Fact-checking GOP ad in Iowa Senate race: Does Josh Turek support ‘amnesty’ for immigrants?

An ad against Josh Turek, the Democratic U.S. Senate candidate in Iowa, portrays him as someone who doesn’t care about border security and would rather have “amnesty” for people in the country illegally.

“Liberal politician Josh Turek supports amnesty for illegals,” the ad’s narrator says before a video clip shows Turek saying, “We need an easier pathway to citizenship.” 

The ad from the Senate Leadership Fund super PAC shows images of people crossing a river and pulling down wire fencing while the narrator argues Turek has lax policies on border security and immigration. It aired nationally during the Sept. 26 University of Iowa-University of Michigan football game.

Turek, a state lawmaker and two-time Paralympic gold medalist in wheelchair basketball, faces Republican U.S. Rep. Ashley Hinson, a former journalist, in the competitive race to fill the seat vacated by Republican Sen. Joni Ernst, who is not seeking reelection. Republicans have painted Turek as supporting broad protections for people in the country illegally.

But this ad oversimplifies Turek’s position and relies on a very narrow interpretation of “amnesty,” a term with no legal definition in immigration policy. 

Although Turek is critical of President Donald Trump’s immigration crackdown, he says he supports strict border security. He has also said it should be easier for immigrants to obtain citizenship, often pointing to his wife, who immigrated from the Dominican Republic. But he stops short of endorsing citizenship for all immigrants in the country illegally, saying some people should be permitted to stay if they meet certain conditions.

The ad’s clip of Turek’s comments comes from a May debate between Turek and his primary election opponent in which he said he supports the Dignity Act, a bipartisan congressional proposal that would let some immigrants who are illegally in the country gain limited legal status if they meet certain requirements; it would not provide a guaranteed pathway to citizenship.

As a super PAC, the Senate Leadership Fund can raise and spend unlimited amounts of money to campaign for federal candidates. When PolitiFact asked the group for evidence Turek supports amnesty, spokesperson Chris Gustafson pointed us to his debate comments and the Dignity Act’s details.

Here’s more to know about the group’s ad.

What is ‘amnesty’? And would the Dignity Act provide it?

At its most broad, amnesty can mean any policy waiving punishments for immigration violations. More narrowly, it’s sometimes understood as a widespread granting of citizenship to people in the country illegally.

Ilya Somin, a George Mason University law professor, said the word is ultimately a political term with no legal definition, and it’s used by immigration opponents to disparage any loosening of immigration penalties. 

One thing is clear: The Dignity Act that Turek said he supports does not meet the latter interpretation.

“If you think that amnesty is complete forgiveness at no cost, then this isn’t it,” Somin said of the Dignity Act.

The Dignity Act, led by Rep. María Elvira Salazar, R-Fla., and Rep. Veronica Escobar, D-Texas, has 38 additional House cosponsors split evenly among Democrats and Republicans. The sponsors introduced the latest version in July 2025, and it has not received any committee action.  

The bill would let immigrants who were in the U.S. illegally before 2021 receive a new “dignity status” if they are employed or in school, pass a background check and pay $7,000 in fines, as well as back taxes and extra taxes going forward. It bars anyone who has committed a felony from qualifying.

Those who get “dignity status” would not be permanent residents and would need to renew their status every seven years. They wouldn’t be eligible for U.S. citizenship or federal benefits, either. 

The proposal would also let immigrants who were brought to the U.S. as children — aka “Dreamers” — obtain legal status and eventually be eligible for permanent residence. At that point, they’d be eligible for U.S. citizenship under the usual paths for permanent residents. 

The bill also includes a slew of immigration enforcement measures: mandating businesses to hire workers with legal status; providing increased funding for border barriers and monitoring;  and increasing penalties for illegally crossing the border.

Steve Camarota, the director of research at the Center for Immigration Studies, a think tank that supports strict immigration laws, said even though the bill includes these conditions, it’s fair to call it amnesty because it waives penalties for an offense.

“You pay this penalty, you behave in this way, you wait this long, and that’s also a type of amnesty,” he said. “And that’s what this one is.”

Even the bill’s sponsors disagree on whether the Dignity Act qualifies as “amnesty.” The Senate Leadership Fund pointed us to an article in which Republican Rep. John Duarte of California said, “if you want to call it, an amnesty. I’m comfortable with the word.”

But other Republican cosponsors reject that sentiment. Rep. Zach Nunn, R-Iowa, said in an April radio interview, “This is not an amnesty bill.” Republican Reps. Mike Lawler of New York and Gabe Evans of Colorado made similar points.

Examining Turek’s past immigration votes and comments

Turek broke with his party and joined Republicans to back stricter immigration laws in 2024. He was one of three Iowa House Democrats that year who voted for a measure that made being in the country illegally a state crime in Iowa, and gave state officials power to enforce immigration laws. 

And although Turek said in his primary debate comments that he would support “permanent residency or citizenship” for some immigrants in the country illegally who qualified under the bill, that goes further than the actual Dignity Act does.

Yet, Turek’s campaign told PolitiFact he does not support a pathway to citizenship for people in the country illegally, and spokesperson Hannah Goss called the ad’s claim “categorically false.” Goss pointed to Turek’s break with his party and said he supports making citizenship easier for people who immigrated to the U.S. legally.

Our ruling

A Senate Leadership Fund ad said Turek “supports amnesty” for immigrants illegally in the country. 

Turek has called for letting some immigrants in the country illegally be eligible for a restricted legal status. But they’d need to pay a fine and wouldn’t be eligible for citizenship. Some advocates of stricter immigration policies consider that amnesty, because it waives punishments.

In other cases, Turek has said he supports a “pathway to citizenship,” without making clear whether that applies to people illegally in the country.

What counts as amnesty is debated, but the context of the Dignity Act matters. It wouldn’t grant citizenship and it places a high bar for people to achieve a limited legal status.

The ad is partially accurate, but it leaves out important details about Turek’s position. We rate it Half True.