Minnesota AG Keith Ellison Thinks ‘Immigration is Essentially a Civil’ Matter
How does a lawyer not know the difference between criminal and civil courts?
Minnesota Attorney General Keith Ellison doesn’t know federal law, even though he served in Congress from 2017 to 2019.
The federal government enforces immigration law. For example, entering America illegally or overstaying a visa are federal crimes.
Ellison told Sen. Bernie Moreno (R-OH) that “immigration is essentially a civil” matter.
Um, what? Civil matters involve a person suing another for damages, personal injury, or breach of contract.
Here is the full exchange:
MORENO: I got a big shot lawyer like you. Just a quick question, if you enter the country illegally or you overstay a visa, should you be deported?
ELLISON: My simple answer is, sir, it depends.
MORENO: Okay, so somebody breaks into your home, should they be arrested for breaking entering? Or does it depend?
ELLISON: It’s an entirely different scenario.
MORENO: How’s that?
ELLISON: Because immigration is essentially a civil and breaking into my home is a criminal matter.
MORENO: Oh, Okay, gotcha. So if there’s, so there’s laws that should be enforced. So we shouldn’t enforce civil violations?
ELLISON: We absolutely should enforce them.
MORENO: So, but you just said that it’s a civil matter. So it’s different. So if somebody…
ELLISON: You enforce civil matters.
MORENO: So if somebody commits a civil infraction, it shouldn’t be enforced?
ELLISON: It should be.
MORENO: Okay. So they should be deported?
ELLISON: No. They should have due process that is associated with their petition. So for example…
MORENO: The act of entering the country illegally, you think we should say, “Well, did you really do it or not do it?” It’s pretty obvious that they did, right?
ELLISON: Well, I mean, it would depend on the facts of the situation, and then they might say…
MORENO: I just gave you the facts right. Entered the country without permission.
ELLISON: But Senator, what if they had a good faith basis to say they would be persecuted in their home country and subjected to real oppression there, under international law, there are provisions for them to make a case.
MORENO: That’s a phenomenal, phenomenal point, Mexico and Canada. Do you consider those to be safe countries? Or no?
ELLISON: Generally, I do. But there are…
MORENO: Generally you do? Well, you border Canada. Don’t insult your neighbors to the north.
ELLISON: No, I love my neighbors.
MORENO: Is it a generally safe country?
ELLISON: Generally, yes.
MORENO: So that somebody seeking asylum could certainly be safe in Canada and Mexico now.
ELLISON: Now so like, if somebody we do know that in Mexico, which is another country I truly admire and think it’s a wonderful country, but there have been cases of persecution. People who I have legitimate fear…
MORENO: Aren’t safe in Mexico? Refugees cannot be that safe in Mexico?
ELLISON: Some might not be, and I think…
MORENO: Maybe then we shouldn’t have a free trade agreement with them then.
ELLISON: I didn’t say that, but what I would say, Senator, is that we should hear their petition. We should at least hear it out. We should say is, is there a well founded legitimate fear of persecution in your home…
MORENO: That can’t happen in Mexico?
ELLISON: Well, I think that we should just follow the international protocols that existed.
MORENO: And it is, which is that you seek asylum in your nearest country that you are seeking asylum in. But it sounds, it sounds to me, that that your answer is, no.
🔥🚨 BREAKING: Minnesota AG Keith Ellison gets BOMBED by Rep. Bernie Moreno.
MORENO: "If you enter the country illegally, or you overstay a visa, should you be deported?"
ELLISON: "It depends…"
MORENO: "So if someone breaks into your home, should they be arrested or does it… pic.twitter.com/ksgziWADOK
— The Patriot Oasis™ (@ThePatriotOasis) February 12, 2026
Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.
Comments
He knows. He just wants to undermine America
That’s what I was thinking, too. Ellison is a partisan political operative first, a lawyer … once in a while? He knows immigration law is LAW. He just doesn’t want to say so because it would undermine his insurrectionist activities.
Gotta love Moreno. So smart and smooth in his delivery to that fool Ellison.
Greasy, corrupt and incompetent Islamofascist/Muslim supremacist bigot-hustler, Keith “Hakim” Ellison is a vile snd evil disgrace.
Senator Moreno should have asked the hustler if he believes that his Somali Muslim grifter/thief co-religionists have used the U.S. “like an ATM machine.” That was the slander that Ellison had used, to denigrate Israel and Israeli Jews.
“Keith Ellison thinks…”
You lost me right there.
Does a bank robber have a legally-enforceable property interest in the money he steals? Does he have such an interest in the money even if he’s found innocent of the crime? No, he does not.
This is why those who enter the country illegally have no legally-enforceable liberty interest in remaining here (certain narrow exceptions aside, and people claiming such exceptions can just as well enter legally to claim them, e.g. there’s no need for someone claiming asylum to enter illegally). Law breakers have no right to the fruits of their actions, whether the fruit is stolen property or the benefits of being allowed to remain illegally in any country.
Also remember that deportation to one’s home country is not punishment. It is an administrative remedy to the unauthorized presence of someone within the country, analogous to the property owner who ejects an uninvited neighbor who crashes his backyard party. A person not invited or extended permission to attend the party can be immediately removed at the discretion of the property owner. The intruder has no legally-enforceable right to remain at the party – even if the intruder has a familial relation to others at the party, including the host.
Interesting choice of words, especially considering how the Communists aren’t being all civil about protecting their criminals
Can we deport Ellison? I don’t care how long his forbearers were in this country. Just consider him to have been voted out the country by his peers like on the show Survivor.
Another DEI puppy reveals his abject stupidity. What’s the over/under on his IQ? 93?
That’s much too generous.
Black Muslim convert-morons, such as Ellison, are especially stupid, gullible and foolish.
These dopes earnestly believe that the ideology of “Submission” represents some sort of liberation theology for American blacks, and are totally ignorant of, or, indifferent to, Arab Muslims’ seminal role in the African slave trade.
Ellison is or was NOI, which has nothing to do with Arab Moslems. NOI is to real Moslems as the antisemitic “Black Hebrews” are to real Jews.
You’re missing the point, entirely, with your rush to display know-it-all pedantry.
The obvious point is that Ellison and other black converts see Islamic ideology, broadly, as a liberating theology.
That Ellison doesn’t follow Wahabi/Arab-influenced Islam, is totally irrelevant. The point is that any self-aware and historically aware black American should fairly be loathe to convert to a religious ideology when that ideology’s adherents played a major role in the African slave trade. Especially given American blacks’ sensitivity, with respect to the history of slavery.
That Islam boasts myriad sub-sects, and, that Ellison is a Nation of Islam clown, is irrelevant. Islam — of whatever flavor/iteration, is his religion.
You’re the one missing the point. NOI is not Islam, just as the religion of the “Black Hebrews” is not Judaism. It’s not the religion that pioneered the slave trade. It’s a kooky and dangerous religion, even more dangerous than genuine Islam, but it isn’t Islam.
It does not matter if illegal immigration is a civil or criminal matter it is Congressional Law with set rules for deportation of the illegal aliens. This has setup Immigration Judges run under Admin to deport the aliens. The problem is that District and Appeal Judges have been interfering with the Congressional Law and the Immigration Judges.
Sorry, Ms Chastain, Ellison is correct on this and you are not.
Entering illegally is a crime; overstaying a visa is not. Nor is staying here once one has entered illegally; the entry is a crime, the staying isn’t.
That is correct. While an illegal entrant can be criminally prosecuted for the act of entry, that almost never happens. Immigration proceedings are civil, not criminal.
Civil matters involve anything that isn’t criminal. Any court case that is not a prosecution is a civil case.
None of that justifies Ellison’s position, but he is correctly defining the terms.
What don’t you understand about entering and staying being FEDERAL CRIMES….?!? Good gawd you get more clueless and pointless with each passing day.
Staying illegally is NOT a crime. And immigration cases are CIVIL cases, exactly as Keith X said.
You keep showing that you are clueless and ignorant. Every time you comment on the law you get it wrong.
Overstaying a deportation order is not classified as a criminal offense in the same way that other crimes are. However, it does have serious legal consequences.
Legal Consequences of Overstaying:
—Deportation: Individuals who overstay a deportation order may face immediate deportation proceedings.
Ineligibility for Future Immigration Benefits:
—Overstaying can lead to being barred from reentering the U.S. for a specific period, often up to ten years, depending on the duration of the overstay.
Impact on Legal Status: Those who overstay may find it difficult to obtain future visas or legal status in the U.S.
Distinction from Criminal Offenses
—Civil vs. Criminal: Overstaying a deportation order is primarily a civil violation rather than a criminal one. This means it is handled through immigration courts rather than criminal courts.
—Potential for Criminal Charges: While the act of overstaying itself is not a crime, related actions, such as illegal entry or using fraudulent documents, can lead to criminal charges.
While overstaying a deportation order is not a criminal offense, it carries significant immigration penalties and can complicate future immigration opportunities.
URL: https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/8/1227
So if somebody breaks into Ellison’s house and they have a good enough reason, shouldn’t they have a right to stay there permanently?
Seems like Democrat property is sacrosanct, but the rest of America is free for the taking.
FFS Ellison is 100% right Mary, immigration enforcement is primarily civil in nature, and overstaying a visa is not a criminal offense. A deportation is a civil or administrative act. Perhaps we should make it criminal, with all the processes, procedures, and protections that entails, but we haven’t.
Just to make it clear, Ellison is 100% right on the terminology. He’s 100% wrong on the policy issue.
Leave a Comment