Homan vs. Johnston: Clash Over Immigration Sparks National Debate

The battle over immigration policy is heating up as President-elect Donald Trump prepares to take office, with tensions erupting between Tom Homan, Trump’s nominee for Border Czar, and Denver Mayor Mike Johnston. Their fiery exchange has sparked national debate and thrust the immigration issue back into the spotlight.

During CNN This Morning on Wednesday, host Kasie Hunt reacted in disbelief after playing a clip of Homan vowing to hold Mayor Johnston accountable for defying federal immigration laws. Homan’s unapologetically bold rhetoric, which included a willingness to jail the mayor, left Hunt visibly unsettled.

Hunt described Homan’s statements as “more extreme” than some of the rhetoric heard during Trump’s 2020 campaign. She turned to a panel featuring Mike Dubke, former Trump White House communications director, and Democratic strategist Hyma Moore to unpack the implications of the remarks.

The controversy began after Mayor Johnston, during an interview with Denver’s 9News, declared his readiness to face arrest rather than comply with what he deemed “illegal or immoral” deportation efforts under the incoming Trump administration. While acknowledging the need for deportations involving individuals convicted of serious crimes, Johnston made it clear that he opposed broader federal policies targeting undocumented immigrants.

“I’m not afraid of that, and I’m also not seeking that,” Johnston said when asked about the possibility of jail time. “The goal is we want to be able to negotiate with reasonable people on how to solve hard problems.”

Homan, a former acting director of Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), did not mince words in his response. Speaking on Fox News with Sean Hannity, Homan cited the Supreme Court case Arizona v. U.S., which reaffirmed the federal government’s authority over immigration enforcement, to argue that Johnston’s stance was illegal.

“But look,” Homan said, “me and the Denver mayor, we agree on one thing. He’s willing to go to jail; I’m willing to put him in jail.”

After the clip aired, Hunt exhaled audibly, visibly startled by the bluntness of Homan’s threat. Turning to the panel, she questioned the impact of such strong rhetoric on the nation’s immigration debate.

Mike Dubke, a veteran of the Trump administration, defended Homan’s approach, explaining that similar rhetoric during Trump’s first term had played a key role in deterring illegal immigration.

“There are several stages to addressing immigration at the border, and one of the most effective tools in the early days of the Trump administration was strong rhetoric,” Dubke said. “Tom Homan’s language serves to restrict and impede the number of people attempting to cross the border.”

When pressed by Hunt on whether harsh rhetoric would discourage illegal immigration, Dubke confidently replied, “Totally. It’s super important. When the Biden administration came in, they toned down the rhetoric, and we saw a flood for a reason.”

Hyma Moore, the Democratic strategist, countered by arguing that aggressive tactics could undermine trust between local governments and immigrant communities, potentially leading to unintended consequences such as fewer crime reports and greater fear among undocumented residents.

CNN’s Kasie Hunt visibly stunned after playing a clip of Tom Homan saying he would gladly throw Denver Mayor Mike Johnston in jail for defying Trump’s deportation operation.

This is the best video you will watch all day.

Homan: Me and the Denver mayor agree on one thing. He’s… pic.twitter.com/ab4XMw5GrK

— Collin Rugg (@CollinRugg) November 28, 2024

The conflict between Homan and Johnston underscores the ongoing tension between federal immigration enforcement and sanctuary city policies, which limit local cooperation with federal deportation efforts. As President-elect Trump’s administration prepares to reintroduce stricter immigration measures, clashes between local and federal officials are expected to escalate.

Johnston’s defiance reflects a broader resistance from Democratic leaders in sanctuary cities, who argue that targeting undocumented immigrants en masse is inhumane and counterproductive. Conversely, Homan’s hardline stance embodies the Trump administration’s commitment to enforcing immigration laws to the fullest extent.

The stakes of this debate extend far beyond Denver. With the incoming administration signaling an aggressive approach to immigration, local and federal tensions are likely to shape national discourse for years to come.

Moreover, the legal battle over enforcement authority is poised to intensify. While the Supreme Court has upheld federal primacy in immigration matters, questions remain about how far local governments can go in resisting federal policies without facing legal repercussions.

As this debate unfolds, it highlights the enduring divisiveness of immigration policy in American politics. For Trump and his supporters, strong enforcement is seen as a cornerstone of sovereignty and security. For opponents, it raises concerns about civil liberties and the moral implications of deporting vulnerable individuals.

Homan’s threat to jail Johnston encapsulates the high-stakes nature of this issue. As 2025 approaches, Americans are bracing for intensified debates over sanctuary city policies, the balance of power between federal and local authorities, and the future of immigration in the United States.

With the immigration battle heating up, it’s clear that the next chapter of this national debate will be as contentious as ever.