The campaign against ICE is all about open borders
By Kenin M. Spivak
Real Clear Wire
Most of the recent vitriolic opposition to ICE is a feint by unrepentant open-borders progressives. They won the first round when Joe Biden was elected president, lost the second when Donald Trump returned to office, and are back for a rematch.
Democratic leaders portray ICE agents as violent Gestapo thugs and murderers. They claim ICE kidnaps good people off the street, rips apart their families and communities, and deprives them of due process. They give lip service to deporting the “worst of the worst,” but they lead sanctuary cities that release hardened criminal illegal aliens and incite protesters to harass and prevent ICE from arresting rapists, child predators, and killers.
For most, the venom has little to do with how ICE performs its mission and everything to do with preventing the Trump administration from undoing Biden’s brazen deluge of illegal migrants. But for the protests, ICE would be nearly invisible to most Americans, who abhor these violent confrontations. Instead, two Americans have tragically died in Minneapolis.
Democratic leaders deflect when challenged with the fact that disruption and mistakes would be greatly reduced if sanctuary cities turned over criminals already confined. Minnesota alone refuses to comply with 1,360 detainers for illegal aliens in its jails, including 500 previously ordered to be deported by federal judges.
The Democratic establishment sees mass immigration as the path to secure permanent rule, with much of the radical left expecting immigrants to force America to abandon its traditional values.
A refresher on how the Biden administration unlawfully admitted at least 12 million unvetted migrants underscores the radical left’s deep commitment to open borders. It also explains why Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz and Minneapolis Mayor Alan Frey flirt with insurrection by inflaming rage-filled protesters who accost ICE agents, invade churches, and protect criminals.
On his first day in office, Biden stopped construction of Trump’s border wall and ended the “Remain in Mexico” policy. He dismantled virtually all Trump immigration policies, exempted most illegal immigrants from deportation, granted protected status to about 1 million illegals, boosted refugee admissions, issued green cards to immigrants who required public benefits, allowed Title 42 authority to lapse – increasing illegal immigration by nearly one million migrants each year, distributed free cell phones and housing subsidies to entice even more illegal immigration, and, in the dead of night, flew hundreds of thousands of migrants from the southern border into American cities and towns.
In 2024, just five of 203 Democrats in the U.S. House supported legislation requiring proof of citizenship to vote, and the Biden Justice Department sued Virginia to prevent it from removing noncitizens from its voter rolls.
Trump won his second term on a platform of closing the borders and deporting illegal aliens, particularly those admitted by Biden or who had committed other crimes. Polls show majority support for deporting all illegal immigrants, and 78% support (including 69% of Democrats) for deporting criminal illegal aliens.
Despite Minnesota’s refusal to cooperate, ICE has already arrested 3,000 illegal aliens in Operation Metro, including migrants convicted of murder, aggravated assault, domestic abuse, drug trafficking, and other serious crimes. Claims that ICE’s mandate is unlawful or unconstitutional, or that it requires permission from sanctuary cities, is nonsense, repudiated by the Supremacy Clause of the Constitution, 250 years of jurisprudence, and well-settled federal law.
So far, Biden-appointed U.S. District Judge Katherine Menendez has refused to grant the temporary restraining order (TRO) to stop ICE sought by Minnesota, Minneapolis, and St. Paul in a frivolous lawsuit that inverts the 10th Amendment into a right for states or even cities to veto federal laws they dislike. Though, in a separate lawsuit, she ordered ICE not to arrest or tear-gas peaceful demonstrators who are not obstructing ICE or who are “safely” following from an “appropriate” distance. That virtue-signaling order, now stayed by the Eighth Circuit pending an appeal, largely summarizes existing law. It likely would not have applied to Renee Good or Alex Pretti.
Contrary to Democratic spin, Good was part of a group that sought to derail ICE operations. She had been stalking ICE, and obstructed its vehicles with her SUV. Instead of complying with instructions to step out of her SUV, she abruptly accelerated, hitting an ICE agent hard enough to cause internal bleeding. As her SUV leapt forward, the agent fired, killing her.
Good either intended to strike the agent, or she acted recklessly by hitting the accelerator on a snowy, icy road in an SUV surrounded by agents. The legally relevant question for the agent is whether he reasonably believed that he or others were in “imminent danger” of death or serious injury.
It is unclear why a Border Patrol agent fatally shot Pretti on Saturday, during yet another protest. Video shows that he intervened between an agent and a woman. To the administration, he was an “armed domestic terrorist.” To Democrats, he was a “murdered nurse.” Both include some truth and premature conclusions. What is known is that he was doing something he should not have been doing because Joseph Robinette Biden Jr. shamelessly ignored America’s sovereignty to admit tens of millions of illegals, and now Democratic leaders and the progressive media are willing to sacrifice people like Good and Pretti on the corrupt altar of open borders.
Polls show that the all-out Democratic campaign to vilify ICE; disturbing video of militarized law enforcement officers in gas masks and fatigues; a growing toll of injuries and fatalities, regardless of fault; adverse court decisions, though many are reversed on appeal; and the administration’s caustic rhetoric are eroding support for ICE and Trump’s deportation program, and may imperil Republican control of the House.
The administration requires support from the public to keep ICE and the public safe, and for ICE to be effective. Democrats sense weakness, and will do everything they can to prevent that. The administration must be the adult in this situation. It must soften its language. ICE should avoid militarized operations and more clearly focus on deporting criminal aliens, and unvetted illegal aliens admitted during the Biden administration. Although it’s time for a reset, backing down is not an option.
Kenin M. Spivak is founder and chairman of SMI Group LLC, an international consulting firm and investment bank. He is the author of fiction and non-fiction books and a frequent speaker and contributor to media, including RealClearPolitics, The American Mind, National Review, television, radio, and podcasts.
* * *
••• Publisher's note: A free press is critical to having well-informed voters and citizens. While some news organizations opt for paid websites or costly paywalls, The Highland County Press has maintained a free newspaper and website for the last 27 years for our community. If you would like to contribute to this service – and want it to continue – it would be greatly appreciated. Donations may be made to: The Highland County Press, P.O. Box 849, Hillsboro, Ohio 45133. Please include "for website" on the memo line.
Comment
I was thinking...
The more I think about, the more I think that Walz's state of Minnesota should have never issued the decedent a CCW. He just wasn't qualified or responsible enough. And I'm now wondering about that woman Good's driving skills too. Being serious now, the MPD, the County Sheriff's department, and the MN state police should have been there and hands-on to keep the peace the past few weeks. But the Democrat gov. and mayor refused to help. They are culpable almost as much as the maimed and deceased... The will of the people and the rule of law keep rolling on.
B.S.
Editor,
This has to be one of the most ill-informed comments you’ve chosen to publish. Matthew shows no understanding of the relevant facts and offers no evidence to support his claims. Instead, the piece relies on mischaracterization and rhetorical sleight of hand that reads more like gaslighting than serious commentary.
Printing opinions is one thing; printing commentary so detached from the facts is another. Readers deserve better than unsupported assertions presented as analysis.
I hope future submissions are held to a higher standard of accuracy and substance.
•••• Publisher's note: You mean like your anonymous posts, Wally Post? (Look him up. He was a Red, but not a communist.) Thanks for reading, but after 46 years of putting ink on dead trees, I don't need any suggestions for my time, political or otherwise. By the way, Matthew has had more than his share of comments rejected. But you wouldn't know that.
Where?
Where am I ill-informed? What relevant facts don't I understand?.... And yes, there are rejections of my comments by the editor. Not as much as they're once was... And there's the times where I name other commentators in my rants, but the editor judicially takes the names out or just changes it to "the progressive/socialist commentators" as a catch-all. He's become really good at tempering my borderline opinions in the heat of the moment, but yet let my keen observations flow.
Where were the MN Dem leaders and law enforcement during this?
First, the two dead agitators made a series of bad decisions. Second, Walz and mayor Fry did nothing to protect or corral "protestors" or help the federal DHS in the performance of their Constitutional duties and obligations. Third, the sinister, socialist, shadow sickos funded a plethora of groups that were "called to arms" in Minnesota. Who would actually show up in MN, in January, 10 below zero, unless you're getting paid? 4th, Waldo Walz has to cover for the Somali daycare and medicaid fraud investigation. 5th, MN law states that a CCW permit holder must: have both his state ID and his CCW ID on him if he's carrying a CCW. And announce to law enforcement, during a LE contact, that he is a CCW carrier and he has a CCW. How are Border Patrol Agents supposed to know that some random obstructor and agitator has an "allegedly" CCW license? When someone actively resists after lawful verbal commands were ignored, the presence of multiple LE officers was ignored, then after the "supposed ccw holder" pushed officers thereby he was obstructing official business and justice. after the suspect being exposed to a less-than-lethal OC spray, after the suspect continues to resist, and it's eventually found out during the struggle that the suspect has a hidden pistol? How do you expect wary and weary law enforcement agents to respond? What's up with 37-year-olds in Minnesota?