Open Borders Inc.: Who's Funding America's Destruction?

Overview
Michelle Malkin investigates the money, organizations, and powerful individuals she argues are driving an "open borders" agenda in the United States. The narrative frames large-scale immigration not as an inevitable social phenomenon but as a politically and financially motivated project supported by nonprofit groups, corporate interests, and wealthy donors. The tone is investigative and polemical, presenting the issue as a threat to national sovereignty, public safety, and middle- and working-class Americans.

Main Arguments
Malkin contends that a network of philanthropies, advocacy groups, technology companies, and some elected officials are aligned to promote policies that reduce immigration enforcement and expand legal and illegal migration. She asserts these actors benefit through cheaper labor, expanded consumer markets, political constituencies, and influence over public institutions. The book argues that grants, foundation funding, media narratives, and legal strategies form a coordinated ecosystem that normalizes open-border policies and undermines traditional immigration controls.

Evidence and Method
The narrative draws on publicly available documents, grant and donation records, organizational tax filings, news reports, and interviews. Malkin traces funding streams and institutional partnerships to sketch lines of influence between funders and advocacy groups, and highlights litigation and policy campaigns that she interprets as part of a broader strategy. Reporting is presented through case studies and profiles of organizations and individuals, often emphasizing financial ties and strategic collaborations.

Policy Prescriptions
The work calls for a renewed focus on border security and stricter enforcement of immigration laws, along with measures to limit funding and influence for groups perceived as promoting open borders. Malkin urges policymakers to reverse sanctuary policies, strengthen interior enforcement and deportation practices, and tighten oversight of nonprofit and philanthropic activities related to immigration advocacy. The proposed remedies are rooted in restoring sovereign control of borders and prioritizing national interest and citizen welfare.

Reception and Criticism
Reception has been sharply divided along ideological lines. The book found a receptive audience among readers skeptical of current immigration trends and those who favor stronger enforcement. Critics counter that the narrative relies on selective evidence, conflates diverse actors under a single conspiratorial framework, and downplays the economic and humanitarian dimensions of migration. Some reviewers argue the emphasis on funding networks amplifies guilt by association and overlooks the complexity of policy formation.

Significance
The account functions as a partisan investigative dossier intended to reframe the immigration debate by focusing attention on funding and influence rather than solely on demographics or labor markets. It has contributed to public conversations about the role of philanthropy and corporate power in shaping policy and has been used by advocates to argue for more stringent controls. The book is most consequential for readers engaged in the immigration debate, serving both as a rallying cry for enforcement advocates and a point of contention for those who favor more open migration policies.