Murphy GRILLS Noem Over Deporting Legal Immigrants for Political Views — She Can’t Answer It

⚖️ A Willful Disregard for Law: Secretary Gnome’s Standoff with the Supreme Court

The exchange between Senator Chris Murphy and Department of Homeland Security Secretary Christine Gnome exposed not just an administration’s aggressive immigration stance, but a troubling, open willingness to disregard the legal authority of the U.S. Supreme Court and the fundamental rights of legal residents.

Evasion on Constitutional Rights

Senator Murphy began by highlighting the economic cost of the administration’s policies, noting that top AI talent is now leaving the U.S. due to uncertainty over their rights. He pressed the Secretary on a simple, foundational question: Does DHS have the right to detain or deport a legal permanent resident for simply expressing their political opinion?

The Secretary’s response was a masterclass in obfuscation. She repeatedly deflected the question, claiming that the Department of State makes decisions on legal status. This evasion is a fundamental refusal to acknowledge the power of her own agency:

The Evasion: “I don’t make decisions on legal status here in the United States. The Department of State does that.“

The Reality: As Senator Murphy correctly pointed out, DHS—through its component agencies like ICE—absolutely holds the authority to detain and deport legal permanent residents. While the process requires due process, the final power to remove someone resides with the executive branch, and specifically with DHS.

The Legal Precedent: Legal permanent residents (Green Card holders) are protected by the U.S. Constitution and possess significant rights, including free speech, though they can be subject to removal for certain crimes or national security threats. However, targeting them solely for non-terrorist political opinions is widely considered unconstitutional and has been challenged in court.

Despite being pressed repeatedly to clarify that DHS does not believe it has the ability to deport a legal permanent resident solely for political speech, Secretary Gnome would only state that the administration “has not detained or deported anybody who’s a citizen or has legal status.” She would not definitively renounce the ability to do so, leaving a chilling ambiguity that fuels the climate of fear Senator Murphy initially cited.

Defiance of the Supreme Court

The most alarming moment of the hearing came when Senator Murphy questioned the Secretary regarding the Supreme Court’s decision in the case of Kilmar Armando Ábrego García.

The Case: Ábrego García, a man with withholding of removal status who lived legally in the U.S. with his citizen family, was illegally deported to El Salvador and detained there in a “terrorism confinement center.” The U.S. government admitted the removal was an “administrative error.“

The Supreme Court Order: The Supreme Court unanimously ruled that the government must “facilitate” Ábrego García’s return to the United States.

The Secretary’s Defiance: Secretary Gnome openly contradicted and disregarded the Supreme Court’s explicit order, stating, “Grego Garcia is a citizen of El Salvador and should never have been in this country and will not be coming back to this country.” She went on to call him a “terrorist,” a “human smuggler,” and a “wife beater.” When Senator Murphy asked if the Supreme Court order required her to facilitate his return, she dodged the question and instead shifted the responsibility: “It is up to the president of the Al Salvador to make the decision is coming back.“

Senator Murphy rightly condemned this as “incredibly chilling for the balance of powers in a democracy,” calling it a decision to “willfully ignore the ruling” of the highest court. The administration’s position—to accuse the deportee of crimes and foreign affiliations after their illegal deportation and subsequent detention abroad—amounts to using executive fiat and foreign policy to circumvent judicial review and due process.

Weaponizing the Budget

Finally, Senator Murphy addressed the apparent impoundment of funds allocated by Congress to the Shelter and Services Program (SSP), which provides humanitarian aid for migrants.

The Concern: Despite the fund containing approximately $600 million, the Secretary has not spent a significant portion of it. Senator Murphy argued that this money was part of a bipartisan budget compromise, where Democrats accepted Republican priorities in exchange for the SSP funding.

The Secretary’s Rationale: Secretary Gnome claimed the previous administration was using the program to “facilitate illegal immigration and shelter for criminals.” She asserted that DHS is following the law, but again, she refused to provide a clear commitment, only stating: “We’re going to follow the authorities that we have… for how Congress appropriates funds.”

The Implication: Senator Murphy concluded that if the administration selectively spends funds only on its own priorities while ignoring those prioritized by the opposing party—a clear act of political impoundment—it destroys the possibility of a functional, bipartisan budget process in the future. This selective non-spending is viewed as another mechanism for the executive branch to undermine the legislative branch.