Trump named Tom Homan his “border Czar,” but after serving as a local cop with the West Carthage, NY police, he joined the Immigration and Naturalization Serve and was appointed by President Obama to the position of “Immigration and Customs Enforcement’s executive associate director of enforcement and removal operations” in 2013. Obama awarded Homan the Presidential Rank Award in 2015, and WaPo praised his service.
Thomas Homan deports people. And he’s really good at it.
As it turned out, there was a reason for this.
But the bottom line is, that plane was full of — of people designated as terrorists, number one. Number two, every — every Venezuelan migrant on that flight was a TDA member based on numerous criminal investigation, on intelligence reports, and a lot of work by ICE officers. Matter of fact, two days after that flight took off, I even had a discussion with the acting director of ICE and we — he reiterated that every person, every Venezuelan on that plane was a known member of the TDA.
In other words, they’re “guilty” because he says they’re really certain they’re guilty, and if there was any doubt, the director of ICE “reiterated” that they were guilty. What more could anyone want?*
KARL: Do they have any due process at all?
HOMAN: Due process — what was Laken Riley’s due process?
(That’s a “no”) pic.twitter.com/cqN5KQn0FV
— Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) March 23, 2025
The “Laken Riley” rationale has become something of a mantra to defenders of extraordinary rendition, who, like Homan, don’t believe they are doing anything wrong by depriving the deported of due process, both because they believe the law allows it and they deserve it. After all, if ICE says they’re guilty, how could they possibly be wrong?
Many people would immediately recognize Homan’s invocation of the “Lakin Riley” mantra to be simplistic and stunningly false. No, murder victims are not given due process by their murderers. That’s because they’re murderers, and murderers are criminals who, upon conviction for their crime, are punished. By no stretch of logic or policy does that mean the government should be no different than a murderer, a criminal, and employ the criminal’s behavior as the measure of the government’s behavior.
Most people do not need this explained to them. But then, Tom Homan isn’t most people.
When pushed on whether he would release the information about the deportations, Homan said the decision would need to be “litigated in the courts.”
“There’s going to be more litigation on this case, I’m sure. But what we did — what was done by the Trump administration was exactly in accordance with federal law, again, enacted by Congress and signed by a president,” he added.
Homan is talking about the Alien Enemies Act, there is little doubt that he believes what he’s saying, that he’s acting in full compliance with the law.
“We’re not making this up. We’re enforcing laws around the books.”
Like Karoline Leavitt, Homan is no lawyer and is merely regurgitating what he’s told, what he believes to be true. That there is “one cool trick” that nobody thought of before but legalizes what he’s been told to do, remove these “illegals” from the United States of America. And he’s really good at it. And those inclined to believe whatever their president, also not a lawyer I might add, tells them no matter how legally nonsensical it might be or logically bankrupt.
For the great unwashed, there really isn’t much of a concern here, as they are absolutely clear that these aliens are “illegal,” that they have “invaded” the US by coming over the border, en masse, through the holes in Trump’s fence illegally, and that they deserve neither due process nor, frankly, any concern for being shipped elsewhere. They “asked for it,” and they’re only getting what they deserve. Wipe away those tears, kids, unless you’re crying for Laken Riley, who was given no due process by her murderer.
But are they all really gangbangers, Tren de Aragua or MS-13? Homan is confident, but is that all we need to be assured they didn’t toss in a barber or a soccer player, neither of whom were convicted of any offense and weren’t here illegally? They may well all have deserved to be removed. Or maybe not.
But it no more falls to Tom “Trust Us” Homan than it would to any arresting officer in any prosecution. This is true despite the victims of crimes never receiving due process, because they are the victims of criminals and the government is not a criminal. At least it didn’t used to be.
*As the late Ronald Reagan astutely said, “Trust, but verify.” He had a point.
Among the “various techniques” cited by Homan for the intelligence gathering was implication via a sworn statement by “a known gang member.” We don’t trust them not to murder coeds, but we trust them to tell us who their fellow gangsters are, even if they are doing it in an effort to avoid their own vacation to El Salvador. Then, of course, everyone they implicate also becomes “a known gang member,” for purposes of tagging additional passengers for the flight. Looks rock solid to me. I don’t see how it could go wrong.
You’re still relying on Homan’s BS. That he says so provides evidence of nothing, and yet here we are treating it as if it’s proven because he says so. It’s nuts.
IIUC,Trump has said that he did not sign anything to invoke the AEA and claims someone else did. Not sure what the legal implications of this should be.
The problem at hand isn’t that Laken Riley was denied due process of the courts by her killer. It is that she (and all Americans) was denied due process of government in general.
It’s quite awful that Americans and perfectly legal immigrants are being wrongfully deported because the Trump government is dismissing its obligation to carefully consider deportation decisions.
But it’s just as awful — lethally bad — that the Biden government dismissed its obligation to carefully consider in-bound immigration decisions.
The people most apoplectic about this dereliction courtroom due process gave not a rodents’ buttocks about the other dereliction.
Yes, to lawyers (especially CDLs) who regard court room due process as sacrosanct, it is indeed a gross injustice. But many folks who are unconstrained by JDs can see that failing to make any effort to screen out murderers and rapists is an equal violation of the social contract. One is codified in the Bill of Rights and volumes of case law. The other in the founding principle that governments are instituted among men to secure our rights to life, liberty & the pursuit of happiness.
The government failed deportees, which is tragic and shameful. The government previously failed every American in a manner that literally got innocent people murdered. The lack of outrage about the latter in one corner directly results in a lack of outrage about the former in the other.
Both sides should be outraged by all of it. An outraged hypocrite is easily dismissed.
[Ed. Note: Hate Biden all you want, but Trump is president now and Biden has nothing to do with the issue at hand.]
What magic wand do you think the Biden Administration left in the drawer which identifies “murderers and rapists”?
Suppose that John Wilkes Booth had been taken into custody, later shot, and the killer said, “What due process did he give Abraham Lincoln?” I could understand his or her logic, even as I condemned the killing. At the risk of winning the Captain Obvious award, I note that Homan’s bringing up Lakin Riley is a non-sequitur.
We need not suppose. Some may simply recall:
Lee Harvey Oswald was taken into custody, was later shot, and the killer, Jack Ruby, said “you killed my president, you rat[, without due process].” (TBH, the bracketed language is nothing but this author’s flight of fancy.)
When that shooting was announced to the crowd outside, many cheered.
Tom Homans invocation of Laken Riley was a P.R. tool not a legal foundation for an argument. Homan is a smart guy and knows the law and how to use it. I doubt he would include that bit of logic in a court of law. I’m not a lawyer but I can identify a straw man in an argument. However, the court of public opinion is made for illogical, emotional appeals like this and lawyers use them all the time.
If one political camp is going to completely disregard the book of law regarding immigration than one is going to have to expect the other camp to invoke the book in it’s entirety. The real disservice to country and culture are the wild swings from left to right. The law is supposed to be a stabilizing influence. I would argue it is the defining element of western civilization and it’s main attraction. Using the law for political gain or for the purpose of creating chaos i.e. allowing millions of unvetted undocumented people into the country, is a betrayal of the very system of law that we rely on to keep us equal and protected.
It can be argued that a crack in a wall represents a tiny fraction of the area of that wall but who in their right mind would ignore that crack.
You don’t appear ready for books of law or logic. Best to start with something far simpler, maybe with pictures.