Dr. Phil Says “I Don’t Think I’m Qualified to Talk About Politics” Just Days After Defending ICE Raids in Heated Debate With Bill Maher

In a development that has drawn significant media attention in the U.S. this past week, Dr. Phil McGraw – the famous television psychologist and host of Dr. Phil – surprised the public by stating:

“I don’t think I’m qualified to talk about politics.”

What makes this statement notable is that it came just days after he engaged in a fierce debate with Bill Maher over U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) raids.

A televised clash

On HBO’s Real Time with Bill Maher, Maher directly challenged Dr. Phil:

“Why are you going on these ICE raids? I don’t understand that. You’re a guy who we’ve known for so many years to be working to put families together, to bring families who are apart and heal them. And now you’re going on raids with people who are literally separating families.”

Maher pointed out the contradiction between Dr. Phil’s public image as someone who helps families overcome crises and his participation in ICE operations, which are often criticized for separating immigrant families.

Dr. Phil fires back

Dr. Phil’s response was immediate and blunt:

“That’s bullsh*t.”

He argued that “family separation” is not unique to ICE but is an inevitable consequence whenever someone commits a serious crime and is arrested.

“If you arrest somebody that’s a citizen, that has committed a crime or is DUI’d with a child in the backseat, do you think they don’t separate that family right then, right there? Of course they do.”

According to Dr. Phil, the individuals ICE targets in these raids are not innocent families but rather “the worst of the worst” — from those with lengthy rap sheets to convicted child predators.

“They’ve got a rap sheet, 12, 14 different cases long of child predators that they’re taking off the street… These are the worst first that they’re taking off the streets. Who would want them back in their communities?”

Two opposing perspectives

The exchange between Maher and Dr. Phil reflects the deep divide in U.S. public opinion over ICE’s role.

Critics of ICE argue that the raids are excessively harsh, leading to the traumatic separation of children from their parents.

Supporters — including Dr. Phil — contend that ICE is enforcing the law and focusing on dangerous individuals, thereby protecting communities.

The reality of ICE operations is more complex than either side’s rhetoric. Independent reports have shown that, while many arrests do involve serious offenders, ICE has also detained individuals with no major criminal history, sparking debate over target selection criteria.

Public reaction

Following the program, social media lit up with heated discussion. Many criticized Dr. Phil for “legitimizing” ICE’s controversial actions, while others praised him for speaking candidly about removing dangerous criminals from neighborhoods.

Some political commentators noted that Dr. Phil’s defense of ICE echoed arguments often made by conservative politicians — making his later claim that he is “not qualified to talk about politics” seem contradictory.

The “I’m not qualified” statement

In a later interview, Dr. Phil unexpectedly softened his tone, saying he doesn’t see himself as knowledgeable enough to weigh in comprehensively on political matters.
According to him, what he did was not engage in political debate, but stand up for justice and public safety.

“I don’t think I’m an expert on politics. I’m a psychologist, used to analyzing behavior and finding solutions for people — not arguing about policy.”

Still, observers argue that by stepping into a highly politicized issue like immigration enforcement and joining ICE raids, Dr. Phil inevitably positioned himself as taking a political side.

The heated backdrop of the ICE debate

ICE has long been at the center of intense controversy. Critics accuse the agency of being inhumane, especially after the widely condemned child–parent separations at the U.S.–Mexico border during 2018–2019.

ICE maintains that it prioritizes the arrest of serious offenders, particularly those with histories of violence, drug trafficking, or child exploitation.
Investigative journalism, however, has revealed a more nuanced reality: while ICE has indeed removed many dangerous criminals, there have also been numerous arrests of individuals whose only offense was an immigration violation, without significant criminal records.

Dr. Phil’s public image

For years, Dr. Phil has been known for his work helping individuals and families navigate emotional and psychological crises. His appearance in ICE raids, therefore, came as a shock to audiences accustomed to seeing him as a “family healer”.

Some media analysts believe Dr. Phil may have underestimated the public image impact of joining such politically charged activities. This risks branding him politically, which could erode trust among his more neutral audience.

The debate isn’t going away

Although Dr. Phil insists he doesn’t want to be a political figure, the exchange with Bill Maher has placed him squarely in the middle of a hot-button political and social issue.

This story is more than just two personalities sparring; it reflects the deep polarization in the U.S. over immigration, law enforcement, and human rights.

In this context, Dr. Phil’s “I’m not qualified to talk about politics” statement may be sincere, but to many it appears to be a strategic retreat after stepping into risky political territory.

Conclusion

The clash between Dr. Phil and Bill Maher is a vivid example of how public figures cannot easily remain “above the fray” once they step into political or social controversies.

Whether he intended to or not, Dr. Phil’s participation in ICE raids and his strong defense of the agency’s actions positioned him as a supporter of tough immigration enforcement.

In an increasingly polarized society, every word and action from a public figure can be politically labeled — and once that happens, returning to a position of perceived neutrality is no easy task.