🌍 Issue
Immigration: what each candidate thinks
By Fadrique Garcia Font · Reviewed on 19/10/2026
A referendum on immigration, birthright citizenship, legal status for undocumented workers, priority for French citizens in social housing and jobs, State medical aid (AME) and family reunification.
6 questions, 66 candidate positions and 6 complete disagreements (how they are assigned).
What each candidate proposes on this issue
A summary of their positions on the questions in this issue, based on their programmes, statements and the votes of their party’s group. Details and sources, question by question, below.
Disagrees: “Birthright citizenship (“droit du sol”) should be abolished”; “Undocumented workers who have a job should be given legal status”; “Social housing and jobs should go to French citizens first”; “Family reunification should be suspended”
In between: “There should be a referendum on immigration”; “Undocumented migrants should keep access to State medical aid (AME)”
Agrees: “There should be a referendum on immigration”; “Birthright citizenship (“droit du sol”) should be abolished”; “Family reunification should be suspended”
Disagrees: “Undocumented workers who have a job should be given legal status”; “Undocumented migrants should keep access to State medical aid (AME)”
In between: “Social housing and jobs should go to French citizens first”
Agrees: “Undocumented workers who have a job should be given legal status”; “Undocumented migrants should keep access to State medical aid (AME)”
Disagrees: “There should be a referendum on immigration”; “Birthright citizenship (“droit du sol”) should be abolished”; “Social housing and jobs should go to French citizens first”; “Family reunification should be suspended”
Agrees: “There should be a referendum on immigration”; “Birthright citizenship (“droit du sol”) should be abolished”; “Social housing and jobs should go to French citizens first”; “Family reunification should be suspended”
Disagrees: “Undocumented workers who have a job should be given legal status”; “Undocumented migrants should keep access to State medical aid (AME)”
Agrees: “There should be a referendum on immigration”; “Birthright citizenship (“droit du sol”) should be abolished”; “Family reunification should be suspended”
Disagrees: “Undocumented workers who have a job should be given legal status”; “Social housing and jobs should go to French citizens first”; “Undocumented migrants should keep access to State medical aid (AME)”
Agrees: “Undocumented workers who have a job should be given legal status”; “Undocumented migrants should keep access to State medical aid (AME)”
Disagrees: “There should be a referendum on immigration”; “Birthright citizenship (“droit du sol”) should be abolished”; “Social housing and jobs should go to French citizens first”; “Family reunification should be suspended”
Agrees: “Family reunification should be suspended”
Disagrees: “Birthright citizenship (“droit du sol”) should be abolished”; “Undocumented workers who have a job should be given legal status”; “Social housing and jobs should go to French citizens first”; “Undocumented migrants should keep access to State medical aid (AME)”
In between: “There should be a referendum on immigration”
Agrees: “There should be a referendum on immigration”; “Birthright citizenship (“droit du sol”) should be abolished”
Disagrees: “Undocumented workers who have a job should be given legal status”; “Social housing and jobs should go to French citizens first”; “Undocumented migrants should keep access to State medical aid (AME)”
In between: “Family reunification should be suspended”
Agrees: “Undocumented workers who have a job should be given legal status”; “Undocumented migrants should keep access to State medical aid (AME)”
Disagrees: “There should be a referendum on immigration”; “Birthright citizenship (“droit du sol”) should be abolished”; “Social housing and jobs should go to French citizens first”; “Family reunification should be suspended”
Agrees: “Undocumented workers who have a job should be given legal status”; “Undocumented migrants should keep access to State medical aid (AME)”
Disagrees: “There should be a referendum on immigration”; “Birthright citizenship (“droit du sol”) should be abolished”; “Social housing and jobs should go to French citizens first”; “Family reunification should be suspended”
Agrees: “There should be a referendum on immigration”; “Birthright citizenship (“droit du sol”) should be abolished”; “Social housing and jobs should go to French citizens first”; “Family reunification should be suspended”
Disagrees: “Undocumented workers who have a job should be given legal status”; “Undocumented migrants should keep access to State medical aid (AME)”
There should be a referendum on immigration.
Article 11 of the Constitution does not currently allow a referendum on immigration: it would first have to be amended.
Of the 11 candidates with a position on this question: 5 in favour, 2 in between and 4 against.
| Candidate | Position | Source |
|---|---|---|
| Attal | In between | Estimated position Why |
| Dupont-Aignan | Strongly in favour | Projet de Debout la France « Immigration et assimilation », mis à jour le 3 mars 2026 Why |
| Glucksmann | Against | Estimated position Why |
| Le Pen | Strongly in favour | Manifeste présidentiel 2022 « M la France », p. 8 Why |
| Lisnard | Strongly in favour | Discours de Bayeux, 17 juin 2026, p. 9 Why |
| Mélenchon | Against | Estimated position Why |
| Philippe | In between | franceinfo, compte rendu de « L’Heure de vérité » (France 2), 8 octobre 2026 Why |
| Retailleau | Strongly in favour | « Ma candidature ira jusqu’au bout », entretien au JDD repris sur republicains.fr, 31 mai 2026 Why |
| Roussel | Against | Estimated position Why |
| Tondelier | Strongly against | Déclaration rapportée par Europe 1, 17 novembre 2023 Why |
| Zemmour | Strongly in favour | Programme présidentiel 2022 « Pour que la France reste la France », p. 6 Why |
-
Attal In between
Estimated position: inferred from the candidate’s overall programme and statements, without a specific document stating it.
Why -
Dupont-Aignan Strongly in favourProjet de Debout la France « Immigration et assimilation », mis à jour le 3 mars 2026 Why
-
Glucksmann Against
Estimated position: inferred from the candidate’s overall programme and statements, without a specific document stating it.
Why -
Le Pen Strongly in favourManifeste présidentiel 2022 « M la France », p. 8 Why
-
Lisnard Strongly in favourDiscours de Bayeux, 17 juin 2026, p. 9 Why
-
Mélenchon Against
Estimated position: inferred from the candidate’s overall programme and statements, without a specific document stating it.
Why -
Philippe In betweenfranceinfo, compte rendu de « L’Heure de vérité » (France 2), 8 octobre 2026 Why
-
Retailleau Strongly in favour« Ma candidature ira jusqu’au bout », entretien au JDD repris sur republicains.fr, 31 mai 2026 Why
-
Roussel Against
Estimated position: inferred from the candidate’s overall programme and statements, without a specific document stating it.
Why -
Tondelier Strongly againstDéclaration rapportée par Europe 1, 17 novembre 2023 Why
-
Zemmour Strongly in favourProgramme présidentiel 2022 « Pour que la France reste la France », p. 6 Why
Birthright citizenship (“droit du sol”) should be abolished.
A child born in France to foreign parents can become French, subject to residence conditions, at 18 or earlier. A 2025 law restricted this right in Mayotte.
Of the 11 candidates with a position on this question: 5 in favour, 0 in between and 6 against.
-
Attal AgainstRenaissance, convention « Une République ferme, une France apaisée », 2025, p. 51 Why
-
Dupont-Aignan Strongly in favourProjet de Debout la France « Immigration et assimilation », mis à jour le 3 mars 2026 Why
-
Glucksmann AgainstVote du groupe Socialistes à l’Assemblée nationale, scrutin n° 1308, 8 avril 2025 Why
-
Le Pen Strongly in favourProgramme du RN aux législatives de 2024, p. 4 Why
-
Lisnard In favourProgramme de Nouvelle Énergie, page thématique « Immigration » (site du parti) Why
-
Mélenchon Strongly againstL’Avenir en commun, édition 2025, chap. 10 (archive du 4 mai 2026) Why
-
Philippe AgainstPriorités « Pour une France plus sûre », site de campagne edouardphilippe.fr (consulté le 19 octobre 2026) Why
-
Retailleau Strongly in favour« En France, la seule cour suprême, c’est le peuple », entretien au Figaro repris sur republicains.fr, 2 septembre 2026 Why
-
Roussel Strongly against« Un communisme de conquêtes », base commune du 40e congrès du PCF, juillet 2026, § 2.2.3.4, p. 12 Why
-
Tondelier Strongly againstProgramme des Écologistes « Pour une prospérité écologique », juillet 2026, chap. 56, mesure 3, p. 178 Why
-
Zemmour Strongly in favourProgramme présidentiel 2022 « Pour que la France reste la France », p. 8 Why
Undocumented workers who have a job should be given legal status.
Today residence permits are granted case by case. The 2024 law created, on a trial basis, a residence permit for jobs with labour shortages.
Of the 11 candidates with a position on this question: 4 in favour, 0 in between and 7 against.
-
Attal AgainstEntretien sur LCI, 25 août 2026 (compte rendu de campagne) Why
-
Dupont-Aignan Strongly againstProjet de Debout la France « Immigration et assimilation », mis à jour le 3 mars 2026 Why
-
Glucksmann In favour« Notre vision pour la France », programme de Place publique (Acte I), mars 2026, p. 82 Why
-
Le Pen Strongly againstProgramme du RN aux législatives de 2024, p. 4 Why
-
Lisnard Strongly againstProgramme de Nouvelle Énergie, axe 2 « Réussir une nouvelle ambition française » (site du parti) Why
-
Mélenchon Strongly in favourL’Avenir en commun, édition 2025, chap. 16 (archive du 9 mai 2026) Why
-
Philippe AgainstPriorités « Pour une France plus sûre », site de campagne edouardphilippe.fr (consulté le 19 octobre 2026) Why
-
Retailleau Strongly against« Ma candidature ira jusqu’au bout », entretien au JDD repris sur republicains.fr, 31 mai 2026 Why
-
Roussel Strongly in favour« Un communisme de conquêtes », base commune du 40e congrès du PCF, juillet 2026, § 2.2.3.4, p. 11 Why
-
Tondelier Strongly in favourProgramme des Écologistes « Pour une prospérité écologique », juillet 2026, chap. 56, mesure 2, p. 178 Why
-
Zemmour Strongly againstProgramme présidentiel 2022 « Pour que la France reste la France », p. 8 Why
Social housing and jobs should go to French citizens first.
Today access to social housing or to a job cannot depend on nationality for foreigners living legally in France. Supporters of “national priority” propose amending the Constitution.
Of the 11 candidates with a position on this question: 2 in favour, 1 in between and 8 against.
| Candidate | Position | Source |
|---|---|---|
| Attal | Against | Estimated position Why |
| Dupont-Aignan | In between | Estimated position Why |
| Glucksmann | Against | Estimated position Why |
| Le Pen | Strongly in favour | Programme présidentiel 2022, 22 mesures, p. 2 Why |
| Lisnard | Against | Estimated position Why |
| Mélenchon | Against | Estimated position Why |
| Philippe | Against | Estimated position Why |
| Retailleau | Against | Les Républicains, « Se loger mieux et moins cher ! », mai 2026, p. 41 Why |
| Roussel | Strongly against | « Un communisme de conquêtes », base commune du 40e congrès du PCF, juillet 2026, § 1.4, p. 6 Why |
| Tondelier | Against | Programme des Écologistes « Pour une prospérité écologique », juillet 2026, avant-propos, p. 2, et chap. 22, mesure 1, p. 87 Why |
| Zemmour | Strongly in favour | Programme présidentiel 2022 « Pour que la France reste la France », p. 44 Why |
-
Attal Against
Estimated position: inferred from the candidate’s overall programme and statements, without a specific document stating it.
Why -
Dupont-Aignan In between
Estimated position: inferred from the candidate’s overall programme and statements, without a specific document stating it.
Why -
Glucksmann Against
Estimated position: inferred from the candidate’s overall programme and statements, without a specific document stating it.
Why -
Le Pen Strongly in favourProgramme présidentiel 2022, 22 mesures, p. 2 Why
-
Lisnard Against
Estimated position: inferred from the candidate’s overall programme and statements, without a specific document stating it.
Why -
Mélenchon Against
Estimated position: inferred from the candidate’s overall programme and statements, without a specific document stating it.
Why -
Philippe Against
Estimated position: inferred from the candidate’s overall programme and statements, without a specific document stating it.
Why -
Retailleau AgainstLes Républicains, « Se loger mieux et moins cher ! », mai 2026, p. 41 Why
-
Roussel Strongly against« Un communisme de conquêtes », base commune du 40e congrès du PCF, juillet 2026, § 1.4, p. 6 Why
-
Tondelier AgainstProgramme des Écologistes « Pour une prospérité écologique », juillet 2026, avant-propos, p. 2, et chap. 22, mesure 1, p. 87 Why
-
Zemmour Strongly in favourProgramme présidentiel 2022 « Pour que la France reste la France », p. 44 Why
Undocumented migrants should keep access to State medical aid (AME).
AME covers healthcare for undocumented migrants who have lived in France for more than three months, depending on income.
Of the 11 candidates with a position on this question: 4 in favour, 1 in between and 6 against.
-
Attal In betweenRenaissance, convention « Une République ferme, une France apaisée », 2025, p. 54 Why
-
Dupont-Aignan Strongly againstProjet de Debout la France « Immigration et assimilation », mis à jour le 3 mars 2026 Why
-
Glucksmann In favour
Estimated position: inferred from the candidate’s overall programme and statements, without a specific document stating it.
Why -
Le Pen Strongly againstContre-budget 2026 du groupe RN, octobre 2025, p. 7 Why
-
Lisnard Strongly againstProgramme de Nouvelle Énergie, page thématique « Immigration » (site du parti) Why
-
Mélenchon Strongly in favourL’Avenir en commun, édition 2025, chap. 16 (archive du 9 mai 2026) Why
-
Philippe Against
Estimated position: inferred from the candidate’s overall programme and statements, without a specific document stating it.
Why -
Retailleau Strongly against« Ce budget, c’est le hold-up du siècle », entretien repris sur republicains.fr, 24 novembre 2025 Why
-
Roussel In favour
Estimated position: inferred from the candidate’s overall programme and statements, without a specific document stating it.
Why -
Tondelier Strongly in favourProgramme des Écologistes « Pour une prospérité écologique », juillet 2026, chap. 56, mesure 1, p. 178 Why
-
Zemmour Strongly againstProgramme présidentiel 2022 « Pour que la France reste la France », p. 8 Why
Family reunification should be suspended.
Family reunification allows a foreigner living legally in France to bring their spouse and children under 18, subject to income and housing conditions.
Of the 11 candidates with a position on this question: 5 in favour, 1 in between and 5 against.
-
Attal AgainstChantier « Frontières », site de campagne attalpresident.fr (consulté le 19 octobre 2026) Why
-
Dupont-Aignan In favourProjet de Debout la France « Immigration et assimilation », mis à jour le 3 mars 2026 Why
-
Glucksmann Strongly againstProgramme « Réveiller l’Europe » (européennes 2024), mesure 242, p. 29 Why
-
Le Pen In favourProgramme présidentiel 2022, 22 mesures, p. 2 Why
-
Lisnard In favourNouvelle Énergie, fiche « Quel candidat veut une politique migratoire ferme ? » (livre Ainsi va la France) Why
-
Mélenchon Strongly againstLivret « Migrations » de L’Avenir en commun, 2022 (archive du 20 février 2022) Why
-
Philippe Strongly in favourPriorités « Pour une France plus sûre », site de campagne edouardphilippe.fr (consulté le 19 octobre 2026) Why
-
Retailleau In between« Ma candidature ira jusqu’au bout », entretien au JDD repris sur republicains.fr, 31 mai 2026 Why
-
Roussel Against
Estimated position: inferred from the candidate’s overall programme and statements, without a specific document stating it.
Why -
Tondelier Strongly againstProgramme des Écologistes « Pour une prospérité écologique », juillet 2026, chap. 56, mesure 1, p. 178 Why
-
Zemmour Strongly in favourProgramme présidentiel 2022 « Pour que la France reste la France », p. 7 Why
Explore other issues
Who do you agree with on this issue?
The questions in this issue are part of the full test. On 6 of them the candidates hold opposite positions, so your answer matters.
Take the political test