Former Representative Katie Porter, a Democratic candidate in California’s crowded gubernatorial primary, is facing significant backlash after her comments regarding the role of illegal immigrants in the state’s population growth.
During a debate on Tuesday, Porter made the controversial statement that illegal immigrants are contributing to California’s population growth, a claim that has long been advanced by Republican critics of immigration policies.
Porter, responding to a question about whether she would cooperate with federal authorities to deport illegal immigrants, stated, “The job of the California governor is to protect every single Californian.” She went on to explain that California’s sanctuary state policy ensures that taxpayer dollars and state resources focus on state matters, not cooperating with federal immigration authorities.
Porter emphasized that illegal immigrants, whom she referred to as “Californians,” are integral to the state’s economy, paying taxes and contributing to population growth.
“These are Californians. They contribute to our economy. They pay taxes. And they’re one of the only ways that our state has been growing in recent years,” she said.
Backlash from Republicans and Critics
Porter’s comments sparked outrage, especially among conservatives. Gunther Eagleman, a prominent right-wing figure on X (formerly Twitter), accused Porter of revealing what many conservatives argue Democrats have been reluctant to admit: that illegal immigrants are effectively mitigating California’s population decline.
Conservative social media account LibsofTikTok also shared the statement, writing, “Katie Porter accidentally admits out loud that Californians are fleeing California and are being replaced by imported illegals.” Other critics on X joined in, with one user questioning, “So she’s saying Cali has too many seats in the House?” — a reference to the influence of noncitizens in the Census count, which affects the distribution of Congressional seats every ten years.
Republicans, including former President Donald Trump, have long accused Democrats of resisting efforts to deport illegal immigrants for political gain, citing the potential loss of House seats that rely on Census data, which counts all residents regardless of immigration status.
Trump’s attempts to add a citizenship question to the Census were part of this strategy, though the U.S. Constitution mandates that all persons, not just citizens, be counted in Congressional apportionment.
Population Trends in California
Porter’s comments also come amid ongoing debates about California’s population trends. Between 2021 and 2023, it’s estimated that around 400,000 illegal immigrants entered California, according to the Public Policy Institute of California. However, during the same period, California’s overall population grew by just under 20,000, according to data from the California Department of Finance.
Critics quickly pointed out that while foreign immigration is contributing to California’s growth, the state is also experiencing a significant net loss of residents due to domestic migration.
In 2025, California saw a net migration loss of over 215,000 residents, while foreign migration led to a net gain of 125,000. This migration trend has had serious economic consequences, with the Legislative Analyst’s Office noting that the state has lost billions in tax revenue due to residents leaving the state.
Economic Impact of Illegal Immigration
Porter’s statement about illegal immigrants benefiting California’s economy also sparked fierce debate. According to estimates from the Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy, California’s illegal immigrants paid about $8.5 billion in state and local taxes in 2022.
However, conservative critics argue that illegal immigrants place a disproportionate burden on public services, such as education and subsidized healthcare, though the full costs remain difficult to quantify.
Some studies, such as a recent report from the Department of Housing and Urban Development, suggest that illegal immigration may drive up the cost of living, particularly by increasing demand for housing. As the state grapples with housing affordability and homelessness, some have linked immigration to rising housing costs and increased strain on public services.
Republican Reactions to Porter’s Comments
Republicans seized on Porter’s remarks, with many using the opportunity to criticize both her stance on immigration and California’s broader political leadership.
Steve Guest, a Republican communications operative, posted on X, “California is cooked: Katie Porter says criminal illegal aliens are ‘one of the only ways California has been growing in recent years.’” Guest further noted that California has been under Democratic control for the past 16 years, suggesting that Porter’s comments reflect a deeper issue with the state’s policies.
Sheriff Chad Bianco, one of the two Republicans who participated in the gubernatorial debate, weighed in, noting, “I contained myself well, I think,” in response to Porter’s statements. Bianco, who has been a vocal critic of California’s sanctuary state policies, also reiterated that illegal immigration poses significant challenges to public safety and resources.
The Broader Context of California’s Demographic Shift
Porter’s remarks are part of a broader discussion in California about immigration, population growth, and the state’s economic future. While illegal immigration is often seen as a key factor in mitigating population decline, the economic and social impact of this trend remains contentious.
California’s ongoing housing crisis, high cost of living, and large-scale migration out of the state have made the issue of immigration particularly charged in the context of gubernatorial campaigns.
As the debate over immigration policy continues to unfold in California, Porter’s statements have put a spotlight on the competing visions for the state’s future. Whether the role of illegal immigrants in California’s growth is seen as a positive or a negative influence, it is clear that the issue will remain a central topic in the state’s political discussions.
