Acting ICE director refuses to comment on Noem's future as Democrats demand impeachment, prosecution

Acting ICE Director Todd Lyons sat before the House Homeland Security Committee on Tuesday and declined to say whether Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem should resign.

Asked point-blank by Rep. Tim Kennedy (D-NY) for a yes or no answer, Lyons offered five words:

"I'm not going to comment on that, sir."

That non-answer became the centerpiece of a hearing that Democrats turned into a four-hour prosecution rehearsal — complete with calls for Noem's impeachment, criminal charges, and, in one memorable moment, speculation about whether a federal official is going to hell.

The committee's first oversight hearing on immigration agencies in more than a year was supposed to examine enforcement operations. Instead, it became a stage for House Democrats to audition their most dramatic lines against the former South Dakota governor, as reported by the Washington Examiner.

The Hearing Democrats Wanted

Kennedy pressed Lyons on the January deaths of two U.S. citizens — Renee Nicole Good and Alex Pretti — shot by ICE and Customs and Border Protection employees in Minneapolis. When Lyons declined to comment on Noem's future, Kennedy escalated:

"So you're going to look the families of Renee Nicole Good and Alex Pretti in the eye and tell them Secretary Noem should keep her job after their loved ones were killed?"

Lyons didn't take the bait. He stated he would not comment on ongoing investigations into the January deaths, and offered only this:

"Sir, the loss of any life is unacceptable."

That's actually the correct answer from an acting agency head whose department is in the middle of active investigations. But correct answers don't generate clips — and Democrats came for clips.

A Parade of Demands

The calls for Noem's head came from every direction. Ranking member Bennie Thompson (D-MS) opened the hearing with a statement that left no ambiguity about the Democrats' agenda:

"Since being sworn in, Secretary Noem has enriched herself, abused the power of her office, obstructed congressional oversight, and violated her oath to the Constitution. Secretary Noem is a liar with no concern for the lives of Americans killed by the Department she runs. She must go."

Thompson wasn't alone. The demands escalated throughout the day:

• Rep. Shri Thanedar (D-MI) called for Noem's impeachment and highlighted a bill he cosponsored to that effect. He also used the hearing to argue ICE should be abolished entirely.
• Rep. Nellie Pou (D-NJ) called on Noem to step down or be impeached, claiming she had "destroyed an agency whose very mission is to protect our country."
• Rep. Al Green (D-TX) waited until the end of the hearing to deliver his contribution: Noem should not merely be investigated — she should be prosecuted.

Green also revived a familiar chant, telling those "associated with Trump immigration" to say "Lock her up" — an explicit inversion of the decade-old rallying cry directed at 2016 Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton. The irony of Democrats adopting a phrase they spent years calling authoritarian apparently escaped him.

The McIver Exchange

Then came the moment that told you everything about the hearing's actual character. Rep. LaMonica McIver (D-NJ) turned her questioning into something that resembled less a congressional inquiry and more a tent revival cross-examination:

"Mr. Lyons, do you consider yourself a religious man?"

Lyons said yes. What followed was not a policy question:

"Well, how do you think Judgment Day will work for you with so much blood on your hands?"

Lyons declined to entertain the question. McIver pressed further:

"Do you think you're going to hell, Mr. Lyons?"

House Homeland Security Chairman Andrew Garbarino interrupted and cut off McIver's questioning as her time expired.

A note on McIver's credibility as a moral arbiter: she was federally indicted last year for assaulting a federal law enforcement officer outside an ICE facility in her home state. A sitting congresswoman under federal indictment for attacking a law enforcement officer asked a law enforcement leader whether he's going to hell. The fact writes its own editorial.

What's Actually Happening Inside DHS

Beneath the theatrics, there are real operational questions at DHS — the government's third-largest department. The administration has shifted its approach in Minnesota in recent weeks. Tom Homan, the White House border czar, took over the Minnesota operation roughly two weeks before Tuesday's hearing, and the administration has pivoted toward more restrained tactics since.

CBP Commissioner Rodney Scott, who appeared as a witness alongside Lyons, has been described as part of an internal push to focus enforcement resources on violent criminals and proceed more carefully and tactfully. That recalibration is happening in real time — a sign that the administration is responding to operational realities on the ground, adjusting without abandoning its core enforcement mission.

None of that nuance appeared in the Democrats' questions. Abolish ICE. Impeach Noem. Prosecute Noem. Lock her up. The policy discussion that an oversight hearing is designed to produce never materialized — because it was never the point.

Oversight or Performance?

Congressional oversight exists for a reason. The deaths of two American citizens in the course of federal operations are serious, and the public deserves answers about what happened in Minneapolis in January. Those investigations are ongoing, and Lyons was right not to prejudice them with political commentary from a witness chair.

But Democrats didn't want answers. They wanted admissions. They wanted an acting ICE director to publicly break with his own cabinet secretary on live television. When he wouldn't play that role, they moved to religious interrogation and calls for criminal prosecution.

Rep. Thanedar didn't just want Noem gone — he wants ICE gone. That's not oversight. That's an ideological project wearing oversight's clothes. The same party that spent years arguing immigration enforcement was too aggressive now demands accountability for enforcement operations — not to improve them, but to dismantle them.

The contradiction is baked in. You cannot simultaneously argue that ICE should be abolished and that ICE leadership must be held to a higher standard. You don't demand excellence from an institution you want erased.

Democrats got their clips. They got their chants. They got their hell questions. What they didn't get was a single moment of serious policy engagement with the men actually running immigration enforcement. The committee's first oversight hearing in more than a year, and they spent it auditioning for cable news.

The families of Renee Nicole Good and Alex Pretti deserve better than that. So does the public.