In hearing Tom Holman interviewed the other day, I was struck by his passion for “enforcing the law.” He was being interviewed by Natalie Kitroeff for the NY Times Daily Podcast on June 16th, 2025, as the federal troops were still in L.A. at Donald Trump’s orders.
Here’s a brief exchange between them that’s worth reading:
Natalie Kitroeff, of the N.Y. Times: “Can you just start by talking us through your goals here? Are you trying to deport every single person who’s here illegally? And if so, why?”
“Well, look, we’re a nation of laws. We’ve got to enforce the laws. Entering this country illegally is a crime, and we need to enforce those laws. Because if we don’t, we send a message to the whole world, you can go ahead and enter this country illegally. It’s a crime, but don’t worry about it. Keep coming.”
“Which means more people are going to die making this journey. The Border Patrol is going to continue to get overwhelmed. So President Trump’s been clear, and I’ve been clear from day one. We’re prioritizing public safety threats and national security threats. That is our priority. But I also said from day one, if you’re in the country illegally, you’re not off the table.”
I was almost convinced, until I remembered: not all laws are fair and just. I also recalled that Homan is clearly subservient to the will of Donald Trump, as well as Steven Miller, the White House Deputy Chief of Staff for Policy. Miller (with the willing assistance of the odious Kristi Noem) has created a very cruel order to counter the chaos that Joe Biden allowed to happen at our southern border. But Homan is just, as he would say, following the dictates of Congressional legislation.
The problem with Homan’s passion, and his political position, is that he, like so many others, are bending the knee to the worst impulses of Trump, who is likely channeling Steven Miller. Please recall that Senators James Lankford (R-OK) (R-Oklahoma), Chris Murphy (D-Connecticut) and Kyrsten Sinema (I-Arizona) crafted the 2024 Border Bill that Pres. Biden would have signed. They negotiated the bill for months starting in late 2023. But Donald Trump has taken credit for tanking the bill by pressuring GOP members on Capitol Hill not to give Biden “a win” in an election year.
“The former president took pleasure in contributing to the bill’s failure Friday in remarks to members of the National Rifle Association in Harrisburg, Pa.”
“You give illegals taxpayer-funded lawyers, so they have millions of dollars in this agreement, in this deal, which we by the way killed,” Trump said during his speech, highlighted by Mediaite, potentially referring to a measure in bill that would have provided immigration lawyers to unaccompanied children under 13.”
https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/4459861-trump-praises-collapse-of-bipartisan-border-deal
If the bipartisan border bill (the Border Act of 2024) had passed in 2024, it would have significantly expanded the federal government’s authority to rapidly expel or deport certain migrants encountered near the U.S.-Mexico border, especially during periods of high border crossings. However, it would not have triggered blanket, nationwide “mass deportations” of all undocumented immigrants in the U.S., but rather focused on expedited removals at and near the border under specific conditions.
The bill’s provisions were focused on new arrivals and those apprehended near the border, not on the estimated 11 million undocumented immigrants living in the interior of the U.S. The expedited removal and emergency authority would have allowed for rapid deportations of recent border crossers, especially during surges, but not for sweeping deportations from across the country.
https://www.congress.gov/bill/118th-congress/senate-bill/4361
and
In which case, the law would be more in accord with the will of the people. Natalie Kitroeff asks Homan this:
“So Trump won the election on the promise to do mass deportations, but I want to talk about the polls here. Because while polls show a majority of Americans support deporting violent criminals, they don’t support deporting people who have been here for a while, who are deeply ingrained in their communities. What do you say to people who say, look, we voted for deporting all the violent criminals, but not for this more sweeping campaign to deport everyone here illegally?”
Homan’s response?
“The president was clear on his campaign promise to secure the border, which we have the most secure border in a lifetime and running a massive deportation operation. And that’s what we’re doing. If people don’t like what ICE is doing, then call your senator. Call your congressman.
ICE isn’t making this up. We’re enforcing the laws enacted by Congress and signed by the president.”
But the current U.S. President worked very hard to oppose a bipartisan bill that would not do mass deportations, the kind that tear mothers away from their young children with no notice to their families.
According to Physicians for Human Rights,
“Immigrants in the United States are facing increasing risks to their health and human rights following the announcement in late May by the White House Deputy Chief of Staff, Stephen Miller, that the Trump Administration set a goal for ICE to deport 3,000 immigrants a day from the United States. Since that time, apprehensions of immigrants have occurred with increased frequency in workplace raids, inside courthouses, and on the streets.”
And. . .
“The aggressiveness of these raids, and their occurrence near places previously designated as protected such as schools, hospitals and courthouses are causing intense anguish and trauma across communities, including health care professionals. Families are being destroyed as they experience separation due to the detention or deportation of parents, or the preventable death of a child unable to access cancer care. Children are losing their parents, and watching their loved ones be taken away in handcuffs. They are scared to go to school.
https://phr.org/news/ice-immigration-raids-endanger-health-and-human-rights-phr
It’s a simple mantra for Homan and politicians generally to say they are in favor of “law and order.” But the important ethical questions are, as usual, what kinds of laws, and what sort of order? It seems to be false that U.S. citizens favor the Miller-Trump “strict enforcement” of the law, especially when a more humane and sensible law had been crafted by Sen. Tom Lankford (R-OK) and others in a lengthy, bipartisan negotiation. Trump took full credit for killing that proposal in February of 2024, wanting to make sure that Biden could not take credit for fixing the border.
https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/4459861-trump-praises-collapse-of-bipartisan-border-deal
So, sure, enforce the law, Tom Homan and Donald Trump, that’s all “perfectly legal.” But why would you oppose a law that is more in accord with humane treatment and the preferences of U.S. citizens? Because demagoguery still works in our democracy, it seems. “Hot lips and rhetoric. . . don’t count much for nothing,” as Steely Dan once sang (“Lost in the Barrio,” on the Katy Lied album). Hot lipped rhetoric from J.D. Vance and Donald Trump about immigrants eating cats seemed to sway enough voters to go along with “mass deportations,” whatever that means.
It’s customary now to offer “thoughts and prayers” when have another mass shooting; with mass deportations, we can offer “thoughts and prayers” that the purveyors of radical rhetoric and ICE violence are eventually tempered by voters who are as caring about the common good as Homan, Miller and Trump are about politics, power, and re-election.