Can someone explain the stance many anti-ICE protesters take on illegal immigration? While hardships faced by many immigrants and backlogs in legal pathways are real, calls from ICE protesters to selectively ignore federal laws, those governing enforcement, detention, and deportation, set a dangerous precedent.
These laws have been in place since the Immigration Act of 1891 and were significantly expanded by the 1996 Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act (IIRIRA) and the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act (AEDPA). They have been enforced by Democratic and Republican administrations alike. Why are they suddenly the subject of violent protest?
Follow this logic: Many disagree with Colorado’s extensive restrictions on gun rights, which are seen as constitutionally questionable overreach. Under Governor Polis alone, at least two dozen gun restriction laws have been signed since 2019. If ICE protesters can advocate ignoring longstanding Federal laws they dislike, will they defend my right to ignore Colorado’s much more recent gun laws, where the ink is barely dry? I didn’t think so.
The United States represents just 4.2% of the world’s population. Should we open our borders to the remaining 95.8%? Of course not. Immigration caps exist to protect our resources, economy, and communities. Unlimited entry would overwhelm schools, hospitals, and housing, pressures already felt by young Americans facing skyrocketing costs and job competition.
Why should taxpayers fund benefits for newcomers while native-born citizens, who have paid into the system, go without? Young Americans are the first generation expected to have a lower quality of life than their parents, and they can feel it in their everyday lives. In a supposedly rich country, many in the next generation see no viable future. Where is the compassion for them?
Advocates praise the contributions of illegal immigrants yet overlook how states like California and Minnesota suffer from significant fraud and diversion of federal dollars intended to help Americans in need. This fraud often includes loopholes in aid programs for undocumented individuals, with states refusing to cooperate in investigations. This is not compassion; it is theft from hardworking taxpayers.
Critics decry ICE tactics as “cruel,” but fail to distinguish between law-abiding asylum seekers and violent criminals: gang members, traffickers, and repeat offenders. We cannot ignore those who cause harm. Protests that began as “ICE Watch” have evolved into outright ICE Obstruction, often without regard for the criminal history of the arrest target. This interference has dire consequences: apprehending a criminal alien in public vs already in custody takes 8–10 times more resources, and is far more dangerous for officers, the public, and the immigrants themselves. What are we to think of those who prioritize their personal ideological resistance to the exclusion of community safety?
Our laws are not supposed to be optional; yet protestors demand otherwise. If the process is overly burdensome, let’s pursue legislative reforms: expand visas for skilled workers, accelerate family reunification, and enforce borders to deter illegal crossings. That is reasonable. The chaos of open borders is not. Polls show most Americans prioritize secure borders and oppose amnesty without strong enforcement.
If advocates truly stand for immigrants, they should lead by example: open their homes to those in need or sponsor them personally. Don’t expect the already overtaxed to bear the cost. America is a nation of immigrants. But the majority choice is clear: enforce the law, reform it where needed, and prioritize Americans who have paid into the system.
Support Independent Local Journalism — High Country Advocate was created as a real alternative to regional media that too often silences dissenting voices while taking sides in the political struggle. Producing in-depth, unflinching reporting like this series and others is expensive: servers, editing, research time, and legal review all add up quickly. If these articles have informed you or given you new perspective, please consider supporting HCA with a paid subscription — every subscriber helps keep this reporting strong and independent. 