Tag: illegal immigration

You Can’t Have A Secure Border Without Deportations

In the wake of the Border Patrol shooting of anti-ICE agitator Alex Pretti, Democrats — and many Republicans — are utilizing his death to call for a “de-escalation” or a complete end of deportation operations while pushing, yet again, for so-called “comprehensive immigration reform.” But these politicians and pundits persistently ignore the reality that taking deportations at scale off the table undermines the entire immigration law enforcement framework President Donald Trump has so successfully implemented during his second term.

Prominent among the anti-deportation voices are, of course, Democrats Tim Walz and Jacob Frey (and their anti-ICE insurgency cells), but their numbers also include GOP Rep. Mike Lawler and editors at The Wall Street Journal and the New York Post, along with Problem Solvers Caucus leaders Rep. Brian Fitzpatrick, R-Penn., and Rep. Tom Souzzi, D-N.Y., and a cacophony of the usual legacy media suspects. WSJ editors warned that Trump’s deportation campaign has become “a moral and political debacle.” The editorial board at the Post directed Trump to “de-escalate,” because “these enforcement tactics won’t turn the tide.” Lawler bemoaned federal agents “conducting forceful operations in American communities.” (Are they just supposed to ask nicely?)

Lawler and the Problem Solvers followed up their anti-deportation admonitions with the same types of ineffectual immigration reform suggestions that proved to be the kryptonite of the obsessively pro-immigration Republicans Trump bludgeoned on his way to the White House. (Byron York of Washington Examiner provided a thorough debunking of these sorts of measures in his daily newsletter.)

As is commonly the case with America’s political and pundit classes, these “experts” overlook or deliberately ignore a basic and obvious reality in their rush to advance their agendas on the backs of the fallout from Minnesota’s anti-ICE obstructionism and sanctuary policies: Deportation is the primary penalty for unlawfully entering the United States, and it’s also the most effective deterrent to would-be illegal border-crossers.

Yes, there are other consequences. Prosecutions for first-time illegal entrants are a somewhat rare possibility (with apparently little consequence). Repeat offenders can get away with something like a year in prison if caught, convicted, and sentenced, though repeated illegal crossings typically coincide with other criminal activity like drug smuggling and human trafficking, which leads to longer prison sentences. The vast majority of illegal aliens apprehended at the border — at least under the Trump administration — are simply denied entry or returned to their home country (or another country willing to take them) courtesy of the U.S. taxpayer. Fines and bans on reentry could come into play, and, of course, the person trying to enter America legally has wasted the money he scraped together to pay cartels to smuggle him in.

But all of that amounts to law enforcement having one hand tied behind its back if an illegal alien sneaking his way into the States and taking up residency in a Democrat-led sanctuary city (or really anywhere, if amnesty advocates have their way) has essentially made himself invulnerable to the enforcement powers of the executive branch. Once you’re in, you’re in — and it’s obvious to all thinking people how that incentive structure will play out. Crises in places like Portland, Oregon, and in California following the defanging of the justice system serve as illustrations of how particular crimes rise when authorities remove deterrents.

Border security measures essentially function as crime prevention, catching the would-be entrant in the act. Deportations are the just punishment for the crime of illegal immigration. Eliminating deportations from the toolbelt of federal law enforcement would be as illogical as a legal system in which authorities stop would-be vandals, thieves, arsonists, and rapists if caught in the act but casually “let bygones be bygones” if they aren’t able to prevent it. (Unsurprisingly, this is actually a position some leftists hold.)

Eliminating deportations, or, as is more likely, stripping them down to a mere performative husk of efficacy, would mean the nullification of immigration law — regardless of the fervor with which federal authorities apply other methods. Deportations work. While canny consumers of legacy media content will rightly dismiss much of the “huddling at home for fear of ICE” messaging as propaganda, there are nuggets of truth to be inferred: Illegal immigrants desperately want to avoid deportations. Democrats desperately want to prevent them. In fact, deportations change the entire calculus of unlawfully entering the United States and helping oneself to the government-funded gravy train of “resources.” They make breaking U.S. law legitimately risky.

Keep reading

Democrats Want To Keep Illegals In America To Rig The Census And Congressional Apportionment

t may seem impossible, but Democrats have been losing their cool a little bit more than usual lately. And by “a little bit,” I mean a whole lot, with much of their fury driven by a brutal political reality highlighted by new census data.

Amid the recent deaths of two Minnesota street communists — who died as a result of their interference with immigration enforcement operations — Democrats have ramped up their opposition to the Trump administration’s efforts to deport illegal aliens present in the United States. While some (like Gov. Tim Walz) have taken their Nazi comparisons to new embarrassing heights, others have opted for calling for the impeachment of Department of Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem.

(Unsurprisingly, none of these bad actors have acknowledged their roles in encouraging such lawless behavior or, in Walz’s case, refusing to cooperate with federal officials like other states have done.)

The left’s rapid obsession with keeping illegal aliens in the United States — even those who have committed violent crimes — may seem strange to some. Especially given how the party’s top officials (such as former Presidents Clinton and Obama) previously touted deporting such individuals.

While Democrats may claim their stance stems from their supposed “compassion” for illegals, the real reason for their illogical and unsustainable position can be found in new data disclosed by the U.S. Census Bureau.

Earlier this week, the federal agency released its latest projections for U.S. population trends throughout the past year. Publication of the information was delayed due to last year’s Democrat-led government shutdown.

What the data showed is that many “red” and “toss-up” states experienced notable gains in population, while many “blue” states saw a net loss of residents. Put another way, Americans are fleeing predominantly Democrat-run states for those fully or partially controlled by Republicans.

This trend is significant when considering its implications for congressional apportionment (that is, deciding how many congressional seats each state is entitled to based on its population). Such a process relatedly determines how many electoral votes each state gets — a critical point for candidates running in presidential elections.

According to The American Redistricting Project, the Census Bureau’s new data indicates that, based on 2025 population estimates, the country’s 2030 apportionment would result in several red and red-leaning states (Texas, Florida, Arizona) gaining congressional seats. Blue and blue-leaning states (California, New York, Illinois), on the other hand, are projected to lose seats.

Such tallies, if ultimately correct and apportioned accurately, would represent a stark contrast to the 2020 apportionment, in which the Census Bureau subsequently admitted to undercounting mostly Republican-led states (five of six) and overcounting mostly Democrat-led states (six of eight).

Where Democrats’ unhinged opposition to deportations comes into play is the fact that the Census Bureau counts illegal aliens when conducting the census. This, in effect, skews the overall population count and results in states with large numbers of illegal immigrants being apportioned more congressional seats than they are otherwise entitled to.

Keep reading

Obama-Era Report on ICE-Related Deaths Proves How Hypocritical Hysteria Over Alex Pretti’s Death Really Is

In case America missed it, Barack Obama hypocrisy is back.

The 42nd president — the man who gave Joe Biden the platform to win the presidency five years ago — deigned to weigh in this week on the death of armed protester Alex Pretti during a confrontation with Border Patrol agents in Minneapolis.

But a report from the last year of Obama’s presidency shows how hypocritical that statement actually was.

In a post published Sunday on the social media platform X, Obama called Pretti’s death a “tragedy” that “should also be a wake-up call to every American, regardless of party, that many of our core values as a nation are increasingly under attack.”

Any needless death is a tragedy, so there’s not much of an argument with Obama on that score. (Still, there’s a case to be made that Pretti contributed a good deal to the circumstances that led to his demise.)

But what exactly are the “core values” that are under attack?

The value in law enforcement officers enforcing the law? That’s not only what they get paid taxpayer money for, the laws they’re enforcing were passed by the Congress of the United States and signed by various presidents of both parties. (That’s a fact that seems to get lost in the shuffle.)

Or maybe Obama’s statement was prompted by the fact that there was a death involved — the second death related to President Donald Trump’s illegal immigration crackdown in Minneapolis in the span of a month.

Well, here’s where things get interesting. Years before the Biden presidency launched an era of border lawlessness unprecedented in U.S. history, and caused the illegal immigration invasion Trump is cleaning up, Obama had a reputation in leftist circles as “deporter in chief.”

Over the course of Obama’s eight years in office, more than 3 million individuals were deported, according to USA Today, citing Syracuse University’s Transactional Records Access Clearinghouse.

The difference is that leftists in the streets are opposing Trump, where they greeted Obama’s actions with muffled moans.

Keep reading

Fetterman: ‘About Two-Thirds’ of Those Deported by ICE Are Criminals

On Tuesday’s broadcast of Newsmax TV’s “American Agenda,” Sen. John Fetterman (D-PA) stated that “about two-thirds of those ICE is deporting are” criminals, but a lot of the tactics the agency is using need to be changed.

Fetterman said, “I don’t agree with many of those tactics” used by ICE and stated that ICE should “stand down” in Minneapolis.

Later, he stated that the administration should “re-focus on securing our border — and that’s been successful — and deporting all of the criminals, I think we can all agree with that. And I have also been mentioning, too, the latest statistics that I have seen, about two-thirds of those ICE is deporting are criminal[s]. And, again, I think we should talk more about that, too. I think that’s a good thing.”

Keep reading

Crying Jimmy Kimmel’s Eyes Are Dry For Victims Of Violent Illegal Aliens

Oh, look out, Martha, Jimmy Kimmel’s crying again. 

The effeminate late-night talk show host who, believe it or not, once hosted something called The Man Show, sobbed his way through another monologue Monday night. Kimmel, the Democrat Party’s biggest shill (more on that in a moment), dedicated his monologue to Alex Pretti, the nurse/agitator fatally shot by a Border Patrol agent in a gun incident over the weekend. 

Jimmy regurgitated the Dems’ talking points, asserting that Pretti and fellow Marxist martyr Renee Good were “executed” by federal law enforcement officials. There’s no evidence to support that. None needed on a network that paid millions of dollars to settle an anti-defamation suit after falsely accusing President Trump of a crime he did not commit. 

“And to the people of Minneapolis, to the Pretti family and the Good family and these people who were looking out for their neighbors” — Kimmel paused and wept like a menopausal woman watching the Hallmark Channel — “we want you to know that we are with you and you are not alone.” The useful idiots serving as his live studio audience vigorously applauded. 

“And I’ll tell you another thing,” little Jimmy said as he sniffled, “we also want to see those Epstein files already.” He sounded like a boy who had gotten a swat for telling fibs and then threatened he’d run away from home. That’ll show ’em.

And then he machine-gunned through his latest litany of Trump derangement syndrome charges, accusing the administration of all manner of crimes, including “kill[ing] two U.S. citizens in cold blood.” 

“And [Trump] still thinks he got cheated out of a Nobel Peace Prize. I mean, if that delusion doesn’t trigger the 25th Amendment, what possibly will?” said the same whimpering man who constantly covered for a president whose mental acuity was as sharp as a bowl of coleslaw. 

None of it was funny. But Kimmel’s dwindling audience has grown accustomed to that. It was more leftist political theater, part of what attorney Daniel Suhr describes as a “propaganda machine for one party.”

“In 2025, not a single Republican politician appeared on late-night television, even as dozens of Democrats were showered with free airtime and softball interviews,” Suhr wrote in a piece this week on the FCC checking equal time abuses. 

Keep reading

How the US Regime Subsidizes Immigration—both Legal and Illegal

In recent months, stories from both the legacy media and the independent media have continued to pile up on how undocumented foreign nationals—also known as “migrants” and “illegal aliens”—are able to take advantage of a vast network of taxpayer funded benefits in daycare, medical care, housing, and more. 

For example, both the New York Post and Denver Post report that these foreign nationals have “overwhelmed” the Denver Health hospital system in Denver, and that the situation is “unsustainable.” Meanwhile, public schools report classrooms are filling up quickly with the children of these foreign nationals. Denver is hardly alone. The New York Post notes that both the City of New York and the state government have expanded local welfare programs, including pre-paid credit cards, to further ensure that migrants continue to receive cash and resources from American taxpayers. This is in addition to the approximately 66,000 foreign nationals who are housed in hotels and shelters, care of both New York and federal taxpayers. USAToday reports that colleges “across the country” are receiving millions in taxpayer money to offer housing to migrants at no charge. Chicago’s mayor is bragging he’s giving away $17 million in taxpayer-funded giveaways to “asylum seekers” who are presently living off the sweat of the taxpayers in government shelters. This, of course, is just a downpayment on many more planned giveaways. 

Just how much in taxpayers’ resources is going to foreign nationals? It’s difficult to estimate for a number of reasons. The spending is done through numerous different government agencies at various levels of government. Moreover, much of the money if filtered through non-profits (i.e., “NGOs”) that are labeled “charities” but are simply adjuncts of the regime. 

Once we add up $1 billion here and $77 million there, after a while we’re talking about real money, and one thing becomes abundantly clear: the regime and its partners are subsidizing the influx of foreign nationals who are promised a variety of both cash and in-kind benefits. It must also be noted that, contrary to certain myths, the largesse is not reserved for only the so-called “illegal aliens.” Legal immigrants can take advantage of the generous and well-funded American welfare state even more readily than can the undocumented migrants.

Keep reading

ICE Agents Regain Authority After Appeals Court Reverses Minnesota Ruling

The Trump administration won a significant legal victory Monday after the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit overturned a lower court ruling that had restricted how federal immigration agents could respond to anti-ICE protests in Minnesota, as reported by Fox News.

In a decision issued by a three-judge panel, the Eighth Circuit granted a full stay of a prior injunction that limited the ability of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents to arrest, detain, pepper-spray, or otherwise respond to protesters in Minneapolis without probable cause.

The ruling allows ICE agents to continue enforcement operations without the protest-specific constraints imposed earlier this month.

The appeals court reviewed video evidence that had also been examined by the lower court and reached a different conclusion about the conduct of protesters.

“We accessed and viewed the same videos the district court did,” the panel wrote.

“What they show is observers and protesters engaging in a wide range of conduct, some of it peaceful but much of it not. They also show federal agents responding in various ways.”

The case stems from a lawsuit filed by six protesters who alleged that federal authorities violated their civil rights while carrying out immigration enforcement operations in the Twin Cities area.

Keep reading

Lawfare’s new weapon: The Habeas Corpus stunt that’s choking the life out of US courts…

If you’re wondering why immigration enforcement always grinds to a halt no matter how hard we push, here’s your answer. The problem isn’t just bad policy or weak politicians… it’s clever lawfare. And the left just found a new weapon, and they’re going crazy.

This one’s sneaky and devastatingly effective. It doesn’t require changing the law or winning elections. All it takes is flooding the courts so badly that nothing else can get done.

Let’s put it simply. It’s this type of Target “protest,” but at the court level…

Jamming up the system and walking away.

That’s exactly what’s happening right now in a federal court in Minnesota.

In just eighteen days, left-wing immigration lawyers have more than 300 so-called “emergency” habeas corpus petitions.  That’s more than half of all civil cases filed in that court so far this year.

This is an attack on the courts, and it’s working.

It’s a deliberate attempt to jam up the system and force judges to start releasing detainees before the government even has a chance to respond.  Once you see how it works, you will understand why enforcement keeps collapsing no matter how tough we get.

Keep reading

ICE Takes Out the Trash Tim Walz Ignored, 3,400 Murderers, Rapists, and Gangsters Removed

An ICE official said federal agents are carrying out an ongoing operation in Minnesota focused on arresting dangerous criminal illegal aliens to prevent further harm to local communities, pushing back against what he described as efforts by politicians, activists, and the media to create fear and confusion.

Marcos Charles said the operation is centered on public safety and removing individuals with serious criminal histories from Minnesota communities.

He criticized what he described as deliberate chaos driven by sanctuary politicians and activists, arguing that it undermines community trust and obscures the purpose of enforcement actions.

“When sanctuary politicians, activists and the media work hard to create chaos and fear instead of using their platforms to reassure their communities, this is the result,” Charles said.

Charles said the goal of the operation is straightforward: arrest criminal illegal aliens so they cannot continue to victimize innocent people.

He said the effort has been ongoing throughout the week and has already resulted in thousands of arrests statewide.

“The reality is, and this is what commander Bovino and I have been talking about all week. All week, we’re out here to arrest dangerous criminal illegal aliens so they can’t victimize innocent people in our communities anymore,” Charles said.

Keep reading

Media Claim: “ICE Drags Citizen in the Snow in His Underwear,” But There Is More to the Story

On January 18, 2026, ICE arrested ChongLy “Scott” Thao in St. Paul, Minnesota. The incident went viral because of footage showing Thao, a 56-year-old naturalized U.S. citizen, being led from his home in sub-freezing weather wearing only underwear and sandals with a small blanket over his shoulders.

The Thao family states that ICE agents forced their way in without a warrant, pointed guns at the family, including a 4-year-old, and refused to look at Thao’s ID. They claim he was driven to a remote location, photographed and fingerprinted, and only returned home after agents realized he was a citizen.

The facts are very different from the family’s claims and the media framing. First off, the agents had a warrant. They were using an administrative warrant rather than a judicial warrant, which is consistent with new ICE directives.

Under the directive signed by Acting ICE Director Todd Lyons, ICE has been instructed that administrative warrants (Form I-205) are now considered sufficient for residential entry. If an individual with a final order of removal is believed to be inside and refuses to open the door, agents are authorized to use a necessary and reasonable amount of force to enter.

DHS described it as a targeted operation for two convicted sex offenders, Kongmeng Vang and Lue Moua. The reason agents used a battering ram to break in was because, according to the Associated Press, a family member alerted Thao that agents were banging on the door, but he told them not to open it.

Agents drew their weapons because the targets were dangerous criminals. Moua is described as “a violent illegal alien sexual offender” and a “child predator,” while Vang is described as a “criminal illegal alien” from Laos with a 2016 removal order and a history involving sexual assault and gang activity.

Because Thao matched the physical description of one of the targets, ICE protocol required agents to use a new mobile biometric app, Mobile Fortify, which captures fingerprints and facial photographs to verify identity. However, Thao refused. Consequently, he was taken into custody, photographed and fingerprinted, and then returned home.

Commenters on social media are outraged that Thao was taken out of the house in his underwear. However, there is no indication that agents stripped him. He was apparently already in his underwear when agents arrived. The half-naked aspect and the use of force are consistent with High-Risk Entry protocols. If agents believe a suspect is a convicted sex offender, they prioritize speed and tactical dominance over the suspect’s comfort.

Keep reading