Jesús Daniel Romero from Miami Strategic Intelligence Institute for Poder & Dinero and FinGurú
Introduction: Legal Clarity in a Politicized Debate
On June 6, 2025, the United States Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) conducted legal immigration control operations throughout California. More than 100 people were arrested, each found to be illegally residing in the country. According to the Immigration and Nationality Act, these individuals are legally classified as illegal aliens. That is the term used by the United States Code. It is not a political invention; it is the language of the law.
Despite this legal basis, political leaders inside and outside the United States quickly distorted these operations. The narrative changed. Law enforcement became oppression. Sovereign action was labeled as discrimination. At the forefront of this rhetorical effort was the President of Mexico, Claudia Sheinbaum, whose rhetoric clearly sought to delegitimize U.S. immigration policy.
U.S. Law is Clear and Binding
The United States Code leaves no room for ambiguity. The term "illegal alien" appears in multiple legal provisions and judicial decisions. Section 1325 of Title 8 penalizes illegal entry. Section 1227 establishes the legal grounds for deportation. Section 1101 defines an alien as any person who is not a citizen or national of the United States.
Attempting to replace these terms with euphemisms like "undocumented immigrant" may serve certain political discourses, but it does not serve the truth or the enforcement of the law.
Sheinbaum's Rhetoric Was Calculated and Strategic
President Claudia Sheinbaum did not merely react to events in California. She intervened rhetorically just as the federal operations began to be targets of political protests. Her statements characterized ICE actions as discriminatory and dangerous for migrant families. She labeled the legal arrests as human rights violations. These statements were echoed by Mexican consular officials and amplified by Hispanic media in the United States.
This was not an innocent diplomatic gesture. It was a deliberate attempt to influence U.S. domestic policy. Sheinbaum did not call for violence or confrontation, but framed law enforcement as a moral grievance. That narrative served as rhetorical fuel for activist groups already mobilized in California. It gave them legitimacy. It gave them momentum.
Strategic Interference Through Moral Language
Sheinbaum's approach is a clear example of soft power in the modern era. Without the need for orders or covert operations, she exerted pressure on U.S. internal affairs. She used moral language to question the legitimacy of the country's sovereign actions. She leveraged her diplomatic visibility to amplify protest voices while suppressing legal facts.
This is not the first time a foreign leader has attempted to interfere in the U.S. internal narrative. But the Sheinbaum case stands out for its scale, its timing with civil instability, and for introducing an external narrative into an already polarized internal debate.
Conclusion: Sovereignty Requires Precision and Resolve
Claudia Sheinbaum's statements were not innocuous. They were calculated. She used her international platform to erode the legal and moral clarity of U.S. immigration policy. That is not diplomacy. That is narrative manipulation.
Sheinbaum is not an ally of the United States. Her conduct does not reflect respect for sovereignty or the rule of law. She continues the ideological legacy of her predecessor, Andrés Manuel López Obrador, who allowed the strengthening of cartels, uncontrolled migration flows, and the weakening of bilateral security cooperation.
While Sheinbaum condemns the legal enforcement of immigration laws in the U.S., her own country is suffocated by criminal groups. Mexican cartels control logistical corridors, key cities, and ports. Their influence extends through public institutions. The Mexican government has not presented a coherent security strategy, and the National Guard has proven ineffective and, in many cases, complicit.
At the same time, Sheinbaum faces credible accusations of illegal financing and money laundering linked to her presidential campaign through the MORENA party. Protected witnesses and intelligence reports have identified suspicious financing networks with possible ties to drug trafficking.
She has also begun to resist U.S. pressure to strengthen drug cooperation, especially in light of the tougher policies of President Trump. This opposition is concerning given the growing instability in Mexico. The recent incident in La Mesilla, Guatemala, where Mexican forces violated Guatemalan sovereignty, reflects a breakdown of command and has raised regional alarm.
Even more concerning is her alignment with Colombian President Gustavo Petro and Venezuelan dictator Nicolás Maduro, both widely criticized for allowing or profiting from drug trafficking. These routes do not bypass Mexico. They cut through it. Large shipments of cocaine from Colombia and Venezuela continue to enter the United States through Mexican territory, operated by cartel-controlled logistical networks.
The only reason Sheinbaum maintains minimal cooperation on migration and narcotics is the economic pressure from the United States, including threats to impose high tariffs on Mexican exports. In this scenario, her government cooperates not out of conviction but out of necessity.
If it were not for this pressure, Sheinbaum would have continued her tacit and direct support for cartels and coyotes, allowing Mexico to function as an active corridor for narcotics and human trafficking while attacking the United States for enforcing its laws.
This is not an alliance. It is an asymmetric manipulation.
The United States must respond clearly. Immigration law is not subject to foreign veto. The term "illegal alien" is not offensive. It is precise, legal, and applicable. Sovereignty is defended through law, language, and policy.
When a foreign female leader, compromised by criminal financing and allied with drug-trafficking regimes, attempts to undermine U.S. law enforcement, she must be confronted firmly, decisively, and without apologies.
Sheinbaum's record is clear. The United States must act accordingly.
References
1. 8 U.S.C. § 1325. Illegal entry of aliens. Retrieved from https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/8/1325
2. 8 U.S.C. § 1227. Grounds for deportation. Retrieved from https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/8/1227
3. 8 U.S.C. § 1101. Legal definitions. Retrieved from https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/8/1101
4. Reuters. (2025, June 9). The President of Mexico condemns violence in Los Angeles protests. https://www.reuters.com/world/americas/mexican-president-rebukes-violence-los-angeles-protests-2025-06-09/
5. El País. (2025, June 10). The U.S. accuses Sheinbaum of encouraging protests in Los Angeles. https://elpais.com/mexico/2025-06-10/
6. Times of India. (2025, June 10). Sheinbaum rejects accusations of inciting protests in the U.S. https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/world/us/mexicos-president-refutes-us-claim-that-she-incited-la-protests-calls-it-absolutely-false/articleshow/121762458.cms
7. U.S. Department of State. (2024). Foreign terrorist organizations. https://www.state.gov/foreign-terrorist-organizations/
8. InSight Crime. (2024). Profile of the Cartel of Suns. https://insightcrime.org/venezuela-organized-crime-news/cartel-de-los-soles/
9. InSight Crime. (2024). FARC and ELN dissidents expand coca cultivation in Colombia. https://insightcrime.org/news/farc-eln-control-coca-colombia/
Jesús Daniel Romero is a retired commander of U.S. Naval Intelligence. Co-founder and Senior Fellow at Miami Strategic Intelligence Institute. Writer and columnist for the Diario Las Américas in Miami. A frequent consultant to media (radio, television, and print) on topics of his expertise.
Comments