The detention of 43-year-old volunteer firefighter Milton Geovanny Guamarrigra-Loja in Port Chester has stirred outrage and sympathy. He has spent years serving his community, raising a family, and working in the trades. He was pursuing a green card. But ICE detained him on a 19-year-old deportation order and a criminal record that includes DWI convictions. In an article published on August 11, 2025, the Westfair Business Journal reports that ICE stated, via DHS Assistant Secretary Tricia McLaughlin.
The question is not whether he is a good man or whether his contributions matter. The real question is whether laws are to be enforced as written or bent when emotions run high. If laws are applied based on popularity or sympathy, they are no longer laws in any meaningful sense—they are suggestions.
Many point to his role as a firefighter as justification for allowing him to stay. But if that’s the case, why didn’t the firefighters’ union step in to assist with his immigration status years ago? Did any elected official in Port Chester take action to ensure his legal status was addressed? Someone in the village must have conducted a background check. Are we truly to believe he had a 19-year-old deportation order and it never came up when applying to be a firefighter for the Village of Port Chester? If so, then the system is broken on multiple levels. And while supporters highlight his service, they often avoid acknowledging that he has multiple convictions for driving under the influence—offenses that put lives at risk. This is not a minor oversight; it is a serious public safety concern. Overlooking it because he has done commendable work sets a dangerous precedent, where rules are bent for those with the right image or the loudest advocates.
When exceptions become the rule, the consequences are predictable. Others in similar situations will expect the same treatment. Enforcement becomes inconsistent. The public loses trust in the system. Over time, the law’s deterrent effect erodes, and the divide between those who believe in the consistent application of the law and those who want case-by-case exceptions grows wider.
The consequences extend beyond individual cases. One policy choice that has quietly reshaped immigration enforcement is the refusal of some counties to let ICE pick up individuals directly from local jails. When I worked at the Westchester County Jail during the Obama administration, the county allowed ICE to take custody of people who had completed their sentences—whatever their crimes. It was straightforward, it kept officers safe, and it avoided unnecessary public confrontations. Tom Homan, then a senior ICE official, warned from the beginning that if local jurisdictions shut ICE out of the jails, agents would have no choice but to go into neighborhoods to make arrests. That is exactly what we see now. Municipalities’ decisions have consequences, and when those decisions limit enforcement in controlled environments, the result is more enforcement in public spaces—often with higher risks for both officers and bystanders.
There is also a deeper failure that no one wants to address. If people are in the United States for 10, 20, or even 30 years and have never completed the process of becoming a legal immigrant, it is a failure on multiple levels. It is a failure of the system for being inefficient and bureaucratic. It is a failure of personal responsibility for not making legal status a top priority. And it is a failure of politicians—Democrats and Republicans—for refusing to fix a broken immigration system decade after decade. Now, families are paying the price for these compounded failures.
In Westchester, sanctuary-style policies have been sold as protecting the community. Yet they sometimes shield individuals who have criminal records from facing the consequences of their actions. The community now has to decide if it wants laws enforced equally or if it prefers a system where exceptions are carved out for those who happen to have community standing.
The most logical path forward is consistent enforcement of the law, regardless of personal popularity. Legal pathways should be clear and functional so that those who want to contribute fully can do so without years of limbo. Volunteer service is admirable, but it should never serve as a free pass for repeated violations that endanger the public. Public safety must remain the priority, and multiple DWI convictions should disqualify anyone from positions that rely on trust, regardless of immigration status.
This case is not about being against immigrants or dismissing community contributions. It is about whether we value the equal application of the law. A society that trades rules for feelings will find that it loses both justice and safety in the long run.
1 Comment
He is a volunteer firefighter so there is no union