Pennsylvania Backs Reform, Not Abolition, on ICE

This article is the second in a series focusing on attitudes toward immigration and ICE in Pennsylvania. The first part looked at the topline numbers and concluded that Pennsylvanian adults were skeptical of ICE enforcement. However, they also supported immigration enforcement in the abstract, and were skeptical of proposed efforts to defund ICE altogether. This article examines the crosstabs – that is, the granular findings by age, race, party, and so forth.

We start, though, with one set of toplines that were left out the previous article, because they are by their nature more affiliated with crosstabs: approval ratings for Pennsylvania politicians. Once again, we find that Democratic Gov. Josh Shapiro is more popular than either of the two senators. Some 46% of respondents approved of the job he is doing, compared to just 23% of respondents who disapproved. The governor is popular among Democrats, with disapproval in the single digits. But even among Republicans his job approval remains relatively robust for our polarized times, with almost 30% approving of the job he is doing. Another 43% disapproved; but again, to be close to even among voters of the opposing party today is a remarkable feat.

Pennsylvania’s two senators don’t fare as well as Shapiro, but can still boast of solid numbers. Republican Sen. David McCormick’s job approval numbers are tepid, at 30% approval and 29% disapproval. In contrast to Shapiro, McCormick’s numbers have a strong partisan valence to them, with Republicans approving 55% to 13%, while Democrats provided a mirror result, with 17% approving and 53% disapproving. Independents split 23% to 25%. Older voters tended to approve of McCormick (43% to 36%) while younger voters were more tepid (16% to 19%). Perhaps surprisingly, union members and households were roughly split on McCormick, demonstrating the shift of a once-solidly Democratic group toward the Republican Party. We also found almost no strong racial valence either, with most racial groups roughly split on his performance. Education provided a stronger predictor of attitudes than race, with voters with postgraduate degrees disapproving of his performance, while other education levels were more mixed.

Pennsylvania’s maverick Democratic senator, John Fetterman, continues to have a coalition that more strongly resembles McCormick’s than his fellow Democrat who sits in the governor’s mansion. His overall job performance was split, at 38%-32%. Republicans approved of his job, at 59%-20%, while Democrats disapproved by a 30%-49% margin. Once again, his job approval was concentrated among older voters and union members. Despite a voting record that is quite liberal overall, his very public apostasies seem to have cost him dearly among his fellow co-partisans.

Moving on to immigration, voters report following the immigration news closely, 80%-20%. Independents are slightly less likely than partisans to be following the news, but the differences within the error margins (85%-15% for Republicans, 89%-11% for Democrats, 76%-24% for independents). Younger voters are less tuned in than older voters; 91% of older voters claim to be following the news closely, as opposed to 73% of 18-29-year-olds and 68% of 30-39-year-olds.

On the key question of whether ICE enforcement actions have gone too far, not far enough, or are about right, Democrats remain united against the administration’s actions. Almost 89% of respondents say ICE has gone too far. Even Republicans have misgivings; a quarter of them say ICE has gone too far, with another quarter saying it has not gone far enough. Independents lean toward the Democratic position, with 59% saying ICE has gone too far and just 20% responding that the agency has not gone far enough. The youngest age cohort is staunchly against ICE, with 73% opposing the agency, while smaller majorities of all other age groups are opposed to it. Over 70% of Hispanic and black residents oppose ICE’s actions, although substantial minorities – around 30% for both ethnicities – believe that it either hasn’t gone far enough or is just right. Interestingly, attitudes between union and non-union members are similar, with around 60% of both groups expressing skepticism toward ICE.

At the same time, remember that Pennsylvania residents were, on balance, skeptical of eliminating ICE. This was also an attitude that held across ethnic groups, union households, and even age groups. Even among Hispanic and black respondents, attitudes were split. The only real disagreement here popped up in political registration, with Democrats on balance supporting the abolition of the agency, while Republicans opposed it alongside independents. Republicans and independents likewise supported police officials cooperating with federal agents.

Taken together, this buttresses the conclusion of the initial piece: On balance, the public is with Democrats on questions of immigration right now. It is disturbed by the Trump administration’s efforts. At the same time, however, there are dangers lurking for the party. Party members support stances like abolition of ICE, and a refusal on the part of police to go along with immigration efforts. As we move into 2026 and 2028, this could play out in primaries in ways that push nominees to take polarized positions, ultimately eroding the potential Democratic advantage on the issue.