It appears that agitators are trying to spark confrontations with federal law enforcement that could lead to protesters being harmed, even killed, to spark outrage and support for their cause.

It’s a sick story. It sounds outrageous. But it’s true, and everything old is new again.

I saw it 40 years ago and testified about it to Congress. Today we are seeing again: Inserting American citizens into flashpoints as part of a political strategy to get people shot for the purpose of inflaming the public against a president and his policies.

The recent deaths of two Minneapolis protesters reminded me of what I had learned as a 24-year-old in the mid-1980s while infiltrating radical groups – much as people in their twenties are doing today.

JOURNALIST ATTACKED DURING MINNEAPOLIS BLOCKADE SAYS ANTI-ICE AGITATORS TRIED TO ‘DETER' THE TRUTH

Revolutionaries and insurgents create or exploit flashpoints in anticipation of getting some of their followers killed. Journalist Cam Higby has reported on this in Minneapolis. They need martyrs to spark or fuel public anger.

Facing professionally organized provocations and stressors, it was inevitable that Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and Border Patrol agents would plunge into circumstances that domestic extremists had created to provoke media outrage.

Revolutionaries call it "armed propaganda."

DAVID MARCUS: ANTI-ICE AGITATORS ADOPT PALESTINIAN TACTICS, INCLUDING MARTYRDOM

After Portland, Ore., activist Benjamin Linder was killed in Nicaragua by U.S.-backed resistance fighters, or contras, against the Soviet-backed Sandinista regime in 1987, the House Subcommittee on Western Hemisphere affairs held a hearing.

Linder was armed with an AK-47 at the time of his death. Sympathizers portrayed him as a peaceful humanitarian worker. I was called as a witness.

"For two years," I testified, a group called Witness for Peace had "anticipated the killing of an American citizen by the contras so that they could use his death for political propaganda. They wanted someone like Benjamin Linder to die."

FOX NEWS DIGITAL ANALYSIS: HOW MINNEAPOLIS AGITATOR NETWORKS USE INSURGENCY TACTICS TO HINDER ICE

That was hard to say, not only because it sounded so outrageous, but because I was sitting with Linder’s parents in the congressional hearing room.

The Linders were lifetime radicals from Portland. They supported North Vietnam and the Vietcong against American troops. The mother was local leader of a group that collaborated with Soviet active measures operations against the United States. They raised their son Benjamin to place himself in mortal danger.

My impression was that they seemed less like grieving parents and more like mourners of a fallen comrade.

ANTI-ICE AGITATORS ARRESTED OUTSIDE MINNESOTA HOTEL AS POLICE DECLARE UNLAWFUL ASSEMBLY: 'NO LONGER PEACEFUL'

As college students and afterward, my friends and I had infiltrated and exposed groups across the country that supported the Central American communists. I also worked with the Nicaraguan resistance fighters against the Sandinistas.

At the hearing, I gave my eyewitness account, plus secondary reports, about how American militant leaders wanted U.S.-backed forces to kill some of their do-gooder allies.

Revolutionary insurgencies require martyrs to outrage and inspire.

DEPUTY AG DETAILS 'MASSIVE UNDERGROUND FRAUD NETWORK' ALLEGEDLY BEHIND MINNEAPOLIS ANTI-ICE PUSH

"It is obvious that Witness for Peace leaders are aware of the military role they are playing in Central America," I testified.

"On one of my trips with the Nicaraguan Democratic Force (FDN) resistance in 1985, I asked several commanders and fighters if the presence of Americans was having any effect on their ability to fight the Sandinista army," I said in my testimony. "The answer was positive: The FDN fighters were afraid of hurting any Americans working with the Sandinistas for fear of a backlash of public opinion in the United States."

At a 1995 Witness for Peace meeting in Boulder, Colo., I learned that the group was planning to expand operations to El Salvador, only to abort three days later when its guerrilla friends murdered four off-duty U.S. Marines and two other Americans.

CLICK HERE FOR MORE FOX NEWS OPINION

I testified that in a later New York meeting, we heard "that some of the group’s leaders privately expressed hope that some of their activists in Nicaragua would get shot by the resistance. If a Witness for Peace activist was killed, they reasoned, American public opinion would turn against the contras."

The Boston Globe quoted another WfP activist, a lawyer from Bangor, Maine, as saying that "Some of us have got to die" at the hands of U.S.-backed forces. "If some of us die, we bring the cause home to our countrymen in a very personal way," he said. "If that’s what it will take, that’s what it will take."

With Linder’s death, I told Congress, the American radicals "finally had a martyr. They got their televised interviews. They have their congressional hearing. They got their wish."

Which brings us back to Minneapolis today. America must face the fact that organizers are out there to enrage, demoralize and manipulate us all. They don’t care about the human fallout.

The immigration debate is focused almost entirely on the border, but the real failure happens after entry, inside taxpayer-funded benefits systems that rarely demand proof. While enforcement dominates the headlines, billions of dollars quietly move through Medicaid, housing and social services with weak identity verification, inconsistent eligibility checks, and little accountability. This is where the system breaks down: Americans work harder, taxpayer dollars move faster and fraud thrives in the absence of enforcement.

While Democrats and much of the mainstream media obsess over ICE enforcement and border encounters, a far more serious failure is unfolding inside Medicaid offices, housing authorities and social services agencies nationwide. Federal data show that Medicaid improper payments of our tax dollars reached $37.4 billion in fiscal year 2025, with error rates climbing above 6%, up from $31.1 billion the year before. Across federal healthcare programs, improper payments now approach $95.5 billion.

They are the taxpayer dollars of hardworking Americans paid out without adequate documentation, verified eligibility, or proof that payments met program rules. Federal auditors report that over 77% of improper payments stem from documentation gaps unsubstantiated by administrators. While not every improper payment constitutes fraud, weak identity verification and minimal oversight create incentives for abuse by both providers and recipients. States lacking robust verification systems are far more likely to issue improper or fraudulent payments, a risk repeatedly flagged by federal watchdogs. This is the predictable outcome of systems that prioritize rapid enrollment over verification, expansion over accountability, and optics over enforcement.

CONGRESS OPENS ‘INDUSTRIAL-SCALE FRAUD’ PROBE IN MINNESOTA, WARNS WALZ DEMANDS ARE ‘JUST THE BEGINNING’

Minnesota has become ground zero for an epic collapse in benefits oversight. Since 2018, approximately half of $18 billion in federally funded social service spending has come under scrutiny amid allegations of fraud tied to Medicaid, housing stabilization services, and disability care programs. Prosecutors allege schemes involving billing for services were never provided, shell providers approved with minimal vetting, and even after red flags were raised, state agencies continued payments. The Feeding Our Future case alone resulted in more than 50 federal convictions and hundreds of millions in fraudulent claims, making it one of the largest nonprofit fraud prosecutions in U.S. history. This is the predictable result of ignored audits and failed oversight.

California is another stark example of taxpayer fraud when verification is optional. A federal Office of Inspector General audit found the state improperly claimed more than $52 million in federal Medicaid reimbursements for illegal aliens because California failed to check eligibility and enforce basic verification. That same breakdown appears in homelessness spending, where federal auditors warned that hundreds of millions of dollars were at risk given weak controls, a warning recently highlighted by a federal criminal complaint alleging a California nonprofit fraudulently obtained $23 million in federal homelessness funds. Instead of proving eligibility, the system assumed eligibility and taxpayers paid the price.

SEC SCOTT BESSENT: HOW TO STOP FRAUD IN MINNESOTA—AND ACROSS THE COUNTRY

Maine shows the same dangerous pattern. A federal Office of Inspector General audit found at least $45.6 million due to improper Medicaid payments driven by lack of compliance of eligibility checks and inadequate documentation. Maine agreed to repay up to $28.7 million in federal funds, but oversight failures continued. Just last month, state investigators also found that Gateway Community Services overbilled MaineCare by more than $1 million, triggering payment suspensions and investigation amid suspected fraud.

WALZ’S MINNESOTA MESS COULD SPARK THE TOUGHEST FRAUD REFORMS IN DECADES

These cases are only the ones that were investigated, but showcase a national pattern where, when benefits systems are designed to move money quickly and verification is treated as optional, waste and fraud are inevitable. Americans feel this disconnect, and the data confirms it. A Reuters/Ipsos poll released in January 2026 found that 53% of Americans say immigration policy is moving in the wrong direction, outweighing approval. At the same time, Pew Research reports only 17% of Americans trust the federal government in Washington to do what is right. That distrust is not just about immigration, but reflects a broader belief that government has lost control, spending taxpayer dollars without audits, accountability, or consequences. The political class is stuck in denial. Democrats often frame audits and eligibility enforcement as cruel or discriminatory, while some Republicans tout it as the "cost of doing business." Both positions are a losing message for taxpayers who see massive fraud with little oversight. Protecting public trust in social safety nets requires pro-taxpayer, pro-rule-of-law enforcement.

CLICK HERE FOR MORE FOX NEWS OPINION

We must enforce the same standards working Americans face daily when they apply for jobs, loans, or any government services. Identity verification, eligibility checks and continuous audits are the bare minimum of responsible governance.

Arguing over border enforcement while ignoring the benefits systems only deepens the chaos. You cannot control immigration while refusing to control the programs that quietly finance disorder. Immigration did not spiral because Americans demanded order — it spiraled because government stopped demanding proof.

CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM MEHEK COOKE

Our broken immigration system is a stain on both major political parties and leaders, who have instead burdened us with massive debt, the world’s most expensive healthcare and medicines, an uninspired, second-tier public education system and policies that actually incentivize illegal crossings of our borders.

Ronald Reagan would be appalled at both parties, and George Washington would say he warned us as we find ourselves at yet another disconcerting moment in American history.

Today’s crisis is one of our own making: a battle over immigration enforcement in Minnesota — a low-crime state estimated to be home to just 100,000 undocumented people, about half the national average per capita and nowhere close to the millions residing in sunny Texas and Florida. Needless to say, it’s not a stretch to believe Operation Metro Surge is a campaign of provocation and retribution rather than resolution. It’s also not a stretch to contend that common-sense Americans (myself included) believe the porous southern border enabled by former President Biden was as absurd and unreasonable as attempting to deport 14 million undocumented people as current President Donald Trump is endeavoring to accomplish at this very moment.

TIM WALZ ACCUSES TRUMP OF 'ORGANIZED BRUTALITY' IN IMMIGRATION CRACKDOWN, SAYS ICE TACTICS ARE 'UN-AMERICAN'

While we should all celebrate the removal of undocumented criminals from our streets, the misguided and mismanaged effort in Minneapolis will be remembered as one of the most horrifying abuses of American law and decency in my lifetime. It killed two American citizens in cold blood and trampled on the civil rights of countless others, including multiple off-duty police officers in the Twin Cities who were accosted by roving, masked, ID-less, armed ICE agents because they were brown, or black, or spoke with an accent. But the operation did accomplish something that had seemed impossible just a month ago: a progressive left unified with gun-rights advocates, libertarians, police chiefs, rule-of-law Republicans and even a Republican senator retiring at the end of his term and liberated to speak the truth.

While the America to which Ronald Reagan aspired seems like a distant dream, I believe the better angels of America’s massive majority recognize the horrifying consequences posed by incompetent leadership and moral breaks in our national fabric.

Some on the left view Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) as an occupying force — an agency to be resisted at every turn. Others on the right see local pushback as undermining lawful immigration enforcement and local public safety.

But to the massive majority, this binary is a false choice.

JONATHAN TURLEY: DEMOCRAT POLITICIANS ARE RISKING LIVES WITH RECKLESS ANTI-ICE RHETORIC

The executive branch has constitutional authority to enforce immigration law, and that mandate doesn’t magically disappear because state or local officials object. That’s why some level of cooperation — even if reluctant — makes sense. It prevents chaotic clashes between different authorities, allows shared information and oversight, and ensures enforcement actions are transparent. Refusing to cooperate entirely only heightens tensions and leaves communities less protected and more polarized.

Yes, cooperation must be thoughtful, conditional and rooted in respect for civil liberties. It should not be blind support for every tactic an agency employs. But neither should it be principled obstruction that fuels distrust and diminishes accountability.

Democrats and Republicans alike should want cooperation where it reinforces constitutional order, protects public safety and ensures due process. That’s not capitulation — it’s common sense governance.

DAVID MARCUS: SPURNING TRUMP MEANS MAYOR JACOB FREY OWNS MINNEAPOLIS MESS

Let’s be clear: the fallout from this operation has been horrifying. People have died. Families have been torn apart. Young children have been detained. These are real harms that demand accountability and reform — not spin and not deflection.

At the same time, dismissing all enforcement as illegitimate invites lawlessness and undermines the very framework of the rule of law, due process and judicial review that protects civil liberties in our country. We don’t want an abdication of enforcement authority, rather a reimagined approach that respects constitutional due process and civil rights.

This is where local cooperation can actually be a force for reform. When state and city officials engage with federal agents, they can help ensure enforcement measures are proportionate, targeted and transparent — rather than arbitrary and alienating.

BIDEN SPEAKS OUT AGAINST IMMIGRATION CRACKDOWN IN MINNESOTA, SAYS IT GOES AGAINST AMERICAN VALUES

But we’ll keep finding ourselves in this destructive battle until we address the root causes once and for all. And there is more common ground on immigration policy than many recognize. I believe:

1. Most of us want a lawful, orderly immigration system that attracts and welcomes high potential contributors while offering reasonable refuge to the oppressed.

2. Most of us want the quick removal of undocumented, convicted criminals, and the application of due process, human dignity and judicial review before the deportation of others.

WHY TRUMP SENDING TOM HOMAN TO MINNESOTA IS A STROKE OF ABSOLUTE GENIUS

3. Most of us want honesty and accountability from federal, state, and local agencies charged with enforcing our laws and protesters who exercise their rights peacefully.

4. Most of us want to fix the broken system with majority support for: Changing our asylum laws, which currently require asylum seekers, legitimate or not, to physically set foot in the United States. That means our law essentially requires an illegal border crossing to legally apply for asylum. Why not require applications to be filed at one of our consulates or embassies around the world before crossing our border?

Devising a pathway to citizenship for those contributing to America, who confess to illegally crossing our borders, who pay a fine to the US Treasury, and who fulfill citizenship education.

SEN RUBEN GALLEGO: I WON'T FUND A ROGUE ICE THAT SHOOTS FIRST AND CALLS IT LAW ENFORCEMENT

Raising the physical bar for illegal immigration and lowering the administrative bar for legal immigration. We should be recruiting the world’s best and brightest while remaining a place of refuge for the oppressed.

CLICK HERE FOR MORE FOX NEWS OPINION

In the meantime, we must come to some resolution on the leadership and tactics of ICE and uncooperative sanctuary states and cities. Minnesota leaders have rightly voiced their concerns about the violence and societal disruptions tied to these enforcement actions. These voices matter and should be part of the national conversation on reform.

But full resistance — refusing any cooperation — risks turning legitimate grievance into fruitless confrontation. That’s why cities and states should engage with enforcement agencies strategically to make immigration enforcement more just instead of creating battlegrounds that magnify mistrust.

Conflict always presents the possibility for collaboration. The current crisis shouldn’t be an end point, rather a turning point — one where Americans of all political stripes prioritize reforms and enforcement that’s lawful, humane, transparent and accountable.

It’s surely the agenda Ronald Reagan would have fought for, and one we’d be foolish not to embrace as a great nation of immigrants.

For more than a generation, American presidents talked about leadership while quietly surrendering leverage, sovereignty and deterrence. President Donald Trump is doing something different — and the foreign-policy establishment is still struggling to catch up.

Call it the Donroe Doctrine: a modern, hard-edged update of the Monroe Doctrine in which American power is unapologetically asserted, adversaries are confronted rather than managed and allies are expected to defend themselves. Since re-entering office, Trump has struck Iran’s nuclear infrastructure, forced NATO allies to rearm, challenged China’s ambitions in the Indo-Pacific and reasserted U.S. dominance in the Western Hemisphere, from Greenland to Venezuela.

To critics, these moves look erratic. Read alongside Trump’s 2025 National Security Strategy (NSS) and the newly released 2026 National Defense Strategy (NDS), however, they reveal something else entirely: a doctrine grounded in hard realism, national sovereignty and old-fashioned power politics. The Donroe Doctrine is not improvisation. It reflects deliberate choices.

America First, redefined

IRAN STRIKES COULD SIGNAL LIMITS OF BEIJING, MOSCOW’S POWER AS US FLEXES STRENGTH

The Donroe Doctrine begins with a rejection of the post–Cold War assumption that America must solve every global problem to remain secure. The 2025 NSS warns that previous administrations expanded the definition of U.S. national interest so broadly that "to focus on everything is to focus on nothing," arguing instead for a hard narrowing of what truly matters.

Under this approach, national security is defined narrowly and deliberately: defending the homeland, securing borders, protecting the economy and preserving U.S. sovereignty. This helps explain why Trump treats border security as national security, why he rejects open-ended global commitments and why he views economic strength and industrial capacity as central to power rather than ignored.

Peace through strength — not endless war

MARTIN GURRI: LET'S LOOK AT ALL THE GLOBAL BENEFITS TRUMP REAPED BY GRABBING MADURO

Trump’s critics accuse him of recklessness. His strategy documents tell a different story. The NSS makes clear a predisposition to non-interventionism, while insisting on a high bar for the use of force. The NDS puts that idea into practice: force exists to deter, to compel and — when necessary — to strike decisively in defense of vital interests, not to conduct ideological crusades or nation-building campaigns.

In Iran’s case, Trump treats the regime as a proliferation and coercion problem, not a nation-building project. Besides, his threats and strikes are finite, conditional and interest-bound — a case study in enforcement, not escalation.

That helps explain why Trump could authorize strikes against Iran’s nuclear program while simultaneously pushing diplomatic settlements elsewhere. In the Donroe Doctrine, overwhelming strength creates space for diplomacy; weakness invites escalation.

MORNING GLORY: THE PRESIDENT ENDS 2025 WITH A CLEAR DECLARATION OF THE TRUMP DOCTRINE

China as the pacing threat

The central threat in the Donroe Doctrine is clear, it is this: China is the "pacing threat."

Both the NSS and NDS identify the People’s Republic of China as the only power capable of contesting U.S. military, economic and technological dominance on a global scale. The NDS is explicit — China’s military buildup, industrial capacity and regional ambitions define the tempo of U.S. defense planning.

THE AMERICA FIRST NATIONAL SECURITY STRATEGY — THROUGH THE EYES OF 'WE THE PEOPLE'

Importantly, Trump’s doctrine does not frame conflict with China as inevitable. The goal is not regime change, humiliation or economic strangulation. It is denial — preventing Beijing from dominating the Indo-Pacific and coercing U.S. allies. Deterrence by denial along the First Island Chain, allied burden-sharing and U.S. industrial rearmament sit at the center of this approach.

Keep in mind, Trump seeks to bound China’s power, not to break China’s system. This is competition with rules — not containment without limits. As a result, Trump stresses that trade and diplomacy with China remain possible because deterrence is credible.

This is balance-of-power thinking, stripped of post–Cold War illusions.

TRUMP'S MADURO TAKEDOWN RESETS THE GLOBAL CHESSBOARD AND REASSERTS AMERICAN POWER

Allies as partners, not dependents

The doctrine is most visible in Trump’s handling of alliances. His demand that NATO allies dramatically increase defense spending is not rhetorical bluster; it reflects the NDS’ warning about a growing "simultaneity problem," in which multiple adversaries could act at once across different theaters.

The solution is not endless U.S. deployments, but capable allies who can defend their own regions with limited American support. Europe, Trump argues, has the wealth and population to deter Russia. Israel is cited in the NDS as a model ally because it defends itself. Burden-sharing is not punishment — it is the price of credibility.

Given China’s rapid naval expansion, restoring American deterrence in the Indo-Pacific ultimately comes down to shipbuilding — more hulls in the water, faster production and shipyards capable of sustaining a prolonged competition at sea.

Geography matters again

The Donroe Doctrine also restores geography to the center of U.S. strategy. The NDS calls for enforcing a Trump Corollary to the Monroe Doctrine, denying hostile powers control over strategic terrain in the Western Hemisphere.

AMB GORDON SONDLAND: TRUMP SHOWED STRENGTH IN VENEZUELA — NOW FINISH THE JOB

Greenland, the Panama Canal, maritime approaches and cartel-dominated regions are treated not as peripheral concerns, but as vital interests. Trump’s high-profile confrontation over Greenland — and his announcement of a "framework of a future deal" with NATO — follows this logic directly.

Power built at home

Finally, the Donroe Doctrine recognizes a truth forgotten since World War II: wars are won by production. Both strategies elevate the defense industrial base to strategic priority, tying economic security directly to military readiness.

CLICK HERE FOR MORE FOX NEWS OPINION

Re-shoring industry, securing critical supply chains, expanding energy production and scaling munitions are not merely economic policies. They are instruments of deterrence.

A Doctrine Takes Shape

Read together, Trump’s NSS and NDS outline a governing philosophy that is hard-headed without being reckless, nationalist without retreating from the world and forceful without drifting into endless war. The Donroe Doctrine rejects utopian idealism in favor of hard choices, clear priorities, and unapologetic American power — especially in the face of a rising China.

It unsettles Washington precisely because it restores clarity. The doctrine is stabilizing because red lines are explicit and priorities are narrow. But it is also dangerous, especially for adversaries — because ambiguity is gone, free-riding is exposed and miscalculations become far more costly.

CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM ROBERT MAGINNIS

Domestic governance and politics continue even as the world waits for President Trump’s decision on how to best defang the reckless and bloodthirsty regime that holds the Iranian population captive. No one not in the rooms with the president and his inner-most circle of advisers knows what are the options before President Trump or what our intelligence and military say and how our regional allies actually feel. It is "wilderness of mirrors" time on all things Iran.

The president’s resolute actions against Iran and Venezuela in 2025 ought to have earned him enormous credibility on national security decision unlike Presidents Joe Biden and Barack Obama, who knew only how to retreat. President 45-47 is not the retreating type. He could, of course, disappoint and do nothing about the despots terrorizing Iranians, thereby forfeiting some, if not all, of that accumulated credit from the past year. But no one can render that judgment yet although partisans on the left are eager to class him with the 44th and 46th presidents as appeasers. We have no idea how this crisis will resolve, and likely won’t for weeks, if not months.

In the meantime, the ongoing negotiations over the appropriations bill for the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) have gifted President Trump an unprecedented opportunity to turn the deep divisions over illegal immigration into a consensus-building breakthrough, one that will put his second term into the history books without equal in post World War II history. A domestic "Nixon-to-China" moment stands before him.

Hard-left Democrats are demanding their congressional members push for the effective neutering of Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) by requiring judicial warrants prior to the detention of immigrants in the country without permission—either because they crossed the border illegally as "got-aways," entered with the consent of the Biden administration as asylum or refugee seekers, or overstayed a visa.

GO BIG, THEN GO SMART: TRUMP, ICE AND THE LAW. HOW TO SKIP THE LEFT’S PR TRAP

The Democrats denied that the border could be closed but Trump has shown it can be and has been. Rather than recognize how badly Team Biden broke the immigration system, now the left now wants to deny ICE the long-standing procedures by which illegal immigrants are deported. The Republicans can never agree to this. If the Democrats shutter DHS for six months by denying the entire department funding, it will be an issue for November.

Voters, however, do not like the dragnet approach to illegal immigrants. They are fueled in their discontent by legacy media misrepresenting every case involving a sympathy-evoking migrant and by the tragedies in Minnesota.

It is pretty easy to see what super-majorities want: the rapid deportation of criminals and violent immigrants — including those not yet convicted but arrested for suspected criminal behavior. Easy to see but very difficult to execute.

DEMOCRATS CAN RUN, BUT THEY CAN'T HIDE: AN IMMIGRATION RECKONING IS NEXT IN 2028

Voters are not generally in favor of deporting hardworking migrants who came here and found work. A very loud but small slice of the right wants deportation of 100% of people in the country illegally, but that policy will boomerang in November.

America is a welcoming country, especially for the law-abiding and hard-working. Now is the moment to continue to demonstrate resolve at the border, focus on who must be deported and, crucially, compassion for specific categories of illegal immigrants determined to build a legitimate life here.

President Trump should go on the offensive with the immigration equivalent of The First Step Act success from his first term. The president can demand right now that the final appropriations bill taking shape for DHS to maintain the current deportation process —including administrative warrants for detention— while fully funding the Department of Homeland Security, with some additional sections of new law.

THE SUPREME COURT IS GOING TO GIVE PRESIDENT TRUMP A MAJOR OPENING ON IMMIGRATION

He should flip the messaging script and demand of the Congress that this appropriations bill regularize all "Dreamers" —illegal immigrants brought to the country as minors— as well as other discrete categories of illegal immigrants, such as those who can present a record of work and tax returns for ten years with no arrests, and all illegal immigrants over the age of 50 who do not have an arrest on their records. Immunity from deportation by categories, based on common sense, makes the operational workload of DHS smaller while reducing the political cost of unpopular deportations of low-skilled but dedicated labor that hardly anyone objects to when they are on the receiving end of the services provided by those migrants.

All the Dreamers —which is an "80-20" common sense issue— and other categories of illegal immigrants who should be "regularized," should receive a five year "blue card," a status renewable every five years provided the holder does not violate the criminal law.

The compromise President Trump puts forward should also articulate that there is no path to citizenship for anyone who entered the country illegally and thus the right to vote will never be theirs. This is a bedrock principle as important as the wall along the border: No one should be able to break the law and thereby gain the right to citizenship. Residency on terms of good behavior, yes, but voting and entitlements: No. A hard no.

TRUMP’S IMMIGRATION CRACKDOWN SPARKS BIPARTISAN CALL FOR ASYLUM FIXES, PROTECTION FOR LONGTIME MIGRANTS

"Regularization" should not be "amnesty" of the sort President Ronald Reagan delivered in 1986 which proved to be a disaster. A grant of regularization to an individual should explicitly bar that individual from qualifying another person outside the country for favorable status in any application for immigration benefits.

Democrats have unwittingly placed illegal immigrants front and center as the only issue presently impeding the ordinary operations of the government. President Trump should take the spotlight the Democrats have created on DHS funding and turn it on to a demand that cannot be rejected. Trump needs to make the Democrats an offer they cannot refuse.

CLICK HERE FOR MORE FOX NEWS OPINION

Most Americans are not eager to eject Dreamers or illegal immigrants who have been here for decades working to build their families and the country. Most Americans are also not sympathetic to the millions who rushed the border during the collapse of border controls during the Biden years.

By taking large numbers of illegal immigrants who arrived long before Biden off the target list for deportation, ICE can focus on the actual problem, which is, in the minds of most Americans, violent and usually criminally violent young men as well as illegal immigrants who arrived in the past five years and immediately imposed enormous costs on the social safety net.

President Trump has proven himself completely capable of managing international crises and legislative achievement at the same time. Even as the crisis continues to unfold in Iran, he should demand that Congress do more than fund the Department of Homeland Security. He should also make the bill providing the funds a first step towards a rational set of rules for the tens of millions of people in the country without any right to be here.

By providing "regularization" for a few million of the tens of millions of illegal immigrants in the country, President Trump will again underscore that he is the president who stands for "common sense." He’s the president who sealed the border. He can also be the one to finally settle the issue of the Dreamers and long-settled immigrants who have been here for decades and decades working and building lives.

Hugh Hewitt is a Fox News contributor and host of "The Hugh Hewitt Show" heard weekday afternoons from 3 PM to 6 PM ET on the Salem Radio Network, and simulcast on Salem News Channel. Hugh drives Americans home on the East Coast and to lunch on the West Coast on over 400 affiliates nationwide, and on all the streaming platforms where SNC can be seen. He is a frequent guest on the Fox News Channel’s news roundtable, hosted by Bret Baier weekdays at 6pm ET. A son of Ohio and a graduate of Harvard College and the University of Michigan Law School, Hewitt has been a Professor of Law at Chapman University’s Fowler School of Law since 1996 where he teaches Constitutional Law. Hewitt launched his eponymous radio show from Los Angeles in 1990. Hewitt has frequently appeared on every major national news television network, hosted television shows for PBS and MSNBC, written for every major American paper, has authored a dozen books and moderated a score of Republican candidate debates, most recently the November 2023 Republican presidential debate in Miami and four Republican presidential debates in the 2015-16 cycle. Hewitt focuses his radio show and his column on the Constitution, national security, American politics and the Cleveland Browns and Guardians. Hewitt has interviewed tens of thousands of guests from Democrats Hillary Clinton and John Kerry to Republican Presidents George W. Bush and Donald Trump over his 40 years in broadcasting. This column previews the lead story that will drive his radio/ TV show today.

CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM HUGH HEWITT

Authorities in Arizona confirmed late Sunday that they are searching for the mother of NBC "Today" co-host Savannah Guthrie.

Nancy Guthrie, 84, was last seen Saturday evening at her residence near East Skyline Drive and North Campbell Avenue, north of Tucson, around 9:30 p.m., according to the Pima County Sheriff’s Department.

A relative of Guthrie’s contacted authorities around noon Sunday to report her missing, Pima County Sheriff Chris Nanos said.

NBC'S SAVANNAH GUTHRIE SHRUGS OFF BIAS ACCUSATIONS AGAINST JOURNALISTS IN CONVERSATION WITH MONICA LEWINSKY

"We’re pretty much just throwing everything at this that we can. Guthrie is 84 years old and is not of good physical health, and so naturally that’s a great concern," Nanos told reporters later Sunday, adding that the scene at the house raised "some concerns for us as well."

"This is very concerning to us. We don’t typically get the sheriff out at a scene like this. But it’s very concerning what we’re learning from the house," Nanos said. "And so we’ll just continue. The detective’s homicide team is out right now looking at the scene as well."

Nanos confirmed the woman is Savannah Guthrie’s mother. He said she is of "good sound mind" but has physical ailments that limit her mobility.

The sheriff said investigators are not ruling out foul play and noted that the circumstances were serious enough to involve the department’s criminal investigation unit.

From TikTok to OnlyFans, adult content creators are seeking O-1 visas to work in the United States — a move former OnlyFans star Nala Ray told Fox News Digital should not qualify as "extraordinary ability" under U.S. immigration law.

Ray, who was once one of the top creators on OnlyFans, left the website two years ago after turning to Christianity. She spoke with Fox News Digital about why she doesn't think OnlyFans creators should receive visas for their work.

"OnlyFans work and adult content is not real work and shouldn't be allowed, even to cross our borders to get even more infiltrated into our society," said Ray. 

"I don’t see adult content as good work," Ray continued. However, she added that other kinds of online content creation are legitimate. "I do think that other people from other countries who do come to do real work on social media here, is a good thing. I don’t see why we should ever ban something like that because being on social media is hard work sometimes. It really can be, and great things have actually come of that."

FLORIDA GOP CANDIDATE WANTS 50% 'SIN TAX' ON ONLYFANS CREATORS TO FIGHT 'CULTURAL DEGENERACY'

The visas are intended for an individual who possesses "extraordinary ability in the sciences, arts, education, business or athletics, or who has a demonstrated record of extraordinary achievement in the motion picture or television industry and has been recognized nationally or internationally for those achievements," according to U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS).

A U.S. employer, U.S. agent or foreign employer through a U.S. agent needs to file on the person's behalf, along with required evidence, the USCIS also says. 

Ray made it clear that OnlyFans models should not qualify for these visas.

"I absolutely would advocate for a ban on that. I think it's unethical to think that OnlyFans work is actual work and doing anything for our country," she said to Fox News Digital.

PASTOR’S CHILD TURNED ONLYFANS MODEL MOVES AWAY FROM SIN TO SALVATION: ‘THIS IS NOT WHERE YOU WANNA GO’

"A lot of OnlyFans creators do make a lot of money, but that doesn't necessarily mean that it's going towards the good of our country," Ray said.

Ray also spoke to the detriments of OnlyFans as a former "0.01%" top creator on the platform.

"OnlyFans destroys relationships, it destroys friendships," said Ray. "People have changed so much in society, both men and women, because of the effects of OnlyFans and doing adult content."

She also shared that the cost of maintaining success on the platform is high. "I felt like I was always taking risks and not always good ones."

Ray added to Fox News Digital: "Once you start making a certain amount of money, like, I feel as though it could be kind of downward spiral from even things like your mental health, relationships that you're building, and you would do anything to maintain that kind of money."

"I do understand and know for a fact from being in the industry, a lot of men and women who are doing that kind of work are on drugs or drinking or, you know, some type of substance abuse, and that's dangerous."

US FREEZES ALL VISA PROCESSING FOR 75 COUNTRIES, INCLUDING SOMALIA, RUSSIA, IRAN

Ray explained that this issue goes beyond providing visas.

"If we were putting God first, none of this lust or pornography or adult film content would be what we want for our own households, what we want in our lives," she said.

Ray said faith and "serving the Lord" would result in a decline in adult industry content. "I do think that we would just see a massive revival if God was more centered in our relationships and in our day-to-day [lives]."

Pennsylvania-based immigration attorney Raymond Lahoud told Fox News Digital, "O-1B visas have been dominated by influencers and content creators."

He added, "We see applicants who appear on various platforms with millions of followers and earning millions of dollars."

ONLYFANS SURGE ON COLLEGE CAMPUSES SPARKS NEW SAFETY FEARS AS EXPERTS WARN OF HIDDEN DANGERS

"If a potential non-immigrant who is the world's most famous OnlyFans star meets the O-1B requirements, who am I to judge?  We're getting that visa," he added.

Ray disagreed with this statement.

"I think that's very shallow to think that just because somebody makes a lot of money that they can be welcomed into our country, but to not even recognize the fact that they're doing something very harmful to our day-to-day society. It's not bringing anything. Good. It's not growing anyone, it's not helping us as a society in any way."

Ray concluded by calling OnlyFans a "societal harm."

"I do think it would be catastrophic if that was continually allowed into our country."

OnlyFans did not respond to Fox News Digital's request for comment.

Fox News' Alba Cuebas-Fantauzzi and Ashley J. DiMella contributed to this report.