DHS Says 60 Minutes Left Out an Asylum Fraud Claim
DHS General Counsel James Percival says the CBS News program 60 Minutes left out the reason a Malian man received refugee status. The segment aired Sunday night and focused on Moussa Diawara, who was deported to Ghana in July. Percival responded on X after pulling Diawara's file. He wrote that the asylum claim rested on sexual orientation. Breitbart's Nolte called the segment deliberately misleading and accused the network of hiding that basis from viewers. Nobody outside the government has published the full file, so the factual dispute comes down to what those records say.
Key Details
The timeline runs as follows, according to the reporting and Percival's post:
- Diawara overstayed a tourist visa.
- A judge granted him a final removal order in 2012.
- He avoided removal for more than a decade after that order.
- He was deported to Ghana in July, even though he had claimed he faced persecution in Mali, his home country.
- The segment portrayed him as a family man separated from his wife and two children.
- Percival said Diawara's stated reason for fearing Mali was that he is gay.
The asylum application, as quoted in the coverage, describes Diawara's feelings toward men and says he felt more comfortable being intimate with boys than with girls. It also states that he was born male but had developed female behaviors and feelings. Nolte's column reads those passages as evidence the claim was false, since Diawara later married a woman and fathered two children in the United States. Percival framed the case as an example of immigration fraud. The coverage presents both points of view. The file itself is the only primary source for the claim, and it has not been released in full.
Background
Asylum in the United States requires proof of a well-founded fear of persecution based on race, religion, nationality, political opinion, or membership in a particular social group. Sexual orientation can qualify as a social group claim, but the applicant must prove it, and immigration judges weigh credibility heavily. Federal law under INA section 208(d)(6) permanently bars an applicant from asylum if an immigration judge finds the application knowingly frivolous. Applicants who receive a removal order and fail to leave face additional consequences, including limits on future relief. Diawara's case illustrates how a removal order issued in 2012 can remain unenforced for years before a final removal happens in 2026.
The timing also matters. The Trump administration has signed third-country removal arrangements, and Ghana has accepted deportees who are not Ghanaian nationals under those deals. Critics argue that third-country removals send people to places they have no ties to. Supporters argue they close the gap when an origin country refuses or delays repatriation. Diawara's deportation fits the second pattern, but the segment's framing invited viewers to see the first.
Why It Matters for Gun Owners
This story is not about firearms, but it touches a rule that every gun owner should understand. Federal law under 18 U.S.C. 922(g)(5) bars anyone unlawfully present in the United States, and certain nonimmigrant visa holders, from possessing firearms or ammunition. A person who obtains status through a fraudulent application is not lawfully present, and a dealer who sells to that person commits a federal crime. The ATF Form 4473 asks buyers to certify their status, and a false answer is a felony under 18 U.S.C. 922(a)(6) and 924(a)(1)(A). Store owners, range operators, and private sellers in states that require background checks for private transfers should know these rules apply to them too. Anyone who hires, sponsors, or sells to a foreign national should check that person's status before the transfer, not after. Gun owners in border states like Texas, Arizona, and California see this issue most often, and they should expect prosecutors to pursue status-based cases.
DownRange Analysis
Deportation policy does not run through the Second Amendment test set out in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen (2022). Nothing in this case asks a court to measure a firearm restriction against the nation's historical tradition. The gun-related lesson is narrower. Prohibited-person rules depend on status, and status depends on the paperwork. Gun owners should keep their own records clean and should not assume a foreign-born buyer or employee is eligible to buy without checking. The market impact is zero. The bigger lesson is about sources. Percival and Nolte both have an interest in the story, and CBS has one too. Read the actual filings when they become public, and do not treat any single outlet as the record. Until then, the only verified facts are the removal order, the 2012 date, the July deportation, and the asylum claim's stated basis.
