DSA Leader Embraces “Open Borders” Goal

DSA co-chair Megan Romer backed “open borders” as a long-term plan and tied it to amnesty for people in the United States illegally.

Quick Take

Romer said “as a long term plan, yes” when asked if the Democratic Socialists of America would abolish borders and grant amnesty.
She said open borders fit into a broader international plan that includes stopping destabilizing countries.
Her answers also confirmed other hard-left DSA goals, including abolishing the Senate and Immigration and Customs Enforcement.
The interview quickly spread across partisan and mainstream outlets, turning the exchange into a wider fight over the DSA brand.

Romer’s Interview Put the DSA Platform on Display

Megan Romer used a Fox News interview to defend a set of DSA positions that went far beyond normal immigration reform. When pressed on whether the group would “abolish borders and give amnesty to anyone currently in the United States illegally,” she answered, “As a long term plan, yes.” She also said the DSA was not calling to “open the borders tomorrow,” but was instead describing a longer-range political project.

That exchange mattered because Romer did not stop at a single immigration slogan. She linked open borders to a wider international strategy and said it was part of “stopping destabilizing countries.” The same interview cycle also showed her affirming other DSA goals, including abolishing the Senate, abolishing Immigration and Customs Enforcement, and replacing major parts of the current federal structure. Taken together, the answers put the DSA’s platform in plain view.

Why the Language Hit a Nerve

The wording landed hard because the DSA has already used open-borders language in its own material. Contemporaneous reporting quoted the group’s 2019 platform language as supporting “the uninhibited transnational free movement of people,” the demilitarization of the border, abolition of Immigration and Customs Enforcement and Customs and Border Protection, decriminalization of immigration, and a pathway to citizenship for all non-citizen residents. Romer’s interview made that older language newly visible to a larger audience.

Several outlets replayed the same exchange, which helped turn it into a fast-moving political story. That matters in an election-era media environment where short clips often travel farther than full context. In this case, the quote was strong enough that supporters could not easily dismiss it as a misread, while critics used it to argue that the DSA is openly attached to border abolition, not just looser immigration rules.

What the Episode Shows About the Broader Fight

The larger lesson is about how activist language gets translated into public politics. On immigration, groups on the left often frame their goals in moral terms, while opponents hear a demand for weak or nonexistent borders. Romer’s answers gave both sides material for that fight. She kept qualifying the position as a “long-term plan,” but she never denied that the DSA’s end goal includes open borders and amnesty for illegal immigrants.

That is why the clip drew so much attention beyond one interview. It fit a familiar pattern in modern politics: a movement uses sweeping language, then faces a public backlash when the language is repeated back to it on television. For many viewers, the episode reinforced a broader worry that major political organizations are more comfortable with ideological slogans than with clear, workable policy. For others, it simply confirmed that the DSA means what it says.