of proceedings, with prosecutors alleging she used her judicial authority to impede federal agents.
If convicted, Dugan faces up to six years in prison and fines reaching $350,000.
