White House border czar Tom Homan on Monday defended Immigration and Customs Enforcement and Border Patrol agents against accusations of racial profiling after the Supreme Court cleared the way for immigration raids to continue in California while an appeals case proceeds.
Speaking to reporters outside the White House, Homan called the high court’s interim decision “a great decision,” praised the training and professionalism of ICE and Border Patrol personnel and criticized the federal judge who had initially blocked the enforcement actions. The Supreme Court allowed the raids to resume as the case moves to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.
Homan disputed media characterizations and the claims in the litigation that agents relied on racial profiling or acted without reasonable suspicion. "Despite what the media said, mischaracterizing me when I said, 'Well, you can have reasonable suspicions based on looks alone.' I never said that," he told reporters, reiterating that looks are only one of several factors considered when establishing reasonable suspicion. He said the totality of circumstances, not a single attribute, informs brief detentions and questioning by officers.
To illustrate his point about cumulative factors, Homan cited an example in which an individual had a gang-related tattoo. "But if the illegal alien has an MS-13 tattoo on his head, that's certainly going to be one of the factors that we consider when we add a bunch of factors together," he said. When pressed on whether ICE or Border Patrol use race as a factor, Homan said, "Of course I’m not. It’s illegal. We’re not racially profiling anybody. I just said we have to establish reasonable suspicion. That is the legal framework."
Homan also pushed back on reporting that he had disparaged oversight of enforcement tactics, asking whether critics had observed the agencies’ investigative work — surveillance, license-plate checks, intelligence reports, database searches and other investigative steps. He said those investigative elements built the basis for reasonable suspicion in the operations that critics have described.
On television Sunday, Homan expanded his criticisms to Democratic officials who have compared enforcement agents to historical totalitarian regimes and urged congressional Democrats to change the law if they oppose current practices. "So members of Congress, everyone that wants to attack ICE is disgusting. They're an embarrassment to the position they hold," he said, adding that if lawmakers disagree they should "do your job and legislate." He said the administration would continue to prioritize public-safety and national-security threats.
Homan also warned employers about illegal hiring practices and said future raids similar to high-profile operations at worksites could occur if companies employ undocumented workers. He framed such enforcement as part of broader efforts to deter illegal employment and reduce public-safety risks.
The dispute stems from a lower-court order that temporarily enjoined certain workplace enforcement actions, prompting litigation that reached the Supreme Court. The high court’s action allows enforcement to proceed while the appeals court evaluates the legal challenges to the tactics and procedures used during raids.
Advocates for immigrant rights, some lawmakers and civil liberties groups have argued that workplace raids and the methods used by immigration authorities can produce discriminatory effects and civil-rights violations. Homan rejected those assertions about intent, saying the agencies follow the legal standard of reasonable suspicion and that the Supreme Court’s decision affirmed the sufficiency of that standard for the operations in question.
Homan’s remarks come amid continued national debate over immigration enforcement, workplace compliance and the balance between public-safety objectives and protections against unlawful discrimination. The Ninth Circuit will now consider the merits of the challenge as the underlying litigation continues.