1. United States
2. N.C.
3. Letter

Thank you for your response on immigration and ICE. You argue that enforcement “restores credibility” to the system. Enforcement without proportionality, due process, and basic human dignity does the opposite. It erodes credibility—both domestically and internationally—by signaling that the United States is willing to abandon its own legal and ethical standards in pursuit of deterrence. If the system is broken, the solution is reform—not blunt-force tactics that sweep up asylum seekers, separate families, or rely on detention practices that have been repeatedly criticized for inhumane conditions and lack of oversight. Those approaches are not a substitute for policy—they are a failure of it. You also frame this as a tradeoff between enforcement and legal immigration. That’s a false dichotomy. A functioning system requires both enforcement and a lawful, humane, and efficient process for those seeking entry or protection. What we are seeing instead is an expansion of enforcement power without corresponding accountability or reform. As my senator, I expect more than alignment with the executive branch. I expect oversight. I expect a willingness to question tactics that may violate civil liberties or international obligations. And I expect you to engage directly with constituents’ concerns, rather than respond with prewritten talking points. So I’ll ask plainly:
Do you support limits on ICE detention practices and stronger due process protections?
Do you support independent oversight of ICE facilities?
Do you believe the current enforcement approach is consistent with American legal and moral standards? I would appreciate a direct answer.