US midterms 2026: Where Indian-American candidates stand on immigration

For Indian Professionals in the US, immigration policy can determine how long the wait for a green card can continue for a worker, whether they can continue working for an employer and how securely their families can plan their future

As the US heads into the November 3 for its midterm elections, Indian-American candidates contesting congressional seats are offering different answers to these questions. While some are calling for changes to employment-based immigration and greater protections for immigrant families, others are emphasising stricter enforcement and tighter scrutiny of visa programmes. Their positions reveal how Indian American politicians are approaching an issue that affects both their constituents and the wider immigrant community.

Also read: US midterms: Two Indian-origin face-offs to watch, and why they matter


Their public statements show that the debate is not simply about whether the US should accept immigrants. It is also about who should qualify, how the law should be enforced, whether employers are exploiting visa programmes and how long legal immigrants should wait for permanent residency.

For Indian nationals, these differences are particularly relevant because India-born professionals face lengthy waits for employment-based green cards, while students and temporary workers depend on immigration rules to maintain their legal status.

Ro Khanna vs Ritesh Tandon

In California, Democratic candidate Ro Khanna is facing Republican challenger Ritesh Tandon, with both candidates addressing immigration policy.

Khanna has supported reforms to the employment-based immigration system, including changes to the H-1B visa programme to prevent abuse while preserving opportunities for highly skilled foreign workers. His immigration policy also supports temporary protection from deportation and work authorisation for certain unauthorised immigrants under programmes such as DACA.

Tandon, meanwhile, has called for stronger border security, stricter enforcement against illegal immigration and a more selective legal immigration system. In an October 2026 interview, he said he supported a pathway to permanent residence for DACA recipients, while arguing that people with criminal backgrounds and those who entered unlawfully should face deportation. He also described the per-country green card limits as unfair to Indian professionals who can face exceptionally long waits.

His position combines tougher enforcement with support for faster processing for legal immigrants. For Indians, this distinction matters because the green card backlog can keep skilled workers and their families waiting for years despite their lawful employment.

Pramila Jayapal vs Nirav Sheth

In Washington state, Democratic incumbent Pramila Jayapal and Republican challenger Nirav Sheth have offered contrasting approaches to immigration enforcement and legal residency.

In a recent interview, Jayapal called for pathways to citizenship for undocumented immigrants who have lived in the US and complied with the rules. She also advocated raising immigration caps, speeding up family reunification, reviewing employment visa programmes according to workforce needs and preserving asylum protections. She argued that immigration laws should also hold employers accountable for unlawful hiring.

Sheth, however, has backed the Trump administration's suspension of Microsoft's green card sponsorship programme. In an interview in October 2026, he alleged that third-party recruitment firms were exploiting immigration loopholes and that fraudulent applications were disadvantaging legitimate workers.

At the same time, he called for a complete overhaul of the green card backlog and said removing per-country limits was possible. He proposed a separate quota for highly skilled technology professionals employed directly by major companies, arguing that legal workers should not be penalised for following the rules.

The difference is significant for Indian technology workers: Sheth's position prioritises action against alleged fraud alongside targeted reform, while Jayapal advocates wider changes to legal immigration and stronger protections for immigrant communities.

Amish Shah: Border security with safeguards on enforcement

In Arizona, Democratic candidate Dr Amish Shah has said the US should enforce its immigration laws but ensure that enforcement follows the Constitution.

During an October 2026 interview, Shah supported funding for Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), while calling for better agent training and safeguards against civil rights violations. He argued that enforcement should target criminals and drug-trafficking networks without putting citizens and other people at risk.

In a televised debate in October, Shah also backed a pathway for people brought to the US as children under the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) programme, as well as a guest-worker programme to meet workforce needs.

His position distinguishes support for border security from endorsement of every enforcement tactic. It also recognises the role of legal migration programmes in meeting labour demand.