I am completely in favor of the ICEmen and the job they are doing under the insane bombardment of violence to which they are being subjected.
Let’s begin by identifying the actual source and purpose of the campaign – the purpose which the anti-ICE protesters are actually promoting and helping to achieve.
First, observe that the ICE campaign is thoroughly political, and not only political, but partisan. It has been welcomed loudly and often profanely by Democratic politicians – e.g., Gov. Walz in Minnesota, Minneapolis Mayor Frei, and Minnesota AG Ellison — all giving repeated passionate speeches attacking ICE. On the other side of the aisle, no Republican officials have come out against ICE in their states.
This should come as no surprise. After all, it is the Democratic Party that opened our Southern border to any and all migrants. Now they are fighting to keep them in. Why? What is motivating the Party to act in this way? It has nothing to do with Biden, who was a mere figurehead obeying his Party’s left. The left wanted millions of unvetted illegal migrants here in the United States and took certain steps (sometimes providing free airplanes) to see that they were dispersed around the country. As a result, a significant number of the illegals took up residence in the US and can be counted by the Census in the states they live in. The census does not only count citizens, it counts people whatever their legal status — and a number of new House seats is awarded to any state because of its gain in population, which is a significant factor in what legislation passes Congress. According to a study conducted by the Center for Immigration Studies (in a report published on October 31, 2024), the counting of non-citizens in the U.S. census has already created a net gain for Democrat-leaning states of approximately +14 in House seats and a corresponding net loss of approximately -10 seats in Republican-leaning states. The states which benefited most from this in the 2020 census were California, New York, New Jersey and Illinois, notorious “sanctuary” jurisdictions. States that were hurt the most included Ohio and Alabama, reliably “red” states. And so the Dem passion and purpose is really a way of increasing the Party’s political power. Why else would they fight so ferociously for these millions?
In general, it is clear from recent Party moves or announced plans that it is, to them, urgent to increase their power. Commentators of just about every complexion are telling them publicly that they have lost much of their traditional base (laborers, lower middle class, certain minorities) and, as the Trump landslide showed, that their Wokism and foolish unceasing attacks on Trump are not playing well to the public.
They have come up with extraordinary suggestions to strengthen their showing in elections, not by increasing their voter base, but rather by weakening traditional checks on their Party’s power. For example, they talk about cancelling the Electoral College specified in the Constitution (which would throw Presidential elections to the large, Democratic-voting proletariat in the big cities). Also: they envision packing the Supreme Court to ensure it is an electoral ally or at least non-enemy of theirs. Also: they advocate turning two Democratic-voting territories, D.C. and Puerto Rico, into states which immediately puts on their side two extra Senators for each state. Also: the latest ridiculous Democratic crusade: to eliminate voter ID at the polls, which of course would leave endless cheating easy for those so inclined – we could have votes by dead bodies, by people who vote several times, etc. — the door is open to anyone willing to cheat, and surely we don’t have to discuss the Democrats in this regard.
In sum, the Party’s strategy in recent years, especially since the Trump landslide, is: we embrace any policy that will lead us to election victory.
One anti-ICEr suggests that conservatives who defend ICE and deportation, are really racists — presumably, in this case, because we are supposed to be hostile to brown bodies. In other words, this student of Objectivism (I don’t call him an Objectivist because he is clearly still learning what the philosophy is) is not only perpetrating an ad hominem, but also invoking as self-evident the WOKE explanation of all evil: RACISM.
Speaking for myself: as a teenager I spent most Augusts in Canada lying on Grand Beach getting a great tan, all the kids did, and we all boasted how brown we looked. Then, some years later, while dating in New York City, I applied bronzer liberally to my face and neck, wanting to look like someone who did not spend all of his time reading books (though it ruined my shirt collars). And now I have married a person of multi-racial ethnicity, and to me Grace is the most beautiful woman I have ever known.
Let me note that there are a number of criticisms of ICE which I consider too dumb to answer. For example: that the ICE members wear masks. Obviously this is because of the protesters who follow them to their homes and then unleash profanity and threats on the man’s terrified family.
Now, one more more bizarre claim by a student of Objectivism defending the anti-ICE protesters: that though the anti-ICE position is the position of the left (which is true), it follows that we should all “rally with the left” on this issue. Think about what this position, if disseminated nationally, would do to Ayn Rand’s name and to the appeal of her philosophy.
ICE agents, of course, are not infallible. Are you? Who is? They have made some errors, widely publicized by a hostile pro-Democratic press. They arrested an American citizen, or they accidentally separated a child from his parents. (Both of which occurred under Obama’s campaign of deportations.) Would you never have been confused or frightened by having to work in that “insane bombardment of violence,” as I called it above?
And twice, in Minnesota, they killed protesters in reaction to physical interference that created a physical danger to others. Once, an agent shot a woman as she seemed to be driving her car into him. And once an agent shot a male nurse who had brought a loaded gun to the protest.
Now tell me that, if you had to work in that “insane bombardment of violence,” you would never have been confused or frightened.
Here is a taste of that environment:
In July, 2025, a shooter attacked an ICE facility in Texas. Days later, dozens of rounds were fired at agents leaving a Border Patrol facility. In September, 2025, still another ICE facility was shot at, causing the death of a detainee.
Between January of 2025 and January of 2026, there were at least 66 cases of ICE vehicles being intentionally rammed by “protestors,” a 3,200% increase. DHS has reported a 1,346% increase in violent assaults on ICE agents. These assaults have involved the use of Molotov cocktails, rocks, frozen water bottles and hitting, kicking and spitting, as well as an 8,000% increase in death threats against these agents and their families.
Agents’ personal information has been widely released and “activists” have used encrypted message apps, like Signal, to track the movements of ICE agents in order to facilitate “protests” that have repeatedly impeded ICE operations.
That is all I have to say here. Thank you for your patience – and don’t forget that the best cure for hotheads is: ICE IN.
Objectivism and Immigration Law: A Two Part Series:
- Part I: Objectivism Applied to Immigration Law by James S. Valliant
- Part II: The Campaign Against ICE by Leonard Peikoff
