If you want the truth about what’s happening on our southern border, listen to the man who spent decades enforcing the law: Tom Homan. Homan told reporters bluntly that the Biden years weren’t a series of mistakes but a deliberate loosening of enforcement — a policy designed to release migrants into the interior so their removal hearings drag on for years and a future amnesty becomes politically feasible. That is not speculation; Homan says the pattern was intentional and politically motivated.
Homan now serves as President Trump’s border czar, charged with undoing the damage and restoring lawful order at the border after years of deliberate chaos. His selection was no accident: Washington needed someone who understood the enforcement levers and the ugly incentives that led to mass migration in the first place. Whether you like his blunt style or not, Homan knows where the rot is and where to start fixing it.
He explains the scheme simply: don’t put migrants in ICE detention where the law forces a quick hearing; put them into hotels and into the interior where court dates are postponed for five, seven, even nine years. That delay is the playbook — create a backlog, create de facto residency, then demand amnesty as the only “humane” solution. Homan’s description of this bureaucratic loophole makes clear this isn’t accidental incompetence; it’s politics by design.
Democrats and their media allies will scream that this is fear-mongering, but their reflexive denial doesn’t change the incentives. When policy rewards lawbreaking and punishes enforcement, the next logical step is to manufacture voters out of circumstances the state itself created. That’s not compassion; it’s cynical vote-maximization dressed up as mercy. Conservatives should call it what it is: a plan to alter the electorate by rewriting immigration rules to benefit one party.
Of course, the establishment press and left-wing outlets will use Homan as a foil, painting him with every smear they can find while ignoring the fundamental questions about national security and rule of law. Critics have loudly complained about his rhetoric and have pointed to other controversies in his career, which is typical when one challenges the open-borders consensus in Washington. Americans owe it to themselves to judge the arguments on facts — not emotional attacks from the coastal media.
The hard reality is that the border crisis has consequences: cartels profit, fentanyl floods our streets, and communities bear the costs while politicians run PR campaigns. The debate isn’t abstract; it is about whether a sovereign nation enforces its laws or allows its future to be reshaped by manufactured amnesty. Those who respect citizenship and the rule of law should demand real enforcement, not bureaucratic games that pretend to be humane while engineering a political payoff.
If Americans want a country that honors legal entry, protects its citizens, and doesn’t let political operatives rearrange the electorate, the path forward is obvious: end catch and release, close legal loopholes, and restore firm enforcement. Let’s stop rewarding lawbreaking and start rewarding the men and women who follow our laws and contribute to our communities. That’s not mean-spirited; it’s patriotism.
