Washington, D.C. — A new controversy erupted on Capitol Hill after Rep. Brandon Gill (R-TX) publicly called for the deportation of Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-MN) back to Somalia, demanding the revocation of her U.S. citizenship and removal from the country. The move has sparked heated debate across the political spectrum, raising questions about immigration, citizenship rights, and the limits of political rhetoric in Congress.

Gill, a freshman Republican lawmaker representing Texas, made the remarks in response to what he described as “anti-American” positions taken by Omar. Without citing a specific trigger, Gill argued that Omar, a naturalized U.S. citizen who immigrated from Somalia as a refugee in the 1990s, has repeatedly shown “contempt for the United States” and therefore does not deserve the privileges of citizenship.

“Ilhan Omar has spent her time in Congress attacking the very country that gave her refuge, opportunity, and freedom,” Gill said in a statement. “If she despises America so much, then she should not remain here. Her citizenship should be revoked, and she should be returned to Somalia.”

Background on Ilhan Omar

Rep. Ilhan Omar, a Democrat representing Minnesota’s 5th Congressional District, is one of the first two Muslim women ever elected to Congress and the first Somali-American member of the U.S. House of Representatives. Having arrived in the United States in 1995 as a child refugee, Omar was naturalized as a U.S. citizen at age 17.

Since entering Congress in 2019, she has been a prominent voice on progressive issues, including foreign policy, immigration, and social justice. Omar has often criticized U.S. military interventions abroad and has been outspoken against Israel’s policies in the Middle East—positions that have frequently drawn the ire of conservative lawmakers.

Her sharp criticism of American foreign policy, combined with controversial statements about U.S. alliances, has made her a lightning rod for Republicans. While Democrats defend her as a bold voice challenging the status quo, her opponents often frame her as unpatriotic.

Gill’s Argument

Rep. Gill, who campaigned as a staunch conservative and an ally of former President Donald Trump, framed his demand as a matter of national integrity. In his remarks, he accused Omar of promoting divisive rhetoric and undermining American values.

“Citizenship is not just a piece of paper—it is a sacred bond of loyalty to this country,” Gill stated. “When someone like Ilhan Omar consistently undermines that bond, we must act to protect America’s future.”

His comments reflect a growing sentiment among certain factions of the Republican Party that progressive lawmakers, particularly women of color and immigrants, should face consequences for controversial remarks about the U.S.

Legal and Constitutional Hurdles

Despite Gill’s call, experts note that revoking Omar’s citizenship and deporting her would be virtually impossible under U.S. law. The Constitution provides strong protections for naturalized citizens, and the Supreme Court has consistently ruled that citizenship cannot be revoked simply because of political beliefs or criticisms of the government.

De-naturalization typically requires evidence of fraud during the naturalization process—for example, lying on citizenship applications or hiding criminal activity. Political dissent, no matter how controversial, is not a valid legal basis for revoking citizenship.

“Rep. Gill’s comments may play well with certain political audiences, but they have no grounding in constitutional law,” said Dr. Maria Delgado, a political science professor at Georgetown University. “Deporting a sitting member of Congress, who is a naturalized U.S. citizen, is not legally feasible.”

Reactions from Democrats and Advocacy Groups

Democratic lawmakers immediately condemned Gill’s remarks, calling them xenophobic and dangerous. Rep. Pramila Jayapal (D-WA), chair of the Congressional Progressive Caucus, described Gill’s comments as “a direct attack on immigrants, Muslims, and women of color.”

“This is not just about Ilhan Omar—this is about an extremist attempt to delegitimize immigrants in our democracy,” Jayapal said. “It is un-American to suggest that dissent is grounds for exile.”

Civil rights organizations also pushed back. The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) issued a statement reaffirming that freedom of speech is protected under the First Amendment, regardless of whether one agrees with the message.

“Calls for stripping citizenship from political opponents are profoundly anti-democratic,” the ACLU said. “We must reject this rhetoric before it erodes the foundation of our constitutional system.”

Republican Response

Reactions among Republicans were mixed. Some hardline conservatives praised Gill for “speaking the truth” about Omar’s criticisms of America, while others privately expressed concern that such rhetoric could backfire politically.

A senior GOP aide, speaking anonymously, noted that while Omar is deeply unpopular among Republican voters, talk of deporting her risks alienating moderate voters and immigrants who identify with her story.

“This kind of statement excites the base but makes it harder for Republicans to build broader coalitions,” the aide said.

Omar’s Response

As of Monday, Rep. Omar had not issued a direct response to Gill’s remarks. In the past, however, she has often defended her critiques of U.S. policy as rooted in a desire to improve the nation rather than tear it down.

“I love this country more than anyone who has ever tried to silence me,” Omar once said in response to similar attacks. “Criticism is not betrayal—it is a demand for America to live up to its highest ideals.”

Conclusion

Rep. Brandon Gill’s call for Ilhan Omar’s deportation highlights the deep divisions in American politics, particularly around immigration, identity, and free speech. While his demand is unlikely to have any legal standing, it underscores how partisan battles increasingly center not just on policies, but on the very definition of what it means to be an American.

As the controversy unfolds, the debate will likely sharpen fault lines within both parties—testing Democrats’ defense of their progressive members and Republicans’ willingness to embrace hardline nationalist rhetoric.