In Fairfax, Virginia, there have been four murders in 2026, with three of those linked to illegal immigrants.
A notable case is that of Abdul Jallow, who came from Sierra Leone and entered the U.S. illegally in 2012. He was involved in numerous crimes—like assault, rape, and theft.
Eventually, Immigration and Customs Enforcement caught him and he spent about two years in custody while awaiting deportation. However, in 2020, a judge ruled that he couldn’t be sent back to Sierra Leone. Because ICE couldn’t find any willing accomplice to take him back, he was released.
Six years after his release, he murdered his mother, Stephanie Minter, while she was waiting for a bus.
The aftermath saw Minter’s family and local Republican officials turning their focus on Fairfax County District Attorney Steve Descano. He had reportedly refused to work with ICE and often gave light sentences to undocumented immigrants. Descano’s perspective is that it distorts justice when two people commit the same crime and only one faces deportation.
In mid-May, Descano was called to testify before Congress, where “suicidal empathy” might have made an appearance.
This term, popularized by Dr. Gad Saad, is often used by right-leaning groups to describe the liberal notion that allowing potentially dangerous immigrants to enter is somehow compassionate.
If you’re against mass immigration, you might be viewed as lacking compassion.
Prominent politicians have echoed this sentiment for years. Back in 2014, Jeb Bush famously referred to illegal immigration as an “act of love.”
This view has persisted in many Western circles despite clear issues arising since the migrant crisis began in 2015. There have been increasing incidents of serious crimes—assaults and even murders—becoming alarmingly common. Eleven years on, these stories have become part of daily life in some areas.
Yet, there’s still strong resistance towards mass deportations, mainly on the grounds that returning individuals to their home countries would be cruel.
Conservatives argue that labeling this mindset as “suicidal empathy” misses the mark—it’s actually deadly. Supporting such empathy implies getting involved in self-sacrifice, risking lives for the sake of those who might commit harm within society.
This perspective is not necessarily accurate. Many who support pro-immigration policies likely would not put themselves in danger. For example, in Frankfurt, Germany, a staggering percentage of serious sexual crimes were committed by foreigners, yet many liberal voters might not feel directly affected.
Rape rates in England and Wales were previously low, but they surged coinciding with large-scale immigration—rising over 300%. In 2024, non-German suspects were linked to a large portion of these crimes. While millions of women may be at risk, not every individual gets targeted.
This reality seems acknowledged by some opposed to mass deportation, although they often downplay its significance, believing large-scale immigration is necessary for societal functions.
Conservative criticisms often point out alleged hidden agendas by groups like the Soros family or Antifa funders. While these networks do exist, they’re not fully responsible for why many liberals might accept the influx of violent immigrants.
To understand the broader context, a historical analogy is useful—consider the Aztecs. They performed mass sacrifices, often brutally, to appease gods and ensure prosperity.
Today’s liberal internationalism shares some foundation with such practices. Large-scale migration can facilitate cheaper labor, which many in power seem to find beneficial. Those advocating for more immigration are not always representative of extreme leftist agendas; instead, they often reflect a dominant ideology present in the West for many years.
In the eyes of liberal internationalists, providing minimal wage jobs may improve the circumstances for low-income workers. Yet, the casualties of immigration—those hurt or killed—are often seen as unfortunate collateral, sacrificed for a “greater good” of diversity.
The worldview has led to nationalist sentiments gaining ground in parts of the West, even if they’ve faced losses in elections.
Abdul Jallow should have faced deportation and shouldn’t have been able to return to the U.S. It wouldn’t have been a disaster if Sierra Leone refused him back. The U.S. is powerful enough to send criminals back to wherever they came from.
This harmful notion has real-world consequences, with an increasing number of victims. The right shouldn’t shy away from confronting leftists for branding them as suicidal. They’re not putting themselves at risk—they’re actually causing harm to others.
