The Volokh Conspiracy
Mostly law professors | Sometimes contrarian | Often libertarian | Always independent
Elon Musk's Story Highlights Harm Caused by Immigration Restrictions
Immigration restrictions nearly prevented Musk from making his major contributions to economic innovation, and they do block all too many other potentially great innovators.

A recent Washington Post article shows Elon Musk was, for a time, working illegally in the US, and subject to deportation. He was able to remain in the US and eventually legalize his status because law enforcement was either unaware of his status or chose to look the other way. Much of the commentary on this issue focuses on Musk's hypocrisy: he has since become an advocate of hardline policies on illegal migration, under which people like Musk himself would be deported.
But Musk's story also highlights the harm caused by immigration restrictions. Cato Institute immigration policy expert Alex Nowrasteh explains:
What bothers me in the WaPo article is how destructive the US immigration system is. It almost didn't allow Elon Musk to settle here and build several innovative firms, push technological breakthroughs, and build enormous consumer surplus and shareholder value. Musk is a 1 in a billion innovator and businessman. If the US immigration system blocked at least one other Musk-type entrepreneur from coming here in the last century, then this should make intelligent nativists rethink their position. Few of them would want to kick Musk out now, but they support rules and enforcement that could stop the next Musk from coming or staying here. Musk was bright before he got a work visa, but there was little indication that he'd become the wealthiest man in the world. The conceit of immigration central planners almost cost us Musk's talents. Let's stop ignoring the right tail of the distribution and error on the side of letting more people in – one of them could take us to Neptune. I hope that readers of this story will come away with the same lesson instead of focusing on the hypocrisy.
Had Musk been forced to return to South Africa, he probably would never have had the opportunity to make major innovations and found Tesla and SpaceX.
Immigrants contribute disproportionately to a wide variety of entrepreneurial and scientific innovations. As discussed more fully in my article "Immigration and the Economic Freedom of Natives," that means large-scale immigration restrictions inevitably keep out significant numbers of people who might otherwise become major innovators or make important scientific breakthroughs. The immigrant we keep out today might have gone on to make a scientific discovery that could have saved your life, or that of one of your loved ones.
Obviously, a small fraction of would-be immigrants will become major innovators. But that small fraction is extremely important. And the cumulative impact of keeping out large numbers of ordinary migrants is that we also lose massive economic and scientific contributions by major innovators.
I am a bit less bullish about Musk's impact, in particular, than Alex Nowrasteh is. The benefits of his great innovations are partly offset by his harmful impact on political discourse, such as promoting bogus conspiracy theories about immigration ("great replacement theory") and voter fraud. On balance, however, the benefits of Musk's presence in the US almost certainly outweigh the costs. The real problem with political misinformation is a matter of demand more than supply. So long as there is a large demand for conspiracy-mongering claptrap, political entrepreneurs are likely to supply it. The particular claptrap that Musk promotes wasn't invented by him, and had widespread dissemination (including by Donald Trump) before Musk became involved. By contrast, Musk's entrepreneurial innovations are far less likely to have been quickly achieved by others, if he weren't around. And Twitter was a cesspool of awful political discourse long before Musk bought it. At most, he made it marginally worse.
There's a chance Musk might ultimately have a massively deleterious political impact. But more likely, he has just somewhat amplified terrible ideas that were already getting widespread dissemination. In addition, I would be wary of empowering government keep out migrants on the theory that they might spread harmful political ideas. If we don't trust government to censor supposedly harmful ideas disseminated by natives, the same reasoning also undermines the case for ideological screening of immigrants. Elsewhere, I have addressed in more detail the issues raised by the possibility that an extraordinary individual migrant could cause great harm as a political leader or a producer of harmful technological innovations.
In sum, the real lesson of Musk's story as an illegal migrant worker is that immigration restrictions often block tremendously valuable innovation. Musk was lucky enough to get around the system. All too many other potentially great innovators aren't as fortunate.
Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
Well, the Washington Post has no credibility.
At this point, even Snopes calls the claim of the WaPo “unproven”.
(10/29/2024 5:14PM)
edits were for punctuation
Oh, nonsense. The WaPo article used the magic words "experts SAY"!!!
Well, Musk has white skin. The perceived threats have brown skin. Therefore, illegals like Must: Good. Illegals from Central & South America: Bed.
QED
There is a correlation.
I'm definitely open to more white middle class immigration so that we can actually have a truly diverse immigrant class rather than the poor unskilled central american Democrat supporting immigrants only definition of diversity leftoids use.
Amazing. Even Elon Musk must fit on Ilya Somin's Procrustean bed of facilitating unlimited mass immigration.
The next massive innovator is probably squatting in an Aurora apartment complex right now!
"So long as there is a large demand for conspiracy-mongering claptrap, political entrepreneurs are likely to supply it."
Since our own politicians won't take the electorate seriously, why should we indulge them with our seriousness?
If the government confiscated his ill-gotten gains it could afford two weeks of spending.
Minor quibble: Musk did not found Tesla.
Didn't know Musk trespassed over the Southern border to settle illegally in this country. But good point, if we deport gang members and other criminals, they might build their criminal enterprises in their native countries and deny the United States the benefit of these entrepreneurial criminal activities. Thanks for opening my eyes.
So one guy overstayed a visa, and became a naturalized citizen, so we should let in 100 million illegals from the Third World? Nope.
I mean, I do approve of the fact that you guys don't bother to pretend to care about anything other than race.
Borders are racist? Well that's going to make being a country rather difficult.
Borders are imaginary lines; how can they be racist? I'm calling you (and Roger) — not borders — racist.
And I was mocking you. My comment pertained to the open southern BORDER and Harris' open border policy. Race was not mentioned you clown. Wit is wasted on fools.
And borders are imaginary lines? Yeah ok. Trespass over the "imaginary" border line of any other country on earth. Let me know how that works out for you.
Any restriction on immigration always gets called racist.
Anything you say gets called racist. Maybe you should look inward and try to figure out why.
Poor broken
sarcDave.I prefer to call him the bat shit crazy guy.
Yes, but that's because it's the insult that has been programmed into you.
I call you bat shit crazy because only a bat shit crazy guy would believe "[i]t’s possible to conclude that Trump being killed could benefit the country..." I'm actually being generous calling you bat shit crazy. Some might use harsher language for such derangement. So, you, and whatever f'd up aliases you use, kindly f off.
But of course it's true, so it can't be crazy. It is in fact possible to conclude that. But of course you cut the sentence in half to pretend that I said that I had concluded that, which I did not.
First, you apparently just reaffirmed the bat shit crazy sentiment so why you comment further is a mystery only the bat shit crazy can understand (and after this I’m thinking phenomenally stupid and bat shit crazy, not a good combination). Second, the remainder of your earlier comment was just strawman bullshit that had nothing to do with any sentiment anyone ever expressed, and, more significantly did absolutely not contradict your bat shit crazy clause. “It’s possible to conclude that Trump being killed could benefit the country, though only an unhinged conspiracy theorist would think Biden would want that.” So I say again, f off. Or maybe f off you piece of garbage, to quote Joe Biden.
Why should we? For most of human history, up until probably 60 to 70 years ago, every nation in the world admitted based on race, if they allowed immigrants at all. Every race for the most part believed in keeping to each other.
And outside of whites, every people still believes that.
Why are whites morally prohibited from caring about race?
That's right. Every country on Earth has a racist immigration policy. Nobody has figured out any other way.
So even before Musk entered the USA he was heavily vetted by immigration services, entered the USA legally and lived here in the USA legally for years.
This compares to illegal aliens who have crossed the border illegally with absolutely zero vetting how?
You do realize that people that overstayed their visas --like Musk is alleged to have done-- have outnumbered border crossers in many years over the last two decades, right?
You do realize that millions of unvetted illegals have trespassed over the border, are consuming taxpayer resources, burdening communities, and some committing violent crimes, right?
Seeing as y'all never stop obsessing over them like a teenager boy who found his dad's used Playboy magazines, yeah, I'm aware.
That said, did you understand my point? Monty asked a question: "what's the relevance?", and I answered, "most years the normal story is closer to Musk's then your wet dream".
Well this is new. I've encountered many TDs deranged a-holes, or just plain old fashioned a-holes here, but this perverse twist is different. Looks like you guys are becoming truly unhinged. You need a time out until after the election.
In just two posts you went from "many years over the past two decades" to "most years."
Care to share your source for the actual stats so we can sing along? Sight unseen, the fact that you're having to reach back 20 years to get ratios you like seems a bit suspect.
For obvious reasons, we don't have concrete data on these things, but here's some from Pew from 2021 looking at it.
And I do apologize, but this isn't my fetish issue, so I don't obsess over these things. That overstayed visas is a huge source of illegal immigrants isn't controversial... except here, apparently.
"Sight unseen, the fact that you’re having to reach back 20 years to get ratios you like seems a bit suspect."
That was more of a comment about how it's a long-standing trend, actually.
As far as singing goes... I've seen way too many folk 'round here singing in Trump and Vance's choir about how Springfield's Haitians are illegal immigrants to worry about good faith readers.
Thanks for passing that on — I misunderstood and thought you had something at least reasonably concrete based on the strength of your statements.
The Pew article was written in early ’21 and only looks at data through ’17, so it doesn’t include the last several years where the southern border has melted down. But on a higher level, Pew doesn’t doesn’t really seem like it’s trying to be credible since it only counts border encounters — it’s beyond reasonable dispute that those are just the tip of the iceberg.
Overstays have the opposite problem, since the lion’s share of visa overstay statistics (reported yearly, as in this 2017 report linked by the Pew article) are just guesses based on the lack of an exit record for about 1-2% of all visa entrants. Those guesses apparently get turned over to ICE, which doesn’t appear to issue annual reports but this Congressional testimony includes 2016 data, where ICE received nearly 1.3 million leads from CBP and others and was able to determine via automated systems that only 4,116 of them were actually actionable (and the field offices that investigated those 4,116 found that over a quarter of those were actually in compliance). CBP also reports its own enforcement actions based on overstays confirmed by actually having a record of the person leaving the country — just later than authorized (“Overstay Identification and Action” section in the reports, generally around pages 7-9). Browsing through a few reports, that looks like it averages 10% or less of suspected overstays. So together with ICE confirmed leads, that appears to shrink the top-line overstay statistics that Pew and others rely on by close to 90%.
So Pew is comparing a statistical floor that everyone understands is by definition a material undercount (known encounters) to a statistical ceiling that appears to dramatically overstate the actual demonstrable problem (potential overstays). They’re of course free to compare whatever two metrics they like, but the pair they chose doesn’t seem to be particularly useful in the real world to compare the magnitude of these two immigration-related issues.
Y’all never stop using the word “y’all.” Are you (1) married to your cousin, or (2) a racist making fun of black dialect?
You arguing cultural appropriation?
There is no distinct 2nd person plural other than y'all. I think it's increasing acceptance has helped with English clarity.
Are you the guy advising Harris to fake all those accents? Please tell her to stop. I beg you.
There kind of is. “You, your, your” is second person plural, and “thee, thine, thy, thou” is second person singular. But for various historical reasons, we don’t talk that way anymore.
Whether “you” is being used singularly or in plural is usually clear enough from context. If there is any ambiguity that must be removed, try using an alternative word or phrase, like “everyone,” “anyone who,” “you people,” etc. It will make you sound slightly less retarded.
And there are other non-standard regional attempts to form a distinctly plural English “you.” E.g. “yous,” “yinz.” But these sound equally ignorant.
It's weird. I use "howdy", "y'all", and other cowboy-isms all the time in meat-space, and other then an occasional comment about how my greetings are a bit more distinctive, I've never had anyone care.
At Reason.com, however, I get this kind of concern-trolling comment about once a year.
Y'all are very weird about it.
The "innovation" I'm seeing in the courts is squads of asylum seeking entrepreneurs staging fake car and construction accidents to load up on plentiful liability insurance and disability
dollars. Doin' work most American's arn't willing to do.
This dopey argument is like saying we must ban abortion, because an abortion might kill the one potential genius to invent a solution to the global warming problem. No, it does not work that way.
"We must ban immigration because otherwise one immigrant might commit a crime… but we can only look at the hypothetical 'one immigrant' harms and not the 'one immigrant' benefits, because Roger is a racist."
The presumption of too many commenters, on both sides of the immigration issue, is that prospective immigrants form a homogeneous group, and should be admitted or denied admission according to whether the country would derive a net benefit from that group.
In reality, prospective immigrants span a broad spectrum of types. Unquestionably, some come in the furtherance of criminal enterprises, or to take advantage of taxpayer-funded social services. Just as unquestionably, some come bringing considerable quantities of human capital, which they'd use in honest work to the general benefit of all of us.
So how do we admit the Indian MDs and West African entrepreneurs while keeping out the M13 soldiers and illiterate campesinos? Refugee programs, national quotas, and other rule-based systems are all too subject to gaming, and don't really distinguish between the immigrants we want to admit and the immigrants we want to exclude.
The sensible course is to let the market decide. Decide on a fixed number, and then sell the entry permits at auction, or create a market in which they can be bought and sold. Prospective immigrants with enough financial or human capital to turn a profit from US residence can buy permits, if necessary borrowing from private lenders who'll assess the value of that human capital. 18-year-old gang-bangers from the slums of San Salvador won't be able to muster the price of a permit.
Glad to see you make a libertarian proposal. Somin calls himself a libertarian, but his proposals are more Marxist.
We could freeze all immigration, deport all illegals, and auction off 100,000 visas. It would be interesting to see what price gets set.
How is "deciding on a fixed number" "letting the market decide"?
We either decide on a fixed number, be that "zero", "unlimited", or some figure in between; or else we establish a set of criteria and admit those who satisfy it while rejecting those who don't. Unfortunately, the latter is all too subject to gaming: if my party's in control of Congress, or I'm the DHS Secretary to whom Congress has casually given the job of deciding, I'm going to set those criteria for the benefit of myself and my party, rather than for the good of the country as a whole.
I'd actually go a step further, making the right of residence in the US transferrable and tradeable. If I'm a Columbia gender-studies major and want to get the hell out of this fortress of institutional racism, I can sell my right of residence at the market price and use the proceeds to grubstake a move to some country where my skills and talents will be properly appreciated. If you're a Nigerian software engineer, you can pay that market price and set up shop in the US. Voluntary transactions all around, so everyone's happier...
That way the net number can be zero. Let people in as people leave and sell their places.
I do not think most people would characterize "unlimited" as a "fixed number."
So you reject all humanitarian concerns.
Except that Musk wasn't a visa overstay. The story is that he was still on a student visa when he began working and the investors in his start up demanded he get on the proper visa, which he immediately did, before continuing . So even comparing it to visa overstays ignores significant differences and comparing it to border crossers is very, very different.
The story is that Musk was on a student visa without actually being a student. That's in fact a visa overstay.
His student visa ended when he dropped out or stopped attending school. At that point he was required to leave the country and reapply if he wanted to return.
This article seems based on a mistaken premise.
From Snopes’ recent article (updating an earlier article):
“Since our initial fact-check in 2016, public interest in Musk’s immigration status has persisted, particularly with the meme’s resurgence in 2024. Updated sources further confirm that while Musk’s immigration status may have been complex at certain points, and despite claims made by The Washington Post, no credible evidence supports that he was an “illegal immigrant,” in his brother’s words.”
https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/musk-undocumented-immigrant/
Seems hard to juxtapose the two parts of that quote.
Maybe Snopes is a right-wing site, or it's carrying water for Musk?
Read what DMN said again. Consider what credible evidence means, and what he wrote.
Read the Snopes article again (or for the first time).
Then contact Snopes and show them your rebuttal – I’m sure they’ll be convinced that they were simply taken in by right-wing talking points.
Wash. Post wanted to smear Musk.
I suspect that more people know about Samuel Morse and his vital connection with telegraphy than even know the names of the Presidents between Monroe and Lincoln. (And even then, people who know about Monroe would just know him as the guy with the Doctrine.)
Today, media attention would be focused primarily on Morse’s politics (which were worse than anything attributed to Musk), with the telegraphy stuff being the tail wagged by the political dog.
Guys, we can't deport all of these illegals because we might deport the next Elon Musk.
The actual state of you, Somin.
Are you no fan of Musk? Because that's legit.
But otherwise, how is that a ridiculous argument?
Expanding the talent pool means increasing the odds of getting a world changing genius.
I'm not as sanguine about the costs as Somin is, but denying that's a benefit seems pretty silly.
No, immigration restrictions did not almost deprive us of the wonders of Elon Musk (“Leon” to his friends). Musk thumbed his nose at immigration restrictions, likely due to his wealth and privilege.
I get opportunism and striking while the iron is hot, Professor, but do better.