In a recent appearance on Fox News Sunday, Border Czar Tom Homan leveled a forceful rebuke at Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY), accusing her of providing misguided advice to illegal migrants. The contentious exchange stems from a heated moment during which AOC told Homan to “learn to read” the Constitution in response to a Department of Justice warning—a comment that Homan claims reflects a deep misunderstanding of the country’s immigration laws.
A Lesson in Legal Realities
Reflecting on a 2019 congressional hearing, Homan recalled how he was compelled to educate the then–New York lawmaker about the legal framework governing U.S. borders. “Look, I forgot more about the Constitution and immigration enforcement than she’ll ever know,” Homan stated on Fox News Sunday. During that hearing, he stressed that entering the country illegally is not merely a breach of policy—it is a crime under federal law. Homan emphasized that AOC should instead study the specific statutes enacted by Congress, notably Title VIII of the United States Code 1324 and provisions within Title 25, which make illegal entry a criminal offense.
“It’s a crime to enter this country illegally,” Homan asserted. “Moreover, if someone harbors, conceals, or actively impedes law enforcement from doing their job, that’s a felony.” According to Homan, AOC’s advice under the guise of “educating” illegal migrants on their constitutional rights is, in reality, equipping them with tactics to evade law enforcement.
Revisiting a Confrontation on the Hill
The tension between Homan and AOC isn’t new. During a congressional hearing in July 2019 focused on the controversial family separation policies at the border, AOC attempted to pin the blame on Homan by suggesting he was the architect of the policy memo that outlined the separation process. Homan quickly corrected her, insisting he never authored the document and highlighting that even U.S. citizens, when arrested, may face family separation. This rebuttal underscored his position that the laws are uniformly applied and that the issue is less about punitive measures and more about enforcing existing statutes.
Homan’s recollections from that day serve as the backdrop for his current warning. He contends that by publicly encouraging a narrative of “constitutional rights” without addressing the clear legal prohibitions against illegal entry, AOC is inadvertently teaching those who break the law how to sidestep federal enforcement.
WATCH:
A Warning With Grave Implications
Homan didn’t mince words when he suggested that AOC’s approach could have dire consequences. Citing the tragic murder of Laken Riley—a 22-year-old nursing student from Georgia—Homan warned, “Let’s hope she’s not educating the next person who gets out and murders a young college student.” For Homan, the stakes couldn’t be higher. He stressed that those in the country illegally who have final removal orders on them are not merely policy issues but active threats to public safety. “These are bad people we’re looking for,” he continued, asserting that any advice aimed at circumventing law enforcement is not harmless but a direct facilitation of criminal behavior.
The “Know Your Rights” Controversy
The controversy flared up further during a virtual event hosted on January 11 via AOC’s Facebook page titled “Know Your Rights With ICE.” During this session, the lawmaker provided guidance for illegal migrants on how to navigate encounters with U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) officers—advice that Homan decried as potentially undermining federal enforcement efforts. In the aftermath, Homan revealed that he is working with the Department of Justice to determine whether AOC’s actions have crossed a legal line, potentially hindering ICE agents in the execution of their duties.
The Broader Debate Over Immigration and Enforcement
This clash between Homan and AOC highlights a broader, deeply polarizing debate over U.S. immigration policy. On one side, Homan and his supporters argue that strict enforcement of federal law is paramount to national security and public safety. On the other, AOC’s supporters claim that her focus on constitutional rights is a necessary counterbalance to what they see as overly harsh enforcement policies that disproportionately affect marginalized communities.
For Homan, the legal framework is clear. He contends that U.S. statutes leave no ambiguity: illegal entry is a crime, and any act that obstructs the law should be met with firm consequences. His admonition to AOC to “learn to read” the relevant statutes is a call for a more informed discussion about the balance between individual rights and the rule of law.
What Lies Ahead
As this debate continues to simmer, both sides remain entrenched in their positions. For Homan, ensuring that the laws are applied as written is not only a matter of legal principle—it is essential for the safety and security of all Americans. Meanwhile, AOC and her supporters argue that a reexamination of immigration enforcement is needed to address systemic issues and safeguard human rights.
The confrontation between these two prominent figures serves as a microcosm of the larger ideological divide on immigration policy in the United States. As legal battles and public debates rage on, one thing remains clear: the discussion over how best to manage the country’s borders is far from over, and its outcomes will have lasting implications for the nation’s future.
