One prediction I have about American politics is that eventually a significant portion of the MAGA movement is going to turn on ICE. Not all of them, of course. Political movements are rarely unanimous about anything. But I think there will come a moment when many of the same people who today defend ICE, praise ICE, and tell critics to simply let ICE do its job will suddenly become some of the agency’s loudest critics.
The reason I believe this has very little to do with immigration policy itself and a lot to do with how political loyalty works.
Right now, many conservatives and MAGA supporters see ICE as an institution that is targeting people they believe should be targeted. As a result, criticism of ICE often gets dismissed. People are told that if they have nothing to hide, they have nothing to worry about. They are told that the agency is simply enforcing the law. They are told that enforcement actions are necessary and that critics are overreacting.
But I think there is a scenario where that changes almost overnight.
Imagine a prominent MAGA influencer. Someone with a large audience. Someone who regularly speaks at conservative events. Someone with millions of followers. Someone who has become deeply embedded in the movement’s culture and identity.
Now imagine ICE determines that this person has immigration issues, visa issues, citizenship issues, residency issues, paperwork problems, or some other legal complication that places them in the agency’s crosshairs.
Suddenly, the situation becomes personal.
Instead of ICE going after a stranger, ICE is going after someone people know.
Instead of ICE targeting an abstract category of people, ICE is targeting a specific individual who has built relationships with the movement.
Instead of a headline about someone far away, it becomes a headline about someone MAGA supporters watch every day.
That is where I believe the conversation would begin to change.
The same people who previously argued that ICE should simply be allowed to do its job would begin asking questions. They would want to know whether the investigation was fair. They would want to know whether due process was followed. They would want to know whether the punishment was excessive. They would want to know whether political motivations were involved.
In other words, they would start asking many of the same questions that immigration activists, civil liberties advocates, progressives, and others have been asking for years.
I can already imagine the arguments.
“This isn’t what ICE should be focusing on.”
“They’re targeting the wrong people.”
“This is government overreach.”
“This is political persecution.”
“They’re abusing their authority.”
“They’re making an example out of someone.”
Whether those arguments would be right or wrong is not really the point. The point is that the arguments themselves would suddenly become acceptable within circles that previously rejected them.
What fascinates me about politics is how often people’s principles are tested when those principles affect someone they personally support.
It is easy to support aggressive enforcement when the consequences fall on strangers.
It is harder when the consequences fall on friends.
It is easy to support investigations when the target is your political opponent.
It is harder when the target is someone whose podcast you watch every week.
It is easy to support government authority when that authority is pointed away from your community.
It becomes much harder when it is pointed directly at your community.
This pattern is not unique to MAGA. I think nearly every political movement is vulnerable to it.
Liberals do it.
Conservatives do it.
Progressives do it.
Libertarians do it.
People often discover the limits of their support for an institution when that institution affects somebody they care about.
That is why I suspect the reaction would be especially interesting.
I could easily imagine a strange political realignment taking place around a specific case. Suddenly, some conservatives might find themselves criticizing ICE while some liberals might find themselves saying that ICE is simply enforcing the law in that particular situation.
The talking points could become completely reversed.
The people who usually defend ICE could be condemning it.
The people who usually criticize ICE could be defending that specific action.
Everyone would suddenly discover exceptions to their previously stated positions.
And honestly, this happens all the time in American politics.
We have seen politicians support free speech until speech they dislike becomes popular.
We have seen politicians support law enforcement until law enforcement investigates someone they support.
We have seen politicians support government power until that power affects their side.
We have seen politicians criticize government power until that same power helps achieve a goal they favor.
Political consistency is often much rarer than people like to admit.
Human beings are tribal creatures. We naturally evaluate events through the lens of our communities and identities. When someone we view as part of our tribe gets targeted, our perspective changes. We begin asking questions we never thought to ask before. We begin noticing flaws in systems we previously trusted.
That is why I think a future conflict between ICE and a major MAGA influencer would be so politically explosive.
The issue would no longer be immigration.
The issue would become loyalty.
The issue would become trust.
The issue would become whether people support institutions consistently or only when those institutions are acting against people they dislike.
Maybe my prediction never happens. Politics has a way of surprising everyone. But if it does happen, I think the reactions will be incredibly revealing.
Because the moment an institution goes after someone your side loves is often the moment you discover what you actually believe about that institution.
And if that day comes, I would not be surprised at all to see some of the loudest defenders of ICE become some of its harshest critics, while some of its harshest critics suddenly find themselves applauding a specific enforcement action.
American politics is full of strange reversals. This would simply be another one.