Investigative writer Peter Schweizer argues that the Mexican government is leveraging various channels—like diplomatic missions, education initiatives, and immigration support—to exert influence within the United States, which goes well beyond typical diplomacy.
In a conversation regarding his latest book, *The Invisible Coup,* Schweitzer described what he terms “weaponized migration,” which he claims is a strategy for applying political pressure in the U.S. He stated, “Foreign powers are using immigration as a weapon to undermine American sovereignty,” with Mexico being a primary example.
He pointed out that Mexico maintains a significant diplomatic footprint in the U.S., operating 53 consulates, which far exceeds those of most of the U.S.’s allies.
Schweitzer remarked, “These consular officials are involved in organizing political activities in the United States, which is a clear violation of their diplomatic standing.” He accused Mexican consular staff of supporting anti-ICE protests, referencing instances where officials have publicly supported community responses to immigration enforcement.
According to Schweitzer, Mexico’s consulate general has consistently offered legal aid to immigrant communities following ICE actions. While Mexican authorities regard this as fulfilling a duty of protection, critics argue it crosses the line into political advocacy.
He also mentioned “immigration legislators” from Mexico—officials elected in Mexico who represent citizens living in the U.S.—as evidence of political engagement across borders. Although they don’t hold U.S. office, they’ve been involved in advocacy events in the U.S., raising questions about foreign political presence on American soil.
Schweitzer claimed that the Mexican government is hindering immigrants’ assimilation in the U.S., pointing out government-produced Spanish textbooks distributed in U.S. school districts. He said, “The Mexican government is providing textbooks that help immigrant children identify primarily as Mexicans, rather than Mexican Americans.” These textbooks, published by Mexico’s state textbook authorities, are largely available through consulates and community centers as supplemental educational materials.
He also criticized these materials for presenting a politically charged version of American history, highlighting how they depict the Mexican-American War with the U.S. as the antagonist.
Schweitzer asserted that collaboration between Mexican diplomatic missions and U.S.-based advocacy groups is influencing electoral politics in the U.S. He referred to a meeting that took place at the Mexican consulate in Oklahoma City in 2024, which included both Mexican diplomats and Democratic Party activists. “They discussed how California and Arizona flipped from red to blue,” he noted, questioning the appropriateness of such discussions for diplomatic officials.
When asked about the legality of these actions, Schweitzer mentioned that U.S. law bars diplomats from participating in elections and expressed that expulsion of those involved should be a priority. He emphasized, “We need a zero-tolerance policy as midterm elections approach; such actions should not be permitted.”
He also brought up a Mexican government-backed streaming channel called Migrant TV, which he described as pro-Kamala Harris and anti-Trump, showing ICE agents in a harsh light. Launched in March 2025, TV Migrante aims to provide a platform for migrants in the U.S., accessible on various digital and cable platforms.
Schweitzer framed Mexico’s actions within a broader geopolitical context, drawing comparisons to China’s influence campaigns, and asked rhetorically, “Why are we condoning this?” He believes the time has come to set firmer boundaries.
The backdrop for these assertions highlights tense relations between the U.S. and Mexico, especially as President Trump has warned of intensified measures against drug cartels and border security. Meanwhile, Mexican President Claudia Sheinbaum stressed cooperation and respect for sovereignty, highlighting achievements in combating cartels and managing migrant flows.
However, Schweitzer remains skeptical about Mexico’s commitments, pointing out the significant economic implications of immigration—over $60 billion in remittances from the U.S. “They view immigrants as a means to exert influence and maintain sovereignty over the U.S.,” he said.
Mexican officials have repeatedly stated that consulates serve to protect the rights of Mexicans abroad, emphasizing cooperation with the U.S. on security issues. The Mexican embassy has yet to respond to Schweitzer’s claims.
