Trump’s Border Czar Visits Indiana to Back Stalled Fairness Act

(INDIANA) President Trump’s Trump border czar Tom Homan visited the Indiana Statehouse on October 15, 2025, urging lawmakers to revive a stalled immigration bill called the Fairness Act in the next legislative session.

In a series of closed-door meetings with Governor Mike Braun, Attorney General Todd Rokita, the Marion County Sheriff, and key legislators, Homan pressed for tougher Indiana immigration enforcement tools and closer alignment with federal efforts under the Trump administration. The push follows a similar measure that cleared the House earlier in 2025 but was blocked in a Senate committee.

Homan framed Indiana as central to national enforcement goals even though the state has no international border. He argued the state is a “gateway” for drugs and trafficking because of highway links and proximity to Illinois and Chicago’s sanctuary policies. He tied the Fairness Act to broader federal priorities, pointing to what he described as record deportations and a drop in border crossings since President Trump returned to office. His goal in Indianapolis was clear: build momentum for a second try when lawmakers return in 2026.

Next steps and timing

Representative JD Prescott plans to introduce the Fairness Act when the 2026 legislative session begins in mid-January. The bill would:

• Expand state-level enforcement and reporting
• Give police added legal protections
• Tighten rules around local cooperation with federal authorities

Republican sponsors say the plan is designed to help local agencies work more closely with federal counterparts. According to analysis by VisaVerge.com, a similar bill advanced through the House earlier in 2025 but stalled in a Senate committee, setting up a fresh test for the new proposal.

Media and the public were not allowed inside the meetings, underscoring how charged the topic has become. Backers highlight community safety and taxpayer costs. Critics — who were not part of the closed-door talks — argue that such laws can chill crime reporting and lead to racial profiling. Statehouse discussions focused on how far Indiana can go while staying within federal law, and whether the Fairness Act should mirror recent statewide steps or go further.

Policy proposals in the Fairness Act

Supporters describe the Fairness Act as a package aimed at employers, local governments, and agencies that handle public benefits. Based on details shared by lawmakers and Homan’s team, the bill would:

• Establish penalties for employers who do not report illegal immigrants. The plan shifts enforcement beyond past job-site audits, imposing a reporting duty on businesses.
• Grant law enforcement immunity from lawsuits for arresting undocumented individuals. Backers say this protects officers acting in good faith.
• Crack down on sanctuary cities within Indiana by restricting or ending local policies that limit cooperation with federal immigration authorities.
• Mandate reporting by family service agencies (including programs like Medicaid) to track taxpayer spending on non-citizens, aiming to produce statewide data on costs linked to immigration status.

Homan and his allies present these steps as a direct answer to federal requests for stronger local cooperation. They argue the bill would let sheriffs and police departments act faster when federal agencies ask for help and would reduce confusion about when local jails should hold individuals for transfer to federal custody.

The broader message from backers: Indiana immigration rules should match national enforcement priorities.

Political stakes and recent context

Indiana has already moved in a similar direction. In April 2025, lawmakers enacted House Bill 1393 (Immigration Notice), which requires law enforcement to notify county sheriffs and proper authorities when there is probable cause that an arrested person isn’t lawfully present in the United States. The law signaled a harder line on cooperation and information-sharing.

For readers seeking the official language, the text of HB 1393 is available on the Indiana General Assembly website at this state page: House Bill 1393 (2025).

Supporters say the Fairness Act goes further by:

• Placing duties on employers
• Shielding officers with legal immunity
• Placing stricter limits on sanctuary policies

Homan’s meetings in Indianapolis were designed to shore up votes, especially in the Senate where the earlier measure stalled. He asked for a quick committee calendar once the legislature reconvenes and urged leaders to keep the package intact rather than split it into separate bills.

The Federation for American Immigration Reform has called Indiana a strategic state for enforcement because of its location and ties to major Midwest corridors. Homan echoed that view, linking the push to what he described as stronger national results at the border. While he didn’t release new Indiana-specific data, he argued that local action amplifies federal work and helps limit trafficking routes through the state.

Key disputed points and stakeholder concerns

Stakeholders expect fresh debate over the employer-penalties section. Positions include:

• Business groups: Warn that new reporting rules can add costs and create legal risks if employers make mistakes while checking status.
• Supporters: Counter that the bill targets employers who skip required checks or look the other way, and that clear guidance will help honest businesses comply.
• Law enforcement groups: Press for immunity provisions so officers have assurance when acting on immigration-related arrests.

Other open questions from the closed-door meetings include:

• How the bill would define “sanctuary” for local policies
• Which family service agencies would face the new reporting mandate
• Safeguards for privacy and data sharing (for example, concerns around Medicaid data)

Backers say drafting continues and that bill text will address scope and privacy. Opponents in prior sessions have asked for strong safeguards around personal information and limits on data sharing.

Practical effects and human stakes

The debate carries real-world consequences for families and workers:

• A broader notice-and-hold structure can change how quickly someone moves from a county jail to federal custody.
• Employer penalties can affect hiring practices across sectors that rely on seasonal or entry-level labor.
• Local rules on cooperation can influence whether a victim or witness feels safe coming forward.

These are the human stakes wrapped inside the Statehouse math.

Outlook and procedural path

According to VisaVerge.com, the earlier Indiana House bill’s failure in a Senate committee set the stage for renewed lobbying from both sides. Homan’s return as the Trump border czar increases pressure on lawmakers who want to align with federal policy.

If Representative Prescott introduces the Fairness Act on schedule in mid-January 2026, hearings could begin soon after the session opens. Committee chairs will determine the pace. Lawmakers will face choices:

1. Keep the bill broad
2. Narrow it to police immunity and sanctuary limits
3. Pause until more data from HB 1393 rollout arrives

For now, supporters are betting on speed, arguing state action can reinforce federal enforcement and reshape Indiana’s role in Midwest trafficking routes. Whether Homan’s lobbying turns into votes will test how far Indiana’s immigration policy will go beyond the steps taken with HB 1393.