When 60 Minutes asked President Trump where he could work with Democrats after the midterms, he pointed to immigration. A few moments later, he said his deportation policy “might be too tough.” He spoke about hotel and landscaping workers who had built lives here, and he entertained the idea of a deal for people who have lived in the United States for a decade or more.

That raises two questions. Will the administration change how it enforces immigration law? And is this an opening for meaningful immigration reform?

Where we can agree

Who doesn't want a secure, orderly border? Who would object to prioritizing the lawful removal of people convicted of serious violent crimes? Those are reasonable public safety goals. We can support both and still ask whether arresting a longtime hotel worker on the job or detaining a parent with no criminal record serves the same purpose.

The President himself drew a distinction between people who pose a serious public safety threat and people who have spent years working and putting down roots here. Will his administration make that distinction in practice?

What would a change in enforcement look like?

Would the Department of Homeland Security issue written priorities directing immigration officers to focus on serious public safety threats? Would officers weigh a person's years in the country, ties to U.S. citizen children, and individual circumstances when making arrest and detention decisions? Would those priorities change how workplace operations are conducted?

For the families who come to our office, those questions are concrete. A parent's detention can mean losing the paycheck that covers the rent and having to find someone to pick up the children from school that same afternoon. A change in enforcement would show up in the decisions officers make in those cases. The President announced no new enforcement directive in the interview.

Is there an opening for meaningful immigration reform?

Congress and the President could pursue a deal that pairs border security with an earned path to legal status for eligible longtime residents. They would have to answer some hard questions. How long would someone have to live here to qualify? What background checks and other requirements would apply? Could eligible applicants work lawfully while their cases are pending? How would the process account for U.S. citizen children and spouses?

Reform could also address why families and employers wait years for decisions and whether existing legal channels meet the needs of U.S. workers and businesses. Those problems deserve attention alongside the debate over who should be allowed to stay.

President Trump has said he is willing to talk. Now the question is whether the White House will change enforcement practices on the ground and whether leaders in Congress will put a bipartisan proposal in writing. Both would give families, employers, and the public something concrete to evaluate.