(下边有中文翻译，请继续看到底。 谢谢。）
The United States has long benefited from an unusual ability to attract ambitious people from around the world. Scientists, engineers, doctors, entrepreneurs, students and skilled professionals have come to American universities and companies, contributing not only their labor but also ideas, businesses, patents and international connections. The latest tightening of U.S. immigration policy therefore raises a question that goes beyond border control: how can America protect its security and immigration system without weakening one of the sources of its economic and technological strength?
The Trump administration has introduced or extended several significant restrictions. A September 2026 proclamation requires most new H-1B petitions for workers outside the United States to be accompanied by a $100,000 payment, with limited national-interest exceptions. The measure has particular implications for technology and other specialized industries that rely on highly skilled international workers.
The administration has also pursued country-specific immigration restrictions. In January 2026, immigrant-visa processing was paused for nationals of 75 countries, including Pakistan, India’s neighbors such as Bangladesh, as well as Afghanistan, Iran, Nigeria, Egypt, Russia and others. A federal judge subsequently struck down that 75-country policy, and the State Department confirmed in August that the January pause was no longer in effect. Separate country-specific entry restrictions nevertheless remain for nationals of a number of countries, including Afghanistan, Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria and Yemen.
Birthright citizenship is another contentious area. The administration’s August 2026 executive orders seek to prevent automatic recognition of citizenship in specified circumstances, including certain cases involving foreign-government employees, designated foreign terrorist organizations and arrangements characterized as birth tourism. This is narrower than a blanket rule denying citizenship to every child born to foreign visitors. The policy is also subject to continuing constitutional and legal disputes.
These measures have real consequences for foreigners. Higher visa costs can make American employers less willing to recruit international graduates. Nationality-based restrictions can separate families, disrupt education and research plans, and make highly qualified applicants reconsider the United States. For students and researchers, uncertainty itself can be a deterrent: a talented applicant may choose Canada, Europe, Australia, Japan, or another destination if the pathway from university to employment appears unpredictable.
The potential cost to America is particularly important in science and technology. According to the National Science Foundation’s 2026 State of U.S. Science and Engineering, foreign-born workers represented 22 percent of the U.S. STEM workforce in 2024. In science and engineering occupations, India and China were the two largest countries of origin among foreign-born workers, accounting for 29 percent and 12 percent, respectively. Foreign-born workers also represented 46 percent of U.S. science and engineering workers with doctorates in 2023.
The contribution is not limited to employment. Research published by the National Bureau of Economic Research estimates that immigrants represent 16 percent of U.S. inventors but account for 23 percent of patents, while immigrant inventors generate substantial knowledge spillovers for American-born collaborators. Another 2025 analysis found that immigrants or their children founded 231 Fortune 500 companies, generating $8.6 trillion in revenue in fiscal year 2024 and employing more than 15.4 million people worldwide.
Chinese and Indian communities illustrate this broader contribution. India and China are major sources of foreign-born scientists and engineers in America, while Indian-origin entrepreneurs have created major technology companies and startups. Their contribution is therefore not simply a matter of filling vacant jobs; it includes entrepreneurship, research, investment, patent creation and the training of future American workers.
None of this means immigration should be uncontrolled. Governments have legitimate responsibilities to screen applicants, prevent fraud, address illegal entry, protect national security and ensure that immigration programs serve genuine economic needs. The debate is therefore not necessarily between open borders and closed borders. The more consequential question is whether restrictions can be sufficiently targeted to address genuine risks without unnecessarily discouraging legitimate talent.
America’s historic competitive advantage has partly been its ability to persuade talented people that their future can be built there. If immigration policy becomes sufficiently uncertain or costly, some of those people may simply build their laboratories, companies and careers elsewhere.
The long-term test for U.S. immigration policy will therefore be broader than how many people are kept out. It will also be whether America can continue attracting the scientists, engineers, entrepreneurs, students and innovators whose ideas have helped make the country a global center of technology and economic opportunity.
美国的移民政策与拒收人才的成本。
美国长期以来一直受益于其吸引全球有抱负人才的独特能力。科学家、工程师、医生、企业家、学生以及技术专业人员纷纷来到美国的大学和企业，不仅贡献了劳动力，还带来了创新理念、商业机会、专利以及国际人脉。因此，美国近期收紧移民政策引发了一个超越边境管控的问题：如何在不削弱其经济与科技实力来源的前提下，保护国家安全和移民制度？
特朗普政府已推出或扩大多项重要限制措施。2026年9月颁布的一项公告要求，大多数赴美工作的新H-1B签证申请必须附带10万美元的费用支付，仅限少数符合国家利益的例外情况。这一措施对依赖高技能国际劳工的技术及其他专业行业具有特别影响。
此外，该政府还推行了针对特定国家的移民限制政策。2026年1月，美国暂停了对75个国家公民的移民签证审批，其中包括巴基斯坦、印度邻国如孟加拉国，以及阿富汗、伊朗、尼日利亚、埃及、俄罗斯等国。随后，一名联邦法官推翻了这一针对75个国家的政策，国务院在8月份确认，1月份的暂停措施已不再生效。然而，对于阿富汗、伊朗、利比亚、索马里、苏丹、叙利亚和也门等国的公民，仍存在特定国家的入境限制。
出生地国籍问题也是另一个争议焦点。2026年8月，政府发布的行政命令试图防止在特定情况下自动承认国籍，包括涉及外国政府雇员、指定外国恐怖组织以及被认定为“出生旅游”行为的情况。该政策范围较窄，不等于所有外国游客子女均被剥夺国籍。此外，这项政策仍持续面临宪法和法律方面的争议。
这些措施对外国人产生了实际影响。更高的签证费用可能使美国雇主更不愿招聘国际毕业生。基于国籍的限制会分割家庭，打乱教育和研究计划，并促使高资质的申请者重新考虑前往美国。对学生和研究人员而言，不确定性本身也可能成为阻碍：如果从大学到就业的路径难以预测，有才华的申请人可能会选择加拿大、欧洲、澳大利亚、日本或其他目的地。
对美国而言，这一潜在成本在科技领域尤为重要。根据美国国家科学基金会2026年发布的《美国科学与工程现状》报告，2024年外国出生的劳动者占美国STEM劳动力的22%。在科学和工程职业中，印度和中国是外国出生劳动者来源国中规模最大的两个国家，分别占比29%和12%。2023年，外国出生劳动者还占美国拥有博士学位的科学与工程从业者总数的46%。
这种贡献不仅限于就业方面。美国国家经济研究局发布的一项研究估计，移民占美国发明者的16%，却拥有23%的专利；而移民发明者为美国本土的合作者带来了显著的知识溢出效应。另一项2025年的分析发现，移民或其子女创办了231家《财富》500强企业，在2024财年创造了8.6万亿美元的收入，并在全球雇佣了超过1540万人。
中国和印度社区体现了这一更广泛的作用。印度和中国是美国外籍科学家和工程师的重要来源，而印度裔企业家则创立了众多科技公司和初创企业。他们的贡献远不止填补空缺岗位，还包括创业、研发、投资、专利创造以及培养未来的美国劳动力。
但这并不意味着移民应当不受控制。各国政府有正当责任对申请人进行筛选、防止欺诈、打击非法入境、维护国家安全，并确保移民政策真正服务于经济发展的实际需要。因此，争论并不一定是在开放边境与封闭边境之间。更关键的问题在于，限制措施能否足够精准地应对真实风险，同时又不会无故打击合法人才。
美国长期以来的竞争优势部分在于其能够说服有才华的人士，让他们相信自己的未来可以在那里实现。如果移民政策变得足够不确定或成本高昂，这些人可能会选择在别处建立实验室、公司和事业。
因此，美国移民政策的长期考验不仅在于有多少人被拒之门外，更在于美国能否持续吸引那些科学家、工程师、企业家、学生和创新者，正是他们的思想推动了国家成为全球科技与经济机遇的中心。
(注意： 本文是用AI翻译的，或有误差。请以原版英文为准。谢谢。)
Reference Link:- https://sovereignista.com/2026/09/29/americas-immigration-policy-and-the-cost-of-turning-away-talent/