Some Conservative Voices Raise Alarm Over Trump’s Immigration Tactics

Prominent right-wing voices initially rallied behind President Trump’s administration during its early months. However, as the government hastened to enforce mass deportations, concerns about due process and procedural errors have begun to surface, leading to divisions within the conservative ranks.

Among those expressing unease is Joe Rogan, a widely influential podcaster and Trump supporter. His concern was sparked by the deportation of a professional makeup artist who was accused—seemingly without solid evidence—of gang involvement. On his podcast, “The Joe Rogan Experience,” he criticized the case, saying, “It’s terrifying that innocent people are being rounded up and sent to prisons in El Salvador. This situation is horrific.”

Similarly, far-right commentator Ann Coulter, known for her hardline stance on immigration, questioned the administration’s decision to arrest a former Columbia University graduate student involved in campus protests. “There’s hardly anyone I wouldn’t want to deport,” she remarked on social media, “but unless they’ve committed a crime, isn’t this a violation of the First Amendment?”

Though dissent remains largely confined to conservative commentators rather than elected Republican officials, it is noteworthy given the usual reluctance of right-wing figures to openly challenge the president. While most criticism has focused on the administration’s methods rather than the overarching goal of accelerating deportations, these emerging cracks indicate growing concerns about the aggressive and at times haphazard approach.

In one troubling case, the administration acknowledged deporting a Maryland resident with legal protection due to an “administrative error.” Despite recognizing the mistake, officials admitted they had no means to secure his release from a Salvadoran prison. The government has also granted itself broad powers to deport Venezuelan migrants suspected of gang ties based on superficial indicators, such as tattoos or certain styles of clothing.

In one instance, officials justified deporting a man because of a crown tattoo, which they claimed signified gang membership. However, his lawyers explained that the tattoo was actually an homage to his favorite soccer team, Real Madrid. Another deported individual had a similar tattoo, which, according to his attorneys, was meant to commemorate his late grandmother.

A government document outlining criteria for gang affiliations suggested that wearing “high-end urban streetwear”—including basketball jerseys featuring the Chicago Bulls or Michael Jordan—could be grounds for deportation, particularly for alleged members of the Tren de Aragua gang.

David J. Bier, director of immigration studies at the libertarian-leaning Cato Institute and a former Republican congressional aide, emphasized that the administration’s focus on maximizing deportations is bound to result in errors. “When you prioritize speed and avoid judicial review, mistakes are inevitable,” he said. He further criticized the reliance on tattoos as evidence, calling it “astoundingly weak.”

“If this were presented in court, it would be dismissed outright,” Bier asserted.

The White House, however, has doubled down on its stance. Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt condemned media coverage of deportation cases, accusing journalists of prioritizing the rights of accused gang members over victims of gang violence. While she acknowledged the clerical error in the Maryland case, she insisted that the administration remained committed to its policies.

“These individuals are ruthless criminals. This is a brutal gang,” Leavitt stated. “I wish the media would devote as much attention to innocent Americans killed by these criminals as they do to disputing deportations. We stand firmly by our policies.”

President Trump reinforced his position by signing an executive order invoking the Alien Enemies Act of 1798, claiming that Tren de Aragua’s activities constituted an “invasion” of the U.S. A federal judge temporarily blocked the administration’s attempt to deport individuals under this law without a hearing, but not before hundreds had already been sent to infamously harsh Salvadoran prisons.

Conservative legal expert Andrew C. McCarthy, writing in National Review, argued that the administration should abandon its controversial use of the Alien Enemies Act and instead rely on established immigration laws. “The administration has done well to reverse incentives for migrants attempting to enter the U.S., which benefits both national security and the migrants themselves,” he wrote. “However, the president cannot simply expel people he finds undesirable. We are a nation governed by laws, not personal whims.”

Despite sporadic conservative dissent, few Republican lawmakers have voiced opposition. The mayor of Springfield, Ohio, expressed concerns to Newsweek about the harm abrupt deportations cause to communities, but congressional Republicans have largely endorsed Trump’s policies.

When questioned about deportation errors and due process issues, Senate Majority Leader John Thune of South Dakota downplayed the matter. “I’m not familiar with the specifics of that case,” he said, but maintained that “the president is right to ensure illegal immigrants who have committed crimes are sent back to their home countries.”

Bier underscored the gravity of these policies, emphasizing that due process is a fundamental safeguard for all. “What we are witnessing is the government condemning people to essentially forced labor, torture, and imprisonment in El Salvador, based on nothing more than a tattoo of a flower,” he warned. “Once we start dismantling due process, we erode the very protections that uphold the rights of all citizens.”