Hearing ERUPTS: Senator Slotkin Confronts Kristi Noem Over “Sloppy” Deportation of U.S. Citizens and Children with Cancer

A routine Senate Homeland Security Committee budget hearing descended into a high-stakes standoff Tuesday as Senator Elissa Slotkin (D-MI) leveled explosive allegations against DHS Secretary Kristi Noem. In a confrontation that has sent shockwaves through the capital, Slotkin accused the department of “absolute dangerous overreach,” citing reports that at least 10 American citizens—including children undergoing treatment for cancer—have been caught in the administration’s mass deportation net.

The exchange highlighted a growing chasm between the administration’s stated goal of removing “dangerous illegal immigrants” and the harrowing reality of its implementation on the ground.

“Not the Good Old Days”: A Mandate Questioned

Slotkin, a former CIA officer, began her questioning by affirming her commitment to border security, noting that as a representative of a northern border state, she understands the need for enforcement. However, she quickly pivoted to the “chilling” reports of collateral damage.

“Either through sloppiness or intent, you have gone far beyond going after the ‘most dangerous illegal immigrants’ and gone into legal immigrants… and even American citizens,” Slotkin stated. She pointed to a specific, grim statistic: “By my count, you have 10 American citizens, including children with cancer, who have been deported out of the country.”

Secretary Noem remained steadfast, denying that the DHS had forcibly deported any U.S. citizens. “We have children that mothers have chosen to keep with them,” Noem responded, characterizing the removals as a choice made by the parents rather than an administrative error.

The “Habeas Corpus” Controversy

The tension escalated when Slotkin moved to the legal framework governing these actions. She took aim at Noem’s earlier testimony regarding habeas corpus, the fundamental legal right to challenge unlawful detention.

“You sat here in front of all of us and swore an oath to the Constitution, and that is not at all what habeas corpus is,” Slotkin remarked, referring to Noem’s suggestion that the suspension of such rights was a presidential prerogative. “It is a right that we all get, that American citizens get, that people who are in the United States legally have. It is complete overreach.”

Budget Cuts and “Cyber Insecurity”

Beyond the humanitarian concerns, Slotkin grilled Noem on the administration’s proposed $491 million budget cut to the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA). Slotkin argued that these cuts directly undermine the safety of local and state governments that rely on federal support to thwart cyber threats.

“You cannot say it’s the most cyber-secure administration if you’re cutting the program to my state and to your state,” Slotkin said. Noem defended the cuts as an effort to put the agency “back on mission” by removing “duplicative” programs and offices she claimed were focused on “censorship.”

FEMA and the “Mass Exodus”

The hearing also touched on the deteriorating state of the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). Senator Josh Hawley (R-MO) joined the fray, questioning Noem on reports that FEMA is on the verge of losing a fifth of its workforce due to early retirements and “deferred resignations” prompted by administration policies.

When Hawley asked how the agency would respond to disasters in states like Missouri or Connecticut with a depleted staff, Noem argued that a larger workforce does not equal a better job. “Better job is accountability to people,” Noem said, though she struggled to provide a specific plan for replacing the departing “dedicated public servants.”

A Policy of Rescission

The most emotional point of the afternoon came when the committee addressed the rescinding of a 2022 policy that provided specific protections for pregnant and postpartum non-citizens and infants in custody. Documents cited during the hearing suggested the policy was removed because it was “misaligned” with new enforcement priorities.

“How in God’s name would that policy be rescinded?” Hawley asked. Noem insisted that “everybody receives medical care” in DHS custody, though she admitted she would need to look into the specifics of why that particular requirement was adapted.

As the hearing adjourned, the primary takeaway was a nation’s enforcement apparatus in the midst of a radical, and often chaotic, transformation. For Slotkin and her colleagues, the “chill” being sent down the spine of America is not just about the border—it’s about the erosion of due process for everyone within it.