FILE PHOTO: White House border czar Tom Homan speaks with reporters on the West Wing driveway at the White House in Washington, D.C., U.S., August 28, 2025. REUTERS/Jonathan Ernst/File Photo
Ethics Watchdog Group Seeks Investigation Into Border Czar and Contracts Following ProPublica Report
by Avi Asher-Schapiro, Mica Rosenberg and Jeff Ernsthausen
ProPublica is a Pulitzer Prize-winning investigative newsroom. Sign up for The Big Story newsletter to receive stories like this one in your inbox.
A Washington-based watchdog is calling for an inspector general investigation into potential conflicts of interest and ethics violations in the office of border czar Tom Homan related to government contracting.
This follows reporting from ProPublica revealing a web of past business relationships involving Homan, his senior adviser Mark Hall, and consultants and firms seeking Department of Homeland Security contracts.
The request by the Campaign Legal Center, a nonprofit nonpartisan government watchdog, also cites a story by MSNBC that reported that Homan had taken a $50,000 cash payment from undercover FBI agents posing as would-be DHS contractors seeking his help obtaining contracts.
ProPublica revealed that Hall met this August with a company interested in winning contracts for immigrant detention centers. That meeting, at the Texas offices of a firm called Industrial Tent Systems, was also attended by Charlie Sowell, a consultant on ITS’ payroll.
Sowell had paid Hall a $50,000 consulting fee as recently as February — right before Hall entered the border czar’s office working under Homan, government disclosure documents show.
Sowell also had a business relationship with Homan. Before he became border czar, Homan had worked with Sowell’s firm SE&M Solutions to advise clients seeking contracts with DHS, according to government documents and an interview with Sowell. In June, Sowell told ProPublica he and Homan avoided any conflicts of interest. “Tom is an exceptionally ethical person,” said Sowell, who has declined further interview requests.
The August meeting between Hall, ITS and Sowell may have violated federal ethics laws and merits an independent investigation, according to CLC.
“When a senior official is involved in contracting decisions that stand to benefit a recent former employer, it raises serious questions about whether government decision making is impartial,” the CLC wrote in its Oct. 16 letter to DHS Inspector General Joseph Cuffari.
“An IG investigation is needed to determine whether Hall’s actions violate federal ethics laws.”
White House spokesperson Abigail Jackson dismissed calls for an inquiry into Homan’s office. “Tom has always operated with the utmost integrity and is working tirelessly to keep all Americans safe,” she said, calling recent reports “debunked left-wing talking points.”
Jackson has said that Homan has “no involvement in the actual awarding of a government contract” and that Hall has not been authorized by Homan to represent him.
Homan, Hall and the inspector general’s office did not respond to requests for comment on the letter. Industrial Tent Systems has not responded to a comment request.
Congress recently allocated $45 billion to massively expand immigration detention spaces, including plans to build an unprecedented series of tent camps on military bases across the country. The windfall of government money has drawn intense interest among DHS contractors and consultants, including some with past business relationships with Hall and Homan.
Both men are bound by conflict-of-interest rules barring them from involvement in government discussions that could impact their former business partners, ethics experts have said.
Homan has said repeatedly that he recused himself from all contracting matters. But ProPublica and Bloomberg have reported he has been involved in conversations with industry players about contracts. Neither DHS nor the White House would provide formal recusal documents sought by ProPublica.
In a separate ethics complaint centering on Homan, the CLC asks the IG to “investigate to determine if Homan intentionally excluded information from his financial disclosure statement in violation of federal criminal law.”
The ethics complaint alleges that if Homan received $50,000 from undercover FBI agents, it should have been reported on his financial disclosure forms.
Homan has not only said he did nothing illegal, he recently maintained he never took the $50,000.
“This matter originated under the previous administration and was subjected to a full review by FBI agents and Justice Department prosecutors,” Jackson said this week. “They found no credible evidence of any criminal wrongdoing.”