This study explores the relationship between executive-legislative conflict and presidential strategic choices in unilateral actions, focusing on U.S. immigration policy under the Obama, Trump, and Biden administrations. By employing decision-making theory, the study analyzes the impact of government type and intra-party criticism on the likelihood of policy adjustments and the modes of unilateral actions. Using case studies spanning 111th to 118th Congresses, the research categorizes presidential strategies into uncompromised direct, uncompromised indirect, and compromised direct actions. The findings demonstrate that conflict levels significantly influence whether presidents adopt conciliatory approaches or uncompromised strategies, offering theoretical insights into executive-legislative dynamics and their implications for policy-making.