Ilhan Omar, Elon Musk, and the Politics of Identity in America

In January 2024, Representative Ilhan Omar found herself at the center of a political firestorm after delivering remarks to her Minneapolis Somali-American constituents about her advocacy regarding Somalia’s territorial interests. These comments resurfaced dramatically in August when Elon Musk, the influential billionaire CEO of Tesla and SpaceX, shared them on his social media platform X with the inflammatory caption, “This sounds like treason.” Musk’s characterization came hours after former President Donald Trump had targeted Omar at a Pennsylvania rally with derogatory comments about her appearance and heritage, suggesting she should be “sent back” to Somalia – remarks that prompted his supporters to chant “Send her back!” The controversy highlights the complex intersection of immigrant identity, political loyalty, and the increasingly heated rhetoric surrounding public officials with international connections in today’s polarized America.

At the heart of the controversy were Omar’s statements from January where she spoke to Somali-Americans in Minneapolis about her opposition to a maritime agreement between Ethiopia and breakaway Somaliland. In these remarks, which were translated from Somali, Omar reportedly assured her audience: “The US government will only do what Somalians in the US tell them to do. They will do what we want and nothing else… As long as I am in the US Congress, Somalia will never be in danger, its waters will not be stolen.” These comments immediately drew criticism from political opponents, including House Majority Whip Tom Emmer, a fellow Minnesota representative, who called them “appalling, Somalia-first” statements that violated her oath of office. The controversy speaks to broader questions about the role of diaspora communities in American politics and the expectations placed on immigrant lawmakers when matters involve their countries of origin.

Omar, who became one of the first two Muslim women elected to Congress in 2018 and the first Somali-American legislator, has consistently been a target for criticism from political opponents since taking office. Her background as a refugee who fled Somalia’s civil war as a child and eventually became an American citizen has made her both a powerful symbol of the American dream and a frequent lightning rod for anti-immigrant sentiment. When Trump attacked her appearance with references to a “little turban” (though Omar typically wears a hijab, not a turban) and questioned her loyalty, he was recycling themes from his presidency when he infamously told Omar and other progressive congresswomen of color to “go back” to where they came from. Omar responded to Trump’s latest comments by calling them “bigoted lies” and describing his “obsession” with her as “beyond weird,” while asserting that his attacks served to distract from substantive policy discussions.

The characterization of Omar’s advocacy as potentially treasonous by Musk, who has over 180 million followers on X and whose comments can significantly shape public discourse, elevates what might otherwise be a standard political disagreement into something far more serious. Treason is specifically defined in the Constitution as “levying War against [the United States], or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort,” and carries severe penalties. While Omar’s comments could be criticized as potentially overreaching in promising to represent Somali interests within the American political system, legal experts would likely find Musk’s characterization to be an extreme overstatement. This escalation reflects a broader trend in American politics where disagreements increasingly involve questioning opponents’ fundamental loyalty to the nation rather than debating the merits of their positions.

For many Somali-Americans and other immigrant communities, the controversy highlights the persistent double standard they face in American politics. While politicians routinely advocate for foreign policy positions that benefit allies like Israel, Ukraine, or Taiwan without having their patriotism questioned, lawmakers from immigrant backgrounds often face heightened scrutiny when they engage with issues related to their countries of origin. Omar’s defenders point out that representing the interests of her constituents – which include many Somali-Americans – is precisely her job as an elected representative, and that advocating for American foreign policy to consider Somalia’s territorial integrity doesn’t constitute placing foreign interests above American ones. The controversy raises important questions about who gets to define American interests in a multicultural democracy, and whether the foreign policy concerns of newer American communities are treated with the same legitimacy as those of more established groups.

The episode illustrates how identity politics continues to shape American public discourse, especially when amplified by social media and high-profile figures. Whether one views Omar’s comments as appropriate constituent service or improper foreign advocacy largely depends on one’s political perspective and understanding of the role of diaspora communities in shaping foreign policy. What remains clear is that immigrant politicians like Omar face challenges that their native-born colleagues do not – having to repeatedly prove their American loyalty while simultaneously being expected to serve as bridges to their communities of origin. As America continues to grapple with its identity as a nation of immigrants, these tensions are likely to persist, especially when inflamed by social media pronouncements from influential figures and inflammatory campaign rhetoric. The question for American democracy is whether we can find ways to discuss complex questions of identity and loyalty without resorting to accusations that undermine the civic fabric that holds our diverse society together.