The debate over immigration enforcement in the United States flared anew this week after Representative Ilhan Omar (D-MN) accused federal agents of racially profiling her son during a traffic stop in Minnesota. The controversy, which unfolded in mid-December 2025, has drawn sharp responses from the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), ignited partisan divides, and highlighted ongoing tensions surrounding U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) operations across the country.
According to multiple reports, the incident began on Saturday, December 14, when Rep. Omar’s 22-year-old son, Adnan Hirsi, was allegedly pulled over by ICE agents in Minnesota after making a stop at a Target store. In an interview with CBS Minnesota’s Esme Murphy—aired the following day—Omar described the experience, stating, “Yesterday, after he made a stop at Target, he did get pulled over by [US Immigration and Customs Enforcement] agents, and once he was able to produce his passport ID, they did let him go.” As reported by WCCO, Omar further explained that this was not the first time her son had encountered ICE agents, claiming they had previously entered a mosque where he and others were praying, though they left without incident.
Omar’s concerns for her son's safety were palpable. She told WCCO, “I had to remind him just how worried I am, because all of these areas that they are talking about are areas where he could possibly find himself in and they are racially profiling, they are looking for young men who look Somali that they think are undocumented.” Omar’s remarks echoed a broader anxiety felt by many in Minnesota’s Somali-American community, particularly in the wake of what she described as an “epidemic of racial profiling.”
Just two days before the alleged stop, Omar sent a pointed letter to Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem and ICE Acting Director Todd Lyons. In it, she accused federal agents of “blatant racial profiling” and “an egregious level of unnecessary force” during recent operations in Minnesota. She asserted, “It is clear to me that this surge came in direct response to Trump’s racist comments about Somali people, and about me in particular.” These allegations came amid a broader pattern of heightened immigration enforcement activity, including a reported tripling of ICE courthouse abductions in Massachusetts and the cancellation of naturalization ceremonies nationwide, as noted in a December 16 report from AM Dispatch.
The response from DHS was swift and unequivocal. On December 16, the agency’s official X (formerly Twitter) account posted, “ICE has absolutely ZERO record of its officers or agents pulling over Congresswoman Omar’s son.” The statement continued, “With no evidence, it is shameful that Congresswoman Omar would level accusations to demonize ICE as part of a PR stunt.” DHS Secretary Kristi Noem added, “Allegations that ICE engages in ‘racial profiling’ are disgusting, reckless and categorically false.” The department emphasized that ICE enforcement targets individuals who are illegally in the U.S., regardless of race, skin color, or ethnicity, and that arrests are made based on “reasonable suspicion” under the Fourth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.
Acting ICE Director Todd Lyons echoed these sentiments in comments reported by NEWSMAX, calling Omar’s charge “a ridiculous effort to unfairly demonize our law enforcement officers.” ICE officials insisted that there was no record of any stop involving Adnan Hirsi, and they dismissed the claims of racial profiling as unfounded. The agency’s denials were reported by several outlets, including James Rosen of NEWSMAX, who posted, “Officials @ICEgov tell @NEWSMAX the agency has no record of stopping a car driven by the son of @Ilhan, as the congresswoman claimed.”
The dispute quickly spilled into the broader political arena. Supporters of Omar, including members of Minnesota’s Somali-American community, pointed to a pattern of aggressive enforcement and what they perceive as targeted actions against minority groups. Critics, however, questioned the veracity of Omar’s claims, with some commentators expressing skepticism about the alleged incident and suggesting that it was part of a broader effort to cast ICE in a negative light. One such voice, writing in a widely-shared opinion piece, asserted, “I’m pretty damn sure that ICE isn’t ‘racial profiling’ anyone. That’s a lie right there.”
The controversy comes at a time when ICE operations have been under increasing scrutiny. According to AM Dispatch, there has been a significant uptick in enforcement actions, particularly in states with large immigrant populations. In Massachusetts, for example, ICE courthouse abductions have reportedly tripled in recent months, raising concerns among immigrant advocates and legal professionals. At the same time, naturalization ceremonies—often a celebratory milestone for new Americans—have been cancelled in various jurisdictions, further fueling anxiety in immigrant communities.
Meanwhile, the political landscape remains deeply divided. Some Republican lawmakers have embraced a tough-on-immigration stance, arguing that strict enforcement is necessary to uphold the rule of law. Others, however, have expressed discomfort with the optics and potential overreach of certain ICE tactics, leading to splits within the party. The issue has also become a flashpoint in the ongoing debate over former President Trump’s immigration policies, with Omar herself linking the recent surge in enforcement to inflammatory rhetoric from Trump and his allies.
Amid these tensions, the lived experiences of individuals like Adnan Hirsi—and their families—remain at the center of the debate. Omar’s allegations, whether ultimately substantiated or not, have drawn renewed attention to the question of how immigration laws are enforced and who bears the brunt of those actions. For many in Minnesota’s Somali-American community, the incident has reinforced a longstanding sense of vulnerability, even as federal authorities maintain that their actions are guided solely by legal standards and not by racial or ethnic considerations.
The episode has also underscored the challenges facing journalists covering such contentious issues. As noted in the CBS Minnesota interview, the details of the alleged stop were not extensively probed, leading some critics to accuse the media of failing to hold public figures accountable. At the same time, the rapid-fire nature of social media and the polarized political climate have made it increasingly difficult to separate fact from allegation, leaving many Americans unsure whom to believe.
With both sides standing firm—Omar insisting on the reality of her son’s experience, and DHS categorically denying any misconduct—the dispute is unlikely to be resolved anytime soon. What is clear, however, is that the debate over immigration enforcement, racial profiling, and the rights of American citizens and residents remains as heated and consequential as ever.
As the nation grapples with these questions, the story of a single traffic stop in Minnesota has become a microcosm of a much larger struggle over identity, justice, and the meaning of equal protection under the law.
