In a world where logic seemingly takes a back seat, some would say it’s hardly surprising to see controversy over the deportation of an illegal immigrant from El Salvador. The tale unfolds with a certain man, a purported member of the notorious MS-13 gang, who was living in Maryland—not because he legally belonged there, but because he chose to be there illegally. Despite his contentious background, there appears to be an odd narrative, almost comedic in its absurdity, that he was some sort of misunderstood Chicago Bulls fan, caught in a bizarre conspiracy.
Stephen Miller, the Deputy Chief of Staff for Policy and Homeland Security Advisor, didn’t mince words on the matter. He was quick to remind everyone that this individual was, by all legal standards, a resident of El Salvador and not an honorary “Cleveland man,” as some creative headlines might suggest. Sure, wearing a Bulls hat might make him seem like just another sports enthusiast, but being declared a gang member by law enforcement and multiple immigration judges paints quite a different picture. And let’s not forget the nod of agreement from the president of El Salvador himself.
This situation continues to unravel with no shortage of irony. Imagine the Democrats’ reaction, reaching near hysteria as they rally around the rights of someone quite far removed from being a model citizen. If they keep aligning themselves with individuals like our deported friend here, they might soon find their support base shrinking to just confirmed MS-13 members, leaving them with an eclectic, albeit concerning, group of supporters. It’s amusing, if not a bit worrying, to see where misguided priorities lie.
Even amidst arguments over where our friend should have been sent—should he go to Russia or Yugoslavia perhaps—a basic truth stands out. There’s a deportation order standing against him, accompanied by claims that sending him back to El Salvador violates some legal prerogative due to non-existent gangs threatening his safety. And sure, why not send him to Haiti or Yemen if those options seem more palatable to some legal eagles? The logic seems lost in translation somewhere along the way.
Ultimately, one must consider the plight of real victims here. There are American families, lawful citizens, whose safety and peace of mind are constantly under threat due to lenient immigration policies. Miller’s sentiment seems sharp as ever, emphasizing empathy and support for American moms and dads over the welfare of those who choose to transgress the law for personal gain. It’s a simple equation, one might say: prioritize those who belong rather than lobby for those who force themselves into a society they aren’t legally part of. A bit of common sense, apparently, can go a long way.
