Political commentator Tiffany Cross ignited a heated national debate after forcefully defending her description of ICE detention facilities as “concentration camps” during a recent panel discussion.
Cross accused U.S. immigration enforcement agents of “kidnapping” and “disappearing” undocumented immigrants under President Donald Trump’s aggressive second-term immigration crackdown.
“This is the challenge I have with even talking about this,” Cross said during the televised exchange. “We are normalizing a government agency disappearing people… kidnapping people and transporting them to concentration camps, both domestic and foreign.”
Cross’s comments come amid escalating enforcement actions across the country, as President Trump, after prioritizing border security in his 2024 re-election campaign, signed a series of executive orders since taking office on January 20.
These directives included the designation of MS-13, TdA, and certain Mexican drug cartels as foreign terrorist organizations and invoked the rarely used Alien Enemies Act of 1798 to accelerate deportations.
ICE Operations Face Backlash, Violence
ICE operations this summer have resulted in widespread protests and even violence. Riots erupted in Los Angeles following a June sweep, with two separate shootings targeting ICE and Border Patrol facilities in Texas. Ten people have been charged with attempted murder in connection with one of those incidents.
Tensions have spilled over into the judiciary and politics. A judge in Milwaukee reportedly helped an undocumented immigrant evade ICE agents. In Nashville, Democratic Mayor Freddie O’Connell drew federal ire for releasing the names of agents involved in local crackdowns.
Meanwhile, Democratic Rep. LaMonica McIver of New Jersey faces assault charges following an altercation with an ICE agent in Newark, and NYC mayoral candidate Brad Lander was arrested for allegedly interfering in an immigration arrest inside a Manhattan court.
It Doesn’t Matter If There Are Gas Chambers
Cross’s explosive remarks drew pushback from New York Post Editor-at-Large Kelly Jane Torrance, who objected to the comparison of ICE detention centers to Holocaust-era camps.
“I think that’s kind of insulting to —” Torrance began, before Cross cut her off.
“I think it’s insulting what they’re doing,” Cross shot back. “It is not insulting to Jewish — I find it insulting that you could even fix your mouth to defend this disgusting behavior.”
Torrance attempted to clarify:
“Are there gas chambers at these, it’s not a death camp.”
“It doesn’t matter!” Cross interrupted. “It’s a concentration camp, what they’re doing. And they are disappearing people… less than 10% of these people have committed crimes!”
Her comment refers to recent investigative reports indicating that the majority of detainees arrested in ICE raids this summer were not violent offenders, contradicting official DHS narratives that allege threats from gang members and foreign nationals convicted of serious crimes.
A Nation Divided on Immigration and Rhetoric
Cross has faced criticism in the past for what some call racially inflammatory language, but supporters argue that her use of the term “concentration camp” is a deliberate rhetorical strategy to draw attention to what they see as increasingly authoritarian immigration policies.
Critics argue the phrase minimizes the atrocities of World War II and inflames tensions amid a fragile national climate already strained by protest violence, legal confrontations, and growing resistance to federal authority.
The Department of Homeland Security has not commented on Cross’s claims or the broader wave of resistance to ICE operations.
Media, Free Speech, and Accountability
Cross’s remarks reignite an ongoing debate over the role of media figures in shaping political discourse and the limits of free speech in calling out perceived injustice.
As President Trump continues his second-term push for border control, including expanded ICE authority and military-style operations, observers warn that political language — and public resistance — may only intensify.
For now, voices like Cross’s remain sharply divisive, but undeniably central to the conversation on how America defines freedom, safety, and human rights at its borders.
