An Overdue Prioritization: Immigration Control as America’s Foremost National Security Imperative

Commentary

“The greatest threat to freedom, even in today’s perilous times, comes from no foreign foe.” —President Ronald Reagan, March 3, 1982

Reagan spoke those words more than four decades ago, yet they have never been more urgent. The United States already has laws on the books—laws that have never been repealed—that prohibit entry to anyone who advocates communism, socialism, or the overthrow of the government by force (8 U.S.C. Section 1182; Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952). These statutes exist for one simple reason: Certain ideologies are inimical to the American experiment. They are incompatible with individual liberty, private property, free enterprise, and constitutional governance. Congress judged—correctly—that admitting large numbers of people who reject the very foundations of our republic is an act of national self-sabotage.

That same logic must now be extended to any ideology fundamentally hostile to the American creed. If communism is rightly seen as a mortal threat to ordered liberty and as an anti-divine force that dissolves moral order, then we must also recognize that it often advances under other banners, such as theocratic supremacism, honor-based tribalism, and any worldview that denies the divine origin of human dignity. These systems reduce women to property and treat free speech as blasphemy to be punished by violence. They are all manifestations of the same revolt against God, tradition, and ordered liberty.

Sure, our own citizens will come up with harmful philosophies, and we must engage in the battle of ideas to combat them and expose them for what they are. But that doesn’t mean we should import large numbers of people who hold such ideologies and have no interest in participating in the marketplace of ideas.

A country becomes what it ingests. Admitting millions who don’t believe in what made America the greatest country the world has ever seen will not improve it. It is not enough for newcomers to refrain from violence themselves; they must also actively reject those among them who preach it—even when the preacher claims to speak in their name. Allowing individuals into our country who will look the other way while people from their community commit violence is profoundly harmful to the nation.

American values are not merely one option among many. They are objectively superior because they produced a country that tens of millions have risked their lives to reach. They came because a society built on Christian moral foundations and a brilliant Constitution—representing the pinnacle of Western morality and philosophy—has created a nation of opportunity, human flourishing, and genuine tolerance, unmatched in history. To keep America the place that people still want to reach, we must require that those who come here be open to adopting the principles that made it great—and we already have the legal and moral precedent to deny entry to those who embrace ideologies incompatible with our Constitution and American values.

Europe ignored this precedent—and the results have been devastating. For more than a decade, European elites have promoted disastrous immigration policies while minimizing and covering up the massive wave of violent crimes and rapes perpetrated by immigrants from Islamic-majority countries. Not only have many of these immigrants brought violence and a lack of respect for the nations that welcomed them, but they have also overwhelmed public welfare systems, threatening services for taxpaying citizens.

From Cologne, Germany, on New Year’s Eve 2015–2016—when an estimated 2,000 men, mostly migrants, assaulted some 1,400 women—to Rotherham, England’s scandal involving more than 1,400 children sexually exploited by migrant men, to daily gang rapes in Sweden and the 708 rapes, robberies, and other crimes committed by migrants in British hotels over three years, authorities have routinely withheld the nationality of perpetrators, delayed disclosures, or refused to publish immigration-status data. Their justification? A fear of promoting “racism” or “Islamophobia.” But that isn’t tolerance. It is moral cowardice—and a betrayal of the law-abiding taxpayers whose daughters, sisters, and wives are being attacked.

Although the United States hasn’t yet reached European levels of disorder—thanks in part to geography and a cultural resistance to such acts—the warning signs are clear: Billion-dollar fraud rings in Minnesota’s Somali community, rising gang violence tied to unvetted immigration, and fiscal drains from certain countries of origin show that not every group contributes positively when admitted en masse. The laws that once kept out communists must now be dusted off and applied consistently to every belief system that is—by its own admission—hostile to the American way of life.

There is no reliable information base to vet each person individually. In the absence of such a tool, we must consider ideology, culture, and country of origin. If these factors indicate that a person is likely to be incompatible with—or harmful to—American society, a responsible government has a duty to deny entry. Being harmful includes being a net burden on society or holding views fundamentally at odds with Western values, such as freedom of speech. We do not need people entering the country who believe that violence against those who criticize their beliefs is justified. We do not need mass immigration from people who reject the constitutional rights of women or who promote theocratic legal systems as superior to our Constitution.

The Trump administration’s focus on shutting down illegal immigration and curbing harmful legal immigration is a necessary first step. By securing our borders, defending Western civilization’s superiority, and restoring cultural and moral cohesion, we can reclaim the moral authority and capacity to end endless meddling abroad. A strong, confident America does not need to police the world—it can lead by example. Ending foreign interventions that often destabilize regions and send their refugees to our shores is both strategic and moral.

This isn’t xenophobia—it’s fidelity to the very laws that Congress enacted to protect our republic from ideologies that undermine its foundations. America should continue to welcome those who sincerely wish to become fully American—those who seek not just material prosperity but also our moral order, civic traditions, and liberty under law. But a republic cannot survive if it indiscriminately absorbs people whose governing ideologies are hostile to liberty and Western civilization.

The “shining city” Reagan spoke of wasn’t a marketplace without borders. It was a civilization with a moral center. If we continue to import, at scale and without expectation of assimilation, America will dissolve from within—without a single shot ever being fired.

Reagan was right. The greatest danger is not out there. It lies within our borders—and it begins with the choices we make about who we allow to become one of us. The 2025 National Security Strategy finally treats the border as the front line of ideological defense—just as the law has always intended.

Views expressed in this article are the opinions of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of The Epoch Times.