Trump’s Border Policy versus Biden’s: Explained

Immigrants Are Us

In the rush of days, they disappear—
gentle souls we hold so dear.
People working at a steady pace,
their quiet lives vanished and erased.

We voted to rid ourselves of wrong,
to make society more secure and strong.
But in the shadows, someone is gone—
something is happening that doesn’t belong.

Not Carolina, no—she’s the one we knew,
a good waitress, steadfast and true.
But who’s to say who truly falls,
within these borders, within these walls?

Let’s pause and reflect on what we lose.
In sweeping actions, we must refuse.
For behind the rules, behind the cries,
are human lives passing us by.

Edited by: ElRoyPoet, 2025

Bill Maher Confronts Trump Border Czar Face-to-Face on Immigration Raids

TOM HOMAN: If you want to send a message to the whole world? Cross the border illegally, it’s a crime, but it’s OK. Have due process, get order removed by an immigration judge, don’t leave, it’s OK, just don’t commit another crime, your good to go. If that’s the message, we send to the whole world, people are going to keep coming. What I’m saying is, that’s why you have to show there’s consequences. Because if you send a message there’s no consequences, and you reward illegal behavior, that’s not going to stop.

FACT CHECK: Who are you sending a message to? They? Them? Trump? Liar! You have already sealed the border. Your virtue signaling is a mask for hypocrisy. The MAGA echo chamber of anti-immigrant hate is so ingrained that Trump’s sycophants resort to theatrics to stay in character.

BILL MAHER: But what we also see is people being just taken away who are just regular-day workers. The waitress who worked for 14 years at some coffee shop. And everybody’s like, oh, you know what? We voted to get rid of the bad people, you know, the people you were just talking about, but not Carol. What’s going on there? Don’t you think it’s been a little heavy-handed? Don’t you think you’ve picked up a bunch of people who shouldn’t be picked up at all? It doesn’t seem like it was done with a scalpel.

FACT CHECK: This is the new MAGA narrative—part of how extreme politics operates—trying to find ordinary ways to describe horrible, inhumane, and morally abhorrent things. “Remigrate” people which means to remove all non-whites from America by brute force, if necessary.

TOM HOMAN: What I think about every day is, we prioritize the worst first, and the numbers show we do it. What I’ve said from day one, if you’re in the country illegally, you’re not off the table. You know why? Because there are millions of people standing in line, taking their tests, doing the background investigations, paying their fees to be part of the greatest nation on earth. If you want to be a part of the greatest nation, there’s a right way and wrong way to do it. If you like it or not, the ones who are here illegally cheated the system. They moved themselves to the front of the line and they’ve overwhelmed the immigration court system back 9, 10 years, which means the people who are really trying to come here the right way are sitting in the back of the bus. But people don’t talk about these 10 million, 10.5 million who came to the border under Biden. Well, they’re asylum seekers. What people don’t understand, if you look at immigration court data over the last 10 years, nearly 9 out of 10 of them will get an order of removal because they don’t qualify for support asylum. They’re not escaping fear and persecution from their home government because of race, religion, and political affiliation. They’re coming here for a better life and I get that. But while they’re clogging up and cheating the system, there are literally thousands of people in this world that really are escaping fear and persecution from their home countries that are sitting in the back of the bus. So there’s a reason we’re a nation of laws ,and if you or people don’t like what ICE is doing, they go scream at Congress. We’re enforcing the law ’cause they enacted it.

FACT CHECK: Liar again! The Republican Congress didn’t even attempt to address the immigration crisis in 2024 when they had the opportunity to author and pass the “Securing Our Southern Border” bill, because doing so would have hurt Trump’s reelection chances. The last significant amendment to U.S. immigration law was the Immigration Reform and Control Act (IRCA) of 1986, which legalized many undocumented immigrants and imposed penalties on employers who hired illegal workers. When Biden was president (2021–2025), his administration followed the law and did not scapegoat or target any migrants.

However, once the Republican president began his second term (2025), Johnson, the Republican Speaker of the House, simply punted the “political football.” This maneuver allowed Trump to manipulate U.S. immigration laws through executive orders and harsh, inhumane policies. The Republican Congress evaded doing the job they were elected to do by not standing up and taking responsibility for addressing the immigration crisis. Their cowardly Representatives basically shirked accountability, letting Trump act unilaterally.

The Constitution of the United States protects the rights of all individuals within its borders, REGARDLESS OF THEIR CITIZENSHIP STATUS. This includes immigrants, or non-citizens, who are in the United States. The Constitution guarantees certain rights and protections, such as due process and equal protection under the law, to all individuals, including immigrants. However, there are certain rights and privileges that are specifically afforded to citizens only, such as the right to vote and run for certain public offices. BUT, that doesn’t give republican voters the right to scapegoat immigrants!

The Law that broke U.S. Immigration

The evolution of immigration policy during Trump’s presidency illustrates a marked shift from incremental border security measures to aggressive, executive-driven efforts to restrict migrant entry. Analyzing this progression reveals how the administration’s approach intensified over time, transitioning from physical infrastructure projects to sweeping policy actions that sought to virtually close the border.

In Trump’s first term (2017–2021), the primary focus was on physical barriers and increased border security. The administration prioritized the construction of a border wall, framing illegal immigration as an “invasion” and emphasizing deterrence through tangible infrastructure. Operation War Room (2018), military deployment—5,600 troops—served as a symbolic and operational measure to discourage crossings, but the border was not fully sealed, reflecting limits in both political support and practical execution. Legislative battles, including a 35-day government shutdown, underscored the political challenges faced in securing comprehensive funding for the wall. Despite these efforts, the border remained permeable, and the policies enacted primarily aimed to curb illegal crossings through physical barriers and increased enforcement rather than complete closure.

However, Trump’s tenure was also marked by controversial and inhumane policies that drew widespread criticism:

Zero Tolerance Policy (2018): Led to the separation of thousands of migrant children from their parents at the border, causing emotional trauma and widespread condemnation.
Family Separation Policy: Officially part of Zero Tolerance, resulting in children being held in detention centers under poor conditions, often with inadequate care and communication.
Migrant Protection Protocols (“Remain in Mexico”) (2019): Forced asylum seekers to stay in Mexico while their cases were processed, exposing them to violence, exploitation, and dangerous conditions.
Public Charge Rule Expansion (2019): Made it harder for immigrants to obtain visas or green cards if they relied on public assistance, creating fear and discouraging lawful immigration and family reunification.
Travel Bans and Restrictions: Imposed bans on travelers from Muslim-majority countries and other regions, criticized as discriminatory.
Prolonged Detention of Children and Families: Continued detention for extended periods, often in inhumane conditions, despite legal challenges.
Restrictions on Asylum Seekers: Limited access to asylum through policies requiring applications in third countries or expedited removals, violating international protections.
Detention in Inhumane Conditions: Widespread reports of overcrowded, unsanitary detention centers with inadequate medical care.

Despite these policies, Trump’s efforts remained focused on deterrence and physical barriers, but his administration’s approach culminated in a more aggressive stance in its second term.

In contrast, under President Biden (2021–2025), the approach to immigration and border enforcement diverged sharply from the aggressive stance of the Trump administration. Biden’s policies emphasized restoring legal processes, humanitarian protections, and adherence to statutory immigration law. Early in his term, Biden sought to dismantle many of Trump’s restrictive policies, including ending the “Remain in Mexico” program, halting border wall construction, and reversing travel bans. His administration prioritized humane treatment of migrants, expanding refugee admissions, and improving asylum processing.

Despite these efforts, Biden faced significant challenges, including a surge in migrant crossings—particularly in 2021 and 2022—driven by factors such as economic instability, violence, and the lingering effects of the COVID-19 pandemic. In response, Biden employed a mix of strategies: increasing resources for processing asylum claims, expanding legal pathways, and implementing policies aimed at managing the flow of migrants rather than outright closing the border. While he used executive authority to implement some restrictions—such as Title 42 expulsions for public health reasons—these were often challenged legally, and courts limited their scope, emphasizing statutory protections and due process rights.

Unlike Trump’s policies, which sought to virtually close the border or suspend lawful entry, Biden’s approach aimed to balance border security with humanitarian obligations. His administration explicitly rejected the use of sweeping executive orders to entirely block migration, instead emphasizing a managed approach that prioritized lawful entry, family reunification, and legal pathways. This reflected a recognition that the legal framework, judicial oversight, and international commitments constrained the ability to implement Trump-style border closures unilaterally.

The transition to Trump’s second term (2025) marked a further escalation in border enforcement strategies. With the declaration of a national emergency and the characterization of unauthorized migration as an “invasion,” the administration adopted a more aggressive stance. Executive orders became the primary tools for policy implementation, bypassing legislative gridlock. The military presence increased to approximately 10,000 service members, reflecting a more militarized approach to border enforcement. Most notably, the policies shifted from deterrence to suspension; the administration suspended the entry of migrants, including asylum seekers, effectively closing the border to many lawful entries. This move signified a departure from infrastructure-focused efforts toward a comprehensive blockade, justified by the administration’s framing of migration as an invasion that necessitated extraordinary measures.

In summary, Biden’s administration adopted an immigration strategy rooted in legal compliance, humanitarian principles, and statutory authority. His approach focused on restoring lawful processes and expanding legal pathways, even amid ongoing challenges. In contrast, Trump’s policies during his second term marked a shift toward a more aggressive stance, including efforts to close the border through executive orders, military deployment, and the suspension of asylum.

The bottom line is that Trump has fabricated an “immigration crisis” to seal the border by repeating his so-called “Big Lie”—claiming there was a national emergency and portraying migration as an “invasion,” which it was not and never has been. He continues to scapegoat immigrants as a false pretext to erode constitutional protections within the United States and to justify citizen surveillance, all while fueling fear and division that ultimately serve to increase political gain for his MAGA movement.

Conservatives Are ENRAGED Over ICE Surveillance Program

The final conclusion is that Trump and his sycophants are wannabe authoritarians who mock the Constitution and its patriots. In contrast, Biden has positioned himself as a leader and statesman by upholding democratic principles and respecting all U.S. citizens and residents.

The Trump administration’s next target: naturalized US citizens

An Illiberal Democracy describes a governing system that hides its “nondemocratic practices behind formally democratic institutions and procedures”. In such regimes, leaders often ignore or bypass constitutional limits, gradually eroding checks and balances to concentrate power. This dangerous trajectory inevitably leads to autocracy, where true freedom and accountability are cancelled. This is exactly what MAGA Republicans are guilty of—using the illusion of democracy to undermine its very foundations and push our nation toward authoritarian rule.

“Conservatism consists of exactly one proposition, to wit: There must be in-groups whom the law protects but does not bind, alongside out-groups whom the law binds but does not protect. The law cannot protect anyone unless it binds everyone; and it cannot bind anyone unless it protects everyone.” Excerpt from: Conservatism and Who the Law Protects

Ultimately, history teaches us that temporary peace achieved through authoritarianism is often an illusion, and the true cost is the erosion of civil rights, individual freedoms, and the rule of law. Democratic societies must remain vigilant, fostering compromise and understanding, even amid polarization. Otherwise, they risk sliding into cycles of authoritarianism, where the promise of stability masks the suppression of dissent and the consolidation of power by a few.“If our democracy dies, the reason won’t be that Americans were too apathetic to save it; it will be that they voted it out of existence.” —H. Scott Butler

The Impact of Justice Brett Kavanaugh’s Recent Interpretation of Immigration Profiling and Its Broader Implications

Justice Brett Kavanaugh’s recent stance on immigration profiling has ignited significant controversy and sparked a vigorous debate about civil liberties, racial justice, and the scope of executive authority. His concurrence in the Supreme Court case Noem v. Vasquez Perdomo supports the use of race and appearance as factors in immigration enforcement, raising concerns about the potential for increased discrimination and erosion of due process protections.

Kavanaugh’s Justification for Racial Profiling

Kavanaugh asserts that immigration agents are permitted to consider physical appearance, language, and the type of work individuals are engaged in when deciding whether to stop and question them about their immigration status. Citing the Fourth Amendment, he suggests that such profiling can be justified under the guise of “reasonable suspicion.” This perspective effectively broadens the criteria for stopping individuals, shifting the burden of suspicion and justification away from the state and onto individuals, often based solely on their ethnicity or appearance. Critics argue that this approach risks institutionalizing racial profiling, undermining the constitutional protections designed to prevent arbitrary searches and seizures.

Historical Precedents and Their Repercussions

Kavanaugh’s opinion heavily references the 1975 case United States v. Brignoni-Ponce, which allowed Border Patrol agents to consider “Mexican appearance” as a factor when conducting stops near the U.S.-Mexico border. He contends that this precedent supports current practices, thereby legitimizing the use of racial and appearance-based profiling. While courts have historically recognized certain border enforcement practices, critics warn that such reliance on outdated precedents can normalize racial profiling and expand its application far beyond traditional border areas, potentially leading to widespread discriminatory enforcement.

Implications for Lawful Residents and Broader Civil Liberties

A key concern voiced by opponents is that if individuals stopped are found to be U.S. citizens or legally present, they are promptly released. However, critics argue that this optimistic portrayal does not reflect the reality of how stops often unfold. Many individuals, especially those from Latino or other minority communities, face arbitrary detentions, harassment, and the threat of deportation based solely on appearance or language. Justice Sonia Sotomayor and others have expressed alarm that such rulings risk turning Latinos into second-class citizens, emphasizing the danger of widespread discrimination rooted in racial or ethnic profiling.

Expanded Authority and Growing Risks

The Supreme Court’s decision effectively allows federal immigration agents to resume “roving patrols” in California, which could lead to increased racial profiling and arbitrary detentions based on appearance, language, or perceived ethnicity. This expansion of authority raises serious concerns about civil rights violations and the erosion of due process protections for immigrants. Under current policies, Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) has considerable latitude; individuals who cannot prove lawful status—whether through birthright citizenship, naturalization, or legal residency—often face minimal due process. Notably, the government is not required to prove that an individual has no right to be in the country; instead, the individual must demonstrate their lawful presence, reversing the typical legal burden of proof. During previous administrations, many deportations occurred after brief hearings, often without meaningful opportunity for defense. The Trump administration, in particular, has been accused of diluting or ignoring even these minimal protections, further undermining due process.

The White House’s Messaging and Its Consequences

Recently, the Trump administration’s messaging to non-citizens in the U.S. has been unequivocal: regardless of how long they have lived in the country or the circumstances they face at home, if the government deems they do not belong, they are not entitled to a fair opportunity to defend themselves. Many are detained, deported, or even disappeared without proper recourse. The administration has also attempted to intimidate legal advocates, threaten judges, and defund legal representation for immigrants—efforts aimed at eroding civil liberties and restricting access to justice. These policies facilitate easier deportations, often at the cost of family separations, wrongful deportations, and the return of victims to dangerous situations or persecutors.

In conclusion, Justice Kavanaugh’s interpretation of immigration profiling marks a troubling shift toward legitimizing racial and appearance-based enforcement practices. When combined with the broader strategies of the Trump administration—such as limiting due process, intimidating legal advocates, and expanding immigration enforcement powers—the result is a significant erosion of immigrant civil liberties and fundamental rights. Such policies not only threaten individual freedoms but also threaten to institutionalize discrimination and injustice within the U.S. legal system. As these developments continue, the importance of vigilant oversight and advocacy to protect civil rights remains more critical than ever.

“We’re being sold a story that mass arrests are what’s going to resolve our immigration issues, when in fact it’s comprehensive immigration reforms.” […] Under the next Trump administration, Hernandez expects to see echoes of Operation Wetback play out in a modern context. “I would expect to see roadblocks and a stop-and-frisk operation around immigration control, especially in the 100-mile zone” near the southern border, she said.”I expect racial profiling to be rampant. Back in ’54 it targeted Mexican immigrants, at this point I think it’s pretty clear that Black and Muslim migrants, in addition to Latinx migrants will be targeted.” Excerpt from: ‘Operation Wetback’: What Happened Last Time US Conducted Mass Deportations

U.S. Immigration Law

The primary law governing immigration in the United States is known as the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA). The INA was first codified in 1952. It has been amended several times, most notably by the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965, which abolished the national origins quota system that favored certain nationalities over others. This law is fundamental to understanding how immigration is managed in the United States today.

Key Features of the INA

Purpose of the INA: Regulates Immigration: The INA establishes the legal framework for immigration, including the processes for obtaining visas, permanent residency, and citizenship.

Categories of Immigration: It includes provisions for family-sponsored immigration, employment-based immigration, and humanitarian assistance for refugees and asylum seekers.

Enforcement: The INA also outlines enforcement measures for immigration control, including the removal of individuals who do not have legal status in the U.S.

In order to explain why we have systemic racism and a culture of ethics violations within our institutions, we need to understand that all systems in government rely on people to do their jobs in good faith. All it takes is for one key player to cheat, and the system fails. No system is self-moderated, no matter how much we audit and try to regulate it; it is up to the civil servant(s) to do his job to the best of his abilities. All the systemic problems we find are to be blamed on the people in power who are acting slick — not on the system. Blaming the culture is unconstitutional; an individual(s) in that system who is unwilling to support it, is literally breaking his oath of office. This is why a democracy can’t survive without a free press — to force transparency of the government — so that if it is discovered that a corrupt public official(s) is gaming the system, it can be brought to the citizens’ attention, so that the bad actor(s) can be impeached by the checks and balances in place.

Trump Fan On CNN Battles Accusation ‘Donald Trump Is a Racist!’

ICE does not protect America—it terrorizes America. And until it is reined in, dismantled, or reformed to operate wholly within constitutional boundaries, it will remain a standing army on domestic soil: unaccountable, unconstitutional, and un-American. Masked gunmen. Tasers. Tear gas. Pepper spray. Unmarked vehicles. Intimidation tactics. Brutality. Racial profiling. Children traumatized. Families terrorized. Journalists targeted. Citizens detained. Disabled individuals, minors, the elderly, pregnant women, military veterans—snatched off the streets. Private property destroyed. This is what now passes for law-and-order policing by ICE agents in Trump’s America—and it is not making America safer or greater. What began as an agency tasked with enforcing immigration law has metastasized into a domestic terror force. From coast to coast, ICE goon squads—incognito, thuggish, fueled by profit-driven incentives and outlandish quotas, and empowered by the Trump administration to act as if they are untouchable—are prowling neighborhoods, churches, courthouses, hospitals, bus stops, and worksites, anywhere “suspected” migrants might be present, snatching people first and asking questions later. Sometimes “later” comes hours, days or even weeks afterwards. No one is off limits—not even American citizens. Make no mistake: this is not how a constitutional republic operates. It is how a dictatorship behaves when it decides the rule of law—in this case, the Bill of Rights—is optional. Excerpt from: Police State Bounty Hunters: The Rise of ICE’s Unconstitutional War on America

Key Points & Details:

1. Description of ICE’s Repressive Tactics:

Uses masked gunmen, tear gas, Tasers, pepper spray, unmarked vehicles, and intimidation methods.
Engages in brutality, racial profiling, and targeting vulnerable populations, including children, families, journalists, disabled individuals, minors, the elderly, pregnant women, and veterans.
Conducts raids that often involve snatching people off the streets, destroying private property, and detaining people without due process.
Incidents across the country demonstrate these practices: a veteran detained without charges, a journalist assaulted, a pregnant woman chained and hospitalized, women dragged from their cars, and others subjected to violent treatment.

2. Shift from Enforcement to Tyranny:

ICE has metastasized into a domestic terror force, with agents empowered by profit-driven incentives, quotas, and political backing.
Thanks to the vast sums of taxpayer money funneled into ICE under Trump’s “One Big Beautiful Bill,” financial incentives are turning ICE agents into bounty hunters. In addition to recruiting ICE agents with $50,000 signing bonuses and $60,000 in student loan forgiveness, DHS is also promising to lavishly reward police agencies that allow their officers to operate as extensions of ICE with salary reimbursements, overtime pay, and monthly bonuses.
The agency operates coast-to-coast in a manner that disregards constitutional protections, targeting anyone perceived as a migrant suspect, often with no evidence or due process.
The agency’s tactics and incentives have transformed it into a force that often acts beyond the bounds of law, targeting anyone perceived as a migrant suspect—often with no evidence or due process.
No one, including American citizens, is safe from arbitrary detention or violence.

3. Constitutional Violations:

Actions violate multiple amendments: First (journalist brutality), Fourth (illegal searches and detentions), Fifth (detentions without charges/habeas corpus).
These abuses demonstrate a departure from the rule of law and a move toward authoritarianism, with the government acting as lawless predators rather than lawful officers.

4. Questioning the Justification of Measures:

The justification of extreme measures such as martial law, mass surveillance, and military operations—like Operation Midway Blitz—is challenged.
Data shows the majority of those rounded up have no criminal records, and studies disprove the stereotype that immigrants are inherently dangerous or criminal.
Despite claims, crime rates in the U.S. are at historic lows, undermining the rationale for aggressive raids justified by “public safety.”

5. Political Motivation & Propaganda:

The real purpose of ICE’s aggressive actions is to weaponize fear, distract from scandals involving corruption and elite complicity, and maintain regime control.
International military strikes and domestic raids serve similar purposes: divert attention and instill fear, consolidating power under the guise of security.

6. Legal & Moral Critique:

The article references Martin Luther King Jr.’s philosophy, emphasizing that legality does not equal morality.
Unjust laws—like those allowing mass detention, violence, and racial profiling—are morally illegitimate, and citizens have a moral obligation to resist them.
King’s message underscores that abandoning moral law leads to lawlessness and tyranny.

7. Citizen Resistance & Moral Courage:

Citizens and activists are responding with nonviolent resistance—symbolic protests, standing silently before armed agents, creative acts of defiance that recall King’s principles.
Moral conscience and active resistance are vital to confronting tyranny.

8. Call for Action & Constitutional Defense:

ICE’s conduct is un-American; unless reined in or dismantled, it will continue to act as an unconstitutional force.
Tyranny often cloaks itself in the language of safety and welfare, but ultimately seeks to erode accountability and impose totalitarian control.
The Constitution must be upheld as the ultimate rule of law; if agencies like ICE operate outside its boundaries, they become what the Framers feared: a government waging war on its own people.

In summary, ICE (Immigration and Customs Enforcement) under the Trump administration is condemned as an unaccountable, militarized force that has transformed from a legitimate immigration enforcement agency into an instrument of tyranny. Its tactics and operations are argued to violate constitutional principles, undermine democracy, and operate outside legal bounds, effectively turning the U.S. into a police state. Citizens must resist ICE’s abuses to defend democratic principles, constitutional rights, and moral integrity, and to prevent the country’s descent into tyranny.

Why the US is deporting so many people

Dozens detained by ICE inside NYC courthouse, sparking backlash

With Summer Almost Over, the Hamptons’ Largely Immigrant Workforce Worries About ICE Crackdowns

Living and Teaching the Principles of the Everlasting Gospel: Defending Immigrants from Government Tyranny

“I am fully aware of the divine decree to be actively engaged in a good cause; of the fact that every true principle which works for the freedom and blessing of mankind has the Lord’s approval; of the need to sustain and support those who espouse proper causes and advocate true principles—all of which things we also should do in the best and most beneficial way we can. The issue, I think, is not what we should do but how we should do it; and I maintain that the most beneficial and productive thing which [we] can do to strengthen every good and proper cause is to live and teach the principles of the everlasting gospel. — Bruce R. McConkie

LDS outreach to immigrants grows, pushing church members to examine GOP ties

These words remind us that as followers of Christ, our actions must be rooted in divine principles. The most effective way to fulfill this divine mandate is to live and teach the principles of the everlasting gospel, especially in times of moral crisis. Today, one pressing issue confronting our nation is the immigration crisis, which challenges us to examine whether we are truly embodying Christ’s teachings or denying our faith.

Let’s take it one step further and consider how evangelicals in general are engaging with this crisis. Are we strengthening the cause for “freedom and blessing of mankind” by condoning the rounding up and brutalization of poor immigrant families by government ICE officials? These immigrants have come to the promised land in hopes of earning the American Dream—and maybe even becoming born-again Christians. Are these evangelicals living and teaching the principles of the everlasting gospel by welcoming new souls into their communities, or are they hypocrites who don’t want to be burdened with the command from Jesus to evangelize all of His people, even immigrants?

The Bible clearly commands us to care for the stranger and the vulnerable. In Exodus 22:21, the Lord declares, “You must not exploit a resident alien or oppress him, since you were resident aliens in the land of Egypt.” And in Leviticus 19:34, “The stranger who dwells with you shall be to you as one born among you, and you shall love him as yourself.” This is reinforced in Matthew 25:35, where Jesus says, “For I was hungry and you gave me food, I was thirsty and you gave me drink, I was a stranger and you welcomed me.” These scriptures are not merely suggestions—they are divine commandments that call us to action.

Furthermore, Jesus’ own life exemplifies compassion and advocacy for the marginalized. He associated with sinners, the sick, and outcasts, demonstrating that no one is outside the reach of God’s love. The Bible underscores the importance of showing mercy to those in need, regardless of their background or nationality. The question for us is: are we living out these principles by welcoming immigrants and defending their dignity, or are we complicit in policies that dehumanize and oppress them?

Regrettably, many evangelicals have aligned with nationalist agendas that seek to exclude and marginalize newcomers. This stance contradicts the very gospel we profess to follow. In John 13:34-35, Jesus commands, “A new commandment I give to you, that you love one another; as I have loved you, that you also love one another. By this all will know that you are My disciples, if you have love for one another.” Loving our neighbor means actively defending those who are vulnerable and oppressed.

The Bible also warns against oppression and injustice. Proverbs 31:8-9 instructs, “Open your mouth for the speechless, in the cause of all who are appointed to die. Open your mouth, judge righteously, and plead the cause of the poor and needy.” As Christians, we are called to be a voice for the voiceless, especially when government policies threaten to silence or destroy them.

In the face of government tyranny and unjust laws, the apostle Paul encourages us in Galatians 5:13, “For you, brethren, have been called to liberty; only do not use liberty as an opportunity for the flesh, but through love serve one another.” Our liberty is rooted in the gospel of love, which compels us to stand against laws and actions that violate God’s principles of justice and mercy.

As Orson F. Whitney has wisely pointed out in the past: “God is using more than one people for the accomplishment of his great and marvelous work. The Latter-day Saints cannot do it all. It is too vast, too arduous, for any one people.” However, we can’t make our influence felt if we completely avoid the troublesome issues in society and insulate ourselves and our families from today’s challenges. Therefore, it is essential that we do not retreat into complacency or avoidance, but instead actively engage with the issues that threaten the moral integrity of our nation.

The most beneficial and productive thing Christians can do to uphold true freedom and justice is to live and teach the principles of the everlasting gospel. We are called to defend the marginalized, advocate for justice, and embody Christ’s love for all people—regardless of nationality or status. As Bruce R. McConkie emphasized, our divine duty is to champion good causes through the lens of gospel principles. Let us not stand on the sidelines or hide in our chapels, but actively defend the immigrant, living out the love and justice that Jesus Christ exemplified. Only then can we truly fulfill our divine calling and bring blessing to mankind.

Where Are The Detainees? Hundreds of “Alligator Alcatraz” Prisoners Disappear from ICE Database

If you want to protect immigrants from ICE, you need to know this number.

How US views of immigration have changed since Trump took office, according to Gallup polling

“I Don’t Want to Be Here Anymore”: They Tried to Self-Deport, Then Got Stranded in Trump’s America

“The inhumanity of bigots and tyrants is that they will never experience guilt or regret, about their desires superseding the needs of those whom they control or hold power over. They are not capable of feeling empathy or compassion for inferior beings.” — B. Bondman

“Most of us are economic immigrants—even if within our own countries— but the term has taken on a new and pejorative meaning since the refugee crisis. It is often deployed in much the same way that “bogus asylum seeker” was in the past by the British tabloid press—to suggest that people are trying to play the system, that their presence is the cause of problems at the border, and that if we could only filter them out, order would be restored. In fact, the history of migration is a history of controls on the movement of all but a wealthy elite.

In the past, states sought to restrict the movement of their own populations, through slavery or serfdom, or poor laws and vagrancy acts; today the right to move freely within one’s own territory is enshrined in the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Most of us take this right for granted, even though it is relatively recent. Now, instead, the movement of people across international borders is tightly controlled and regulated. As a proportion of the world population, the total number of international migrants—of any kind—has stayed relatively steady: roughly 3% since 1960, according to the sociologist Hein de Haas.” Excerpt from Five myths about the refugee crisis

“Migrants have to bank on the fact: ‘That its easier to ask for forgiveness, than it is to ask for permission’ to come to America. Because MAGA Republicans will never allow it; they hate poor immigrants and only love rich tourists.” — B. Bondman

Immigrants waiting 10 years in US just to get a court date

Commentary: Throughout history, young people have been driven by a variety of motivations to leave behind their parents’ home, family, and friends, and embark on perilous journeys across countries, jungles, and rivers. The question then arises: what compels them to put their lives and limbs in jeopardy? Many argue that it is the aspiration for the renowned “American Dream” and the conviction that such a promised land truly exists, where everyone is free and enjoys economic security.

Undeniably, tales of the American Dream have been passed down from generation to generation, capturing the imagination and fueling the hopes of many. It is a captivating notion that beckons those yearning for a better life, offering the possibility of prosperity and success. This belief in the existence of a land where opportunities abound is a powerful motivator for young people to set off on the quest of a lifetime, leaving behind the familiar comforts of home.

Once individuals take that fateful first step, the momentum perpetuates their resolve. They convince themselves that they have already conquered the most arduous challenges, and eagerly anticipate a smoother path ahead. This mindset fuels their determination, as they remain firmly convicted that their dreams lie just beyond the horizon. The allure of the “American Dream” continues to drive them forward, pushing them to endure the hardships and dangers that inevitably accompany their pursuit

In the eyes of a young person without a job, the absence of employment is not merely a source of concern; it is seen as a travesty. The “American Dream” promises the realization of one’s potential, where hard work is rewarded and opportunities are abundant. Hence, being unable to secure a job represents a profound disappointment and a setback in the quest for economic stability. The fear of remaining stagnant and the desire for upward mobility drives young adults to take the leap into the unknown.

For many, the prospect of growing old without a life partner is a reality that they also strive to avoid. In search of a better future and a sense of companionship, unmarried immigrants are willing to travel outside their comfort zone and risk their personal safety. The “American Dream” promises not only economic stability but also the opportunity to start a family, and to build a new home for their loved ones.

“Inhumane”: Marine Veteran Calls for ICE to Release His Father

Fear grips Coachella Valley over Trump deportations

Five Biggest Border Lies Debunked

Trump’s ICE Has Started Targeting Activists, Not Just Immigrants

“Though liberty is established by law, we must be vigilant, for liberty to enslave us is always present under that same liberty. Our Constitution speaks of the ‘general welfare of the people’. Under that phrase all sorts of excesses can be employed by [authoritarian] tyrants — to make us bondmen.” — Marcus Tullius Cicero

“However [political parties] may now and then answer popular ends, they are likely in the course of time and things, to become potent engines, by which cunning, ambitious, and unprincipled men will be enabled to subvert the power of the people and to usurp for themselves the reins of government, destroying afterwards the very engines which have lifted them to unjust dominion.” — George Washington (Farewell Address, September 17, 1796)

“First they came for the socialists, and I did not speak out—because I was not a socialist.
Then they came for the trade unionists, and I did not speak out—because I was not a trade unionist.
Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out—because I was not a Jew.
Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me.” — Pastor Martin Niemöller

“The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men should do nothing […] When bad people join forces, good people need to form a resistance; otherwise, they will be picked off—one by one and suffer in a futile struggle, without anyone caring.” — Edmund Burke (Paraphrased)

“Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.” — Benjamin Franklin

“It does not matter how well the Bible, or the Constitution was written: if those aspirations are not animated by the spirit that dwells in your heart.” — ElRoyPoet

“Each of us feels some aspect of the world’s suffering acutely. And we must pay attention. We must act. This little corner of the world is ours to transform. This little corner of the world is ours to save.” ― Stephen Cope

“We recognize the great good [other religions] accomplish. We must teach our children to be tolerant and friendly toward those not of our faith. We can and do work with those of other religions in the defense of those values which have made our civilization great and our society distinctive.” ― Gordon B. Hinckley