Conservative Alarm Over Trump’s Immigration Tactics

Cracks in Conservative Support as Trump Administration Faces Backlash Over Aggressive Deportation Tactics

The first few months of President Trump’s administration have witnessed widespread applause from influential conservatives, particularly regarding his hardline immigration policies. However, the rapid execution of mass deportations—often marred by errors and concerns over due process—has begun to create fissures in the support from this traditionally united front.

Prominent voices, including notable podcaster Joe Rogan, have started to publicly question the administration’s approach. In a striking departure from his earlier endorsement of the president, Rogan expressed alarm over the case of a professional makeup artist who was deported after being wrongly accused of gang affiliations. On a recent episode of "The Joe Rogan Experience," he criticized the authorities for potentially deporting innocent individuals, remarking, “You’ve got to get scared that people who are not criminals are getting lassoed up and deported and sent to El Salvador prisons,” labeling the incident as “horrific.”

Similarly, the far-right commentator Ann Coulter, who has typically been a staunch supporter of Trump, raised her own concerns when a former Columbia University student involved in protests was arrested and deported. On social media, she stated, “There’s almost no one I don’t want to deport, but unless they’ve committed a crime, isn’t this a violation of the First Amendment?” Such dissent from high-profile conservatives is notable as it is uncommon for them to openly challenge the president on immigration issues.

While these objections are centered primarily on tactics rather than the overarching aim of increasing deportations, they highlight a warning sign within the party about the administration’s aggressive, and often hasty, methods. Recent reports have confirmed that the administration deported a Maryland man, who had protected legal status, based on what they later described as an “administrative error.” Despite acknowledging the mistake, officials stated that they are unable to secure his return home. They have also claimed the authority to deport Venezuelan migrants suspected of gang involvement based solely on superficial indicators, such as tattoos or clothing choices reminiscent of gang culture.

Indeed, there have been alarming examples where deportees have been accused of gang membership based on dubious evidence. In one instance, a deported man was alleged to have a crown tattoo used as proof of affiliation with a gang, while his attorneys clarified that it was a tribute to his favorite soccer team, Real Madrid. In another case, a tattoo meant to commemorate a deceased grandmother was incorrectly interpreted as evidence of gang ties. Such instances raise serious questions about the methods used by the administration to identify gang members.

David J. Bier, director of immigration studies at the Cato Institute and a former GOP aide, articulated concerns regarding the administration’s aim to maximize deportations, warning that such a strategy could lead to more mistakes. “That operating mode will lead to more mistakes, especially when you’re trying to evade judicial review of your decisions,” he stated. Bier dismissed the evidence of gang affiliation, calling it “astoundingly thin” and suggesting that any competent court would disregard such claims.

Amid this turmoil, White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt defended the administration’s policies. Addressing criticisms, she contended that the focus should not be on the deportation cases but rather on the victims of gang violence, asserting, “These are vicious criminals. This is a vicious gang.” Leavitt acknowledged a “clerical error” regarding the deported Maryland man but insisted that the administration would continue its current deportation tactics.

The administration’s approach reached further controversy when President Trump signed an executive order invoking the Alien Enemies Act of 1798 to target the Tren de Aragua gang, calling it an “invasion.” Although a federal judge has blocked certain uses of this law, hundreds of migrants had already been sent to notoriously violent prisons in El Salvador prior to the injunction. Conservative figures, including former prosecutor Andrew C. McCarthy, have recommended that Trump pivot away from the questionable legal basis of the Alien Enemy Act for deportations and return to conventional immigration laws.

While a few elected Republicans are beginning to voice their concerns—such as the Republican mayor of Springfield, Ohio, who described the abrupt deportations as damaging to his community—many others remain steadfastly supportive of Trump’s initiatives.

Senate Majority Leader John Thune, in response to questions about the deportations and their associated mistakes, maintained that most Americans support Trump’s objective of deporting illegal immigrants with criminal records. “I’m not familiar with the particulars of that individual case,” Thune stated, but emphasized the need to ensure that individuals who have committed crimes are returned to their home countries.

As calls for maintaining due process in this contentious policy area grow louder among some conservatives, others warn that the absence of due process could undermine the very principles that uphold American citizenship rights. Bier concluded by underscoring the gravity of the situation: “We’re talking about doing something extraordinary here for the government to sentence people to what’s essentially slave labor, torture, prison in El Salvador based on nothing.”

As the Trump administration continues to face increasing scrutiny and internal dissent, the future of its aggressive immigration policies remains uncertain. The discord within conservative ranks suggests that a reevaluation of tactics may soon be necessary if the administration hopes to sustain support from its core base.