Key Takeaways

• A new video urges Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents to quit their jobs.
• The ad ran in three major cities, including Palm Beach over Thanksgiving weekend.
• Newsmax hosts and guests called the ad “dangerous,” “disgusting,” and “communist.”
• Conservatives warn the message could fuel attacks on law enforcement.
• Critics link the ad to a broader push to shift family loyalty to the state.

A recent video ad campaign has sparked fierce debate on a Sunday panel at Newsmax. The ad urges ICE officers to leave their posts before shame follows them home. Critics on the show slammed it as an attack on families and law enforcement. They even compared it to tactics used in Soviet Russia. The panel’s strong language shows how charged the debate over immigration has become.

What the Ad Shows

The ad begins with an ICE agent walking in the door. We see a young child ask, “How was your day?” A narrator speaks directly to the agent. He says a mask will not hide you from your neighbors, your child, or God. He then invites the agent to quit before shame comes home. The ad closes with a plea: walk away now.

Moreover, the video uses quiet music and soft colors. This contrast makes its message feel personal and urgent. The ad aired first in Palm Beach, Florida. The political action committee behind it chose that city because a former president spent Thanksgiving there. Over the weekend, it also played in Chicago and Charlotte. Both cities saw recent immigration raids.

Conservative Criticism

Conservative voices on Newsmax wasted no time calling out the ICE ads. Deneen Borelli, a well-known commentator, called the ad “beyond propaganda.” She warned it could lead to violence against ICE officers. In her view, the video put targets on law enforcement backs. Deneen demanded networks stop showing these commercials.

In addition, Tom Borelli compared the campaign to classic communism. He argued the ad tries to break family bonds and shift loyalty to the state. He said Soviet Russia used similar methods to control people. He also tied the ICE ads message to other cultural battles. He claimed it aimed to replace parents with state authority on issues like transgender youth.

A Newsmax host joined the chorus, calling the ad “shocking” and “disgusting.” The host even linked the video’s message to a recent shooting of two National Guard members. She argued that words like those in the ICE ads can inspire real violence.

Why ICE Ads Sparked Outrage

First, the ad attacks a specific group of officers. This direct call to quit has rarely appeared in mainstream political ads. Consequently, many saw it as an assault on a vital federal force. Second, the timing tied it to high-profile immigration moves. Many believe it crossed a line from criticism into personal attack. Finally, the use of family imagery heightened emotions. Viewers felt the video aimed to shame parents who work in law enforcement.

Furthermore, networks that aired the spots have come under fire. Critics blame them for spreading dangerous messages. They claim airing the ICE ads is irresponsible. Meanwhile, defenders argue free speech must allow political ads, even if they feel harsh.

Political Impact and Strategy

The ad campaign comes from the Women’s March WIN political action committee. Their strategy targets cities with recent ICE activity. They want to stoke a broader debate on deportation and immigration policy. By placing the ads in Palm Beach over Thanksgiving, they tapped into high traffic during the holiday. They also reached people visiting Mar-a-Lago resort.

Chicago and Charlotte share histories of major immigration raids. Thus, the ads aimed to influence local views on enforcement tactics. They also sought to energize activists and voters ahead of upcoming elections. For example, city leaders in both areas have faced criticism over cooperation with federal immigration agents. The campaign aimed to widen that debate.

Meanwhile, opponents warn the ads could backfire. They say the harsh messaging might unite supporters of ICE. That reaction could lead to more public support and funding for enforcement. Opponents also fear the ads might embolden extremists to target officers. Such concerns highlight the risks of polarizing political ads.

Broader Lessons on Political Messaging

This clash over ICE ads underlines a larger trend in modern politics. Campaigns now use emotional appeals and personal stories to sway opinions. They no longer rely solely on facts or policies. Instead, they frame messages to hit viewers on a gut level. However, this tactic brings ethical questions. When does emotional persuasion become harmful? How far can campaigns go without risking violence?

Moreover, the use of family imagery raises complex debates. Families face tough choices when loved ones work in controversial fields. Ads like these force personal issues into public arguments. That blend of private life and politics creates fierce reactions. It also shows how political rhetoric can shape, or even divide, families.

What Comes Next?

Given the backlash, networks may rethink airing similar ads. Some media outlets already said they will review their policies. On the other hand, activists view the controversy as a win. They see the debate as proof the ads struck a nerve. As a result, more groups might launch bold campaigns on other topics.

Legally, political ads enjoy broad protections. Courts have long upheld the right to speak freely in elections. Still, airing ads that target specific groups can spark calls for new rules. Lawmakers may debate transparency measures. For instance, they could push for clearer disclaimers on who pays for the ads. They might also propose limits on ads that incite or threaten.

Public opinion polls in the coming weeks will show if the ICE ads moved the needle. If more people side with the critics, networks might pull the spots. Conversely, if viewers see the ads as valid protest, more campaigns might follow this model. In any case, the ICE ads debate has set a new standard for heated political messaging.

Frequently Asked Questions

Why did the ad campaign target ICE officers?

The group behind the ads wanted to challenge strict immigration enforcement. They aimed to persuade officers to resign by appealing to family and moral values.

Is it legal to urge federal workers to quit their jobs in political ads?

Yes. Political speech has strong protection under free speech laws. As long as the ads follow disclosure rules, they can call for resignations.

Could these ads lead to violence?

Critics believe harsh messages can inspire extremism. They worry the ads paint officers as villains, which could provoke attacks. Supporters say the ads remain peaceful persuasion.

What might happen to political ad rules after this controversy?

Lawmakers could propose new transparency or content limits for political ads. They might require clearer disclaimers on who funds them or ban ads targeting specific groups.