In a recent New York Times opinion piece, M. Gessen recoiled in horror at the White House’s launch of Aliens.gov.
The author branded the site, which highlights immigration enforcement actions and uses straightforward language about those who enter the country unlawfully, as “grotesque,” “fascist-tinged,” and a deliberate provocation meant to incite violence.
This reaction says far more about the critics than about the site. Opposition to robust immigration enforcement is increasingly driven not by data, law or outcomes, but by aesthetics and childlike emotions. Trendy euphemisms like “undocumented newcomer” or “migrant community member” may sound compassionate in editorial boardrooms, but they fail utterly when measured against what’s needed for a safe, orderly and prosperous nation.
The term “alien” is not a slur invented for rhetorical effect, nor is it meant to describe one’s value as a human being. It is the foundational legal term enshrined in the Immigration and Nationality Act, the statute governing U.S. immigration policy for decades. Section 101(a)(3) states plainly: “The term ‘alien’ means any person not a citizen or national of the United States.”
Federal courts, the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services policy manual, and enforcement operations rely on this terminology because law demands clarity, not sentiment. Attempts to scrub “alien” from statutes and news reporting in favor of “noncitizen” or “foreign national” are cosmetic exercises in political correctness. A country that cannot name the legal category of persons subject to its immigration laws has already begun to surrender control of its borders.
Recent enforcement successes demonstrate why such clarity and resolve matter. Thanks to the work of Immigration and Customs Enforcement and Border Patrol operations, southwest border apprehensions have plummeted more than 90% from Biden-era peaks in multiple recent months, with stretches of zero releases into the interior.
Targeted interior actions have removed thousands of individuals with criminal convictions for serious offenses: assault, DUI, gang membership, and more. These are not abstractions, but concrete gains in public safety for American communities long burdened by the consequences of lackadaisical enforcement.
Yet so-called “elite” critics focus on word choice and tone. They lament “dehumanizing rhetoric” while ignoring the very real humans victimized by those who should never have been here. The emotional framing in news reports conveniently omits that lawful residents and citizens are victimized when repeat offenders are shielded by sanctuary policies and released into communities.
Emotional appeals treat every deportation as a tragedy rather than the routine exercise of sovereignty it represents. Nations maintain immigration laws precisely because porous borders come with painful consequences: legal workers replaced by cheap foreign labor, strains on housing and welfare systems, and the risk of injury or death from criminal aliens wreaking havoc in our communities.
This is no way to run a city, state or country. Governance by feelings produces predictably toxic results. Look no further than the immigration policies of the Biden years as evidence. Prosperous societies thrive on order, not performative compassion that collapses when put into practice.
The Aliens.gov site does not “dehumanize” anyone. It states a legal fact and shows results. Illegal aliens do not have an inherent right to remain in the United States against the will of its people and their elected government. Deportation is not punishment for existing; it is the consequence of violating immigration laws that every sovereign nation enforces.
Nations that prioritize emotional comfort over enforcement invite mayhem. The United States has tried the laissez-faire approach to border enforcement for decades; the results have been unacceptable surges in crossings, crime spikes, and preventable deaths.
True compassion lies in upholding the rule of law so that legal immigration remains a valued privilege, not an overwhelmed free-for-all. Enforcement protects the integrity of that system. It deters future violations and restores public confidence. Rhetoric that prioritizes feelings over facts, appearances over statistics, and performative outrage over results undermines the hard work of securing the republic.
America can welcome a manageable number of immigrants who follow its processes while firmly removing those who do not. That balance is not cruelty, but governance. The law calls them aliens for a reason. We need to stop apologizing for the language of our democratically enacted laws just because a loud minority with bad intentions for our country is offended.