Providing amnesty to illegal alien invaders - has proven time and again - it does not work.

 

A history lesson from America to Spain: Amnesty for illegal migrants will backfire

The U.S, has tried this, in 1986 and in at least one other instance beyond that. It does not work.

Pawel Styrna | March 27, 2026 www.americanthinker.com

 In Spain, the socialist-dominated government of Pedro Sanchez recently pushed through an amnesty for approximately 500,000 to 800,000 illegal migrants.

 This would be the equivalent of granting amnesty to anywhere between 3.5 and 5.6 million illegal aliens in the U.S.

 The anti-borders left is celebrating, but if history is any guide (and it usually is), Spain’s misguided amnesty will backfire massively and only encourage more illegal migration.

 Due to both Spain’s European Union membership and its visa-free travel arrangements with the U.S., Madrid’s ill-considered amnesty poses a threat to the security of other European nations and the U.S.

 Sanchez rammed his amnesty through via executive fiat, not through a vote in Spain’s parliament. He knew he did not have the votes, particularly since 60 percent of Spaniards believe immigration is too high.

 To qualify for the amnesty, which is set to go into effect in April, illegal migrants would have to show at least five months of residency in Spain prior to Dec. 31, 2025, and have a clean criminal record. Those approved would, at least initially, receive not only one-year temporary residency permits but also access to taxpayer-funded health care and social security benefits.

 Had Spain’s leadership consulted American immigration policy history, they would have learned that amnesty is a non-solution that rewards immigration violators. In 1986, President Ronald Reagan and a bipartisan coalition in the U.S. Congress sought to address mass illegal immigration by passing an amnesty called the Immigration Reform and Control Act (IRCA). Illegal aliens who had resided in the U.S. before Jan. 1, 1982 and met other requirements could apply for legal status.

 In exchange, Americans were promised more enforcement and penalties against employers who knowingly hired unauthorized laborers. Predictably, 3 million illegal aliens and their cheerleaders got their amnesty, but the enforcement and employer sanctions proved largely ineffective and toothless. IRCA covered more than 3 million illegal aliens.

 However, IRCA demonstrated that amnesties incentivize further waves of illegal immigration and exacerbate the problem.

 Approximately 2 million illegal aliens failed to qualify and remained unauthorized after IRCA, and the illegal alien population in the U.S. continued to grow rapidly in subsequent decades, reaching an estimated 18.6 million as Donald Trump began his second term in early 2025 – a ninefold increase since the late 1980s.

 The proponents of the Sanchez amnesty attempt to deflect criticism by arguing that, because Spain has implemented six amnesties between 1986 and 2005, the latest amnesty should not raise alarm bells.

 However, the previous amnesties were smaller and more restrictive.

 Moreover, the very fact that Spain granted amnesty to illegal migrants so many times in itself clearly shows that, as in the American case, amnesty drives more illegal migration (which the anti-borders crowd takes advantage of to argue for new amnesties).

 But, perhaps for the Spanish left, the predictable, illegal-migration-incentivizing failure of amnesty is a feature, not a bug?

 The promoters of the Spanish amnesty are framing it in both humanitarian terms – with Prime Minister Sanchez claiming it represents “dignity, community and justice” – and as a supposed boon to Spain’s economy.

 But Spain’s former Equality Minister and far-left Member of the European Parliament, Irene Montero, revealed that the real motivation was nakedly and cynically political, saying “of course we want them [amnestied illegal aliens] to vote” and that the goal is “to change the law so they can vote.”

 Montero went so far as to say that “I wish the replacement theory were true. I hope we can sweep this country of fachas [fascists/right wingers] and racists,” It was the typical slanderous label pinned on citizens who oppose open borders and amnesty.

 Of course, in a world of rapid and visa-free travel, what happens in Spain does not stay in Spain.

 The Iberian nation, like most European countries, is part of the U.S. Visa Waiver Program. Thus, amnesty beneficiaries in Spain will be able to travel to the U.S. visa-free. Being part of the Schengen zone, they will also be able to travel with ease to other European nations.

 The loophole has already been utilized by terrorists, such as U.K. national Malik Faisal Akram, the perpetrator of a hostage crisis at Congregation Beth Israel in Colleyville, Texas, in January 2022.

 Criminals have also taken advantage of current visa-free system, such as Dominican national Joel Carmona Roa (recently arrested by ICE in New Jersey) who entered the U.S. as a Spanish citizen and was wanted in that country for raping a child. The Spanish amnesty does of course require that beneficiaries have no criminal record, but no vetting system is fool-proof and some bad actors will likely slip through the cracks.

 What Spain’s amnesty proves, above all else, is that anti-borders globalist politicians and activists simply do not care if their schemes fail or lead to greater risk and a lower quality of life for their citizens. As long as they gain political and economic benefits from harmful immigration policies and can feel good about themselves, the average citizen is thrown to the lions as collateral damage. This is as true in Spain as it is in the U.S., France, Italy, or the UK.   

 

If you take the time to read this post, the last paragraph says it all.

 

It’s Happening — Trump’s Border Wall Rising Apace

Thomas Gallatin patriotpost.us 3-26-26

While little attention has been paid to the border in recent months, the Trump administration has been busy building the border wall.

During his first term, one of President Donald Trump’s leading campaign issues — the construction of a “big, beautiful wall” along the southern border — faced loads of political opposition and judicial frustration.

By the time Joe Biden entered office, the Trump administration had only managed to construct roughly 80 miles of new border wall, as much of the energy was focused on updating the 500 miles of existing barrier.

While Trump’s dream of a southern wall never ended, it was far less of a focus during his third presidential campaign, during which he pivoted to addressing the millions of illegal aliens who entered the country through Biden’s wide-open border.

It didn’t take long for Trump to turn things around in his second term. As he put it, “All we really needed was a new president.” Illegal border crossings dropped to record lows within just a few months and have since stabilized at those record lows. For perspective, more illegal crossings occurred in one month under Biden than under Trump this entire past year.

The primary focus of the country and media when it comes to illegal immigration has been on the efforts by Immigration and Customs Enforcement to arrest, detain, and deport criminal aliens. And this is due to the tremendous success of the Trump administration’s actions on shutting down the border.

So, what about that wall? Is it still a priority?

The answer is yes. It remains a priority for the Trump administration, and its construction is progressing rapidly, likely much faster than many Americans realize.

Thanks to the passage of the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, $46.5 billion has been allocated to funding the construction of the southern border wall. Thus far, the Trump administration has awarded contracts totaling upwards of $22 billion to construction crews.

This has produced a barrier-construction rate of roughly three miles per week. Further, the Department of Homeland Security aims to construct more than 1,350 miles of border wall. U.S. Customs and Border Protection also plans to install 500 miles of water barriers, such as buoys, and smart surveillance technology along the entire wall.

CBP Commissioner Rodney Scott explained last month, “This border wall actually makes every single agent more effective. Every investment we make in infrastructure and technology across all of CBP lets the actual agent, the human being, do things that only the human being can do.”

A border barrier always made sense, despite those who pooh-poohed the concept as archaic — often from behind their own private walls. It also makes sense for the future, since Biden thoroughly demonstrated that a subsequent administration may not prevent people from illegally entering, instead throwing out the welcome mat. But welcome mats only work for openings, which Trump is quickly closing up.

Of course, the latest complaint from those opposed to a physical border wall is the supposed negative environmental impact. The Washington Post cites environmental advocates who claim the wall threatens endangered species. (Yeah, like a certain kind of coyote.)

This concern is interesting given that the same environmentalists advocate renewable energy — a much more problematic, land-consuming industry. How many birds, whales, and other animals have to die before these folks call for ending the installation of massive wind and solar farms? Furthermore, these renewables have proven to be less efficient and more costly than fossil-fuel-based power plants.

Trump’s border wall will help control not only illegal immigration but also the drug cartels. It will also help keep Americans safer — a reality we are reminded of every time an illegal alien murders an innocent victim, such as Loyola University student Sheridan Gorman, who was killed last week by an illegal from Venezuela. As Democrat Senator John Fetterman pointed out in chastising his own party, “Why can’t we just talk about that life lost? Why can’t we just acknowledge that this is a serious, serious failure?” He added, “Why can’t you just agree that if you’re breaking the law and you’re already here illegally, deport them?”

Gorman, Laken Riley, and many others are why building a border wall matters. It’s first and foremost about the federal government doing its job to protect American citizens. Thankfully, Donald Trump understands that and is getting the job done.

 

These disgusting horrific events are the tragic consequences of a failed immigration system.

 

Three infuriating things about Sheridan Gorman’s alleged killer

Believe it or not, these maddening facts are on top of the fact that Jose Medina, the man charged with the 18-year-old’s murder, is an illegal alien.

Andrea Widburg | March 25, 2026 www.americanthinker.com

On March 19, Sheridan Gorman, an 18-year-old freshman at Loyola University in Chicago, was murdered when she and her friends went out to spot the northern lights. A masked gunman randomly shot her in the back of her head and neck. Using CC cameras, the cops eventually located and arrested Jose Medina, an illegal alien who entered the U.S. under Biden, was detained and released, and then failed to appear in court on shoplifting charges.

The reason I haven’t commented on the story is that it’s so sadly common that I couldn’t think of anything to add. It’s becoming a dog bites man story: “Illegal alien who entered the country under Biden ends a young American’s life.” Same old story, and then the Democrats come out and blame the victim (which we’ve always been told you cannot do), or they blame Trump, or, of course, they blame the gun. The illegal alien is absolved from responsibility.

My commentary would be too simple for a post: Allowing unvetted illegal aliens into the country is a terrible idea. Gun control does not stop bad people from doing bad things. The killer is entirely responsible for this foul deed, but I also blame those who opened the border, since this murder would not have happened but for the Democrats’ aggressively violating U.S. immigration laws.

The reason I’m posting today is that there’s more to the story, and it’s utterly infuriating.

The first maddening thing is that Medina missed his first court appearance because he’s being hospitalized (at taxpayer expense, of course) with tuberculosis: (X Video)

Tuberculosis is not an inconsequential disease. Around 1900, tuberculosis was annually responsible for 10-12% of all deaths in America. Translated into today’s population numbers, that would be over 34 million TB-related deaths a year. The number dropped significantly by the 1940s thanks to better treatment (this is a fascinating first-hand autobiography about having TB in the 1930s, written by the author of the Mrs. Piggle Wiggle children’s books), but it was still a devastating and deadly disease.

The scourge of TB was just one of the reasons that immigrants to America were required to go through formal immigration processes, the most famous taking place at Ellis Island off the coast of New York. This was one way to keep deadly diseases from entering our country.

What really changed things was the advent of antibiotics. Then, TB seemed kind of irrelevant...that is, until AIDS and an enormous number of drug abusers who failed to follow through on their antibiotic treatments. Suddenly, TB was back, and many strains were drug-resistant. It’s still treatable, but it takes more work, more time, more medicine, and more money. And Jose Medina, illegal alien and accused killer, is sucking up that labor, time, medicine, and money.

Here’s the second maddening thing. It’s entirely possible that this TB-infected illegal alien is a Tren de Aragua member who slaughtered Sheridan Gorman as part of a gang initiation:  (X Video)

And now, the third maddening thing: The Loyola campus newspaper apologized for how it reported Sheridan Gorman’s death. It didn’t get her name or age wrong. It didn’t misstate the date or manner of her death. No.

The problem, according to the editor of the Loyola Phoenix, is that it referred to Medina, a TB-infected illegal alien (which is the proper statutory term for a person illegally in this country), as...an “illegal immigrant.” Indeed, the original (and accurate) title of the Phoenix report was “Immigrant Man Charged in Murder of Sheridan Gorman, DHS Involved.”

But that was wrong. So wrong. The updated report, found here, is entitled “Charges Filed Against Man Arrested in Murder of Sheridan Gorman,” making no reference to his immigration status or DHS. Additionally, the first paragraph describes Medina as a “Rogers Park Resident.” Only in the third paragraph does it delicately say he “was living in the United States illegally.”

The editor’s note is almost as long as the article. Regarding the changed language, it says:        

...in the body of the original post, we described the man who was charged as an “illegal immigrant,” using language provided by the Department of Homeland Security. That language does not align with Associated Press style, nor does it align with the values of this newspaper.

If you’re wondering what those values are, the editors (presumably led by Lilli Malone, the white, female editor-in-chief) explain in the most groveling terms:

No human’s existence is illegal, and we quickly changed our wording to reflect that.

We acknowledge the harm such language can cause and the power and importance of the words we choose to use. We deeply regret these errors...

Jonathan Turley has the perfect riposte: (X Video)

If you’re wondering about the collapse of journalism in America, this is it, writ large. These are the graduates who staff America’s newsrooms: Truly awful middle-class Marxists, indoctrinated in America’s academic institutions.

Sheridan Gorman’s death was a completely preventable tragedy. And everything else—the alleged killer’s illegal presence here, his bringing in a deadly disease, his possible gang membership, and a university newspaper’s anguished apology for calling him what he is—explains how this preventable tragedy happened.

 

The problem of 'immigration' has destroyed nations in the past, it continues today worldwide. Let US hope we do not fall for the same reason.

 

Trump Wants Immigration Enforcement Optics Corrected

Thomas Gallatin patriotpost.us 3-25-26

The question is not how far deportations should go. It’s how to correct the Left’s negative framing of immigration enforcement.

The key term is “mass deportations,” which President Donald Trump has identified as having created problematic and negative optics for his immigration enforcement policy.

According to reports, Trump became convinced through conversations with his wife, Melania, and other advisers like Chief of Staff Susan Wiles that his administration’s immigration enforcement had effectively gone too far, at least with the broad policy optics of “mass deportations,” and his immigration policy was souring on the American public.

Instead, Trump wants to refocus his policy messaging on arresting the “bad guys,” or, as Border Czar Tom Homan has repeatedly emphasized, have ICE target the “worst of the worst.” As Trump put it, “We’ve got to focus on the criminals.”

Following the confrontations in Minneapolis between immigration enforcement officers and anti-ICE activists, which left two agitators dead, the Trump administration has struggled to address a growing negative mainstream media framing of its immigration enforcement.

It helped to create a window for Democrat lawmakers to exploit in their demand for ridiculous and radical enforcement changes for ICE. Indeed, Senate Democrats have succeeded for a month now in shutting down the Department of Homeland Security as they seek to leverage the negative perception of ICE to gain concessions from Republicans and the Trump administration.

Trump’s removal of DHS Secretary Kristi Noem, as well as Border Patrol commander at large Greg Bovino, was a not-so-subtle acknowledgement that while they met expectations when it came to getting results in tracking down, arresting, and deporting criminal illegal aliens, they had failed in effectively responding to the Democrats’ and Leftmedia’s framing of immigration enforcement.

In fact, months ago, Homan warned that leaning too hard on a wide net, a mass deportation approach, would end up backfiring on the positive political capital Trump had built up against the Biden administration’s willful negligence on immigration and its de facto open-border policy.

With Trump tasking Homan to take over ICE operations in Minneapolis and tapping Senator Markwayne Mullin to head DHS, he’s aiming to reframe the optics on his immigration enforcement policy, not change his original strategy — the targeting of criminal illegal aliens. As White House spokeswoman Abigail Jackson explained, “Nobody is changing the Administration’s immigration enforcement agenda. President Trump’s highest priority has always been the deportation of illegal alien criminals who endanger American communities.”

Mullin also tacitly identified the problem of negative optics surrounding ICE, stating, “My goal in six months is that we’re not in the lead story every day.”

According to a recent Washington Post/ABC News poll, some 58% of respondents agreed with the statement that “Trump is going too far” with deportations. Just a month prior, 48% of respondents saw it that way. Given the actual data and success of Trump’s immigration and border enforcement, and the major benefits it has brought, with crime down by a significant amount across the country, it’s not Trump’s policy that was the problem; it’s that his administration had allowed the Democrats and the mainstream media to negatively frame his administration’s enforcement.

It’s unfortunate that months ago, when a disagreement arose within the White House over how best to focus on immigration enforcement, Noem’s hard-nosed, in-your-face messaging approach apparently won out over Homan’s advice of a more low-key but targeted operations prioritizing the arrest and removal of criminal illegals.

With midterms fast approaching and Republican lawmakers struggling to find an edge over Democrats on popular legislation like the SAVE Act, which the vast majority of Americans support, taking the issue of ICE enforcement off the front page should help GOP candidates in November.

As frustrating as it can be at times, how a policy is framed and packaged for the American public is just as important, if not more so, than its actual implementation. In politics, whoever wins the optics battle usually wins the issue.