Lisa Ramirez's optimistic pugilism

Whether Prop 50 passes or flops, the immigration attorney and CA-40 congressional candidate is in it to win. And she's running with a smile and a sharp jab.

Ramirez in her office on a recent morning.

So I went to see Lisa Ramirez at her Santa Ana-based law office a week or so ago, and I expected to be sorta underwhelmed. First, Ramirez announced her CA-40 congressional candidacy later than the other entrants, which led to a general shrugging of the shoulders and, “Meh” reaction chain. Second, with what I hope will be the passing of Proposition 50, CA-40 feels increasingly out of reach for Democrats. And third … do we really need yet another attorney serving in government?

And yet …

I have to say, I departed two hours later a Lisa Ramirez fan. The Orange County native isn’t merely an attorney–she’s an immigration attorney who has represented (among others) Narciso Barranco, the local father of three Marines who was detained by ICE earlier this year. She is scrappy, well-spoken, sharp, dogged, inquisitive. She’s a Latina woman in a district with an enormous Latino population. When you ask a question, she answers directly. When you look her in the eyes, she looks you right back.

She’s not a big fan of the 2025 boom box, but she’ll have you believing Young Kim is ripe for the taking.

Who knows? Maybe Lisa Ramirez is right.

Here’s our chat …

JEFF PEARLMAN: “OK, Lisa—this is why I always say every time I interview someone like this. When I was growing up, I used to want to run for office. How cool would it be? Run for office, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah. And now I think, being blunt, who the fuck would want to do these jobs? The meetings are long. People are always complaining. You’re not doing it for the money. It’s not very glorious and it’s frustrating and it’s red tape and being in Congress, you’re sitting there next to Marjorie Taylor Green and a bunch of nut jobs. Why would you want to possibly do this job?”

LISA RAMIREZ: “I mean, I’ll tell you fundamentally that it’s because I love people.”

J.P.: “And?”

L.R.: “For me it’s really that I love to serve and I love people and to me there’s no greater place that can have that impact like the highest places of our government. People underestimate how policy impacts where the rubber hits the road. And I’ve been living my entire life where the rubber hits the road. Sure, politics is local, but ultimately it’s where the decisions are made, where money is spent. If you watch the money, that’s what really makes or breaks our communities and the people who kind of suffer the consequences. So for me, this is really just about people. That’s what it comes down to.”

J.P.: “But it does seem like a profoundly frustrating job. It seems like serving in Congress used to be much more collaborative than it is now. And there are always local politicians who run and they say, ‘When I get there, I’m going to try to work with the other side.’ And then 10 minutes later they’re like, ‘This sucks.’ What do you possibly hope to accomplish?”

L.R.: “So for me personally—and I know this sounds like maybe fluff—but it’s really about transforming politics. It’s about transforming the conversations we’re having, about the issues we care about. I have been very effective throughout my professional career working on both sides of an issue. A lot of people don’t know my background is in theater. And I think it’s what makes me the most effective lawyer because I can see things from everyone’s perspective, whether it’s the judge or the trial attorney or the business person or the other side of whatever the issue may be. And so I think I’m really good and effective at speaking to people who are listening. And to build bridges. I’m a bridge builder.

“I’ve done it with ICE. I will tell you people hate ICE and want to abolish ICE. Which I obviously understand. But I’m also like, ‘I need ICE agents to be on the team of my clients. So even taking the case of Narciso Barranco had a really great, one of the things that was important was establishing a respectful, cordial relationship with ICE. I’ve had clients hug ICE officers. Because I’m that advocate. I kind of set the ground. I set the stage to really get past their title, I guess, and really relate to the human being that’s in the position. They’re putting food on their table just as you or I are. And so when Narciso was going to get released, there was a media frenzy outside of the detention center, and I was able to get ahold of his ICE officer and I said, ‘Look, I need your help.’ Narciso had no idea that his story had become national news. And so not only did they work with me in getting him out, locking down the facility so only the family vehicle could go in, but they actually escorted him down a back road behind the facility so that he could get away without the media frenzy following him. And we had a whole strategy of how to make that work, but that only comes from having a reputation of one who treats people with respect.

“But, to be 100-percent clear, I will call them out. When it comes to conditions, it comes to the lack of medical attention or whatever. I’m relentless. So I’m kind of like that. I like to consider myself like a California mama bear. Like, ‘Hey, I can be really great and kind and diplomatic as long as we’re making progress, even if it’s baby steps.’ But I think once there’s any semblance of abuse or injustice, it’s kind of like, ‘Yeah, no, now we need to have a different conversation.’ So that’s what I feel like Congress is really about; that it’s really trying to speak to everyone. That’s the bottom line.”

J.P.: “OK, so people see on the news a bunch of ICE agents and they appear to be masked goobers with really bad tattoos and beer guts and they’re wearing ill fitted vests and it’s kind of like, ‘Who the hell are these people?’ Are you saying in a way you try to see them as individuals? So is it wrong to think of ICE as this large monolith group? Are we doing ourselves wrong by thinking all these agents are a bunch of assholes? Is there something more micro?”

L.R.: “I think that’s the scariest part about what we’re seeing today is we don’t know who these people are. We don’t know if they’re ICE, we don’t know if they’re bounty hunters. We don’t know what agency they’re operating from. So those that go out on the streets and apprehend people are not the ones that I am in communication with and not the ones that I’m talking about. It’s really the ones that are at the detention facilities. They’re working in the background, they’ve got a caseload, they’re just there to make sure the people are processed, whatever, if they have health needs or dietary needs or medication. So they’re really in the facility. They’re not out on the streets. So there’s very different, I guess, aspects of ICE and ICE agents and what they do.”

J.P.: “You’re some guy. You’re me. And you see some guy in a mask with no identification wearing a green vest. Maybe it says FBI, maybe it doesn’t. He’s in jeans again with maybe some QAnon tattoo on his arm or some nonsense and a baseball cap and he’s grabbing someone. And someone’s screaming. Am I not allowed to punch that guy? You’re attacking someone. If this were any normal circumstance, I’d be considered a hero for defending the person who’s being grabbed. What are we actually supposed to do?”

L.R.: “Well, I think by jumping in, you run the risk of getting charged. That’s what we’ve been seeing. I can probably name a half a dozen cases where people intervene. I mean, there was that medical clinic where that poor kid jumped in to try to protect this woman who was being apprehended violently. So I think you assume the risk. So I don’t think it’s smart or safe unless you’re willing to basically go to jail for it.”

J.P.: “But I don’t even understand. s it legal? Someone without an ID in a mask, not showing anything, not telling you why you’re being arrested, all these things. How can you just grab people off the street? I don’t even understand this.”

L.R.: “So I would say it’s absolutely not legal, but I think the Supreme Court has said otherwise. They have now given these agents permission to define reasonable suspicion. It’s like, ‘Yeah, you look ethnic, you speak Spanish in public, you’re at the wrong place at the wrong time.’ That’s all it takes. So the bar has been lowered so far below anything we’ve ever seen, but that’s really the heart of the controversy right now. And I think California is really leading the stance in terms of no masking policy. They need to identify themselves. But I think the the current administration feels that they’re in the right place of handling things the way they are.”

J.P.: “It’s just interesting because it seems like there’s this pattern now with ICE where if they don’t identify themselves, I stand up to them, they arrest me for interfering in something. I don’t stand up to them, they’re grabbing someone. I don’t even know if they’re ICE. So it’s like, I don’t even see how any human being can win, possibly win this situation right now.”

L.R.: “Well, I don’t think any human being can win individually, but I think collectively, this is why the media and the videos that are kind of becoming commonplace today are so important. Those are really the eyes and ears for lawsuits and litigation. Trying to save that one person may not be possible, but it’s really the collective masses coming together and rising and saying, ‘Hey, this is not OK. Not in our town, not in our state.’ And it’s going to get much worse. I hate to say it, but this is just the beginning why I’ve been saying that. The funding alone, the recruitment, the chaos, and the fact that, I mean the Supreme Court decision was addressing only the injunction, but it obviously gave them full permission. The lawsuit’s still going to go forward, but I think there’s a great deal of damage that’s going to be done in the interim.

“And I don’t think there is any care or concern about doing things in accordance with the law or the Constitution. I had a conversation with someone who works for the Attorney General’s office, and to my face, she said, ‘Everything we’re doing is 100 percent Constitutional. We work every day to ensure that the Constitution is being followed.’ And I asked her, ‘Can I help you?’ Because clearly there’s a difference of opinion. But I could not even get her to acknowledge that there is a concern in the community about people’s Constitutional rights. So I think in their eyes and the eyes of the government and those who defend their position, this is 100 percent above board. It’s in accordance with the law. So I say it’s not legal, but until it fundamentally gets challenged in court, and we get justices who can take positions like that judge in Boston on the First Amendment case, we’ll have to see where things land in the end. But the Supreme Court obviously has taken its own position inside with this administration, in my opinion. So we’re just going to have to buckle up and hold on.”

J.P.: “Do you think these people genuinely believe what they’re saying and that they’re doing the right thing?”

L.R.: “So I can’t tell anymore because I think that a lot of it is job security.”

J.P.: “Which is so crazy depressing.”

L.R.: “I have so many stories. I was in another meeting, really kind of pushing this issue and wanting an organization to make a statement and to take a stance here locally. And, boy, the threats that came from one individual—basically saying that if we did, he would ensure that there was a lawsuit. We’ve lost all common sense and decency in terms of what the right thing is for people and for our community and humanity. I just feel that their heels are just so dug, so deep for whatever their reason is.”

J.P.: “How do you explain it?”

L.R.: “I think for those folks, I would say two things. First, I would say they have completely forgotten their own roots and story, if you will. And second, they are so far removed from the everyday reality of the damage that these policies are having in our community. It really is. And this is the funny thing about my work—it isn’t until it affects their nanny, until it affects their house, until it affects their gardener. Right now it’s like, ‘Wait. Can you help me?’ They have a need for their children, for their yard, whatever—and then they want action. They ask, ‘How can this be happening?’ And this is what they always say. It’s like, ‘Well, so-and-so is the exception. She or he is just like the nicest and has no criminal history.’ This is not what it’s supposed to be. Until it hits home, people aren’t going to even be disturbed by what’s happening.”

J.P.: “I always tell my kids that people have an amazingly depressing ability to rationalize all behaviors.”

L.R.: “So I was a theology and political science double major. And I’ve always said people’s politics is their religion and people’s religion is their politics. They’re two sides of the same coin. And I think what we’ve really seen that these days. Thirty years ago people thought they were contradictory. And I’ve always seen it kind be one in the same. And I think this is probably the most we’ve ever seen as a country where people who are die-hard MAGA, it’s their religion. And this is what I try to tell people.”

J.P.: “Do you feel like you can convince Trump voters to wake up?”

L.R.: “So I don’t think my interest is in reaching the Trump voters. I think there are many Trump voters—and especially Latinos, for example—who are shocked by what’s happening. And they didn’t, for whatever reason, think he wasn’t going to do what he said and are either kind of shocked or surprised by what’s going on. And there are recovering Republicans, I would say, that have left the party and are definitely welcome to join us on our campaign. So I think there are a ton of independents who probably fall politically in the middle. And so to me, that is really where the opportunity lies. It’s really the NPPs. It’s also the Dems, right? It’s also the Dems who are disappointed. I have been one of them. I think they’re frustrated because I think the messaging has been off.

“I don’t think they have a thumb on the pulse of what most Americans care about. So in terms of the Trump supporters on the right, it’s just not where I’m going to put time and energy. If they ever feel like they’re disheartened with what’s happening, they are absolutely welcome. But I think they’re very happy to stay where they are. But there are enough of us outside of that realm that I think can really move this country in the right direction.”

J.P.: “I admit, I am asking you this because you’re a Latino woman and you’re running for office. How do you explain Trump’s Latino support?”

L.R.: “I wish I had a good explanation. So I think the Democrats have really misunderstood Latino voters. Latinos are not a one-size-fits-all. They are not one social group. They are not one. Even though they may all speak Spanish, there are nuances to messaging and dialects and ways of expressing things. So you need to be very intentional who of the Latino community you’re trying to reach. So when we talk about—as examples—Cubans and Venezuelans, they come from communist backgrounds. There is a reaction that they have to any semblance of what they perceive to be socialist or communistic. The Democratic Party has never, in my opinion, been great about explaining what the Democratic Party stands for in the minds of many Venezuelans and Cubans. And again, there are generational gaps because I’m talking probably about my parents’ generation more. So they are going to vote against anything that resembles socialism or communism, period.

“For the first time ever I went to an event, the Hispanic 100. I don’t know if you’ve heard of this group. I’ve known about them. And I thought I knew most Latinos who are in privileged positions of power and wealth in this county. And I will tell you, I probably knew six of 500 people. And it was very interesting to me, because I’m curious about people. So at this event, Gary Vasquez, the ambassador, was the MC. And he started off the entire event by saying that it is so cool to be Latino. Everybody wants to be Latino. I have friends asking me, how can I be Latino? And I usually can keep pretty quiet, but I guess under my breath I was like, ‘Are you kidding? Me?’ And a woman got sort of triggered by my comment. She’s like, ‘I am very proud to be Latina!’ And I was like, ‘Whoa.’ I needed to lower the heat. I said, ‘Look, don’t misunderstand me. I am just as proud of being a Latina, but when you see and hear the assault that’s happening to our community …’

“And she’s like, ‘Well, I don’t see that,’ which is true. She’s in Newport. And she says, ‘Besides, my family came here legally.’ So there’s another distinction—you’ve got the people who came here first that want to basically build that wall after they’ve been let in. And I don’t relate to those people. There’s also the perception that people grabbed by ICE deserve it because they did something wrong.

“It’s like when the Republicans decided rose tattoos prove people are part of a gang. And once it got established that this is the sign of a gang member, that’s all it took. And there’s no evidence. And that’s the scary part about what’s happening right now. People are referencing sources without checking if it’s true. The secondary information just gets repeated, repeated, repeated. And no one ever really does any digging. So where did that come from? Who made these tattoo definitions up for this group of people? So they assume that they did something wrong.”

J.P.: “I mean, I have to ask you about the most important issue facing this country. How do you feel about Bad Bunny performing at the Super Bowl?”

L.R.: “Well, I’m just kind of like …”

J.P.: “He’s the most popular performer in the world. Why is this an issue?”

L.R.: “Well, it’s an issue because ICE is making an issue. That’s the thing. They’re relentless. They’re not going to let any opportunity pass to just kind of instill fear, the paranoia, just kind of make everyone afraid. I feel the message. It’s like you can’t go anywhere. Not even the Super Bowl without ICE being there. So I think that is part of the propaganda. It’s part of the PR agenda. It’s just like, ‘Yeah, we’re going to make an issue of this everywhere we possibly can.’”

J.P.: “When I met you the other day, you had this optimism. Oftentimes I feel like we’re just fucked. Fucked, fucked, fucked. And you don’t seem to feel that way …”

L.R.: “No.”

J.P.: “Is this political mask, or you actually feel some weird sense of optimism when everyone else is like, ‘We’re just fucked’?”

L.R.: “I absolutely do, but it’s not based in whatever theory I’m inventing. It’s really based on numbers and based on experience and what I think is possible during this time.”

J.P.: “Can you elaborate?”

L.R.: “So if Proposition 50 passes—and to be clear, I want it to pass—this district goes 10 points more Latino. There is a ton of opportunity where I would say a lot of Latinos are engaged on some level politically. I believe that people both NPP, Latinos and Democrats are hungry to see someone step up that they can trust, that they can believe in, and that they can get behind. And if there’s one thing that I know to be true about the Latino community, it’s that once they’re on board, watch out, it will be a movement. Like nothing we’ve ever seen.

“Now, I can’t presume and I can’t take that for granted. It’s going to take work, time, and energy and investment. And for me, in the Inland Empire, I’ve got contacts out there, I’ve got relationships out there. I think we have a very clear strategy of what a win can look like. And as long as we can kind of build together with the NPPs, and even the recovering Republicans and those who are still registered in the party, but are like, ‘Whoa, I didn’t know this was going to happen. How could this happen? It’s not what I thought I was voting for kind’ We can blow it out of the water. Seriously. So it bothers me when I hear even other candidates—and I’ve heard probably every single one of them—be like, ‘Oh, this is doomed. It’s a lost race.’” I believe we will win this district, whatever happens with Prop 50.”

J.P.: “So you’’re staying in no matter what happens with 50?”

L.R.: “Absolutely. And I’m already strategizing. We’re already building those relationships. I’m focusing on the overlap right now, but yes, we’re in it 100 percent.”

J.P.: “Right now the Democratic Party is basing the shutdown on healthcare. And I’m not saying they’re wrong. Or right. But do you think more emphasis should be placed on what ICE is doing, and they’re grabbing people and they’re taking people and they instilling fear. Is that one of the big things you are going to run on as far as wooing Latino voters? And do you think the National Party should be doing that as well?”

L.R.: “Well, I think the national party needs to really adjust its messaging. I think the shutdown is much more limiting in terms of what they can really say about it. And I think, really, the healthcare piece to me is extremely critical in this district alone. Between those who are going to lose the subsidies, and those who are going to lose Medicaid—it’s a disaster. Not only that, but the cost of the premiums going up by 288 percent for someone who is 60 or older. Americans need to understand, they need to be educated. When I go out into the community, it’s about educating, equipping, and empowering. When people are educated, they’re like, ‘Whoa, I didn’t know that. Oh, wow.’ You know what I’m saying? And if you don’t educate them, then you’re just telling them to vote certain ways, or you’re just blaming the Republicans without elaboration. If people really understood what was at stake, I think they would be like, ‘Oh, hell no.’”

J.P.: “Let me counter that with something. People have the attention spans of fleas these days. You said you’re on TikTok. It’s two seconds scroll, two seconds scroll. How do you even get people to pay attention long enough to say, ‘Wait, you need to know this and that and that and this?’”

L.R.: “Yeah, it’s 20 seconds. It’s 22 seconds. Sound bites. I think we have to flood social media with appropriate messaging so that they see it, even if they wanted to avoid it. And I think that, while I’m not the expert on social media, we need to meet people where they’re at, whatever it is. If we need to create sports analogies for the people who are interested only on the sports things—let’s do it. Just something that people can relate to so they can understand whatever that context is. And we just can’t speak these pie-in-the-sky statistics, because no one’s going to sit through and listen to a lecture. I don’t think people do that in college anymore. Everything that I hear from my son is even professors know they need to integrate videos and different elements. We can’t really lecture for an hour anymore. So yeah, I think we just need to be more creative. And I don’t think we’ve been very creative. I don’t think we’ve been very innovative, and I think there are untapped opportunities that we haven’t even tried.”

At the Orange County Labor Fed Picnic with Lou Correa

J.P.: “Did you have a literal moment when you decided to run?”

L.R.: “Absolutely. June 6, 2025, when the tanks rolled into Santa Ana. That was the moment that when I started thinking about it. Well, then, but also in March, when I began to see the constitutional rights erode, specifically in the unlawful apprehensions and detentions of people. Then I saw the threats to due process. They were taking due process away from immigrants. And then you have Alligator Alcatraz, right? The horrific facilities and stuff. And I think that also kind of contributed to it. And I started having conversations with people in office, because I really wanted to go in with my eyes wide open knowing what I was going to get into, what the impact it was going to have on my family, on my work, all of it."

J.P.: “June was crazy, huh?”

L.R.: “I was actually out of the country the day that it happened, and my phone was flooded in e-mails and panic and worry. And I turned on the television and I was like, ‘What the hell is happening? What is going on?’ And that to me was the moment that I realized what was what. And for anyone who has any knowledge of what happens around the world, I’ve had people say to me, ‘Welcome to the rest of the world, America.’ They’ve seen it happen, but not here. It’s just being born and raised here. The principles and values that we learned in elementary school, this is not what this country stands for. This is not who we are, using our military against our own people, making up threats that really don’t exist. So that was the moment I said, ‘I can’t sit back and do nothing.’ And here I am.”

J.P.: “How did your family feel about it?”

L.R.: “My husband said he knew I was thinking about it. But he didn’t think I was serious. He’s a consultant and he does a nonprofit and faith-based board work. And when I finally said, ‘I’m going to run,’ he was not happy about it. He’s like, ‘I knew you were thinking about it, but I didn’t take you seriously. I really didn’t.’ But he also knows me. When I say I’m doing something, I do it. I think he hoped I was kidding. I talked to my daughter, and she said, ‘Mom, I support you. Can you just be there for my senior events?’ I told her I would be, of course.

“And my son, who’s away at college, is actually conservative. He’s like an Alex P. Keaton. But he was very supportive and told me his friends are backing me. He also has a nice liberal girlfriend. [She laughs] So maybe there’s still hope.”

J.P.: “Does the political violence going down scare you at all?”

L.R.: “The violence that people have resorted to is sickening. I can’t say it never enters my mind. It does. I don’t want anyone physically targeted—politicians, ICE employees. No one. I was at an event very recently, and I didn’t hear my phone. And my husband had been traveling. My daughter was home, and she called me, she texted me. So as soon as I saw her message, I called her and she’s like, ‘Mom. I was so worried. Why didn’t you return my call? I said, ‘I’m sorry. There’s a lot of noise. I didn’t hear it. What’s going on?’ And I said, ‘Were you worried? Did you think I got in a car accident?’ And she’s like, ‘No, mom. I thought you got shot.’”

Ramirez pauses to gather herself.

“I’ve got over 50 years of life experience. That’s not what occurs to me. But when you talk to young people, with all the school shootings, this is what they’ve grown up with. This has become a part of the reality and something that I think has formed their perspective and their ideas about what society is like. It’s shocking.”

J.P.: “Someone said to me recently that most of our kids have grown up knowing Trump and MAGA as normal. It’s day to day. They don’t really remember Obama. So this is America to them in a fucked-up way …”

L.R.: “Yes, exactly. I agree. That’s crazy. It’s like crazy to think about that. I feel like growing up, we had …”

J.P.: “Reagan and Carter and Ford. And it’s like, you could dislike them, but they weren’t evil. They were just shitty politicians …”

L.R.: “Right. Just people you disagreed with, right? It sounds quaint. Trump and his madness is all they know about America and our policies and our priorities. And to me, this is really the fight for the future of this country …”

J.P.: “I think it was always assumed, for the most part, that a president was going to stay within certain boundaries and that his people would stay within the boundaries. And even if he was awful, there would be a Deep Throat or a John Kelly. Someone to stand up. Is it possible—10 years from now or 20 years from now—we look back and we think, ‘Wow, that was a really crappy time, but now we’re back to normal?’ Or do you feel like the ramifications of this are just a permanently changed America?”

L.R.: “It’s an absolutely changed America. It’s like you set a house on fire, you can always rebuild, but it’s never going to be the same house that it once was. And I don’t want to sound Pollyanna, but I think it can be greater than the America we once knew.”

J.P.: “How?”

L.R.: “If we can get people to reengage. Let’s be honest, I think Americans have fallen asleep. We have allowed government to make decisions for us. We’re at the whim, at the mercy of powerful people who don’t always do what’s right. And there’s really an opportunity. That’s what this campaign is about. It’s not about this election. It goes beyond the election. I’m talking more of a movement where people can take back their power. We have relinquished our power to government, and then we’re wondering why they don’t care about us. It’s like, ‘Well, you just gave away all your power. So it’s time for us to take it back, to reengage at every level of government—locally and federally—and to understand that we have power. We just need to exercise it.”

J.P.: “You have a theater background. Are you comfortable with the role of a political candidate asking for money and attending rubber chicken dinners?”

L.R.: “So here’s the thing. Asking for money is uncomfortable, right? It just is. Always will be. But I see it as an investment. How I present it is really investing in the future of this country, investing in you, in us, in this campaign. It’s not about me. This isn’t a career move. This isn’t a plan to become president. But I believe I was born for this moment, and this is really the moment that we can really make the biggest difference. Logically, it’s probably perceived to be the worst possible time to enter politics. For me, I see it as the perfect time.”

J.P.: “Give me your greatest moment from your theater background. So were you a kid actor?”

L.R.: “Nope, I wasn’t. So I had a full ride to the American Academy of Dramatic Arts. I wanted to go there instead of a traditional college, but my parents were a hard no. But I did a good amount of theater work.”

J.P.: “What was your greatest moment?”

L.R.: The thing that comes to mind right now is acting in a small production outside of college that I did in LA. Theatre can be mesmerizing. It’s you, and audience. It’s intense. But energizing. I loved the buzz …”

J.P.: “Is there an alternative reality where I’m sitting with you and you’re a multi-Academy Award winner?”

L.R.: “I don’t see why not. I think anything is possible. But I like where I am. I don’t need an Oscar. Unless you have one to spare …”

Narciso Baranco, second right, with his sons, Emanuel, left, Alejandro and José Luis Barranco.

J.P.: “I wanted to ask, as we speak what is the status of Narciso Barranco?”

L.R.: “So right now we have his parole application pending, and we have a petition pending …”

J.P.: “He’s home now?”

L.R.: “Yeah, he’s home now. Telemundo just did an interview that aired yesterday with him. So he can’t work until we get his work permit, so we’re waiting for that as well. But the biggest challenge right now is we filed his application over three months ago. We’ve got confirmation of delivery yet no receipt, which is very unusual. I’ve never had a case go this long. It takes long, but never this long. Senator Schiff has been super supportive in trying to see what’s going on. And so we have a strategy. However, there’s a colleague of mine who just had their parole in place denied, and the basis for the denial was that they didn’t have jurisdiction because the person was in removal proceedings.”

J.P.: “Oy.”

L.R.: “And because this person’s client was in removal proceedings—which obviously Narciso is as well—I asked if they could please send me a redacted version of the decision? I wanted to see it. And they cite a statute that doesn’t even apply to parole in place. I’m really not even sure, but I’m going to be using that to try to get his case terminated. The government can’t have two positions at the same time. Well, they can, but we’ll see how the court reconciles that.”

J.P.: “Does it at all piss you off? Like, you hear the argument, ‘How can you deport this guy? He has three kids who are Marines.’ But should that even make a difference? It would be wrong even if the man were a housekeeper or zoologist without kids. Is it almost like there’s a certain level of BS in the fact that you have to make the argument, ‘Look, he has three kids who are Marines’? When someone who does the exact same job but doesn’t have three kids who are Marines is going to be judged by a different standard?”

L.R.: “We’ve got the law and we’ve got public perception. If Narciso had come to me when his oldest son had enlisted, he would be a citizen by now. There’s no doubt tis man should have his full papers, if not citizenship. But circumstances didn’t work out. The other piece I think is a public perception that I agree with, but that hasn’t really been adopted by our elected officials. It’s been 40 years without immigration reform. I think of it this way: People are like, ‘Oh, why don’t our immigration laws work?” And it’s like trying to sell boom boxes today and wondering why they don’t sell. There’s such a disconnect with our laws and how people live life and how people want to live life. And I really think immigrants have been used as political pawns for 40 years by both sides. And so for me, yes, absolutely, we need to bring these people out of the shadows. And at the same time, we can’t have laws on the books and not enforce them.

“So if enforcement needs to happen, it needs to happen. But there’s a way in which we can do that. That’s with dignity and respecting people’s humanity. I will be the first to admit I raise hell. I think Biden and Harris completely blew it at the border. I was like, ‘What the hell are you doing right now? This is ridiculous.’ But I also think the Dignity Act that’s being introduced and is a bipartisan bill is also an abysmal effort. It’s going to bring more people from the outside rather than dealing with the people who are here. And it’s really an allowance of legalized indentured servitude. It’s like, ‘Hey, yeah, you could come for seven years, pay $1,000 to do so—but gosh, you better not get married or have children in that period of time because we’re going to kick you back out.’ I’m like, who can live anywhere for seven years and not establish some sense of roots here? It just doesn’t make sense. I think it’s not rocket science to fix our immigration crisis. I’ve always said it’s something that was created and perpetuated by Congress, and until we hold our leaders accountable or we change the elected officials completely, I don’t think what people would like to see happen is going to happen.”

J.P.: “Just being honest—I would buy a boom box in 2025.”

L.R.: “Well, I’m sure there’s an antiques store pretty close to here.”