Turns Out The Left Loves Borders — Just Not America’s
An article by brianna Lyman for the Federalist argues that the left’s longstanding skepticism of borders is undercut by recent events. It highlights anti-ICE protests in Minneapolis where demonstrators allegedly set up checkpoints to determine if drivers were ICE-affiliated and erected barricades to create an autonomous zone,effectively establishing de facto borders. The piece cites Billie Eilish’s remark that “no one is illegal on stolen land” and contrasts it with her use of legal mechanisms to restrict access to her own property, framing this as hypocrisy. It contends that anti-ICE protesters understand the concept of exclusion in principle, but apply it selectively—advocating border enforcement against federal agents they oppose while opposing immigration enforcement. The author maintains that ICE exists to enforce border laws that Americans chose through democracy, arguing that the movement against ICE is not a rejection of borders itself but a critique of America’s border policies.
We’ve heard it for years: borders are immoral, no human is illegal — the whole nine. Yet in recent weeks — from anti-ICE riots in Minnesota to checkpoints and barricades and autonomous zones — the left has accidentally made the clearest case yet for why borders exist and why they matter.
Take for example that anti-ICE protesters in Minneapolis set up a checkpoint to determine which cars could pass on public streets. If the driver was not ICE or affiliated with ICE, they were allowed to pass on the public roadway, Fox News reported. According to reporter Jorge Ventura, these anti-ICE protesters were stopping vehicles and checking their license plates and driver’s licenses to determine if they were ICE-affiliated before letting them pass.
In other words, these anti-ICE agitators were creating their own de-facto borders — deciding who belongs and who doesn’t — while denouncing the very concept of federal immigration border enforcement.
If the hypocrisy wasn’t already clear, let’s not forget that protesters set up barricades — otherwise known as a makeshift border — to block off parts of Minneapolis as they created what’s become known as an autonomous zone.
Meanwhile Billie Eilish claimed on Sunday while accepting a Grammy award that “no one is illegal on stolen land.”
“F-ck ICE,” she said.
But when someone crossed the boundary (or “border”) of Eilish’s property uninvited, she didn’t ramble on about stolen land or question the immorality of borders. She ran to court and begged the government to declare that a specific person was not allowed within a certain radius of her home — and to enforce that rule. In other words, when her safety was at risk, borders (like her property line) suddenly mattered, and enforcement wasn’t something to curse but rather beg for.
But this hypocrisy isn’t unique to celebrities, it’s the core of the entire anti-ICE movement. Chants of “ICE Out” are an admission that discretion about who is in your community matters — and implies that these protesters do understand that communities must have a right to decide who is allowed inside and who is to be kept out.
These protesters fully understand the idea of exclusion, and in their case, they reserve it for federal agents enforcing laws they like, while pretending the same principle is immoral when applied to illegal immigration.
But the irony is clear. ICE exists to enforce border laws that were passed decades ago precisely because Americans decided, through a democratic process, that not everyone is allowed to enter or remain in the country.
Anti-ICE protesters and celebrities aren’t rejecting borders as a concept — they’ve already proved they understand the need for borders and in many cases, like borders.
They just reject America’s borders.
" Conservative News Daily does not always share or support the views and opinions expressed here; they are just those of the writer."
*As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases
