Minnesota Democrat Rep. Ilhan Omar, a refugee from Somalia, believes that the United States of America, the nation where her family fled, is becoming one of the worst countries in the world, yet she chooses to stay.In a recent interview with Democracy Now, Omar pointed out that U.S. troops were sent to put down protests in Los Angeles during the same week the Trump administration held a massive military parade to celebrate 250 years of the U.S. Army.
“Can you imagine that image that is going to be coming out of our country? I mean, I grew up in a dictatorship, and I don’t even remember ever witnessing anything like that,” the representative said, referring to Somalia.
“To have a democracy, a beacon of hope for the world, to now be turned into one of the, you know, one of the worst countries, where the military are in our streets without any regard for people’s constitutional rights, while our president’s spending millions of dollars propping himself up like a failed dictator with a military parade — it is really shocking,” she said.
“It should be a wake-up call for all Americans to say, ‘This is not the country we were born in. It’s not the country we believe in. This is not the country our Founding Fathers imagined, and this is not the country that is supported by our Constitution, our ideals, our values,’” the woman, who was not actually born in the United States, said.
“And we should all collectively be out in the streets, rejecting what is taking place this week,” she said.
“I think the person who is in the process of destroying our country should look in the mirror and that’s Trump,” she said. “And notice that he is the one that has hatred for the values that we have here in America and everything that we have built. The reality is protest, dissent, is constitutionally protected that is everybody’s First Amendment right in this country.”
“She wasn’t born here at all,” one X user said.
“The hyperbole here is appalling, made worse by her astounding ingratitude,” Fox News contributor Guy Benson said.
“[I]f people are seriously offended by a parade for the first time in decades, then go outside and touch some grass,” OutKick contributor David Hookstead said. “We have the greatest military on the planet, and we shouldn’t ever apologize for it. After all, our men died to try to protect innocent lives in Somalia. I guess that sacrifice just doesn’t matter to Congresswoman Omar.”
“I will never understand immigrants who come to America, utilize every opportunity this country offers, and then complain about and bash this country. Can we have Ilhan Omar deported?” another X user said.
“When elected leaders like Rep Ilhan Omar claim the US is the worst country on the planet they’re calling for violence against the legitimate government,” another said.“We have a major problem. We’re not a single Republican in Congress is demanding her resignation. And we wonder why Congress has yet to codify President Trump’s executive orders, stop broke judges and passed the America first agenda. Trump works 24 seven and Republicans sit back and play footsie with these terrorists in the Democrat party,” another user said.
“There’s literally nothing stopping Omar from leaving if she isn’t happy here…because we’re a free country. Unlike the Somalia she idealizes!” another said.She has currently not announced any plans to leave the country.Texas Faces Unprecedented Legal Showdown Over Absent LawmakersAustin, Texas – A rare constitutional dispute is unfolding in Texas as state officials launch an aggressive legal effort to challenge the status of lawmakers who have left the state to block legislative proceedings. The conflict, now drawing national attention, raises fundamental questions about the limits of political protest, the duties of elected officials, and the powers of the state’s legal system.
Attorney General’s High-Stakes Move
Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton has filed a lawsuit directly with the Texas Supreme Court, targeting 13 members of the state House of Representatives. The filing seeks to have the lawmakers declared as having abandoned their seats after extended absences, a move that could fundamentally reshape the state legislature’s composition.
Paxton’s case uses quo warranto proceedings—a rarely invoked legal mechanism typically reserved for challenging an individual’s right to hold office. His petition argues that the lawmakers’ refusal to attend sessions amounts to a forfeiture of their positions, effectively creating vacancies.
“These legislators have walked away from their responsibilities and left their constituents without representation,” Paxton said in a statement. “Their deliberate absence undermines the constitutional process they swore to uphold.”
Constitutional and Legal Arguments
The lawsuit argues that while Texas law allows the minority party broad opportunities to voice dissent, it does not authorize coordinated boycotts that prevent the legislature from functioning. The filing claims that ignoring arrest warrants, remaining outside state borders, and publicly declaring an intention to block legislative business show clear “intent to relinquish and abandon” office.
If successful, this legal argument would mark a first in Texas history. The case hinges on whether prolonged absence—combined with public statements—can legally constitute abandonment without a formal resignation.
Democrats’ Strategy and Justification
The 13 Democratic lawmakers named in the suit left Texas to prevent a quorum, thereby halting legislation they consider harmful to voting rights and democratic representation. Many have remained active in public events and media appearances from locations outside the state, including Chicago.
Supporters describe their absence as an act of civil resistance, designed to protect what they view as fundamental democratic principles. The lawmakers have relied on a rule preventing state authorities from arresting legislators who are outside Texas, effectively placing themselves beyond immediate enforcement.
Escalating Enforcement Efforts
The dispute intensified when federal officials became involved. U.S. Senator John Cornyn announced that FBI Director Kash Patel had agreed to assist in locating and potentially detaining the absent lawmakers. This marks a significant escalation, blurring the lines between state-level legislative disputes and federal law enforcement actions.
What Comes Next
The Texas Supreme Court will now consider whether the lawmakers’ extended absence and public statements amount to a legal forfeiture of office. A ruling in favor of Paxton could set a precedent not only for Texas but for similar legislative walkouts in other states.
As both sides prepare for a potentially lengthy court battle, the case continues to spark debate over the balance between political protest and constitutional duty—an argument likely to resonate far beyond the Lone Star State.
