>> Continued From the Previous Page <<
The remark immediately drew sharp backlash both inside and outside the hearing room.
Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) responded within minutes on social media, condemning Cohen’s statement and accusing the congressman of dismissing the families’ grief.
“Rep. Cohen pointing to Angel Families in the audience: ‘I’m sorry for what happened to your loved ones, BUT…’” ICE wrote. “There is no ‘but,’ Rep. Cohen. Your comments here are reprehensible.”
The Department of Homeland Security also criticized Cohen’s conduct during the hearing. Officials said the congressman repeatedly interrupted Secretary Noem as she read the names and criminal histories of illegal immigrants arrested by ICE.
DHS described Cohen’s behavior as “shameful,” noting that the hearing had been organized in part to highlight victims of crimes committed by individuals who were in the country illegally.
For families like the Ronnebecks, the debate is deeply personal.
Grant Ronnebeck was only 21 years old when he was shot and killed while working the night shift at a Mesa QuickTrip convenience store. His killer, Apolinar Altamirano, was a member of Mexico’s Sinaloa Cartel who had been living illegally in the United States for years.
Altamirano reportedly shot Ronnebeck during a robbery over a pack of cigarettes.
Since that night, Grant’s father Steve Ronnebeck has traveled repeatedly to Washington, sharing his son’s story in an effort to push for stronger immigration enforcement and policies aimed at preventing similar tragedies.
During the hearing, critics argued that Cohen’s comments missed the central issue confronting the families seated in the room.
The question, they said, is not how many crimes are committed by citizens versus illegal immigrants in raw numbers. Rather, the issue is whether crimes committed by individuals who were not legally allowed to be in the country could have been prevented through stricter enforcement of immigration laws.
According to immigration advocates, the debate often hinges on population size. With more than 330 million American citizens compared to an estimated 11 to 20 million illegal immigrants, raw crime totals alone do not necessarily reflect relative crime rates.
However, families of victims say statistics offer little comfort when the loss might have been avoided.
Republican Representative Brad Knott of North Carolina addressed the Angel Families during the hearing and accused Democratic lawmakers of offering sympathy while supporting policies he said contribute to the problem.
“They issue crocodile tears,” Knott said. “They issue fake sympathy, and then they continue to defend the open border policies that enable preventable crimes that brought you here today.”
Republican lawmakers have increasingly highlighted Angel Families as part of their argument for stricter immigration enforcement and expanded deportation efforts.
The issue has also been a central theme for President Donald Trump during his second term.
According to Department of Homeland Security data, federal authorities have removed more than 675,000 illegal immigrants since January 2025. DHS officials estimate an additional 2.2 million individuals have voluntarily left the country.
ICE has also reported thousands of arrests involving gang members and suspected terrorists during the same period.
The Trump administration has placed renewed emphasis on victims of crimes committed by illegal immigrants. On his first day back in office, Trump reinstated the VOICE Office, a program originally created during his first presidency to provide resources and assistance to victims and their families.
The administration has also hosted Angel Families at the White House and designated February 22 as National Angel Family Day.
At one of those events, Steve Ronnebeck delivered a message that continues to resonate with families across the country.
“All these deaths at the hands of illegal immigrants are preventable. They could’ve been stopped.”
For many of the families who attended the hearing, that belief remains the central point of the debate.
