Former Maine Gov. Paul LePage has spent years advocating tougher immigration enforcement and supporting Donald Trump's hard-line approach to immigration.

Now the issue has landed inside his own family.

LePage revealed this week that his son's father-in-law is facing deportation by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, despite what LePage says is legal status in the United States and a valid work permit.

And suddenly, the former governor is arguing that immigration enforcement needs more discretion.

“My son's wife's dad is here legally,” LePage told reporters. “But he's being deported because he came from a country that's not to the liking to certain people in Washington.”

LePage was unequivocal about what he thinks of the government's decision.

“That's not right.”

When Immigration Policy Becomes Personal

LePage made the revelation while campaigning for Maine's open 2nd Congressional District seat.

He did not identify his relative, disclose his country of origin or provide details about the government's legal basis for seeking his removal.

That means there are important facts about the individual immigration case that remain unknown.

But LePage says the man has authorization to work in the United States and should be permitted to remain.

“He has a work permit,” LePage said. “He should be allowed to stay.”

LePage then offered a considerably more selective vision of immigration enforcement than the broad crackdown being carried out by the Trump administration.

“Would I go after everybody that's here, that have work permits and have been here for decades? Probably not,” he said.

Instead, LePage said he would prioritize “people in the gangs and the criminals.”

That distinction has become especially significant because ICE's enforcement campaign has reached far beyond immigrants convicted of serious crimes.

LePage Previously Welcomed ICE Enforcement

LePage's comments stand against his own record of support for tougher immigration enforcement.

When ICE dramatically increased operations in Maine earlier this year, LePage publicly welcomed efforts to remove dangerous criminals.

During his two terms as governor from 2011 to 2019, LePage also pursued policies restricting public assistance for certain noncitizens and withdrew Maine from participation in the federal refugee resettlement program.

And even while discussing his relative's situation this week, LePage continued defending ICE's broader mission.

“They have a job to do,” he said.

He also criticized a new Maine law restricting cooperation between state and local law enforcement and federal immigration authorities.

The dispute, then, isn't that LePage has suddenly rejected immigration enforcement.

He hasn't.

Instead, he is arguing that enforcement should distinguish between dangerous criminals and long-term residents with work authorization.

The uncomfortable political question is why that distinction has become more prominent now that someone in his own family may be removed.

ICE Hasn't Been Arresting Only Criminals

LePage's call for ICE to concentrate on gang members and criminals also runs into the reality of the administration's enforcement operation in Maine.

During a major ICE operation in the state earlier this year, nearly 200 people were detained.

According to data reviewed by Maine news organizations, only 11 had criminal convictions.

Data covering ICE arrests in Maine between January and July showed that approximately 68 percent of those arrested had no criminal record.

Those numbers complicate the administration's repeated portrayal of its immigration campaign as primarily focused on dangerous criminals.

They also demonstrate why LePage's relative isn't necessarily an unusual exception to the way immigration enforcement is now operating.

People without criminal records have been caught up in the crackdown too.

Legal Presence Doesn't Always Prevent Deportation

There is also an important distinction buried inside LePage's comments.

Having a valid work permit does not necessarily mean someone cannot legally be ordered removed from the United States.

Immigration law contains numerous categories of temporary status, humanitarian protection and employment authorization. Someone may legally work in the country while still facing proceedings that could eventually result in removal.

Without knowing the identity of LePage's relative or the details of his immigration case, it is impossible to determine why the government is seeking to deport him or whether ICE's action is legally justified.

LePage has provided his own explanation.

He says his relative is being targeted because of the country he comes from.

But neither LePage nor his campaign has publicly provided enough information to independently establish that claim.

“Legal, Not Illegal Immigration”

The timing is particularly striking because LePage is campaigning heavily on immigration.

In a campaign advertisement released this week, he emphasized his own family's immigrant background and drew a sharp distinction between legal and illegal immigration.

“Immigration built our nation,” LePage says in the advertisement.

He then argues that illegal immigration is wrong and highlights his record as governor restricting benefits for undocumented immigrants.

That position gives LePage a straightforward defense of his current stance: he says he supports legal immigration, and he says his relative is here legally.

But it also exposes one of the complications of a sweeping deportation campaign.

Real immigration cases don't always divide neatly into two groups labeled “legal” and “illegal.”

People can have work permits while facing removal.

Asylum seekers can legally remain in the United States while their claims are adjudicated.

People with final removal orders may still have appeals or other legal remedies available.

And immigration status can change as government policies change.

A Policy Looks Different Up Close

LePage's Democratic opponent, Maine State Auditor Matt Dunlap, has seized on the episode.

Dunlap argues that LePage supported aggressive immigration policies when their consequences were falling on other families but is objecting now that his own family has been affected.

LePage would likely frame the situation differently.

His position is that immigration laws should be enforced but that authorities should concentrate their resources on criminals rather than long-term residents who have permission to work.

Those two interpretations will undoubtedly become part of Maine's congressional campaign.

But the episode also illustrates something larger about America's current immigration debate.

Mass deportation isn't an abstract slogan once enforcement begins.

Every number represents an individual immigration case, often involving employers, spouses, children, parents and extended families.

For years, politicians have debated those people collectively—as migrants, asylum seekers, undocumented immigrants or deportees.

For Paul LePage, one of those cases now has another description.

Family.