Two Honduran women, both living in the U.S. illegally, were deported on Friday, April 25, accompanied by their American-born children. The legal and ethical implications of the case have sparked media and political debate, with differing narratives depending on the outlet’s political bias.
The story gained traction after headlines suggested the Trump administration had deported U.S. citizen children, drawing sharp criticism from immigrant advocates. Others defended the government’s position, saying the children left with their deported mothers and rightful guardians.
Download the SAN app today to stay up-to-date with Unbiased. Straight Facts™.
Point phone camera here
Polarized media coverage over word ‘deported’
News outlets on the political left — such as The Washington Post, CNN and MSNBC — largely echoed statements from immigration attorneys and advocacy groups, often omitting or downplaying the fact that the children were with their mothers.
The Washington Post: “Three U.S. citizens, ages 2, 4 and 7, swiftly deported from Louisiana.”
CNN: “3 children who are US citizens — including one with cancer — deported with their mothers, lawyers and advocacy groups say.”
MSNBC: “4-year-old with cancer among three American kids removed from U.S. by ICE, lawyers say.”
Conversely, right-leaning outlets like The New York Post, Breitbart and The Daily Caller focused on rebutting claims of child deportation, citing Trump officials who emphasized the children belonged with their legal custodians.
The Daily Caller: “‘Just Not True’: Marco Rubio Calls Out ‘Misleading’ Reports About Recent Deportations.”
New York Post: “Rubio, Homan dispute ‘misleading’ accusations Trump admin deported kids to parents’ country of origin: ‘They went with their mothers’.”
Breitbart: “Rubio Decries WaPo’s ‘Misleading Headline’ — Three U.S. Citizen Children ‘Were Not Deported’”
Differences in ‘bigger picture’ from news outlets
Left-leaning media also framed the incident as part of a broader due process crisis under the Trump administration’s deportation policies.
“The cases pile onto the legal and ethical questions surrounding expedited deportations that have surrounded the Trump administration’s push to deport immigrants (and in this case, remove U.S. citizens) with little or no due process.”
Axios reported
“The cases have renewed concerns that the Trump administration’s expedited deportations are violating the due process rights of both citizens and noncitizens.”
The Washington Post reported
In contrast, right-leaning coverage portrayed the deportations as a lawful execution of immigration enforcement. Outlets noted that the administration had been pursuing efforts to end birthright citizenship and that Immigration and Customs Enforcement actions were consistent with its mandate.
“President Trump has been keen on carrying out deportations across the country expeditiously. Trump’s team has also been fighting in the courts to end birthright citizenship, the policy under the 14th Amendment of automatically granting citizenship to anyone born in the US. Backers of his effort believe that ending birthright citizenship will eliminate a key incentive for illegal migrants to enter the US.”
The New York Post reported
“Homan said Monday that he is satisfied with the 139,000 deportations that have occurred thus far since Jan. 20, and praised the record low drop in border encounters since Trump took office. Just one month into Trump’s second term, border encounters reached the lowest numbers since the 1960s.”
The Daily Caller reported
Inside the case: What court documents reveal
The case involves two Honduran women, detained by ICE in New Orleans on April 22 and April 24. One woman had a 2-year-old child, while the other had two children aged 4 and 7. All three children were born in the United States.
Court filings reveal that an attorney for the 2-year-old child, identified as “V.M.L.,” requested an emergency restraining order to prevent the child’s removal from the U.S., citing a custodial arrangement with a family friend.
“Ms. Mack is a family friend, her custodian as appointed by V.M.L.’s father, has known V.M.L. for about a year,” the petition read.
The 2-year-old’s attorney wrote an ICE official, Mellissa Harper, “refused to honor a request to release V.M.L., stating that it was not needed because V.M.L. was already with her mother. Ms. Harper stated that the father could try to pick her up, but that he would also be taken into custody.”
Government attorneys responded in their own court filing, refuting claims there was any proof of another rightful custodian.
“Ms. Lopez Villela (the mother) made known to ICE officials that she wanted to retain custody of V.M.L. and for V.M.L. to go with Ms. Lopez
Villela to Honduras,” the filing said. “See Ex. A, Handwritten Letter from Ms. Lopez Villela. Importantly, the rough translation of that letter is: “I, Jenny Carolina Lopez [Villela], will bring my daughter (V.M.L.) with me to Honduras.”
Before that restraining order was ruled on, the two families left the country Friday.
A federal judge expressed concern about the deportation, writing: “It is illegal and unconstitutional to deport, detain for deportation, or recommend deportation of a U.S. citizen. The Government contends that this is all okay because the mother wishes that the child be deported with her. But the Court doesn’t know that.”
The judge noted the mother and child had already arrived in Honduras, limiting the court’s ability to obtain clarification.
A hearing is scheduled for May 16, with the court ordering the government to explain its actions more fully.
Officials, advocates and commentators react
U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio and Border Czar Tom Homan both insisted no citizen child was deported.
“Their mothers were legally deported and the children went with their mothers. Ultimately it was the mothers who were here illegally. You guys make it sound like ICE kicked down the door and grabbed the child and threw them on an airplane and it’s misleading and not true.”
Marco Rubio, Secretary of State
“No U.S. citizen child was deported. ‘Deported’ means you have to be ordered by the immigration judge. The mother chose to take the children with her, having a U.S. citizen child isn’t a get off jail free card. It doesn’t make you immune from our laws.”
Tom Homan, ‘Border Czar’
Democratic leaders and civil rights groups strongly disagreed, raising due process concerns.
“What he’s doing here is outrageous and against every iota of what Americans believe. It’s not the only instance. There are reportedly other instances of U.S. citizen children deported without any due process. Due process is a hallmark of what our country is all about.”
Chuck Schumer, D-NY
“’Deportation Donald’ is not allowing any due process for families in the state of Louisiana or anywhere else in this nation. Families in Louisiana are being disappeared.”
Alana Odoms, ACLU of Louisiana Executive Director
On “The Breakfast Club,” radio host Charlamagne Tha God criticized media outlets for emphasizing emotionally charged headlines without providing full context.
“I do think when the media have that conversation, we can’t rage bait, though. Because, you know, every time they say it, they’ll be like, ‘Oh, a 2-year-old got deported, a 3-year-old got deported. But they’re not telling the whole story of — their parent was here illegally, and so the parent got deported, and so they sent the child with them. Because when I hear it, I’m like, why the hell would they deport a 2-year-old? Why would they deport some child with cancer? But then there’s a whole other story that goes with it. The only reason I think that, you know, media should be completely honest and tell the whole totality of the story is because that’s when people, you know, label things fake news.”
Charlamagne tha God
Bias Breakdown: One case, two narratives
The media is largely highlighting and reporting the side of the immigration case that aligns with a political narrative. If a viewer or reader were to only get information from a left-leaning source, they may not know the mothers of the children were deported for being in the country illegally, and that ICE officials say the mothers wanted their children to go with them.
On the other hand, if someone only followed right-leaning sources, they may not have heard immigration lawyers say family members were trying to transfer custody of at least one U.S. citizen child to someone else so the child could remain in the U.S., and that a restraining order was filed prior to the flight.
The case is still playing out in court, with a hearing scheduled for May 16. But depending on how the facts are framed by media outlets on the left and right, audiences could be guided to different conclusions based on the political leaning of their news source.
For more episodes of Bias Breakdown, click here.
