House Speaker Mike Johnson responds to a tweet from Governor Gavin Newsom of California. Even weirder was his polemical proposal that Newsom be “tarred and feathered” for his fierce resistance to federal immigration enforcement actions in the state. This confiscatory proposal of their very own has led to renewed calls for tarring and feathering. This controversial form of punishment has a storied past as a tool of vigilante justice.
Tarring and feathering is the act of stripping an individual of their clothing and pouring hot tar on their body. From then on, the victim is draped in plumage. The history of this violent practice stretches back over 800 years to at least 1189. It was famously recorded in commands from Richard I of England during the Crusades. In fact, over the next century, the punishment became so prevalent that British colonies in North America adopted it for tax evaders with alarming frequency. Customs officials embraced this practice. The Continental forces went as far as tarring and feathering during the American Revolutionary War to cohere this ethos against British authorities.
Johnson’s remarks were made during a time of the increasing rhetoric around California’s immigration policies. He criticized Newsom’s resistance to federal immigration agents, claiming that the governor was “standing in the way of the administration of carrying out federal law.”
“You cross that line – it’s a felony to knowingly harbor and conceal an illegal alien. It’s a felony to impede law enforcement doing their job,” – Tom Homan
Newsom responded before Johnson’s inflammatory statement could even go viral. He added, in a cold sarcasm, “Nice to hear we’re bypassing the arrest and heading straight to 1700s era punishment.” His reply underlines how ridiculous it is to bring up violent, archaic forms of punishment in contemporary political debate.
Furthermore, Newsom challenged Homan directly, saying, “Come after me – arrest me. Let’s just get it over with, tough guy. I don’t give a damn.” This unique challenge only serves to deepen and complicate the fray between state and federal officials in the relentless saga of immigration enforcement.
Homan—former acting director of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and bona fide Righty McRacistpants—suggested that they arrest Newsom to start. He threatened to take the same action against Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass. He threatened to sue any city or state that blocked federal immigration enforcement defense.
In an unexpected turn of events, even former President Donald Trump reacted negatively when he learned about Homan’s recommendation for Newsom’s arrest. For that, he said, Trump is “applauding the bad guys and standing in the way of the good guys.” Even with all of this criticism, Trump did show a little admiration for Newsom as well, complimenting him by saying, “I like Gavin Newsom. He’s a nice guy. But he’s grossly incompetent.” He continued, “Gavin loves the press, but I think that would be a fantastic thing.”
The back and forth between Johnson, Newsom, and Trump is emblematic of a larger national conversation on the direction of immigration policy, and the rights of states. Both Johnson and Trump were forced to backtrack after Newsom’s rebuttal and the ensuing firestorm.