Vice President Kamala Harris recently sparked debate with comments made during a radio interview about fears that former President Donald Trump could target non-white individuals if re-elected.
The discussion arose when a caller, identified as "Bobby from Georgia," expressed concerns over Trump potentially using the Alien Enemies Act of 1798 to round up immigrants, specifically citing the historical precedent of internment camps used against Asian Americans during World War II.
In her response, Harris acknowledged the caller’s fears, saying that he had made an "important point" and underscoring that Trump’s political strategy appears to be rooted in generating fear. Harris emphasized that these fears are not unfounded, pointing to the former president’s campaign as being "full-time" focused on sowing fear and division.
Her remarks were a direct reflection of the broader Democratic narrative, which often portrays Trump’s rhetoric and policies as divisive and harmful to minority communities.
A caller asks Kamala Harris "Please respond to Trump's claim that he's going to use the Illegal Alien Act of 1798 to round up immigrants... He's going to use this law to put anyone who doesn't look white in camps and I'm scared."
Unless you are an illegal alien gang member, you… pic.twitter.com/VSBFeobGe1
— Trump War Room (@TrumpWarRoom) October 15, 2024
The Trump campaign wasted no time in responding. Taking to X, formerly Twitter, they mocked the concerns, writing, "Unless you are an illegal alien gang member, you have nothing to worry about. 😂" This sharp retort plays into Trump’s longstanding narrative that his immigration policies primarily target criminal elements, and not law-abiding citizens or residents.
The core of this controversy lies in differing interpretations of the potential use of historical laws like the Alien Enemies Act. Originally enacted during a period of international conflict, it has been largely dormant in modern times, except during times of war, such as the internment of Japanese Americans in the 1940s.
The suggestion that it could be revived in a modern context has alarmed some voters, particularly in light of Trump’s past hardline stances on immigration.