‘We’re removing public safety threats’: We interrupt your day to report that Trump’s border czar thinks tattoos are a crime

It turns out that under the Trump administration, your body art might just get you deported. Yes, you heard that right. Tattoos. Forget violent criminal records. Got a bad tattoo? Well, welcome to the dystopian immigration enforcement playbook.

During an interview with ABC’s Jonathan Karl, Tom Homan, the border czar for Trump,  defended using tattoos as a key factor in deporting people, even when those individuals hadn’t been convicted of crimes. Wnder Homan’s logic, tattoos are apparently not art—they’re evidence. Evidence of what, exactly? Gang affiliation, of course. Because, obviously, anyone with a tattoo is just waiting to join MS-13, right?

‘You Can’t Ignore a Tattoo!’ Trump Border Czar Tom Homan Defends Tattoos as Grounds for Deportations in Testy Exchange With ABC’s Karl https://t.co/EozIDJ9UAe

— #TuckFrump (@realTuckFrumper) April 20, 2025

Homan defended this approach by saying tattoos are “one of many factors” immigration officials consider when deciding if someone is part of a gang. But let’s be honest—this is a slippery slope that basically greenlights racial profiling. After all, who decides which tattoos are “gang-related” and which are just regrettable Saturday night decisions? Is there some sort of federal tattoo decoder ring we’re not aware of? Or are we just winging it and hoping for the best? The absurdity here is staggering. What’s next? Deporting people for wearing the wrong color shirt or for listening to gangster rap? The logic is as thin as the border czar’s patience during that interview.

And where, you might ask, are these tattooed “threats to public safety” being sent? Oh, just to some of the most notorious prisons in El Salvador. These are overcrowded, violent hellscapes where inmates often languish indefinitely without trial. For context (because the Trump administration didn’t seem to care much for context), these prisons are infamous for their inhumane conditions—think mass prison cells where inmates are crammed together like sardines, with little to no access to basic necessities.

Many of the people deported to these prisons haven’t been convicted of any crimes in the U.S. They’re being sent there based on assumptions and circumstantial evidence, like the aforementioned tattoos. Essentially, the policy boils down to: “We think you might be a gang member, so off you go to a place where you’ll probably never see the light of day again.” Deporting someone to a dangerous prison without a proper hearing or solid evidence is the kind of shortcut that sacrifices justice for the illusion of security.

Throughout the interview, Homan repeatedly deployed what I’ll call the “Personal Experience Shield,” a rhetorical device where one’s individual experiences are presented as trump cards that render all other considerations moot. “I’ve talked to young girls as young as 9 who were raped by members of these gang cartels,” Homan recounted. “I’ve held dead bodies throughout my career.” These experiences are undoubtedly traumatic and real. Gang violence is a genuine problem deserving serious attention. But here’s the thing: traumatic personal experiences, no matter how genuine, don’t suspend constitutional protections or international human rights norms

I’d laugh if people’s lives weren’t literally hanging in the balance. The truth is, there’s a reason we have due process. There’s a reason we don’t allow government officials, no matter how well-intentioned or experienced, to act as judge, jury, and executioner based on their gut feelings about tattoos. Those reasons are called “civilization” and “basic human rights.” And if that makes me a bleeding-heart liberal, then pass the Band-Aids. At least my heart’s still beating.