Federal law is really clear. Federal law enforcement has jurisdiction over people who are illegal aliens, and it is imperative that anyone standing in the way, whether they're private citizens or whether they are local or state authorities, observe that federal law. Welcome back to The Kevin Roberts Show. I'm Larry O'Connor, and you know here we like to zoom out and look at the big issues, principles, values that are sort of guiding who we are as a country and who we are as a conservative movement. But sometimes, once in a while, there's a flash point in the headlines. Something happens in the news. We want to jump in on that as well. And of course, I'm talking about the events in Minneapolis over the last couple of weeks to really sort of figure out what's going on there and what we as Americans, what we as conservatives should think and believe and feel and well act about these issues. Well, that takes a broader view. And that's why we've got Dr. Kevin Roberts to join us and sort of help us navigate through this story, because it's not on the face of it necessarily a black and white easy one to get a hold of until you get down to those grounded fundamentals, right? It is. There are elements of this that are very black and white, which starting with we want rule of law. The federal government has jurisdiction, but there are some gray areas and those gray areas include making sure we have an investigation of the incident itself. The president himself said that as we sit here and record this, Larry, I should say, who knows how this story will change in coming days. But as we record this, Tom Homan has been on the ground for less than 24 hours. I think the president has taken a really good approach to the incident itself. But the black and white parts of this are that local authorities are violating the jurisdiction of the federal government. And I'm so proud of my colleagues at Heritage from our immigration experts to our legal experts in saying it's really important for the rule of law, not just for people right now in Minneapolis, but for all Americans across this country that we get this right. Yeah. Before this episode, Dr. Roberts, I was combing through some of the backlog there, the great content that's at Heritage website, as well as Daily Signal. And boy, just unwavering, you know, true north compass here with regard to the rule of law and immigration policies in particular and border control. Let's go back to what sort of the original sin here is, because people are losing sight of it. We wouldn't have any, you know, so-called chaos right now in Minneapolis were it not for the chaos that we were told to endure during the four years of the Biden administration at the border. But also this goes back well beyond that as well. Well, it's true. It reminds me of a question that a left of center reporter, but I repeat myself, asked me a few years ago. They said, well, Kevin, what percentage of illegal aliens have broken the law? And I sat there dumbfounded as well. A hundred percent. You know, the original sin is they've all broken the law. Now, obviously, there is a subset of them, roughly 300,000. We know to be known felons. And to the administration's credit, they've been focused on them. But this is really the heart of the matter, Larry, and in particular, the heart of the matter in Minnesota. Where there are sanctuary cities and counties and states, it has been nearly impossible for federal law enforcement, which obviously have jurisdiction in those situations, to access them. That is the rub. That is the origins of this problem. In other words, if the governor and county executive and mayor would all stand out of the way and allow ICE to do their job, then we wouldn't have this flashpoint. Yeah, the sanctuary policies, let's call it original sin, too, if there is such a thing. And God forgive me. But but that is it. First, you've got the illegal immigrants and then you've got sometimes you have a president who empowers the executive branch to actually enforce those immigration laws. And you try to interact with the local jurisdictions and then they claim sanctuary. And now now let's zoom out a little bit on the historical perspective. It's not unprecedented for a state or a local jurisdiction to claim some level of independence from federal law and federal law enforcement. Where do we as a conservative movement fall on issues like that? Well, you know, you've asked this historian a very tempting question, tempting to give you sort of a mini lecture on this. So I'll give you the bottom line before going. We live for it, Kevin. It's why people come here. Let's face it. Indeed. Will this be on the test? That's the question. Of course, it's all on the test. That's what I used to tell my students. The bottom line is we settled this. We believe that we settled this in the constitutional debates. Unfortunately, we had a grave tragedy known as the Civil War, which, among other things, settled this question. But there were periods just to delve very briefly into some of the history that's relevant here. There were periods both before the Civil War and after the Civil War, the late 1800s and infamously in the 1950s and 60s during the desegregation movement when this was a very relevant issue. And so in places like Arkansas, Mississippi, most southern states, but also a number of states in the north, there were local authorities who decided that they were going to not observe the federal jurisdiction over desegregation. And interestingly, the really relevant legal code here, I'd learned this from my lawyer colleagues this morning, goes back all the way to the Constitution, but particularly during those flashpoints of the desegregation era. Yeah. And by the way, for anybody on the political left, it might say, well, that's completely different. This has to do with, you know, ripping people from their families and deporting them overseas just for breaking the immigration laws. You can't compare that to Brown versus Board of Education or the Voting Rights Act. But but fundamentally, the principle involved here, Dr. Roberts, really is federal authority and their ability to enforce federal law and local jurisdictions impeding that effort. That's regardless of what the law is, that's what this is about. It's that simple and it's that airtight. And so what I would encourage people to do is sort of an intellectual exercise is number one take a step back from the flashpoint that is Minneapolis 2026 and take an additional step back from whatever you think about how to handle the problem of illegal immigration And instead, Homen, as you started this conversation on, by those matters that are cut and dry. And what's cut and dry is that federal law is really clear. Federal law enforcement has jurisdiction over people who are illegal aliens. And it is imperative that anyone standing in the way, whether they're private citizens or whether they are local or state authorities, observe that federal law to to undermine that, to violate that. For that matter, not to understand that and sort of implement it in our own thinking. And I'm sorry that sounds like hyperbole. It really does challenge the very legitimacy of the rule of law generally. Yeah. All right. So now one other historical nugget I'd love to draw from you here, because we're seeing another conversation take place that has to do with the right to protest, First Amendment rights to peacefully assemble and to take issue with the policies of the federal government in various ways. And then what we're told is excessive force from federal law enforcement trying to do their job and also, you know, try to calm down these protests that don't look very peaceful to me. This is something that societies always have to struggle with. Our founders struggled with the idea of giving people the freedom to petition the government, assemble free speech, yet at the same time having to maintain obvious law and order. Are you seeing anything new here in that conflict that we see play out in Minneapolis? Well, I see a lot of violations of the American custom of nonviolent protest. You would have 95 percent support across the American public if you were engaged in nonviolent protest or get whatever the issue is, because we understand that to be one of our natural rights. And I really applaud the president and an increasing number of members of his cabinet as we sit here and have this conversation for saying, look, we're going to get to the bottom of the incident itself, the tragic death of a fellow American. But there is another issue related to that, obviously, and that is what the what's incumbent upon the protesters themselves to do. And what we know from the research at Heritage, especially by my colleague Mike Gonzalez, is that not only is there a very well-funded, broad network, basically it's a Soros network of protesters, those protesters are being trained, evidenced by that signal chat with a thousand people in it, to do the exact opposite of nonviolent protest. To sum up here, what they're trained to do is to provoke law enforcement using, speaking about the protesters themselves, violent or at least quasi violent tactics. That's the kind of thing that we have to bring to an end. Yeah, you know, we just honored Martin Luther King's life and legacy and the whole epitome of his movement at the time during the civil rights era was passive resistance. That was the term, passive resistance. Other societies have had passive resistance. What I'm seeing up there, what I saw in that that signal chat and the operations, nothing passive about it. That's when you sort of lose the moral high ground of merely peacefully protesting. This is direct action. This is engagement, is it not? Well, it really is. And what it does is undermine whatever the valid policy position is for politically liberal policymakers in Washington or in state legislatures, because Americans then start conflating the rather violent actions of these people in Minneapolis with those policy positions. Now, I and my colleagues at Heritage disagree mightily with those policy positions, but they're occurring within the confines of a legislative body. That's where that needs to happen. If you're going to take action to the streets, let it be personified by Martin Luther King. You think about what I have argued for decades in classrooms and other venues, one of the greatest speeches in modern history, not just in American history, but that stirring speech. I get chills just referring to it now. In the steps of the Lincoln Memorial in 1963, King referenced, among other things, the promissory note that we have. The promissory note goes back to the American founding. And part of that promissory note that, yes, is inscribed in parts of the Constitution, especially the First Amendment, but even more importantly, as part of our custom as a people of the West is, yes, freedom to assemble, freedom of speech, but doing so nonviolently so that you're not taking on the rule of law itself. That's what's being missed by so many people who are part of this radical leftist movement. All right. So, Dr. Roberts, I know that you just keep your eye on the prize here in Washington. And you don't listen to any of these other voices in town that are, you know, nipping at your heels and sort of undermining conservative messages. I have to hear them. You know, the libertarian, the more establishment types. I hear their voices right now. They're saying that when law enforcement is is surrounded by public sentiment, the way our ICE agents and Border Patrol are in Minneapolis, that they need to have a strategic retreat. They need to get at this point when the mob is on the street and the mob is shouting you down to this level. Their presence is, in fact, provoking and actually undermining the policy in the long run. Do they have a point? No. This is what I would say. Would they have said that in 1957 in Little Rock? Would they have said that after the assassination of Medgar Evers? Would they have said that after the assassination of Martin Luther King? If there is a validity to that point, just to try to steal a minute, which we try to do at Heritage, it would be that public opinion is very important here. And that's an aspect of that argument that I think is very helpful. But what I would say is what we're arguing for at Heritage, which is sustaining this presence, maintaining this law enforcement presence in Minneapolis, is not mutually exclusive from building the public opinion case to make sure that the American people understand what going on I think the administration would be the first to say given how assertive let say they been on policy issues across the board that messaging is always a challenge It going to be a challenge whenever you moving quickly to repair the damage of several decades of the radical left. One of the grave areas of damage that the radical left has imposed upon us is undermining the rule of law. They've created a situation in which in their politics and their policies, but also in their education, their indoctrination of Americans, that it's okay to challenge federal law enforcement even when there is jurisdiction. So the good element of that nipping at the heels would be, let's stay focused on public opinion. This is why, frankly, we at Heritage, in addition to all of the great policy and legal analysis we've done on this issue over the years, have decided we want to be the biggest advocate for why this is important, not just for people in Minnesota, not just for people for whom immigration is their top policy issue, but for Americans generally. By the way, one of the reasons I love this story, I mean, I love I don't love the story, but I think it's ripe for conversation like this and deep dive is that it's not just a question of immigration. And it's not just a question of open borders and our laws. It also reaches into all these other things we're talking about, too, and the role of the federal government and whether we have a right to protest and how that protest looks. And then there was this one galvanizing moment, Dr. Roberts, where you saw the protesters really cross a Rubicon, interrupt a church service, Christians expressing their faith in prayer, hearing a sermon at a Baptist church in St. Paul. They barged in and purposely traumatized the children and the people there. What can you tell me personally, when you saw that moment, what it meant to you and what you think this actually displays and demonstrates about those who are on the streets right now and sort of representing the left position here. Well, I looked at it not as a policy leader, not as a political policy conservative, but as someone who just loves this country and loves all Americans. And while there are a lot of natural rights that I cherish. At the top of the list, and I think most Americans would say this, is the right to worship where we want, how we want, when we want, and in peace. And the first thing that occurred to me was, what if, as did happen hundreds of times in the South in the 1950s during the desegregation movement, there were sort of white activists going into a black church to intimidate those people from being active politically. And that happened. I mean, we have accounted for several hundred of those episodes. Would the same people who are defending those knuckleheads for doing that in Minnesota have defended them in the 1950s? I'm intellectually honest enough, I think, to say, no, of course they wouldn't. It's the same thing because it goes to the heart of your question, Larry. It goes to the core of who we are as Americans. In fact, it's so close to the core of who we are, It's difficult for us to even apprehend what a violation of our custom and the rule of law that that was. It would have been nice, by the way, to see more supposedly conservative voices in Washington make that analysis. But they're a little too caught up in finding these cute angles of how they can be critical of the administration. You know, conservatives don't take to the streets. We don't organize like that. We don't barge into places of worship. of Lord knows. And we don't sort of get into the faces of authority figures. We don't use these tactics. So I always feel like the left has some sort of upper hand here in terms of the appearance of energy and the appearance of some level of moral righteous anger when they're demonstrating the way that they're demonstrating, the way that we're seeing. What's the best thing for conservatives to do in response to this sort of thing? Because I feel like, honestly, we just want everyone to leave us alone so we can raise our kids and worship our God. I think to map to, that is to refer to the historical precedence here. You know, the United States is the last best hope in the world, and it's the last best hope because however imperfect certain chapters in our history have been, inherent in our founding, particularly our declaration and and almost perfected by our Constitution are not just the mechanisms, but the assumed involvement of the American people to get it right. And so I think appealing not just to our better angels, but to our better angels who know history, that what is happening in Minnesota isn't about immigration. It actually isn't even about certain policies of Donald Trump. It really is about the American way of life. I don't want to be melodramatic by saying that, But it's really true. And so the more Americans can just refer to the common sense of this, the history of this, ignore the ridiculous chatter in some media outlets. Thankfully, there are a number of media outlets who are covering this very fairly and divorce that from all of the nonsense. I think that's going to be helpful. But, you know, that requires us to know our history, Larry. Well, and listen, we're celebrating the 250th anniversary of this great country. And I try to weave that into every one of these episodes. When you see this play out in Minneapolis, what are sort of the broader themes in your mind in terms of acknowledging where we came from? Somewhat chaotic turmoil of the revolution and what started as sort of, you know, some anger at some boxes of tea in a boat in Boston Harbor that then led to our Constitution. Is there any sort of patriotic and historical parallel we can draw from this and sort of emerge a stronger country once we get on the right side of this issue? You know, whenever the history of the American Republic is written after the Republic has reached its conclusion, hopefully hundreds of years from now, I believe that at the top of that list of attributes that will be unique in world history is the emphasis by America on ordered liberty That is putting into balance on the one hand liberty or freedom which of course we love but too much of would be anarchy with on the other hand order And too much of that, of course, would be totalitarianism. But in the words of Washington, this attempt to balance order and liberty is what it means to be truly free. And so as we look at a really challenging episode, of course, the human tragedies of the loss of life, as well as the sort of political, civil tragedy, if you will, of putting into harm's way law enforcement officers, whether they be federal or state or local, that it is part of our American inheritance that we put order and liberty together, which is a sort of academic way of saying, yes, go protest, go protest whatever you think you need to protest, but make sure that it's peaceful. I would encourage you, if you actually want it to be politically popular, that you actually be appealing and attractive and message this really well. I don't think the protesters right now in Minnesota are getting any of that right. And then let the chips fall where they may as it relates to politics, referring to politics, and let the American people continue to decide. On that point, which is also connected to our founding, this position of re-migrating at least the felons among the millions of illegal aliens remains very popular. And I think that's the key thing to remember. It is pretty remarkable. And I think it's important to as we just finished our conversation over the last several weeks about the four cornerstones initiative that Heritage has put out there, the four cornerstones of our society and of our republic that, you know, the people that disagree with us politically who are out there causing trouble in Minneapolis, they they are sort of embracing in their own way those four cornerstones in a misguided way, in a very destructive way. But there is something, you know, I guess I'm trying to be positive here. I'm trying to find some level of American sort of enthusiasm there. They think they're on the right side of this thing. Well, let me let me sprinkle in some more hopefulness. As I said, as we sit here, this is the story has a few more positive elements to it than it did even 24 hours ago. I think my friend and former Heritage colleague Tom Homan will bring a lot of order. He is very good at what he does. I applaud the president and all of the political leaders who've had good conversations with him for trying to lower the temperature. And if out of this tragedy and these sort of successive incidents, we have a renewed appreciation in this country for how we do nonviolent protest so that we can get back to our institutions, our families, our schools, our universities, really homing in on those enduring values that make us American, that for that matter, make us a free people, then maybe that's the upside here. I think we've got a long way to go to get there. But if you forced me to be optimistic about this as I sit here, that's what I would say. All right. Final question. Imagine you're sitting across the resolute desk from the president. He calls you and he says, you know, this is a tough one, Kevin. Need your advice on this. Politically, this isn't going well for us right now. And I'm getting a lot of advice that tell me that I should sort of pull back on our efforts in Minneapolis. I should withdraw the ICE agents. You know, if Minneapolis wants all these criminals in their community, fine, let them. I'll focus our efforts elsewhere. What would your advice to him be? I would say, sir, number one, please maintain the federal presence in Minnesota because failing to do that, that is removing that presence, will only embolden radical leftists who are simply going to move to another state or states. Number two, let's be sure we get to the bottom of the most recent tragedy. And the president, as we've mentioned, has already done that and endorsing an investigation, which is proper. But the third thing is, I would say, sir, please, in addition to handling this well, what you are doing. Go out and talk about the issues that the American people care about. They care about this one, to be sure. It's one of the reasons you were elected. But they also care about the future of the economy. They care about what they call the affordability crisis. You're talking about those things means you're not giving the radical left a when. A when would be distracting you from the agenda of the American people. And look, very fittingly, the president's not perfect, The administration is not perfect. But boy, they both get really strong grades a year into office. This is exactly what the president has done. And that's not surprising to me, Larry, because just intuitively, his instincts are so close to what the everyday American thinks. It's part of his genius, not just as a president, but as I think one of the great cultural and social leaders of our time. Well, one thing is for certain. The events in Minneapolis are not just headlines and breaking news banners on cable news. These are real human beings with real passion. And we're seeing so many principles and so many values of the American experiment, a successful one so far, colliding before our very eyes. This is not just about immigration. It's about our principles of freedom and the federal government and law enforcement and law in order and living in a sane society and being able to let not just the mob rule in the streets. No, far from it. It's about that constant silent majority who still believes in Americans values, who aren't taking to the streets and who need to be represented and protected as well. So keep your eye on that story. And don't forget to share this one and leave us your comments and your reaction, too, because we do read them and we want to be a part of a conversation with you about all of these ideas. Next week, we've got, well, Dr. Roberts just mentioned the radical far left. How about China? We've got China in our sights, and we'll talk about TikTok and the battle for the American mind next on The Kevin Roberts Show. We'll see you next week. Thank you.
