Virtually All New Jobs Under Biden Went to Illegal Immigrants says Peter Navarro

Washington, D.C. – March 19, 2025 – Peter Navarro, a prominent figure in the Trump administration, asserted that "virtually all new jobs" created during President Joe Biden’s tenure have been taken by illegal immigrants. Navarro, who served as senior counselor for trade and manufacturing under former President Donald Trump, made the claim during an exclusive interview with Breitbart News Editor-in-Chief Alex Marlow on "The Alex Marlow Show" podcast. The assertion, delivered from the White House during a sit-down discussion, ties mass immigration to broader economic concerns, including wage suppression and job displacement for American citizens—a narrative that has long been a rallying cry for critics of Biden’s immigration policies.

Navarro’s comments come at a time when immigration remains a deeply polarizing issue in the United States, with the Biden administration facing scrutiny over its handling of record migrant encounters at the U.S.-Mexico border. As of March 19, 2025, the debate over the economic impacts of immigration is intensifying, particularly as the nation reflects on the Biden years and anticipates potential shifts in policy under a new administration. Navarro’s bold claim, rooted in his interpretation of labor market data, has sparked both support and skepticism, prompting a closer examination of the numbers, the rhetoric, and the broader implications for American workers.

Navarro’s assertion hinges on a stark interpretation of job creation trends under Biden. “If you look at the net new job creation during the Biden administration, virtually all of the new jobs were taken by illegal immigrants,” he told Marlow. “And virtually all the people who lost their jobs, because it was a net, net kind of thing, were American citizens. I mean, that is freaking insane.” He framed this phenomenon as a consequence of what he calls the “Ricardian free trade model,” arguing that unrestricted immigration floods the labor market with workers willing to accept lower wages, thereby undercutting American citizens.

The former Trump advisor’s remarks align with a narrative he has long championed: that mass immigration, coupled with free trade policies, erodes the economic prospects of native-born workers. During the interview, Navarro drew parallels to the United Kingdom, where he suggested that mobile labor from Eastern Europe had displaced British workers in industrial towns, leading to cultural and economic upheaval. “The next thing you know, you got the world coming in to your factories willing to undercut your wages by a significant amount,” he said, painting a dystopian picture of labor market competition.

Navarro’s claim is not entirely new. It echoes sentiments expressed by other conservative figures, including former President Trump and Senator J.D. Vance (R-Ohio), who have similarly argued that Biden’s immigration policies have prioritized foreign workers over American citizens. However, Navarro’s assertion that “virtually all” new jobs went to illegal immigrants stands out for its sweeping scope, raising questions about the data behind it and the feasibility of such a dramatic shift in the labor market.

To substantiate his claim, Navarro pointed to statistics that he said were published by the Biden administration itself—a detail he found surprising given its implications. While he did not cite a specific report during the interview, analyses from outlets like Breitbart News and the Center for Immigration Studies (CIS) have tracked similar trends, offering a potential basis for his argument. According to a CIS review of Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) data, from January 2020—before illegal immigration reached record levels—through January 2025, approximately 88 percent of U.S. job growth went to foreign-born workers, including both legal and illegal immigrants. During this period, migrants gained more than 4.7 million jobs, while native-born Americans saw an increase of just 645,000 jobs.

This disparity, Navarro and his supporters argue, reflects a labor market skewed against American workers, particularly during a time when a near-record share of working-age U.S.-born men remain out of the labor force. CIS researcher Steven Camarota noted in a recent analysis that the labor force participation rate for native-born men aged 16 to 64 stood at roughly 22.1 percent in January 2025, a figure near historic highs for an economic expansion. “All this at a time when a near-record share of working-age U.S.-born men remain out of the labor force,” Camarota wrote, suggesting that immigration has filled a gap that might otherwise have drawn native workers back into employment.

However, the data is more nuanced than Navarro’s blanket statement implies. The BLS category of “foreign-born” workers includes not only illegal immigrants but also legal immigrants, naturalized citizens, refugees, and temporary workers. The agency does not break down employment figures by immigration status, making it impossible to definitively attribute all—or even “virtually all”—job gains to illegal immigrants alone. Critics of Navarro’s claim, including economists and fact-checkers, have pointed out this limitation, arguing that his assertion oversimplifies a complex labor market dynamic.

For instance, a Forbes analysis from July 2024 found that 59 percent of employment growth under Biden through June 2024—approximately 7.8 million of 13.4 million jobs—went to U.S.-born workers, directly contradicting the notion that illegal immigrants dominated job creation. Even when considering the broader category of foreign-born workers, the growth includes long-term residents and legal immigrants, not just recent arrivals crossing the border illegally. “Government statistics do not measure how many lacked legal status,” the Forbes report noted, underscoring the lack of precise data to support Navarro’s specific focus on illegal immigration.

Navarro’s critique comes against the backdrop of Biden’s immigration policies, which have been both ambitious and controversial. Since taking office in January 2021, the Biden administration has overseen a record 6.5 million migrant encounters at the U.S.-Mexico border through October 2024, according to the Office of Homeland Security Statistics. Of these, more than 2.4 million individuals were allowed into the country, many in active removal proceedings where they can claim asylum. The administration has also deported or expelled 3.7 million migrants, including 2.8 million directly from Customs and Border Protection (CBP) custody, often under the Title 42 public health measure during the pandemic.

These figures reflect a border policy tested by unprecedented arrivals, driven by factors ranging from economic opportunity in the U.S. to instability in Central America and beyond. Biden has sought to balance enforcement with humanitarian measures, expanding legal pathways like the parole process for Venezuelans, Nicaraguans, Haitians, and Cubans, while ramping up expedited removals under Title 8 immigration laws. Yet, critics like Navarro argue that this approach has incentivized illegal crossings, flooding the labor market with workers who compete with Americans for jobs.

The Migration Policy Institute (MPI) reported that Biden’s administration executed 605 immigration-related executive actions by December 2024—far surpassing the 472 under Trump’s first term—making it the most active presidency on immigration in U.S. history. These actions restored legal immigration levels post-COVID, rebuilt refugee resettlement, and naturalized nearly 3.5 million people. However, the administration has struggled to address the border crisis narrative, with conservatives charging that its policies have led to chaos and liberals decrying a perceived doubling-down on Trump-era restrictions.

Navarro’s claim taps into a broader economic anxiety: the fear that immigration undermines the livelihoods of American workers. He ties this to free trade, arguing that mobile labor and capital depress wages—a theory rooted in classical economics but contested in its modern application. “Immigration is fine if it benefits a country, but [not] if it totally destroys a country,” he said, framing the Biden-era job trends as a betrayal of American citizens.

Economists, however, caution against such sweeping conclusions. Felix Koenig, a professor at Carnegie Mellon University, told Forbes that attributing labor market shifts solely to presidential policies is “very difficult,” given global macroeconomic factors like the post-COVID recovery. Brown University economist Dany Bahar has similarly found that border crossings correlate more with U.S. job openings than with specific administrations, a pattern consistent across Bush, Obama, Trump, and Biden.

Politically, Navarro’s remarks amplify a key Republican talking point as the nation looks toward future elections. The claim that Biden’s policies have handed jobs to illegal immigrants resonates with voters concerned about economic security and border control—issues that proved decisive in past campaigns. Yet, fact-checkers like PolitiFact have rated similar assertions, such as Vance’s claim that “100% of net job creation” went to foreign-born workers, as “Mostly False,” citing the inclusion of pre-Biden data and the lack of specificity on illegal immigration. 17GEN4.com