Please Follow us on Gab, Minds, Telegram, Rumble, Gettr, Truth Social, Twitter

Only in 2025 Connecticut can you tune into a Zoom panel titled, “Tenant Power for a Green Future — Immigrant-Led Toward Sustainable Community-Controlled Housing” and watch activists who openly describe themselves as undocumented lay out a 40-minute list of demands as if breaking our laws automatically puts them in charge of rewriting them.

The presentation began with one speaker describing how she slept on a couch for months after arriving in the United States illegally, while others lived in overcrowded apartments, basements, or wherever they could fit. In her telling, these arrangements should officially count as being “unhoused,” conveniently paving the way for demands for permanent, taxpayer-funded housing regardless of immigration status.

From there, the wishlist only grew.

Undocumented immigrants, we were told, are being wronged because landlords expect the same basic documentation required of every legal resident in Connecticut. Credit history? A Social Security number? Proof of anything? According to the panel, treating those as standard requirements is essentially discrimination.

Application fees, background checks, and even legal security-deposit limits were portrayed as predatory tools used to “take advantage” of immigrant families — especially those with children.

One speaker insisted tenants can “criminalize themselves” simply by signing a lease written in English, as if the language of the country is an unfair barrier rather than the default expectation.

By the end of the discussion, the message was unmistakable: the routine screening practices every landlord relies on are obstacles to be dismantled, and the housing market should bend itself around undocumented tenants while everyone else follows the rules.

One of the more surreal complaints was that landlords “force” tenants into month-to-month leases. Ironically, this complaint came from speakers who openly admit the tenants could be deported at any moment.

Yet somehow landlords are the villains for not guaranteeing long-term housing stability to people whose very ability to live in the country is uncertain. In other words, responsibility for the consequences of illegal entry must fall on literally everyone except the person who broke the law.

Connecticut Democrats never miss a chance to brag about being a “welcoming state,” but the reality on the ground is a humanitarian failure they created and refuse to deal with.

In fact, they have gone out of their way to brand the state as a destination for undocumented immigrants.

Gov. Ned Lamont has repeatedly delivered the message directly, telling undocumented residents, “You’re welcome here,” and declaring that “Connecticut is a safe haven. I want people to feel safe here. I want people to feel welcome here.”

Even the state’s top prosecutor, Attorney General William Tong, reinforces the theme, promising, “We are committed to protecting immigrant families in Connecticut.”

The legislature has echoed it as well, celebrating the TRUST Act — a law that limits when local police can cooperate with federal immigration authorities — with the assurance that the law “ensures Connecticut remains a place where immigrant families can feel safe and supported.”

The political message is unmistakable: the state’s leadership invites undocumented immigrants in with open arms and feel-good promises — while offering no plan to keep them out of the dangerous, unregulated housing conditions their own policies have helped produce.

By encouraging people to come here without legal status, Connecticut Democrats virtually guarantee those families will be pushed into the only housing available to them — overcrowded basements in Hartford, rodent infested rooms in Bridgeport, and unsafe firetraps in New Haven.

These conditions don’t appear out of nowhere. They exist because the state actively invites people into a system where their lack of legal status leaves them unable to secure safe housing, unable to report abuse, and unable to challenge the slumlords who exploit them.

If Connecticut’s leaders weren’t signaling that anyone can come here illegally and expect protection, these families wouldn’t be funneled into the most dangerous, neglected corners of the housing market.

Democrats call this compassion, but it is their own policies — not fate, not landlords — that create the vulnerability and the exploitation they claim to oppose.

The panel made clear they weren’t simply listing problems but pushing for a political movement.

One activist declared, “We should organize and fight for change and for agency. We should dream together and make everything possible for all of us, regardless of our immigration status.”

The conference organizers themselves described the session as an effort to “lay the groundwork for broader, long-term demands” and to shift control of housing “away from private landlords and speculative investors and toward tenants.”

The panel dropped the act that this was about mold or leaky pipes. What they really pushed was a plan to grow tenant unions, rewrite housing policy, and demand social housing that is “permanently affordable,” “under community control,” and branded as “green social housing.”

And because no progressive movement is complete without a climate sermon, the panel also insisted that Connecticut must enforce “green” and “sustainable” mandates.

This includes eco-renovations, removal of “toxic” materials, expansion of green spaces, collectivist living arrangements, and strict environmental accountability for government and corporations. It is the most expensive possible version of housing policy — paired with the insistence that the poorest residents should not be expected to contribute financially to any of it.

The most honest moment came near the end, when the presenters declared, “No one is going to give us this. We need to get organized and push for these things together.” There was no humility, no acknowledgment of the legal system they bypassed, no faint recognition that they are demanding changes to a country whose rules they ignored to get here.

What emerged instead was an ever-growing set of expectations Connecticut should fulfill, backed by activist talking points and the confidence that any criticism can be dismissed as prejudice.

This is how the game works now. Illegally enter the country, declare yourself a marginalized class, demand rights and benefits, and shame anyone who objects.

In states like Connecticut, where activist groups have money and influence, this strategy works. And unless people who actually live here legally are willing to say aloud that this is not normal, the demands outlined on that Zoom call will quietly become the next wave of housing policy.

‘NO AD’ subscription for CDM!  Sign up here and support real investigative journalism and help save the republic!'