Abdul El-Sayed’s old campaign remarks about granting driver’s licenses to undocumented immigrants have come back into the political conversation as he runs for the U.S. Senate, prompting fresh scrutiny over whether such policies would effectively normalize undocumented status and expand access to state services.
Back in 2018, while running for governor, El-Sayed argued that denying licenses to people without documentation was a form of unfair treatment. “We’ve got to make sure that in this state we are not discriminating against documentation status. Right now, if you’re undocumented, you don’t get access to a driver’s license. You’re stuck,” he said in a campaign interview.
That earlier position is now resurfacing as El-Sayed seeks a Senate seat, and Republicans see it as emblematic of a broader approach to immigration and public benefits. The debate centers on whether issuing state identification to people in the country unlawfully simply removes practical barriers and, in effect, normalizes their presence.
Hans von Spakovsky, an elections expert with a conservative group, warned that driver’s licenses serve as more than a permit to drive. “Because America does not have a national ID card like the Europeans and other nations, state driver’s licenses are a stand-in for that ID card. Issuing driver’s licenses to aliens will help them in all the instances where a license is needed, from opening bank accounts to all types of other transactions,” he said, arguing that ID access unlocks a host of other services.
Spakovsky pointed to common paperwork and everyday transactions where a state ID makes a real difference. He noted that I-9 forms, the documentation used to verify employment eligibility, often accept a driver’s license as sufficient ID, and he cautioned that loosening restrictions would change the incentives around remaining in the country. “The key to getting aliens to self-deport would be to ensure that they cannot rent apartments, open bank accounts and take all of the other steps necessary to live and work in the U.S.,” he said.
From his past comments, El-Sayed framed the issue as one of equal access to basic state services, insisting people without papers shouldn’t be barred from everyday necessities. “You don’t get access to a lot of the basic things that the state offers everybody else, and I think that’s ridiculous and so we’ve got to stop discriminating that way,” he told audiences while running for office, and he later expanded his platform to push a more government-first agenda on issues like health care and education.
El-Sayed has resisted labels like progressive or far-left, but his policy prescriptions have leaned toward broader government involvement, including proposals like Medicare for all and tuition-free college. On the campaign trail he argued that Democrats are moving toward bigger government solutions, saying, “You’re seeing that kind of resonance here in Michigan for sure. And I’m not surprised that you’re seeing that in New York, too. Government ought to be available to set an equal playing field for everybody and to offer those basic things that everybody needs and deserves.”
El-Sayed’s campaign did not provide an immediate response when asked how far government should go in extending services to non-residents, and they did not spell out whether offering licenses to undocumented immigrants would be treated as tacit recognition of their status. That silence leaves voters looking to primary matchups and policy records for clues about where he would draw the line.
On Tuesday night El-Sayed faces Rep. Haley Stevens in Michigan’s primary, with the winner moving on to the November general election. The outcome will decide who mounts the official Democratic challenge, and conservative critics are already using these past remarks to shape the story voters will hear about immigration and state responsibility.
