In a fiery and unexpected clash on live television, CNN anchor Brianna Keilar caught New York Attorney General Letitia James in a spiraling defense of state policies after the shocking case of a criminal illegal immigrant shooting a U.S. Border Patrol agent surfaced.
What began as a seemingly routine interview quickly turned tense when James struggled to explain why Dominican national Miguel Francisco Mora Nunez—an individual with a deportation record and multiple arrests—was allowed to roam freely in New York City before allegedly shooting a federal officer in the face.
The exchange, aired Tuesday, has since gone viral, leaving viewers stunned as James visibly faltered, pausing mid-sentence and struggling to justify what many are calling a tragic consequence of failed immigration enforcement and a broken state-federal coordination system.
Keilar, citing recent polling data, pressed James on the widening gap in public opinion regarding immigration—specifically the difference between undocumented migrants seeking a better life and criminal illegal aliens with prior deportation orders.
“Why should those voters think that this is something other than the system not working?” Keilar asked pointedly, referring to Nunez’s ability to evade both federal and local authorities despite being deported once already and then re-entering the country illegally.
James initially responded with a carefully worded answer that attempted to shift focus to broader issues of fairness and compassion in immigration enforcement.
“At the outset, I indicated to you that, in fact, New York state and other Democratic states cooperate with ICE when it comes to criminal convictions. But when it comes to innocent individuals — individuals who serve as your nanny, clean your home, individuals who are our neighbors, individuals who just unfortunately are trying to make ends meet…” she said before Keilar swiftly interrupted.
The anchor then delivered the interview’s pivotal moment: “But both of these individuals have multiple arrests after lawful deportation orders. Why are those not opportunities?” Her tone sharp, Keilar refused to allow James to pivot or generalize.
What followed was a visibly shaken Letitia James trying to regain control. “And that is why the state of New York when it comes to individuals, as you indicated, individuals with criminal convictions…” she began, before trailing off and then repeating a similar refrain. “Then we cooperate with ICE. But it’s important that we make a distinction.”
Keilar pressed again, noting that many voters are not persuaded by vague references to general cooperation with Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), especially when specific individuals with known criminal histories are allowed to re-offend—sometimes with tragic consequences.
James, now clearly on the defensive, tried to shift blame, suggesting that ICE agents were engaging in actions akin to “kidnapping” individuals in communities, and claimed they often acted “without any insignia, without any identification.”
This accusation sparked instant controversy online and among law enforcement communities who view such rhetoric as a political attack on officers enforcing the law.
“Innocent people are being caught up in these ICE raids,” she insisted, returning to the argument that enforcement actions are often sweeping and indiscriminate.
But Keilar continued to push for clarity, asking why coordination with federal agencies isn’t stronger in cases involving repeat offenders like Nunez. She pointed to federal data showing that many sanctuary policies result in local law enforcement failing to honor ICE detainer requests—even when the individuals in question pose demonstrable risks to public safety.
James offered little in response beyond reiterating that the state of New York does cooperate with ICE “when it comes to individuals with criminal convictions.”
However, her vague framing seemed to dodge the heart of Keilar’s question: Why was a man like Miguel Francisco Mora Nunez—who had already been deported once—back on New York streets and ultimately free to allegedly shoot a border patrol agent?
The incident in question has reignited national debates over sanctuary policies and the limits of state resistance to federal immigration enforcement. According to initial law enforcement reports, Nunez was deported under federal authority several years ago, but illegally re-entered the country.
Despite multiple subsequent arrests in the United States, he was never turned over to ICE. His most recent arrest came just weeks before the shooting of the border agent, which took place during a joint investigation.
Critics of sanctuary cities argue that this is exactly the kind of case that proves such policies are dangerous. “This man never should have been in New York,” said Tom Homan, former Acting Director of ICE, in a statement following the CNN segment.
“This is what happens when local officials put politics above public safety. An agent was shot in the face because the state of New York refused to do its job.”
Supporters of sanctuary policies, however, argue that broad cooperation with ICE erodes community trust and leads to unnecessary detentions of individuals who pose no threat.
They claim local law enforcement is not responsible for enforcing federal immigration law and that asking them to do so undermines the justice system at large.
Letitia James has long aligned herself with this latter view, frequently speaking out against federal immigration crackdowns and characterizing ICE operations as excessive and harmful.
But her critics argue that Tuesday’s interview revealed just how unsustainable that position is when confronted with real-world consequences.
Social media was ablaze within minutes of the CNN segment airing. Clips of the interview circulated rapidly, with many users highlighting James’ visible discomfort and repeated failure to provide a direct answer.
“Letitia James just got dismantled on live TV,” one user posted. “She can’t explain why New York lets violent criminals walk the streets. It’s shameful.”
Conservative commentators called the interview a “mask-off moment” for progressive immigration policies. “This is what the far-left vision of immigration looks like in real life,” said commentator Benny Johnson. “Excuses, deflection, and victims—like a border agent shot in the face—left to suffer the consequences.”
Even some moderate Democrats privately expressed concern about the optics of the segment. One anonymous Democratic strategist reportedly told Politico, “When we’re out here trying to convince suburban voters that we can be trusted on law and order, this kind of performance really doesn’t help.”
Others, however, defended James, suggesting that she was put in an unfair position by a media environment that often conflates all undocumented immigrants with dangerous criminals.
“Letitia James tried to bring nuance into a conversation where nuance is often weaponized against progress,” one immigration advocate tweeted. “But the reality is, no system is perfect. We don’t throw away the Constitution because of one tragedy.”
Still, the timing of the exchange couldn’t be worse for Democrats. Immigration has once again surged to the forefront of national politics, with President Trump hammering the Biden administration over its border policies and Republican-led states passing increasingly tough anti-immigration laws. Cases like Nunez’s serve as a potent rallying cry for those advocating for stricter enforcement and closer cooperation between state and federal authorities.
Tuesday’s CNN segment will likely become a talking point for weeks to come. As political campaigns ramp up and immigration remains a key wedge issue, Letitia James’ answers—or lack thereof—could come back to haunt her and her party.
Whether this moment represents a broader turning point in how Americans view sanctuary policies is yet to be seen. But one thing is certain: when confronted with the consequences of those policies in action, even seasoned politicians like James can be left stammering on live national television. And in today’s viral media age, one interview might echo louder than a thousand press releases.
