Drew Pavlou, an Australian influencer and self-described activist, claims he was removed from the United States at LAX after Billie Eilish's legal team allegedly flagged him to the Department of Homeland Security. His offense? A crowdfunding campaign — launched as a joke, he says — to "move into" Eilish's multi-million-dollar Los Angeles mansion.

Fox News reported that the U.S. Customs and Border Protection flatly denied the story:

"Claims that this individual's admissibility was tied to external reports regarding Billie Eilish are false."

So what actually happened? The answer depends entirely on whom you believe — a shitposting Australian with a flair for the dramatic, or the federal agency that processed him. The truth is probably less interesting than either version, but the whole episode does illuminate something real about the culture we're living in.

The Stunt

The backstory starts at the 2026 Grammy Awards. Eilish, 24, won Song of the Year and used her acceptance speech to wade into immigration politics with the now-familiar line:

"No one is illegal on stolen land."

Pavlou responded the way a certain breed of internet provocateur responds to everything — with a bit. Earlier this month, he launched a crowdfunding campaign to "move into" Eilish's mansion, a pointed mockery of her open-borders posturing. The logic was crude but effective: if no one is illegal on stolen land, surely an Australian can set up shop in a celebrity's living room.

It's the kind of stunt that lives and dies on the internet. It was never serious. Everyone knew it was never serious. But someone, apparently, took it seriously enough.

Thirty Hours at LAX

Pavlou wrote on X that what followed was a surreal ordeal at LAX immigration. His account reads like something between a Kafka novel and a comedy sketch.

"I spent 30 hours at LAX immigration trying to explain that my s--- posts were just a joke and that I didn't actually plan to personally move into her mansion."

According to Pavlou, agents questioned him about far more than a joke about a pop star's house. He claimed they asked about his history as an activist opposed to the Chinese government — and whether he had ever plotted to assassinate Chinese Communist Party officials.

"The agents were asking me about my entire history as an activist opposed to the Chinese government, whether I had ever plotted to assassinate Chinese Communist Party officials; it was legitimately insane."

He also claimed authorities asked if he planned to trespass on Eilish's property and told him he should have applied for a business visa, given his planned appearance on Stephen Crowder's show in Texas later that week. Pavlou posted what appeared to be his removal paperwork, though its contents and authenticity remain unverified.

A community note on X stated that Pavlou was denied entry due to visa issues, not deported. Pavlou pushed back:

"Community note is wrong, customs officials told me that I was denied entry because of the Billie Eilish posts."

That claim sits in direct tension with CBP's official denial. Pavlou has provided no direct evidence that Eilish or her legal team was involved in any way. His allegation that her lawyers "compiled a dossier" on him is exactly that — an allegation, unsupported by anything beyond his own posts.

The Visa Question Nobody Wants to Talk About

Strip away the celebrity drama and the internet theatrics, and you're left with something mundane: a foreign national apparently showed up at a U.S. port of entry on the wrong visa. Authorities told him he wasn't banned — just that he needed to apply with the correct one next time.

"They didn't ban me from the US but they said I have to apply with a different visa next time."

If Pavlou was planning a paid appearance on a media show in Texas, a tourist visa wouldn't cut it. That's not political persecution. That's paperwork. CBP processes these determinations every day. The system worked exactly as it's supposed to: a foreign visitor arrived without proper documentation for his intended activities, and he was turned around.

Pavlou, naturally, sees it differently. He cast himself as a martyr to the deep state and online comedy alike:

"Maybe evil leftists are still in charge of sections of the bureaucracy. I guess some people are in fact actually illegal on stolen land, and I guess I am just a BAD GUY…."

"I suffered for my art as an online s---poster."

"Honestly I am legitimately one of the most misunderstood theorists/artists of the 21st century."

That last one is doing a lot of heavy lifting.

The Real Irony

The actual story here isn't about Drew Pavlou. It's about Billie Eilish — or rather, the worldview she represents.

"No one is illegal on stolen land" is one of those applause lines that sounds profound in a room full of celebrities and collapses on contact with reality. It's a bumper sticker dressed up as moral philosophy. It demands that the United States abandon any meaningful concept of sovereignty, citizenship, or immigration law — delivered, always, by people who live behind gates and security systems in some of the most expensive real estate on earth.

Pavlou's stunt, juvenile as it was, drove a fork straight into that contradiction. If borders are illegitimate, why does your property line matter? If national sovereignty is theft, what makes your mansion any different? The joke landed precisely because it exposed the logic that open-borders rhetoric never intends anyone to follow to its conclusion.

Eilish's representatives did not respond to requests for comment. The silence is unsurprising. There's no good answer to the question Pavlou was really asking — which is why the stunt worked in the first place, and why it was always going to be more effective than any policy paper.

Meanwhile, the U.S. immigration system did what Eilish apparently doesn't want it to do to anyone else. It enforced its own rules. A foreign national without the right visa got turned away at the border. No drama. No cruelty. Just the ordinary machinery of a sovereign country deciding who gets in and on what terms.

Funny how that works when it's not happening to someone the left has designated as sympathetic.