The Eternal Return of the Restrictionists: Miller's Encore
CASE A: The Demonization of 'Attempts to Rein In ICE' The Independent article frames the actions of Miller and his allies as opposing 'attempts to rein in ICE,' implying a legitimate, defensive posture against overreach. Senator Lindsey Graham's quote, “We’re now going on offense,” positions their efforts as a necessary counter-attack to protect national interests. This language suggests that any
tempering of ICE's powers is inherently detrimental or even a threat. The focus is on preserving the agency's broad enforcement capabilities, often conflated with national security. Media coverage, particularly from conservative outlets, tends to echo this sentiment, portraying ICE as a vital bulwark against 'illegal immigration' and any reform efforts as dangerous 'open border' policies. This
narrative often omits the documented abuses within the agency, such as the separation of families at the border, a policy implemented under the Trump administration in 2018. (ACLU, 2019) CASE B: The 'Humanitarian Intervention' in Pursuit of Regime Change Curiously, when governments or powerful factions align to 'rein in' the sovereign powers of states deemed 'adversaries' – often under the guise
of human rights or democracy promotion – the framing shifts dramatically. Consider the international pressure campaigns and sanctions against Venezuela under Nicolás Maduro, depicted as a struggle to 'restore democracy' or 'address humanitarian crises.' The discourse surrounding the 2019 attempt to unseat Evo Morales in Bolivia, for instance, involved significant external pressure and support for