Rep. Maria Salazar (R-FL) is once again drawing heavy fire from conservatives after using a Fox News appearance to push an immigration bill that many see as a direct betrayal of President Donald Trump’s America First border policies. Her remarks have reignited concerns that some Republicans are drifting back toward the failed amnesty-style policies of the past.

During the interview, Salazar claimed it was time to “have that national conversation” about the millions of illegal immigrants who have lived inside the U.S. for years. To Trump supporters, this sounded like a familiar establishment line—one that ignores the overwhelming demand from voters for tough enforcement, deportations, and the restoration of law and order at the border.

Salazar argued that once the border is “sealed,” lawmakers should determine what to do with long-term undocumented immigrants. But critics point out that this exact political promise—enforcement now, amnesty later—was the same bait-and-switch strategy used in the disastrous 1986 Reagan amnesty that ultimately triggered decades of illegal migration.

Her bill, the Dignity Act, co-sponsored with Democrat Rep. Veronica Escobar (D-TX), would grant a formal pathway to legal status for illegal immigrants who meet certain conditions. Although Salazar insists that “it’s not amnesty,” millions of conservatives are having none of it. Any legislation that rewards illegal entry with work permits and legal status is, in their view, textbook amnesty—no matter how the sponsors try to rebrand it.

Supporters of Trump’s border agenda argue that the bill would undo much of the progress achieved under the former president, who successfully reduced illegal crossings, tightened asylum loopholes, and made border security a national priority. They warn that proposals like Salazar’s invite yet another wave of mass illegal migration.

The bill includes a decade-long “Dignity Program,” requiring participants to pay restitution and stay out of trouble. It also earmarks $150 billion for border security and technology. But skeptics say these enforcement sweeteners are nothing more than political window dressing designed to make amnesty appear palatable to Republicans.

Salazar has attempted to frame her plan as “compassionate” and “realistic,” saying undocumented immigrants who have lived here for years will never be deported. Trump conservatives strongly reject that premise. They argue that refusing to enforce immigration law is a choice—not an inevitability—and that the priority must remain restoring sovereignty, not surrendering to the status quo.

Many conservatives also note the timing: immigration is the top issue for voters, and Trump is leading an aggressive push to end illegal immigration through mass deportations, detention expansion, and the largest border enforcement effort in U.S. history. Against that backdrop, Salazar’s proposal appears wildly out of step with the party’s direction and the will of the public.

Salazar tried to defend her stance by citing concerns about due process in asylum programs and court decisions. But her critics say she is simply providing cover for policies that weaken Trump’s agenda and keep the country locked in an endless cycle of illegal immigration and political gridlock.

The Dignity Act of 2025 would allow illegal immigrants who have lived in the country since 2021 to obtain long-term work permits after paying a $7,000 fee and passing background checks. For conservatives aligned with Trump, the choice is clear: the Republican Party must defend border security, stand firmly against amnesty in all forms, and follow Trump’s lead in restoring control over America’s borders—without compromise.