ICE is an artefact of the post 9-11 hysteria which created the Dept. of Homeland Security. Over the last 100 years, oversight of immigration has changed hands within administrations, from the Dept. of Labor, to the Dept. of Justice, and the role of the Dept. of State in issuing visas and funding integration was consistently underfunded. Once upon a time there was an Immigration and Naturalization Service. Since 9-11 naturalization increasingly has been "privatized" and disappeared from government in favor of law enforcement. People are not contraband and should not be treated as such. Fewer people would lack authorization to immigrate if the US consulates were properly located and staffed. It's a complex system, and Mr. Trump is a simpleton. You see the problem. He is right about one thing, though. Congress needs to cease being consistently inconsistent about immigration, and simplify the system.
Democratic claims that the party doesn't support Open Borders are completely exposed by these demands from the far left that ICE be abolished.
The far left opposes every single effort to enforce immigration laws. They oppose e-verify. They oppose a national identity card (something virtually every other nation in the world has without controversy). They opposing detaining would-be illegal immigrants and bogus asylum seekers separately. They oppose detaining them together. They even chained themselves to the White House fence during the Obama administration to demand an end to all deportations.
A vote for Democrats this fall is a vote for Open Borders. The Times and others can try to rationalize the call to abolish ICE. There is only reasonable conclusion: the people advocating getting rid of ICE want everybody and anybody to enter the United States. It would be the end of this country.
As a result, though I oppose 70 percent of the Republican agenda, I will hold my nose and vote GOP for Senate and Congress this fall. Why? Because, if the Open Borders democrats win, we all lose. Without secure borders and tough enforcement of immigration laws, our country will go from 1st world to 2nd or 3rd in a generation or two.
11
To those who really want a Democratic Congress to be elected in November, the issues which candidates choose in order to excite their base will sometimes be the issues that win the election for the Republicans. Humanize ICE is a better term. The American people do not want open borders. They do want fair and humane treatment of refugees. If you try to force anything down the throats of people who do not want it, it is a sure winning issue for the Republicans. HUMANIZE ICE is a far better meme for repetition. ABOLISH ICE has a subliminal message of open borders. Not too many will vote for that.
2
We DO need to eliminate ICE.
But we need to put something in its place which can handle immigration in a sane and logical manner--and which doesn't have such an unfortunate acronym.
However, the devil is in the details of presentation. People suspicious of immigrants, particularly undocumented ones, will simply hear "open borders/overrun by bad people" unless there is immediate attention paid to the messaging (Madison Avenue should be involved). People must be told--repeatedly, and through all channels--that the elimination of ICE is NOT about no immigration policy at all, and that the reasons for the elimination are cruelty and corruption and mismanagement of taxpayer funds. AND there need to be comprehensive, structural ideas as to sane immigration policy delineated along with these messages.
1
Several commenters assert that the proponents of this plan, while they are not very clear, are not saying "open borders". But how can you be sure unless those proponents explicitly say so? We don't need people to try to interpret other's vague statements, we need to hear directly from those others in their own words. Also, people talk as if ICE is operating in a vacuum. But there are laws on the books to uphold and a President directing them. Is ICE operating outside of the law or the P's guidance? Is ICE not upholding the law or following the P's guidance? If it is a matter of inefficiency, that should be addressed but this hardly seems like the primary issue that is getting people worked up. In all, Dems may complain that the Trumplicans are mis-representing their position but it is their (or at least the proponents of this issue's) own fault. In a void of clarity it is easy to make the case that this seems to be an attempt to end-around Trump's immigration agenda and/or a pursue open borders. A pure gift to Trumplicania.
6
This article failed to mention a critical point: ICE was only created in 2003. Also, it might have been useful to put a number to the fiscal burden issue: the $6 Billion annual budget.
Because the popular comments here seem written by people immune to nuance, who are simply reacting to the headline...you know, the opposite of ICE is not open borders, for God's sake, we had functioning borders before 2003....no one on the "far left" (that ludicrous code word for progressives whose policies are supported by super-majorities of the American electorate) is saying they want open borders or ever has to my knowledge.
Get educated, liberals, and don't blow these coming election with your wishy washy fretting and your knee jerk repetition of ill-informed dog whistles against progressives.
Open borders indeed. The only context I have heard this in, is from the actual, intellectual far left, light years away from anything Bernie Sanders would go for, which imagines the end of a capitalism that permits relatively open borders for goods and capital, i.e. the economic globalization we currently enjoy, but does not allow open borders for humans, and can we come up with a system that is less restrictive to human freedom?
Progressives hold the values and promote the positions of the around 2/3 of the American people on every major issue, including immigration, and excepting abortion which is more evenly split.
And if you don't believe me or know that already, read the damn polls.
2
Senator Gillibrand calling to repeal and replace ICE is just like Paul Ryan calling to repeal and replace the ACA. They only mean the repeal part.
5
This is yet another example of Democrats doing Republicans' work for them. Will they never learn?
13
Please read "How Many is Too Many" by Philip Cafaro. It is a reasoned look at immigration with supporting facts. Clearly, we need ICE or some kind of enforcement. No must mean no. It can be humane, but it must be strong, or people will simply ignore it. like they have for the past 40+ years. It is hard to tell nice people no, but it must be done.
17
Eliminating the 'Immigration' part of the customs enforcement agency is the logical end point of the Left's view of border security when a Republican President is in office, so it shouldn't be surprising that some are calling for it. Apparently the only type of immigration service that would be acceptable to the Democratic left is for everyone crossing the border to be gifted a welcome basket, and an instruction guide for how to game the U.S. asylum system. Instead of the incendiary charge of 'open borders', if I were a Republican campaigning for office this year, I would ask why the Democrats of all stripes seem to value the interests of illegal border crossers higher than that of their own law-abiding constituents, and ask exactly for whom do the Democrats really seem to be working nowadays.
13
A small anecdote from an American-born; once a child. My parent and I, with Louis XVI, a basset hound were stopped at the Spanish border in transit from France, when it was discovered by the security guard that my passport was missing. The blame for this omission was not placed on the adult, the dog, or my crown.
We were not detained or separated. A cab took us safely on our journey and it was understood that we were not a family planning to make Spain our new home.
Times have changed, and if I were to pitch my tent in Canada without an official document to cross the border, some security questioning would take place.
In America, the leading democracy of the world, children are not separated from their parent by guards. The breaking of family during WWII in Europe will always bring to mind one of the greatest blights in contemporary times.
If the creation of another political party is needed to enforce this rule, then America is lost. This presidency has made a fatal mistake with its zero-tolerance regime. Sessions should have been fired on the spot, and listening to an American leader babble away on the above, is not going to make us sleep like babies.
More voters are going 'Independent' until the air has cleared and ICE understands our Constitution with the amendment of rules.
Millions of migrants and refugees are not pouring into open borders, nor can they move to Belize as a commentator suggested.
Save our Wits.
As a naturalized citizen since the 70s, non-white and with a 'foreign' name, I have never had anything but courteous or neutral treatment from immigration officers. Customs officials however have ALWAYS been rude, offensive and gratuitously brutal. In the late eighties one customs official told me that my white companion could not be part of my household. I was flabbergasted. When I protested, after spilling the contents of my suitcase, the fellow was on the verge of strip searching me in front of my friend in a closed room. Just an isolated anecdote? Sure! Still, I think It was a grave mistake finally to put I & C together under Homeland Security. I think it brings the worst out in these 'guardians' of our borders. I don't trust a one of them.
I am a "progressive" who voted for Bernie Sanders, yet I am against abolishing ICE. The problem is not ICE but the orders handed down to it by the president!
Although anti-Trump, I believe illegal immigration has been tolerated for way too long.
However, building a giant wall along the jagged Mexican border is super expensive and highly ineffective.
The only way to reduce illegal immigration is to cut the supply of jobs available to them. Solve the demand problem (employers) and the supply problem (illegals) will diminish.
And therein lies the rub because neither Dems nor Pubs have the stomach for imposing harsh fines and even criminal penalties on employers who abusively hire illegals. Neither party wants a national ID card (or any viable substitute) that employers would have to demand before hiring someone. That leaves us with a totally hypocritical debate in which each side tries to blame the other for the real or imagined problem.
BTW, I like Ms Ocasio and would've voted for her, despite my disagreement with her about ICE and illegals. Despite the hysteria by media pundits, there is no chance in H that Democrats will call for an end to ICE. That said, they do not need to PANDER after Latino voters (and not just Latino voters -- Israel). You can promote the rights of and opportunities for minorities in America without advocating policies that can only alienate the vast majority of Americans!
2
The inevitable bitter harvest of identity politics: Watch as a once great party dissolves into a set of contradictory, incoherent and ultimately self-defeating demands from an ever more fragmented confederation of special interest groups. A train wreck in slow motion.
20
Democrats literally do not have a plan to stop illegal immigration. When Republicans say they're in favor of Open Borders it sticks like glue because it makes sense.
They will continue to lose elections unless they come up with a coherent message
I suggest taking a page from the brilliant and successful George W Bush 'compassionate conservative' message and using these three words to sum up their position:
"Compassionate Border Enforcement"
4
What? No Borders? Really? That just hands the election to the right. I don't see how the country could keep any social safety net such as Medicaid going if we opened it up to the whole world.
13
The Democrat Party needs to exercise constructive leadership on this issue or in the 2020 elections we are going to see “Willy Horton” goes to the Border” political ads.
4
I admire those calling for the abolition of ICE. They are, at least, consistent.
There is a lot of support for crippling enforcement of immigration laws in the interior. Sanctuary cities. No local police cooperation with Federal authorities. No arresting of illegal immigrants in courthouses. No inspection of trains or buses, even near the border. Driver's licenses for illegal immigrants, to make their lives easier. Special city ID card in states that don't allow this. Access to tertiary education, with in-state tuition to boot. And so on.
This isn't "open borders" - technically. But just get by border patrol - or get bail and fail to show up at your hearing - or enter legally but overstay - and, without interior enforcement, you are home free. Just hang out until the next round of legalization.
"Don't rip apart families" - sounds good, but it provides a clear incentive to marry someone legally present or have children here as quickly as possible. Voila! You're safe from deportation.
We need a conversation about how we're going to enforce immigration laws in the interior - what's OK and what's not. Because failure to enforce those laws is what handed Trump the election on a silver platter. If liberal and centerist politicians refuse to enforce the law, voters will turn to someone who will. They'll vote us right out of democracy if they have to.
13
100% onboard with this. While at it, can you please also abolish the TSA?
2
Republicans are very good with messaging. Estate tax becomes death tax. Anti-union becomes right to work. LGBT discrimination becomes religious freedom. End of life counseling becomes death panels.
Why do some people think Abolish ICE and Abolish CBP are going to sell well. For most people that becomes open borders. You’re doing Mitch McConnell’s work for him.
I think of Obama’s line that we are both a nation of immigrants and a nation of laws. Comprehensive immigration reform. Whatever that means. Still waiting for it.
5
It’s going to get worse before it gets better.
I used to think that the 2018 election would be a resounding rejection of Trump.
Now I see that the Ultra Liberals who blew the 2016 election for the Democrats are at it again.
As a lifelong FDR/JFK reality based Liberal I am furious that the Ultras are again going to drive the Democratic Party into the ditch.
All that Democrats need to do is to contrast the values of the Roosevelt Era to the values of the Reagan Era.
We are still in the Reagan Era and income inequality gets worse every year and deregulation means that the Great Recession can recur at any moment.
We must return to the economic stability of the Roosevelt Era before we can solve the cultural issues of our time
7
The entire Democratic Party is addicted to illegal immigration. The party has been quite clear in their goal: import enough illegal economic migrants, and grant them citizenship, to create a new majority.
The Democratic Party has no interest in serving the needs of current citizens.
4
We need more Doug Jones or Conor Lamb types. As much as I love the energy of Ms. Cortez, this type of messaging will only hurt us in the midterms. There has to be a better way to secure the border intelligently and humanely. If the Democrats cant get it together, losing Roe v Wade will be just the beginning.
9
Hey, NYT, how about some information about the merits of the proposal as policy - whether it’s a good idea for America, it’s citizens, and the people whose lives ICE impacts - and not just as political strategy. A whole article about the movement to abolish ICE that doesn’t discuss ICE’s history, mandate, activities or budget, the alternatives (if any) for carrying out its duties or even the need to carry out its duties? Some of us are still interested in evaluating policy proposals on their merits and it would be great to have some help doing that.
3
The Democratic Party policy will result in tens of millions of low skill people entering the country- illegally. These people will mean lower wages for citizens. These people will compete for housing and public resources.
What that means, necessarily, is that many citizens will suffer so that some illegal economic migrants can be wage slaves here instead of in their home countries.
The upper class will love it as they will get cheaper servants. The Democratic Party will love it because they will get guaranteed voters down the line.
Most working class citizens will suffer.
4
The Democratic Senators running in red states that Trump won by a landslide must be very depressed when they look at their chance to get re-elected as their party moves to the extreme left.
5
Trump likes to brag that he is more popular with Republicans than any of his predecessors.
That is because there are less and less Republicans - as they can't stomach baby internment camps, reckless tariffs, massive deficits, executive nepotism and blatant corruption, and racism and religious discrimination.
Trump will have the support of a shrinking base of what remains of the GOP, so he can crow about that all he wants to his rallies and Twitter bots.
We just need the popular vote to count again, and the Russians out of our elections, to have our free democracy and our closest free democratic allies back (hold on Canada, this will pass!).
3
It is unfair and misguided to place the blame on ICE for the actions being taken on immigration. They are federal law enforcement officers carrying out lawful orders from elected officials in the Trump administration. If you disagree with and are upset by what is taking place. blame our elected office holders and vote to make a change. ICE carries out a wide array of essential law enforcement duties including child molestation and pornography rings,human traffickers, drug traffickers and counterfeiters. They are also responsible for detaining non-citizens who are wanted for serious crimes in their native countries. The men and women of ICE are patriotic and hard working citizens who put their lives on the line to protects us and are the same people who were on duty under previous administrations which did not carry out such severe immigration policies.
19
It took 30+ years of bi-partisan failure to enforce our immigration laws after the misbegotten Reagan Amnesty of 1986, but it eventually led to pockets of illegal "immigrants" all over the US. For awhile, it was just a problem out in California and Arizona. The folks in Ohio, Pennsylvania, Virginia, New York, etc. could and did ignore it. But now there are voters in both parties across the country who are livid at the mess that has been created.
Democrats still don't grasp that furious voters from both parties rallied to "build the wall" and elected Trump. Anyone who wants to campaign on "abolish ICE" can have at it.
25
I've voted DEM all my life but I'm losing faith in the party's ability to function with any effectiveness whatsoever.
The large majority of DEM supporters (as evidenced by the Reader Picks comments for this article) see the nonsense of abolishing ICE. And I believe the large majority of elected DEM politicians see the nonsense as well.
There are a small handful of supporters and politicians who don't and can get behind a message like "abolish ICE".
But the Party has so lost control of its ability to control its message that this small minority will be used by the GOP and Fox to completely mis-characterize all DEMs.
We need DEM leaders standing on the floor of the House talking REASON. We need them on all the media talk shows. We need them being quoted in articles such as this. Their message to the American public needs to be so loud that it drowns out this nonsense and the abuse that will soon follow from the GOP.
But it's not happening and it won't be happening. The party is completely dysfunctional now. I am rapidly losing hope for 2018.
26
So, in other words, this is really bad news for the Democratic Party.
How about "Defend Our Constitution"?
How about "Our Rights, Our Lives"?
How about actually having a feasible policy that actually defends the human rights of people in your country and counter-acts the negative actions of the Trump administration, instead of something that is largely symbolic and plays into one of the hyperbolic fears ("open borders!") of the alt-right?
Having Ocasio-Cortex nominated isn't a good thing, it's a pretty bad thing. This is why the Trump administration doesn't fear the mid-term elections coming up. Why?
Because the policies that certain people are advocating for (Abolish ICE! Impeach! Simple hyperbolic slogan that can't actually be legislated!) will rally Republican voters who absolutely would not come out otherwise and will sap their support of Democratic candidates. It will reinforce party lines and give credibility to the idea that the Republican Party needs Trump in order to prevent some sort of liberal chaos.
There are massive issues in your country right now. The Muslim ban. The disintegration of foreign policy. The constant, consistent erosion of human rights. The authoritarian language of the administration, attempting to justify lack of Constitutional rights such as freedom of speech, a free press, and right to trial. Those are legislative issues than can run concurrently with immigration.
But save the slogans for the demagogues.
11
I'm amazed at how ignorant the majority of these comments are. ICE is not border patrol. Eliminating ICE would not magically open the borders. The Democrats are not calling for open borders, but humane immigration policy (you know, the kind that might break with America's storied history of wildly racist immigration laws). I'd like to think that these comments were brigaded from somewhere like Drudge; NYT readers aren't usually so ill-informed
11
Except that border patrol doesn't do deportations, and border patrol also estimates that it stops, at most, 50% of the people coming over the border.
Historically, adults accompanied by children were not held more than 20 days, because legally children couldn't be beyond 20 days (the legal reason behind the separations of children from parents recently.) After 20 days, those detained would be told to show up for a court date, perhaps months into the future. If they don't show up and there's no ICE to deport them, they are in the US indefinitely. While that may be a goal of the NYT editorial staff, as well as a small number of voters, my guess is that Americans as a whole don't want this. And Democrats shouldn't want their party to stand for it either, because if it does in 2020 they don't stand a chance of defeating Trump. Keep in mind that Bernie Sanders referred to open borders ( a short hand term for virtually limitless immigration) as a Koch Brothers plan. Historically, big labor has NEVER supported open borders. It has been something that the capitalist class supported, not the left.
19
Migrant groups such as “United We Dream” are advocating for “Abolish ICE and CBP.” No one is conflating the two agencies.
And relying solely on border patrol is effectively an open borders policy since people do cross illegally without being caught and many others are visa overstayers. People would try to enter by any means, knowing they wouldn’t be deported once here.
The current immigration system is hardly racist. The visa lottery program benefits immigrants primarily from Africa and other areas with limited immigration to the US. The family reunification visas benefits immigrants mostly from Asia and Latin America. The refugee visas help people from conflicts all across the world. The United States issues over a million green cards annually, primarily to people from developing countries. So I’m amazed by your comment and not in a good way.
5
Of course ICE is not the Border Patrol. The point trying to be made here is that’s how it will play out politically. This Democratic Immigration policy you speak of what is it? Nobody really knows. What is certain is that the GOP will hammer the Democrats with the “They Want no Borders”, “Soft On Enforcement” line, and like it or not it will resonate with the majority of Americans until someone, I’d hope a Democrat, but I don’t care anymore, takes a stand for the millions of people who are here in this country and those trying to get across the border and recognize the positive and essential role they play in our economy. The half measures this country is doing for these people amounts to nothing more than racism.
People on both sides of the political spectrum are reacting to the image of the proposal, and refusing to discuss the details of how ICE could be abolished and a new, more effective agency created. We Americans have become so simple-minded, reactive, that we we're afraid to pursue thoughtful solutions to big problems because we're afraid of knee-jerk reactions. All the while, complain about the current state of Congress and politics because it is stacked with politicians doing the same thing. Maybe they are representative of us after all.
3
If my representative said Abolish ICE was part of their agenda they would have just lost my vote.
I want more legal immigration. I want less illegal immigration. I believe in E-verify and I definitely dont believe that immigration only benefits our society.
As our nation turns to automation, open borders becomes a recipe for disaster. We need control of our borders like every other nation on earth. We need to make legal immigration more merit based and end corporations reliance on constant supplies of unskilled labor. The stock market has doubled yet wages remain flat. We need to stop thinking this is the only way to growth. We need to stop caring about GDP growth, and care about the environment and quality of life.
We need to welcome refugees, but if we make having a sad life then only prerequisite then I dont see any reason why 80% of the earth couldnt claim asylum in America. Also, I think we have a right to be suspect when someone claims asylum only after being caught illegally immigrating. I dont think we should separate parents from kids though. As for "jobs Americans dont want to do" I believe that there should be no job in America that Americans dont want to do. People already pay 500% more for an organic label. Why are they so against paying 30% more ti make sure the workers picking those organic fruits and veggies have fair wages and workers comp and safe hours?
31
Exactly , within 15 years all lower level jobs will be automated . We do not need torrents of unskilled labor in the county. The only thing these crazy slogans such as abolish ice do is motivate the most right wing base. Democrats take your party back from the Uber left fringe. Make some sense and get back to basics when you were for the common worker. No more identity politics.
4
How about altering the 100 mile border limit to 50 or 35?
It’s ridiculous and stressful to see this new agency (16 years old?) aggressively going after non-violent migrants. Some agents seem almost gestapo like. There have to be parameters.
5
We need a look at what ICE does and what other border systems do. How effective are they? What is their history? Could their work be better done by another system? Are they recently changed? How do other countries handle their borders? More analysis of political tactics and tired exaggerations we don't need.
3
It's not so much a rallying cry as an attempt to secure the votes of the far left of the Democratic Party since they have an outsized role in Democratic primaries. In the general election when centrist Democrats,independents and Republicans also vote this "rallying cry" may prove a major liability. Remember November, 2016.There is a groundswell of opposition to unfettered migration in Europe at this very moment.
26
I'm constantly on here complaining that the centrists don't listen to the left.
But Abolish ICE is a bad idea. Another bad idea is that somehow Democrats should pack the Supreme Court, though only Trump could do that.
Right now, the last things Democrats need to do is help Trump attack the institutions of our Republic. The problem is not that the government has a department in charge of immigration and customs. The problem is the politicians running those agencies.
Trump is attacking the vital institutions of our democracy. If you help Trump "abolish ICE," he will privatize ripping children from their parents arms.
We can't triangulate like centrist Democrats, but we need to be very precise about what we say.
The defense we have against Trump is to keep calling him out on his abuses of the Constitution. If we help Trump undermine the rule of law and the Constitution, then our country will realy be just a Banana Republic.
The rule of law, the Constitution, the judiciary, justice department, FBI, etc. make looting our Republic more difficult. The Party of Trump is loudly attacking all of those things, and bragging that they are doing it to steal, because they are "smart."
Our Constitution is under attack. They even want to privatize the United States Post Office (a self funding agency directly created by the Constitution) and give it away cheap to the shipping industry.
Save the Constitution and the institutions.
The rot is from the top down, not from the rule of law.
11
The public overwhelmingly favors deporting or jailing violent gang members - undocumented or otherwise.
Instead, ICE is tearing apart generations of families. Many of the American-born children are far too young to care for themselves.
ICE should be abolished, as they are complicit in crimes against humanity and laws protecting refugees seeking sanctuary.
Trump wants to turn away refugees seeking sanctuary from violence without a hearing, despite laws designed with US leadership in the UN after World War II.
Trump, and the so-called "evangelical Christians" who back him, are sending mothers, fathers and children back to violence, torture and death in Mexico, Ecuador, Honduras and El Salvador.
What lessons have these purported Christians learned from Jesus Christ? They would nail him to the cross if he came back, for preaching love and other liberal values.
During the elections, Russian trolls and bots dredged up divisiveness and enmity through social media in this county to put Trump in office despite losing by 3 million votes.
Trump has continued that method of operation by fracturing the country, tearing communities and families apart, and turning the US against her closest American allies in favor of brutal dictators.
Loop pictures of ICE baby internment camps. Spend the money by meeting state ID impediments, registering voters, and calculating optimal logistics for transporting voters to polls and organizing mail-in campaigns.
And audit the vote in 2018!
2
I honestly don't understand. If you don't like the policies by which an agency operates, then you need to change the policies. Obviously, ICE accomplishes lots of necessary things. They do essential functions for the country. Pretty clearly, many people do not like some of the policies they enforce, me included. But "Abolish ICE" is not a serious proposal. It's a polarizing rallying cry that will allow candidates in some districts to fake supporting something they probably will not really support after the primaries, unless they are in a truly far left or anarchist district.
It's much more important and serious a matter to force our dysfunctional elected officials on both sides to pass humane, just, and enforceable immigration law. Fake ideas like "Abolish ICE" are just further distractions from the hard work that lies before us. Work we must accomplish together, as many of us as possible.
10
Well, that was divisive and emotional.
ICE is an institution that represents the orders of your current administration. In other words, ICE does what it's told to by the Trump administration. If you don't like what ICE is doing, the answer isn't to abolish ICE. The answer is to vote out the Trump administration, the people who are giving the orders.
Otherwise it's like firing a cashier because you don't like that head office didn't organize a sale on Friday. The cashier doesn't have the power to control anything, and head office will just hire a new one. But you've hurt that particular person, and insulted anyone who otherwise would have helped you because you just targeted a cashier for no reason.
Yes, the vote should be audited. Isn't it already? But more importantly, strict rules should be put in place that limit financing from foreign nationals, financing from corporations, financing from non-profits who receive donations from foreign nationals, and in-kind donations. Those rules are not currently followed. There should also be a ban on micro-targeting using large-scale data profiles, proprietary data, and data of unknown, foreign, or illicit origin (for example: Cambridge Analytica posing as a researcher to steal information). Propaganda is a real problem, isn't it?
By the way, yes, people generally favour jailing violent gang members (you mean criminally violent, right?), but not deporting them. Why deport someone who is a citizen? Interesting assumption, tho.
6
I.C.E did not exist before 9/11.
If any government organization is so inept as to separate babies and pre-schoolers from parents without a plan to reunite them, they should be dissolved and reconstituted.
I would show the children's internment camp on a loop, and ask if this arm of the government deserves to be in charge of such an important mission.
The US Border and Customs Protection (CBP) protects the nation's border from terrorists and weapons. That is the critical mission.
I.C.E. are thugs tearing apart generations of families, not protecting the nation.
Flushing the 16 year old name down the toilet and reconstituting the organization with competent staff is the least that could be done.
But you go ahead- support your local baby internment camp.
America was better off with the INS, and it's time to bring them back. They managed immigration better, and they did it cheaper and more efficiently. It's not a partisan issue, but a constitutional one. For the sake of our republic, we must eliminate our paramilitary border army and put power back in the hands of law enforcement. True conservative governments place their faith in civilian police. Leftist dictatorships use militarized domestic armies like ICE to enforce the will of Big Government upon the individual.
4
Remember the old INS raids? Not pretty or just or fair or humane. Immigration is difficult for any country that attracts people who live in misery or fear or simply want greater opportunity. It is tearing Europe apart right now. Some of the problems are intractable.
The answer that addresses the tractable problems is to have a properly regulated entry flow. One needs just, humane, and enforceable immigration law to do this. If it is unjust and inhumane, it will produce a legitimation crisis and people will not support it. If it is unenforceable, the potential immigrants and criminal opportunists will ignore it.
Unfortunately, both parties use immigration to polarize the electorate, consolidate their base, and win elections. We need to elect people who refuse to do this, people who instead face the issue squarely and who are willing to compromise to get actual legislation passed. The alternative is more misery and more chaos and more polarization, which right now looks to be our future.
1
Once again Democrats are trying their hardest to seize defeat from the jaws of victory. Americans do not want open borders and that is just how they will interpret this slogan.
34
yes, abolish ICE and free jobs for life and healthcare for all. it garnered almost 15,000 votes in an overwhelmingly Democratic district. better yet, dont run any Democrats for Congress, call it a protest and hand the Repubicans all the keys. this is not the stuff of a national party platform. this is nuts.
22
Many of the comments here reflect a misconception about ICE.
ICE is NOT part of the Customs and Border Control agency.
Customs and Border Control is the largest uniformed law enforcement agency in the country. Border control agents are part of CBC. Border control agents are NOT ICE agents. Border control agents have authority to question, investigate, and detain anyone they suspect of illegally entering the country, or smuggling contraband including drugs, at the border -- and anywhere within 100 miles of any border.
ICE is different. ICE is part of the Department of Homeland Security, and was conceived after 9/11, as a response to wide fear of terrorism. ICE has an investigative arm whose function it is to investigate not just terror, but crimes like money laundering.
Recently, a group of ICE investigators petitioned Homeland Security to allow them to break off from the policing/deporting arm of ICE. This makes sense. The investigators perform an important Homeland Security job.
But the police/deportation arm of ICE should be abolished. ICE agents have authority to arrest/deport/detain people in the interior of the country. Under Trump, they have been emboldened to intrude into the jurisdictions of local police departments, hindering the ability of those departments to keep their citizens safe.
Nobody is safer because of ICE's policing/deportation force. It is expensive and redundant at the very least, and an abusive gestapo-in-training force at worst.
10
Well the problem with eliminating ICE is our tendency to use a sledgehammer in place of a scalpel, because it's easier and more dramatic and satisfies our rage. And that's apart from the fact that it ain't gonna happen.
10
'Reform Ice'
If we want to win in the fall. ffs.
6
People have short memories. ICE came into being post-9/11, when the INS was divided into 3 parts and made into 3 separate divisions Homeland Security. Before that, immigration agents were not hated and feared as now, and we didn’t see the abuses we see now.
When the breaking up of INS happened, many of us foresaw the results: The creation of a separate, militarized institutional culture built on our post-9/11 fear and anger; the division of our immigration service into different departments with competing missions; and – yes, this matters – a name, “ICE,” that’s full of connotations, that the new agents just loved to wear on their backs, and that couldn’t have been better designed to bring out the worst in them.
This should not have happened. Unfortunately, some Democratic leaders were among the most enthusiastic promoters, competing to be seen as toughest on terrorism.
Of course, all the swaggering ICE guys wouldn’t have prevented the 9/11 attacks; the attackers were here legally. But no matter: The politicians had to Look Tough, and so they gave voice to all the ugliest sentiments of immigrant-haters, and created ICE.
We had immigration enforcement before ICE and we can have it without ICE. It should be rebuilt as something else and run by someone else.
11
Abolishing ICE makes sense only to those who advocate for open borders, a condition that no sovereign nation can or will ever approve.
The US cannot afford to support its own citizens: the poor, the ill, elderly, disabled, veterans, et al. It is thus impossible for US taxpayers to support the hundreds of millions of foreigners who would like to come to the US. That is why there are laws limiting the numbers of immigrants allowed into the US each year. Every nation in the world has laws that limit immigration.
The cruelty lies not in detaining and deporting illegal aliens. What is cruel, unethical and probably illegal is teaching foreigners how to game the system to enter the US by falsely claiming asylum, persecution, abuse, etc.; that is, to violate US laws.
By the way, those hoping for Democratic progress in the mid-terms (and 2020) will have to kiss their dreams goodbye if open borders becomes a plank in the Democratic platform.
38
Open borders is not a plank in the Democratic platform; stop repeating the Republican propaganda. We can abolish/reform ICE and still border control; the CBC is a different group from ICE, and would still patrol and maintain the borders. We could take of the poor and sick in this country if we had a progressive tax code that didn't shovel money upwards to the 0.1%.
3
It's not a plank in the platform, but you hear almost no concrete proposals for enforcing the border from leading Democrats.
They show no interest in enforcement and don't want to talk about it, which reasonably leads many to conclude they are de facto in favor of open borders and are waiting only for a working majority to allow unrestricted immigration.
Imagine a candidate saying this in a Democratic primary: "I want a generous policy toward bona fide asylum seekers, but I also believe in aggressively deporting all criminals who are in the country illegally. All means all: felons and misdemeanants alike."
In many districts, such a statement would be poison for a Democrat. But if you won't cooperate with the deportment of criminals, who would you deport?
The Progressive rumblings within the Democrat Party get stronger everyday. It started with Obama and got much louder with Bernie Sanders.Here in Maryland we have Ben jealous trouncing the preferred candidate of the Democrat establishment in the Governors race and of course the victory in New York of Ms.Cortez. Senator Gillibrand has stuck her finger in the wind and figured out the wind is very much blowing in a Progressive direction. She used to be very tough on illegal immigration almost Trump like. Now she wants to abolish ICE. We voters were born on a day but it was not yesterday. I think she is trying to appeal to the Progressives whose numbers are growing lest she end up like her fellow Democrat Mr. Crowley.The idea that ICE should be abolished given the current state of world affairs is absurd. The fact that a respected and seasoned United States Senator is parroting that sentiment means that the D in Democrat also now stands for Desperate.
25
Lifelong Dem, here. " Abolish ICE " is a recipe for disaster, and electoral defeat. REFORM ICE: when we have a functioning government, again. The first step : VOTE. WIN the Midterms, our number one priority. Yes, I'm nearly sixty, but far from stupid. Get Real, and get to work.
Seriously.
19
How about we get some smart progressive candidates in office so they can rein in ICE.
3
My first reaction to abolish ICE was that it was not realistic. But since then, I have been doing a lot of research on the mysterious data mining firm, PALANTIR, which fuels ICE arrests at workplaces and otherwise. It’s truly scary. Plots out a network of a targetted person starting with address and traces all that person’s activities and connections, spouse, children, prchases, the works. It’s like a huge spider. And, it hs data on half the US population. Rogue employees have gotten into trouble using it.
I invite readers to look up PALANTIR. It won’t be easy because it is purposefully secretive., I hd to print up about ten articles since it was founded to the present to get an idea of its scope.
7
Oh, please. This is not a "progressive rallying cry," it's a beginner's guide to self-immolation. If the Democratic Party is lucky, the shelf life of this nonsense will equate that of the "Occupy Movement."
34
Playing right into the hands of the Followers of the Trump. Open borders. Let them all in. This is dangerous nonsense even if Trump was not president, and any reasonable person would reject this premise "on the face of it".
25
First we deport every person who lives and works here illegally- THEN we can abolish ICE.
35
Abolish ICE and make the US the first country in the world defacto open borders? To get an idea of what that would look like take a trip through Salvador, Honduras, Venezuela....
No one with any money will be attracted to immigrate to the US and many people with money will emigrate.
Great solution Progressives! You're on a roll to ruin the US.
40
Be careful how you do this. If you want to reorganize (not abolish ICE) to prevent family separation that is a just and winnable point re most Americans.
If you want to abolish ICE to open the floodgates to anybody that wants to come here for any reason you are not only wrong but conceding the midterms to the republicans and reelection of the ego maniac Trump.
Learn from history and leaders like Lincoln otherwise be condemned to its' worst mistakes.
38
When Melania Trump went to visit ICE yesterday and applaud their "hard work" I could not help but notice that the ICE men in-charge had chosen the facility she could visit and then went on and on about how they had to enforce the law.
The ICE officers spoke as though they were holding murdering prisoners -- no asylum seeking women and children. In other words they were just like the cops that bully minorities and/or kill them at traffic stops.
What were all the arrests throughout the nation yesterday? Have we become a dictatorship whereby people are no longer allowed to demonstrate peacefully.
Someday the Trumpists will realize what a mistake they have for a president. No they won't, they have FOX telling them what they want them to here. I just hope it is not too late.
8
Honestly people, did anyone here actually read the statement that the House member wrote? This article took a couple of pictures and cherry picked what tthe House Rep. said and made a wild assumption. The Representatives words are no different than RONALD REAGAN. Get a grip conservatives. This is media at its worst and not indicate of the Independents.
5
“Abolish ICE” makes as little sense as “Abolish EPA” or “Abolish IRS.” If Democratic candidates can’t do something more constructive and vastly less harmful to the whole left with their justifiable anger towards ICE, they are fools who don’t deserve to be elected. Their blind urge to tear down government instead of reform it is entirely Trumpian. Democrats can’t afford the luxury of his nihilism. We have to rebuild the government and our republic after Trump and his enablers get through with it.
21
Yes, end family separations but the vast majority of America does not want to eliminate ICE.
Progressive should not waste their their energies on issues that are so extreme.
35
If this becomes the position of most Democrats, it will guarantee four more years of Trump (I cannot stand him by the way). He truly is driving people to support the insane.
33
Progressive ? More like radical tea party tactics of my way or the highway . It won't work , they are still a minority voice in the Democratic party and most democrats don't go along with the idea . How about asking for reform instead ? Gillibrand and those crying for abolishing ICE are political animals latching on to ideas that will get them votes . Perhaps they should stop running as democrats and form their own party . The democrats need to shake off the rust , get their ducks in a row to address and do something about the damage the Trump administration and the Republicans are doing to the country . Screaming and yelling gets the Democrats nowhere except to confirm to Trump supporters that they are losers and becomes a major distraction . Get together with sensible strategies instead whacky ideas . There are more serious things going on ie: the vacant supreme court seat , the Mueller investigation , the undoing of laws , etc . Medicare for all is a lovely idea but not when Trump is about to try and privatize it , else we all end up as losers giving Trump more power . Concentrate on what is possible at the moment .
16
When the state of California started giving drivers licenses to illegal immigrants a few years ago, I stopped being a Democrat. When Governor Brown declared California a "sanctuary state" last year, I became a Republican. I don't like most Republican policies but will vote that way from now on unless the Democrats come to their senses.
66
Ok I get a little of what you say, ... but then you are complicit with a man and a regime without moral or ethical center, who acts and deed are often unjust and unnecessarily cruel, whose total disregard for the truth is undermining the real basis of society and culture. Besides enriching his family and himself. Go there but know where you are going,
3
You don’t know the history of California, do you?
2
A country that doesn't define and defend its borders is no country. If effect, these folks are calling for the end of the US and return to the a world without nation states.
I guess they would prefer the Dark Ages when wandering hoards swept across Europe and took whomever and whatever they wanted.
37
The Left are doing a mighty fine job influencing us moderate liberals to vote Republican in November...for the first time in our adult lives. Bravo.
76
I can imagine some GOPERS carry signs that say "abolish" just to get more Republican votes. Reveal those people for who they are because that is not what the Dems want.
1
If you're dumb enough to believe that A) The Democrats want open borders B) That abolishing ICE would leave the borders undefended (it wouldn't, since that's the CBC's job and C) That poor migrants are a greater that than the authoritarian policies being pushed by the GOP, then you probably should have been voting for Trump all along
‘Abolish ICE’ and 'Free Healthcare for All" should be Hillary's themes during her inevitable 2020 presidential run. Wouldn't it make more sense to just give Trump the keys to the White House for a second term and save everyone the trouble?
24
“Immigrants are some of the most courageous and industrious people humanity has to offer,”
In other words, they’re hungry. Why we put our species up on such a pedestal, I have no idea.
8
Get rid of ICE. Let local police do that job. We need to differentiate the good from the bad. Let the people choose their side and may the best side win. Just do what's right.
Amazing how Americans not living in border towns are all for ICE; these fearful pearl-clutchers think they're being invaded! What an embarrassment they are to the human race.
Border town police and businesses all hate ICE. They know the ginned up invasion is fake and those who do arrive are hard-working, law-abiding, good people that any town would be lucky to have.
There is no immigrant crisis at all. It's fake! The net flow over the southern border has been negative - into Mexico - since 2009.
Furthermore, undocumented workers are more law abiding than citizens and they pay Billions more in taxes than they take out.
The outflow of immigrants back into Mexico (for family reunification and because Mexico now has better jobs due to outsourced auto manufacturing) from New Mexico depressed housing prices. US border towns want their immigrants to stay. When they leave, the economy goes with them and employers are left high and dry.
Eventually we need open borders, which will increase GDP.
Two ways to immediately increase GDP with no investment at all are open borders and no tariffs. Studies by economists show this to be true even if every other country has tariffs and closed borders. (If every country had open borders, world GDP would increase by an estimated $78 Trillion)
4
Yes, the border crisis is fake, invented by Trump.
But now is not the time to being demanding reorganization of our government. Trump is the one with control of that, so we want to oppose any change to existing branches of government or agencies.
Trump is attacking our Constitution. We need to protect the Constitution and the Institutions of our Republic. Yes they need to be improved, but not until we have removed the Party of Trump and their donors from control of the government.
"Eliminating a federal agency is a position that leaves little room for compromise, and moderate Democrats who do not support the proposal risk drawing the ire of the very vocal far left, which already views the party establishment as slow to embrace their ideals." Isn't this precisely what the far right has been doing for several years now? Isn't this why supposedly sane, moderate Republicans are cowering in fear of "the base"? Isn't this exactly why the right wing is winning? Because they are driven by a frothing-at-the-mouth radical fringe? Why shouldn't the left adopt a winning tactic?
6
Because it cannot be done -- no nation can survive without immigration control (of some sort), and customs enforcement.
12
I am against triangulating and all for loudly demanding good policy.
But this is not good policy. Trump is trying to attack our very system of government. The problem is not the institutions of our Republic. The problem is the politicians that have taken control of those institutions. We need to attack those politicians (and their donors) and their abuses of the existing system. If you help them attack the existing system, then you give Trump and his party the ability to remake these institutions in their image. And right now most of the Republican Party wants to be saying thank you to a pathological liar who muses about being "president for life" and would like the American People to "sit up at attention," like the North Koreans do for his buddy Kim.
Trump is attacking the Constitution every day. We need to protect the Constitution with everything we have,
Because the Constitution is Freedom of Speech, Freedom of Religion, Freedom from search and seizure without a warrant.
Without the Constitution, we revert to the Divine Rule of Trump.
Be very careful what you say about our institutions. Some of the Justices may be corrupt, but the Supreme Court and the Judiciary are not Corrupt. They are a coequal branch of government.
ICE agents are being abused by forcing them to do these things. Instead of trying to abolish them, try to make their job do the right thing. ICE agents didn't make this policy. Trump and his cabinet of billionaires made this policy.
Attack what they do.
1
Are progressives trying to lose elections? Because a slogan of 'Abolish ICE' is guaranteed to do that.
I have no love for ICE and the cruel, inhumane tactics they have adopted under this administration. But abolish ICE is as ridiculous as abolish EPA, or abolish Department of Education, or repeal Obamacare.
If you see a problem with an organization or a policy, then talk to the voters about fixing the problem rather than simply ripping things apart.
31
As much as I see "abolish ICE" on my Facebook timeline accompanied by justifications ranging from its post-9/11 founding to its continued separation of families, the idea of abolishing a federal agency will not sit well with the majority of America and fuels the narrative that Democrats want open borders (courtesy of our very own president). ICE isn't a great agency. It's done a lot of unsavory things. But it is necessary to a certain extent--not to deport immigrants who have done nothing wrong and who simply want to live, but to investigate the (very small) minority who do commit felonies and come back. ICE, and in particular Enforcement and Removal Operations, needs immense restructuring and a decrease in staffing--it should not be another militant force acting against this country's own people (because really, immigrants who make the arduous journey here for freedom are the biggest example of the American Dream there is). It certainly needs a change in leadership, since ICE's current director has defended separating children from parents and lauded Donald Trump's excessive immigration policies. The letters "ICE" shouldn't strike fear into people's hearts, but it shouldn't disappear, either, because like it or not, the political ramifications will be immense. Maybe I'm being cautious, but sometimes, you have to be realistic. Especially in this polarized nation, calling for the ICE to be abolished is only going to drive Republican turnout.
4
As an outsider and admirer of the US, I think it’s a shame that there are just two political parties and both are getting hijacked by extreme combative elements. Imagine the positive momentum that could come if there was a sensible centrist party that probably could incorporate many leaders who today are stuck within the Red and Blue boundaries. You could have sensible but also sensitive border security, tax cuts but not skewed to the super rich, environmental care, gun control, less burdensome regulation, more free trade but more infrastructure spending to also create blue collar jobs, etc. Instead we have centrists silent while extremists wage war.
8
A country that seems to be leaning more 'law and order,' and THIS is how the Dems think they'll find a majority in the mid-terms, much less 2020?
This is counterproductive messaging, folks. Imagine the campaign ad footage that has been handed to the Rs thanks to this choice.
Gonna be a long 7+ (or more) years.
14
This proposal has nothing to do with progressive nor liberal political movements, it's old fashioned anarchism, opposition to governments entirely, people living without any formal government organizations nor services at all. The assumption is that all government are instruments of privileged ruling classes and so are all instruments of oppression. Better to live under the conditions of the strong dominating over the weak informally. It's more nihilistic than any attempt to provide a more just social order.
9
ICE is a recent creation and it does not need to exist. Of course, getting rid of ICE does not get rid of its policies, which could be enforced by other agencies.
It is not unreasonable to demand the dismantling of an oppressive government agency. It's a difficult thing to do, but it's not unreasonable.
2
Eliminating ICE is not a progressive issue; it's a liberal issue, which is fine. But lets call it what it is. Most people want to eliminate ICE because of the challenging issues of separating parents from children. It certainly is an issue worth fighting for. But ICE does so much more that people do not understand. We must also realize that the United routinely separates children from fit parents and has done so for decades. Just ask any law-abiding father who looses his children in the family courts.
6
How about demanding that our Government sit down and come up with a workable immigration solution. If the Democrats are hoping that most American's are ok with open borders they'd better take a hard look at the numbers. That's how GOP is going to play this in November and hating ICE isn't going to be enough. The Democrat solution of detaining whole families may make people "feel" better but the fact is that whole family detentions are still morally wrong. These people want to come here. When is it going to be time to embrace this historic wave of immigrantion and help these people make a transition that would have future benefits for the country. I'd like to see less Trump finger pointing and more action from the Democrats. It appears that outside the Russia probe, it's all they have.
1
Nothing radical about doing away with ICE, which was ill-conceived to begin with. But partisan politics based on immigrants and immigration is a script written by Republicans, and it will only benefit them.
6
I think the Times should've mentioned that ICE is less than 20 years old. Somehow, we managed to prevent child trafficking and enforce customs policy without it until very recently.
Moreover, if the Times is going to quote multiple right-wing politicians and pundits making overwrought claims about open borders, the paper should also note why ICE has become so unpopular. ICE agents have detained citizens, kept immigrants from seeking justice by staking out courthouses, entered schools on immigration sweeps, violently arrested parents in front of their young children, accused Oakland's mayor of criminal acts, and caused lethal car accidents. In short, many of us feel strongly that ICE endangers us and our communities.
4
I've said it before and I'll say it again: The Democrats just lost the midterms and maybe 2020. Eliminating ICE is an unreasonable thing to do and the mere idea stokes "open border" fears. Oscario-Cortez prominently rolled out the socialism boogeyman for the right on a silver platter. All this talk of getting rid of the "old white men" fuels alt right narratives of "whiteness" being under attack. In one week, the Dems lost many independents and never Trump Republicans. Sigh... I thought some check to the madness was on the horizon but we shot ourselves in the foot. The party has gone too far left to be palatable to those on the fence. Both parties are bowing to the extremists. If there ever was a ripe opportunity for a unifying third party centrist candidate, this is it because the Democrats can no longer beat Trump and his cronies on a national level unless Mueller presents some smoking gun or the economy totally tanks (don't count on it).
21
It's one thing for a single candidate like Oscario-Cortez, to say abolish ICE. It's another thing altogether when more Democrats jump on the bandwagon.
5
ICE should not be abolished, but it definitely needs some reform and oversight
3
Immigrant families are desperate and powerless. Under this administration's direction, ICE has been brutal and cruel. There is a moral imperative to make this better.
All the same, immigration should be just one of a number of policy priorities for the Democrats.
The story that there are two kinds of progressives is just wrong. I wasn't a Sanders supporter but that doesn't make me less progressive. On economics I was a bit more realistic (that is, I wanted to take into account how we would pay for things), but on social policy I was more progressive.
The president has broad discretion to do whatever he likes with immigration and ICE. So ICE looks like what Trump would do everywhere if only he could.
Calls to replace ICE will keep front and center the fact that this White House is ripping thousands of young children away from their mothers and fathers.
By the way, I don't believe we need to make public university free. It would be sufficient to peg tuition at an amount that an undergraduate could earn with a typical full-time summer job.
Of course it is a Republican lie that Democrats want open borders. The Republicans will push that lie no matter whether or not Democrats push for an ICE replacement.
It would make the most sense to be flexible on this, and let local elections determine its priority. It worked for Ocasio-Cortez in New York but would not have worked in Pennsylvania.
2
1. Increase funding to a level to quickly clear the backlog of cases.
2. Reform the immigration laws and close loopholes.
3. Mandatory E-verify by independent agencies of all workers and don’t make it the employers responsibility. Use the IRS via payroll to weed out non compliance.
4. Offer existing illegals a chance to citizenship via back taxes and a 5year waiting period. Non compliance results in immediate deportation.
Address the issue sanely and humanely. If we are a nation of laws and not men, we have to enforce them or we are nothing.
7
So, the Democrats' solution to illegal immigration is to eliminate the primary law enforcement agency that controls illegal immigration.
Wow, the campaign advertisements almost write themselves.
On behalf of Trump supporters everywhere, I beg the Democrats to make this their 2018 campaign focus.
22
People have short memories. ICE came into being post-9/11, when the INS was divided into 3 parts and made into 3 separate divisions Homeland Security. Before that, we didn’t see the abuses we see now.
When the breaking up of INS happened, many of us foresaw the results: The creation of a separate, militarized institutional culture built on our post-9/11 fear and anger; the division of our immigration service into different departments with competing missions; and – yes, this matters – a name, “ICE,” that’s full of connotations, that the new agents just loved to wear on their backs, and that couldn’t have been better designed to bring out the worst in them.
This should not have happened. Unfortunately, some Democratic leaders were among the most enthusiastic promoters, competing to be seen as toughest on terrorism.
Of course, all the swaggering ICE guys wouldn’t have prevented the 9/11 attacks; the attackers were here legally. But no matter: The politicians had to Look Tough, and so they gave voice to all the ugliest sentiments of immigrant-haters, and created ICE.
We had immigration enforcement before ICE and we can have it without ICE. It should be rebuilt as something else and run by someone else.
1
When robots, computers and cheap foreign labor renders us all useless and idle, just image all the time that will leave for marching on the streets with protest signs. That’s when we’ll finally see some real change then, I’m sure.
8
While Progressives may be well meaning
they seem to out of touch with the very country
they wish to change.
Reforme ICE will get them farther than abolish.
Why does the Left-Wing of the Democratic Party
insist on shooting themselves in the foot over
and over again ?
This type of thinking led to McGovern in 1972 -
do you really want Trump to win in 2020 and
the Republicans to keep the Senate and House
in 2018 ?
21
The Trump camp has been fighting the ridiculous straw-man claim that the democrats want totally open borders. No country on earth has totally open borders. So becoming a democrat who seems to espouse that very view is literally playing into their hands. We can argue over how much immigration we should allow, we can argue over how generous our asylum program is. But it also doesn't make sense to simply cede control of immigration altogether. Perhaps ICE is not the best way to control immigration. But honestly, even to sensible people, running on a platform of "abolish ICE" sounds so much like - let anyone come here without any rules whatsoever. You really have to be out of touch to think that most Americans will ever support that. It is also totally illogical to support that view by saying that immigrants contribute so much to the country. I agree...so set a large legal quota. It doesn't follow that we should just give up on any immigration laws. I really don't think anyone who is trying to think carefully about this situation can possibly disagree with this.
11
Liberals seldom promote constructive means to resolve a problem as is evident by this article. Liberal activism or act up, is grounded in the burn baby burn approach to a problem. There is no acknowledgement of the Flores v Reno settlement or the recognition that those being deported are not here legally and is some instances are convicted criminals. Where is the acknowledgement that the legislative branch of our government is responsible for this problem and it goes back over a decade? There is nothing constructive that will come out of this.
6
More fodder for the Republicans to use in the upcoming elections. Could we possibly make it any easier for them to maintain control of both Houses?
11
The reason calls to "abolish ICE" have gained traction is that those calls are the correct position. Thuggish behavior should not be a part of the United States's government.
1
It is not ICE that is thuggish. It is the politicians that are in Trump's cabinet, telling ICE what to do that are thuggish. This is a fake issue created by Trump to distract the Left while he does real damage to the Constitution and the Bill of Rights.
Trump is a master of redirection. He didn't take children hostage by accident. He did it to get you to react.
The rule of law is not the problem. It protects us and can be changed constitutionally. Corruption of the mega-rich in our politics is the problem.
Radical means go to the root of the problem. Don't let them distract you.
If you help Trump "abolish ICE," he will just give it a more obscure name and farm taking children from their parents to a private corporation.
Attack the politicians, not the institutions.
8
Democrats ought to be very, very careful of letting their brand be associated with such ideas. There are probably enough people who voted for Trump (just to see what would happen) who now wouldn't. But an idea like this, will lose them. A better idea right now would be REFORM ICE.
6
Once again, the Democrats are on a path of self-destruction. Let's see, which states were mentioned in this article - Hawaii, Massachusetts, New York, Washington, New Jersey. Notice any common thread? Yes, they are all reliably Democratic states in presidential elections and midterms. Does it really matter what the people in those states think about this policy? NO! They are going to vote Democrat no matter what.
The only way for the Democrats to win back Congress and the presidency is to convince independents like myself that they are better for this country. Spewing nonsense like "abolish ICE" is not going to accomplish this. Who is going to enforce our immigration laws? I interpret the progressives message as "this is an open invitation to all immigrants to come here without regard for our immigration laws; you can pick and choose which laws should be followed". ICE performs for a valuable service for our society; we should be supporting it, and possibly reforming it where needed, instead of abolishing it. Calls like this are a slap in the face of legal immigrants who jumped through the hoops to come to this country through the proper channels.
If the Democrats keep spewing such nonsense, they are not going to get my vote. Guess I am voting Republican in the midterms and possibly in 2020.
18
It's too bad these folks aren't directing all this energy towards advocating constructive immigration reform legislation. Lord knows there are flaws in the system, but these people are just flinging things around in a tantrum; they don't even seem to know what the existing rules are and how they work. Mind you, neither do many of the reporters--for example, there has been a database in use that tracks the custody status, location and custodian of every unaccompanied child in immigration proceedings for YEARS. Most reporters covering the juvenile migrant issue do not seem to have realized this.
45
By all means, give us your source of information stating that their is database in use that tracks the custody status, location and custodian of every minor. Sure, because Sean Hannity said so.
Where is your source?
1
In the late 1800's a movement arose in opposition to all governments called Anarchism. It was based upon the presumption that governments were all the instruments of oppression of the people by ruling classes from capitalists to emperors. Elimination of government would allow people to live free and peaceful lives with no oppressors nor exploiters and without any need for governments to even exist.
Progressivism was never against government because it presumed that democratic governments acting on the will of the people could actually make government by the consent of the governed a reality by countering the inequities which allow a few to dominate over the many. The Progressives championed one man one vote, breaking up trusts, eliminating the power of entities like railroads to dominate local government, the legalization of collective bargaining, etc. They were for government as an agency of change.
4
Consider what would it mean to not have passports, no visas, no government records of who comes in or goes out. No knowledge of any goods or property brought in or taken out of the country. That is what this proposal would produce.
80
ICE doesn't issue passports and visas. The State Dept does that. ICE didn't even exist before 2003. It may have had a purpose at some point, but it is now nothing more than a tool used by this administration to terrify communities.
3
Nope. That's not what this proposal would produce--at all. Eliminating ICE would leave Customs and Border Control *a separate agency) to secure the border, fight the flow of drugs, etc.
1
I got my first passport in 1981, over twenty years before ICE was founded. Equating ICE with all kinds of customs and border control is at best uninformed and at worst intentionally misleading.
1
Simplemindedness. You don't eliminate an agency. You change the LAWS. And you don't get to choose which laws get enforced and which don't.
Just like liberals (and I include myself) were aghast and demanded a Clerk issue Marriage licenses to Gay couples and insisted the letter and force of the law back them up.
You can't turn around and them say an agency that is there to enforce LAWS on the books is useless and be dismantled. where is the logic in that. Yes, it is increasingly militant in it's tactics - yet I'm guessing most of them are legal.
Change the laws. This makes the Progressive cause look bad and childish. Why run for office and instate laws that you feel are beneficial if you can't expect them to be enforced (or only your chosen set of laws get enforced)? Why get into politics at all?
I do admit it's pandering at it's best (free beer anyone?) and Trump definitely eked out a win with similar tactics.
17
Congressional representatives should ALWAYS represent the people of their district -- rather than the party machine. Thankfully, we are seeing a handful of candidates who are taking up the real issues that face people in their district: Like Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, who advocated for universal health care and the abolishment of I.C.E in a district that is 80% minority-majority. For too long the center-right Wall Street "Democrats" have controlled the party purse strings and the platform. They would not take a stand to support #MedicareForALL or #FightFor15 or #StopTPP in their platform. They said, workers should "settle" for a possible fight for $12 an hour, and Hillary Clinton campaigned on a weak platform that said high unemployment among inner city youths could be addressed by giving more subsidies to Walmart (a corporation that she sat on their board when workers were being fired for protesting wages!) The low-wage employer is already responsible for massive numbers of working poor, who need food stamps and housing subsidies every month...
1
I'm to the left of Mahatma Gandhi and Nelson Mandela in my politics, and consider myself a Western European Democratic Socialist. I also wholeheartedly support legal immigration, but do not support open borders, letting people who are here illegally to stay here indefinitely, or the abolishing ICE.
There are literally billions of poor, starving, and abused people in the world, and over 65 million refugees (a low figure) not only in Latin America but Africa, Asia and the Middle East. Our world is overpopulated and we are literally killing our planet for its limited resources. No country in the world, including the United States, can afford to take in 10s of millions of the people by opening the border, or they will suffer an economic collapse. Heck, we can't even afford to take care of our own people by providing them affordable healthcare and housing and good paying jobs or a decent education.
The rallying cry of some 'progressives' on open border immigration is foolish, unrealistic and fiscally and environmentally unsustainable and I won't vote for anyone shrieking this to the ignorant masses.
When did enforcing against millions of people who entered this country without permission and removing them become something terrible? I support enforcing our immigration laws and allowing a million people a year to become citizen's, not 10s of millions rushing our airports and borders like the land rush in Oklahoma.
114
Sasha you are absolutely correct. The left claims to be for the environment but is completely blind when it comes to the effect of population on the environment and every other aspect of our lives and the planet. It's very hard to take them seriously when they rail against the republicans who ignore the numbers on GW yet commit a worse error of ignoring the biggest contributor to the problems we face as a planet and country.
3
Abolish ICE and then what?
When people ignore their orders of deportation, just let it go?
When people in the nation illegally are convicted of a crime, just let it go? Local police cannot remove residents from the US interior.
When counterfeit medicines and other products come across the borders, just let it go?
When industries hire illegal labor because it's cheap and avoid paying taxes, just let it go?
I’ve never heard an answer from advocates as to what happens next and that worries me.
35
Are you aware that ICE was founded in 2003? Immigration enforcement went on before its creation, and would certainly continue without it.
1
Maybe ICE came into existence because immigration enforcement before 2003 was ineffective? Because it surely was!
Abolishing ICE will inch America closer to the lawlessness seen south of our border. As the corrupt governments of Central America continue to deteriorate, law enforcement at our border has never been more important.
It is ridiculous ideas like this by the fringe of the Democratic Party that will keep Congress and the White House under Republican control for another decade.
46
This is an obvious example of emotion replacing reason and as a conservative I am 100% in favor of Democrats supporting it.
60
This is good news for the GOP and Trump. They are being handed their future election victories on a silver plate...
45
We at one time called this "pandering"
The democrats should work on trying to win ... they keep talking about a wave .. but so far all the water is going out.
all this talk is just going to get the GOP to the polls
21
Hardly a fringe issue when you consider the underfunding of INS in general. All the money in policing and little to run admin. Added to red tape put there. It is an issue created by terrible budgeting of existing funds. All hidden under unsubstantiated claims about spending and crime.
1
The INS disappeared with the advent of DHS. Its remnants are USCIS, CBP, and ICE - and CBP basically lumped former INS inspectors into Customs.
Ugh.
Abolishing ICE is a very simple-minded proposal being articulated by a lot of very simple-minded people, because it gins up the far left of the Democratic base.
Abolishing ICE is terrible policy and probably worse politically, because it will lead independent voters in swing states to roll their eyes, like they always do about stuff like this. If the Democrats want to win, they'll stick with healthcare, jobs, raising wages (i.e., stuff people care about).
42
Americans are complicated people. We fancy ourselves as generous. If someone is choking in front of us, we will jump in an do the Heimlich. But somehow, sanitized evil is okay. We look the other way when we wage violence on other countries (Iraq). We yawn when we talk about capital punishment and the conditions of super max jails. We fiddle nervously with our hair when we talk about immigrants being deported. It has absolutely nothing to do with us. It does nothing FOR us.
If anything, we stoke our resentment like a fire that needs kindling. "They deserved it".
So let's start there when talking about immigration.
ICE is essentially the straw man poll for how you feel about immigration. If you are for it, you think ICE agents are the devil. If you are against it, you think ICE agents are heroes. That is genuinely how the conversations have gone down with the people I know.
What we need to do is reframe the conversation to what it ought to have been all along:
Is immigration good for us? Are our immigration policies aligned with our goals as a country.
I would say yes to the former and no to the latter.
The numbers do not lie: immigrants of all sorts contribute to our economy, they sustain large segments of jobs and industries and they contribute to our tax base. The removal of undocumented people alone would bankrupt us.
ICE is a symptom of prejudice, ignorance and a lack of action on the part of congress to do what is right for all: legislate.
4
Actually, the numbers show that immigrants are a net burden on the country for at least 2 generations and then become net additive thereafter. So overall positive, yes. But completely misleading to leave out the part about how it's an additional burden on the country in the near and mid terms.
So you're talking about actually hurting the country for maybe 50 years (?) without any reservation at all, in order to chase the benefits that follow after that time. There "might" be some other measures/investments that could help the current population much sooner and more effectively than that.
25
Frank: I wasn't trying to be misleading: I just don't know what you are referring to..... first time I am hearing this. Do you have a link that backs up your statement? Not trying to be remotely snarky--trying to learn.
I did a tiny bit of research about the % of immigrants---and the one thing I saw was that we are now at 13%. In 1850, first year they measured, I believe it was at 10%---and at the height of it was close to 15%--and my understanding is that an economic boon followed those eras.
However--the point you are adding--that is news to me..... Sorry if I missed it somewhere.
1
What needs to be abolished is the mind set of the people who work for it. It's an agency made up of gun toting bouncers who strut around in their "ICE POLICE" T-shirts, long on intimidation and short on law enforcement savvy. And the leadership consists of ex-cops with high school educations who are not the brightest lights in the chandelier.
3
Have you ever lived in a border town? I did for many years. I encountered plenty of Border Patrol agents. They dressed and looked like all other cops.
19
Abby of Pleasant Hill said, "...Have you ever lived in a border town? I did for many years. I encountered plenty of Border Patrol agents. They dressed and looked like all other cops.:
What does that have to do with ICE? To give you a clue: Border Patrol and ICE are not the same agency.
Trump got into the White House, for one reason and one reason only, and that was his position on illegal immigration. Until and unless the democrats come up with some rational policy on illegal immigration, they will not win votes. Moving further to the left and calling yourself progressive is hardly going to inspire voters. What we need is some sensible people and not pie in the sky liberals saying ICE should be abolished. We cannot afford 4 more years of Trump and it infuriates me that the democrats don't see that this is not a winning platform in anything by but super liberal places like NY. Take a hint from Europe, which found out the hard way, unlimited immigration doesn't work.
124
Trump may have gotten into the WH on immigration but when he asked Congress to reform immigration Trump was empty-handed. Trump and Congress only break things, not fix things. Same story with Obamacare, the majority Congress couldn't pass anything.
3
The same Democrats called these people illegals and that they were a threat to jobs in America 10 years ago. I couldn't agree with you more. This current strategy is going to backfire.
9
Because it sounds better and is a lot more coy than "open borders" which is what they actually want.
58
A separate agency -- Customs and Border Control -- secures the border. Abolishing ICE would do nothing to hinder border control.
2
Democrats need to stop wringing their hands over how Republicans will demonize them and mischaracterize their positions on issues.
News Flash: Republicans will demonize Democrats no matter what Democrats say and do.
So, you might as well do the right thing, and at least inspire some faith in your supporters.
Close down ICE. They are the race police. They think 'probable cause' for arrest is having brown skin or speaking with a spanish accent. I'm ashamed that thousands of federal workers obey racist orders every day.
7
Some Republicans say they want to abolish the IRS. What's the difference?
1
Can someone point me to a single sentence uttered by any Democratic politician in America that comes even remotely close to putting one shred of blame on the ILLEGAL immigrants themselves?
55
Democrats need their heads examined if they think the American people would support eliminating enforcement of our borders.
It is as if Democrats don’t even want to win an election.
74
So the Democrats want to be in the wilderness for scores of years instead of just decades? At 53, I hope to live long enough to see another progressive era. If Democrats are associated with this policy, I hope my children live long enough to see another progressive era. Dump this slogan immediately.
37
ICE was founded when you were 38.
1
The picture with this article as well as the mug shots of ms13 members might as well be sent to trumps reelection campaign staff. I've never voted for a republican presidential candidate but if the democrats and the left continue to press for open borders and ever increasing immigration no matter who or how many, I will be rethinking my party affiliation. The left seems to only care for anyone here illegally and they never met an immigrant they didn't love more than any American. That got trump elected and could do it again. The u.s. gets to have immigration laws and enforce them like every other country on earth.
75
Illegal "immigrants" are some of the most poorly educated folks to have come to this country in the last 100 years. They are and will always be very low earning. They are unable to help their kids in school. They have led to a large and growing underclass whose US citizen kids are on all manner of entitlements. That's why 60% of California's non elderly Medicaid recipients are Hispanic. In Texas, it's 57%.
"Progressives", in business to hand out taxpayer money, don't care. Sure, abolish ICE. Open the borders. The US, social worker to the world.
37
Really who cares what "progressive" think outside other "progressives". But the Dems are saddled with them and "progressives" will be the death of the party in 2018-20 like they were the death of the party in 2016. The Dems need a leader - not backwash from Bernie and Warren. The need to take the middle back from the Rebs, not cement their ownership with stupid reactive posturing like "get rid of ICE"!
47
This will be the death knell for our party in upcoming elections. Republicans will say that the Democrats are for abolishing ICE, which is essentially a call for open borders. Look to Germany and see how even a modest step in that direction has played out politically. When the Republicans organize, why do we always organize a circular firing squad!?!
36
I really hope the next Democrat nominee for President goes for this.
Unfortunately, Trump won’t have Crooked Hillary to rail against. But if we can get a crazy socialist like Pocahontas that supports killing ICE, that would be almost as good.
34
This isn't a socialist idea, its an anarchist one. I anti cops, anti ICE, its alll amounts to the same thing. A society needs law and order. These people protesting ICE should go live in countries in South and Central America. If anarchy and lawlessness are so great, why are thousands of people trying to migrate to safe, law and order ruled western nations?
33
America has no need for a national force operating to enforce our immigration laws. We already have the border patrol, the FBI, and ATF operating internally to enforce laws broken by illegal aliens. I.C.E. has no real law enforcement work other than to harass aliens and immigrants, and hire private venders to build more prison camps. Getting rid of the entire branch would be a money saver. We need them less than we need illegal aliens.
2
Why doen't US become part of Mexico? A country without borders is not a country.
67
ICE primarily arrests people in the interior of the country. It is separate from Customs and Border Control -- which polices the border and about 100 miles into the United States.
ICE was conceived after 9/11 as a response to terror. The investigative arm of ICE performs that function, and should continue to do so.
The deportation force is expensive, redundant, interferes with local policing, and keeps nobody safe. The only beneficiary is our burgeoning private prison industries which run most ICE detention centers.
Abolishing ICE is a conservative proposal. It seeks to strip government of redundant functions and wasteful spending.
2
You do know, don't you, that a large swath of the US was part of Mexico at one time? - All of Texas, California, New Mexico, Arizona, Oregon, and more.
Why not give it back? Then close your borders.
That's stupid, 'abolish ICE', and counterproductive. People need to step back from being unnecessarily confrontational - it only widens the divide with nothing to show for it.
We do need some enforcement at the borders and it is a matter of doing it right rather than making it either/or. Doing it right is a matter of good laws (immigration law reform to coincide with the reality of job demands and refugees) and regulations, of attitude presented from the top down, enough trained personnel, enough financing, and less uncertainty for those enforcing and those they are going after (or not, as the case may be).
More divisiveness and demonizing is what we don't need.
23
Family separation is bad policy, but calls to abolish ICE are absurd. We need to secure our borders. We may have reasonable disagreements on how to do that, but ICE is not the problem. If there are problems it may be how Trump is using ICE. Simply having an open southern border is stupid, and this weakens the position of the Democrat party, making it look unhinged outside of heavily progressive locales.
20
Hey look! It's an immigration trap! Let's walk right in.
The ability of the left for self sabotage knows no bounds. This after receiving a huge gift from Trump.
90
"Hey look! It's an immigration trap! Let's walk right in"
That's the funniest thing I've read all day. The sad fact is that you are correct.
3
Just call them ICEsis. They claim to grieved over separating families, I won't believe that until the cages come down. I would rather have an undocumented family living next door than one of these dishonorable thugs.
2
"Abolish ICE". What a stupid provocation. Just as effective as branding yourself a "socialist" (which is a well-understood and failed idea of the previous century). If progressives are going this route, they will lose big, because it will be so easy for the right to blame them as crazy and extremist.
I'm all for a turn to the left. This idiotic extremism is not it.
25
I'm a liberal democrat, but progressives are why I cashed out and left San Francisco, with its rampant property crime, sidewalk defecation, tent cities and open-air injection drug use.
81
It's almost like the Democrats want to lose the midterms and the Supreme Court.
No first world country has open borders without immigration control. We have one of the most lax as it is.
28
I commented earlier today that advocating open borders is a radical position, and out of step with most Americans. Readers rebuked me, stating that no progressive has ever advocated open borders. Now, hours later NYT reports that some Democrats are calling for ICE to be abolished. I rest my case.
106
@ME - USA: don't put all of us in the same category. Just because there are some on the fringes doesn't mean that their actions are indicative of the party or the majority. I rest my case.
Are you suggesting we had open borders prior to 2003? Because ICE didn't exist before that.
1
ICE and Customs and Border Control are separate agencies with separate functions. Border control agents police the border, and as far as 100 miles into the country.
ICE primarily arrests people in the interior of the country. One function of ICE is to investigate terrorism, and that function should continue.
But ICE's deportation force is redundant, and should be abolished.
1
ICE acts more like the SS and Gestapo than some form of American Law Enforcement. And, under Trump, we can only expect it to get much worse. We've already got baby prisons and cages for adults and children. Now, Trump wants to move them to military bases and keep the babies and kids they took because they don't know where they put them. Abolish ICE. Impeach Trump. God only knows how many federal and international laws Trump has broken in this fiasco and We the People will be the ones to pay for it.
9
A really dumb idea. Eliminating the Agency enforcing border security and legal immigration laws serves only illegal entrants, smugglers and criminals at the expense of citizens.
26
Nowhere in these United States of America is safe. Our POTUS mis-spelled his slogan: "Make America Grate Again!" The Grateful Dead took the name, back when we had to get drafted and sent to a foreign country to witness mass deaths. We are now all Grateful. The dead are everywhere and piling up. The folks that produce weapons of war buy our "leaders" and tell us more weapons are the only hope.
We shall all die, with our without our rent-a-Congress leaders.
And the world population will wash all our failures into history.
3
Abolish ICE. Open every border to all comers. Sanctuary cities nationwide. Unlimited illegal immigration. Don't worry about MS 13 which has murdered multiple people on Long island and the ethnic Hispanic gang that just dismembered an innocent kid in the Bronx. No cares about Mexican drug cartels packing their heroin and crystal meth mules across the border to poison our youth. Everything is good. Evil rich white people just don't understand that their wealth is not really theirs. It belongs to the poor and oppressed illegal alien non-earners who are flooding our country. This is the message sent to you by Democrats, liberals and progressives. Buying votes reaps the whirlwind. Good luck with that.
56
In the future, if you are going to write an article about abolishing ICE, I would recommend talking to Mr. Abolish ICE himself, Sean McElwee. He has been the activist leading the charge on this issue.
2
Abolishing ICE is not going to happen with Trump is in office, but it is worthwhile to cite them as an example of the kind of secret police forces that proliferate in authoritarian regimes -- the kind of thing the GOP used to worry about before it lost its mind.
1
Immigration restriction has a long history in the left and in American Labor. Samuel Gompers wrote a powerful letter in 1921 to restrict immigration. Illegal immigration is much worse than legal immigration. It undermines US wages and our labor laws. It substantially suppresses wages. American's will do any job if it pays a living wage. And, training and safety measures are not always enforce with undocumented immigrants
28
Yeah, and Democrats used to support it too, but then they sold out to big corporations and the same goes for "free trade". What we need is well regulated immigration and trade for the benefit of the vast majority of citizens not the wealthy.
6
I can't think of a better way to give Donald Trump a second term.
34
This is like those conservative calls to abolish the IRS and the EPA.
Pandering and ridiculous.
112
And highly counter productive. For the end result I would think they are after.
Trumps will love it and it will be of more help to him.
4
Except they are unfortunately actually gutting the EPA.
1
You are spot on. The conservatives had their "abolish the IRS" movement and "abolish the EPA" movement and no one called them the names that the Dems are called. Nevertheless, if the Dems don't straighten up they will lose again in 2018 and 2020.
I don't support Donald Trump's counterproductive and inhumane measures at all.
But people in favor of open borders should say so plainly. You can't claim you don't favor open borders if you oppose any and every effort to enforce our immigration laws, which will inevitably involve detaining and deporting people. Children included in some cases.
87
Oh yes we can Greg - Brooklyn. We can be opposed to open borders but also be select in the methods of handling immigration including opposing any inhumane method such as children being separated from their parent and housed in cages.
5
This is a satisfying slogan, but it doesn't address any actual policy issues that are driving the way ICE operates. It's like proposing to end so-called mass incarceration (it's not "mass," it's been highly targeted at certain segments of the population) by eliminating the courts or police.
Functionaries don't make policy, although they often find their own means to abuse power and over-reach, especially when a system is broken or priorities are radically misdirected.
Also, the implication that the only alternative to current dysfunction and disastrous policy is "open borders" plays into Trump's agenda.
8
Abolish ICE? No. Most Americans don't want that to happen. Most Democrats don't want that to happen. We want secure borders. We want immigration to continue. We need someone to keep the whole process under control - thats ICE. Thats what they do. And deportation is a necessary part of that.
I dearly hope the far left stops calling for an end to ICE. If they don't, this one issue is going to hand the entire nation over to the Republicans in the next election - on a silver platter.
154
The more progressives talk about abolishing ICE, the more conservatives will go to the polls in November.
164
Agreed Rolf...read my post below.
Be careful how you do this. If you want to reorganize (not abolish ICE) to prevent family separation that is a just and winnable point re most Americans. If you want to abolish ICE to open the floodgates to anybody that wants to come here for any reason you are not only wrong but conceding the midterms to the republicans and reelection of the ego maniac Trump. Learn from history and leaders like Lincoln otherwise be condemned to its' worst mistakes.
1
The more progressives talk about abolishing ICE, the more conservatives AND independents will go to the polls in November.
I am not a conservative. I am pro choice, pro-LGBT rights, anti-guns. But this nonsense about abolishing ICE (and these activists throwing administration officials out of restaurants and harassing them in their private lives) has led me to believe I must hold my nose and vote GOP for Congress and Senate this fall.
Any politician who advocates abolishing ICE is advocating Open Borders. You can try to rationalize it all you like but that's what it amounts to. As much as I would like to vote for a Democrat who is pro-choice, pro-LGBT rights and anti-gun, if they don't take a reasonable position on border control I won't vote for them.
The cray-cray left is determined to doom endangered senators like Bill Nelson, Joe Donnelly, and Joe Manchin. Their party has become the party of Open Borders and I will not vote for a party that advocates Open Borders or eliminating the agency charged with enforcing our immigration laws.
It's becoming increasingly likely the Democrats may lose 4-5 seats in the Senate and, at best, break even in the House. Democrats ability to pull defeat from the jaws of victory never ceases to amaze me.
1
The best way to cut down mass migration is policy and programs that change the environment that exmigrants flee. Most policy so far is reactive. Good examples are programs in Jordan to train and educate migrants from war torn middle eastern countries. The lesson is if you want these nearby countries to help, then you have to fund a good admin of program there and invest additional resources in the country running the program so their nationals dont rise up against their governments, as in Jordan right now.
If the inclination is against that, then just have to take them in.
6
I strongly disagree with just about everything Trump has done regarding immigration, but calls to eliminate ICE are misplaced. ICE is simply the agency doing what it is told; the source of the problem is higher up. The same mistake was made during the Vietnam War--blaming the soldiers was misplaced and damaging.
63
I rarely see the progressive media feature stories about the trials and tribulations of average Americans along with policy proposals to improve their lot. Contrast that with the daily lionization of people who knowingly pass through numerous poor countries to ultimately land in the rich United States illegally. The "Abolish ICE" movement just continues that trend.
123
>Don L
"Policy proposals to improve the lot of average Americans".
The progressive media has noted a number of such policy proposals. Think - the 2017 tax cuts, the recent imposition of tariffs on imports, the choking of the evil Obamacare by withholding funding, banning Muslims from certain countries from entering the US so that average Americans can walk the streets safely, resisting restrictive gun laws so that Americans can continue to buy military style weapons to defend their families.
There are loads of examples reported in the progressive media of policies that help the lot of the average American.
3
Perhaps Senator Gillibrand will go ahead and craft a serious proposal for how she intends to "start over and build something that actually works". If Democrats can't come up with something more substantial than an extreme sounding slogan, then they may as well gift wrap a second term for Donald. Perhaps their time would be better spent deciding on what kind of club they want to hand Republicans to beat them with.
85
Laws not enforced are non-existent and can be ruled null and void in court. Eliminating ICE would effectively void all laws that that agency enforces. On the face of it the advocates of this demand no laws regarding immigration nor customs should exist.
It would mean that anyone can enter this country for any purpose and bring in anything, and nobody can stop them unless they can be proven to have broken laws unrelated to immigration nor customs. Anyone can enter and stay as long as they want.
Trump has used ICE to entertain his base. Immigration laws are not applied fairly nor wisely. There should be changes. But laws control people who are willfully nasty or inconsiderate of others and enforcement that enables considerate people to live in peace is not to be dismissed as irrelevant.
53
Casual Observer said, "... Eliminating ICE would effectively void all laws that that agency enforces. ..."
Why? We had immigration enforcement since before your and my grandparents were born. ICE just came into being in 2003. We can have enforcement, but we don't need that agency, separate from other immigration-related agencies, with its swaggering culture, right-wing leadership, and ongoing abuses.
2
So your position is that the United States had open borders and no customs enforcement until ICE began operations in March 2003? I can assure that this is not the case. Lawless anarchy will not ensue if ICE is abolished. Indeed, given its agents repeated and widespread rogue, even illegal conduct, it's far more reasonable to suggest our borders would be more secure without ICE.
1
ICE is the enforcement arm formed from the enforcement arms of immigrant and customs existing prior to the formation of ICE. The Department of Homeland Security incorporated the enforcement arms of numerous departments into it but they remained the enforcement arms of those departments. Eliminating ICE would eliminate the enforcement arms of immigration and customs. Enforcement arms for those agencies could be restored but because the President would be the same, they would do the same as does ICE.
The Democrats are successfully being framed as the "no borders" party who will let everyone in. And the Democrats are complicit in that framing. Until the Democrats can articulate a comprehensive immigration policy that addresses border security and how to handle the estimated 11 million illegal immigrants without offering blanket amnesty, they will continue to lose at the ballot box.
140
Politically, this is an absolutely awful idea. It will galvanize conservatives who want to claim the Democrats want "open borders." Immigration in general is a dangerous issue despite sympathy for separated families. Just my opinion but I think this talk will backfire at a time when the Democrats are in disarray and dismay over the Supreme Court nominee. There are better issues to run on.
88
Abolish the agency charged with stemming ILLEGAL immigration?
The left has officially lost their minds...
If they keep up this insanity Trump will get a second term
138
"I think it's important to know also that parents and children aren't just being separated at the border," Nixon continued, winding up to lay into ICE. "They're being separated throughout this country by ICE. I think we need to abolish ICE; that seems really clear." Behar asked what Nixon thought ICE should be replaced with, and Nixon said there doesn't need to be a replacement.
"ICE is relatively new, it came in after September 11," Nixon explained, referring to the 2003 Homeland Security Act's creation of ICE, Customs and Border Protection, and U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services. "We've been handling immigration and customs for a long time here. We don't need ICE, and they have strayed so far from the interests of the American people and the interests of humanity. We need to abolish it."
- Cynthia Nixon
https://www.teenvogue.com/story/cynthia-nixon-abolish-ice-the-view
1
The left cannot and should not allow itself to be branded as favoring open borders and opposing the enforcement of the immigration laws.
Everything the left stands for; better wages, fair employment laws, affordable housing, good public schools, and a generous safety net will buckle and collapse under an open borders policy. It's hard enough to get America's aristocrats to cough up any money already for those sorts of things.
We take in more than enough legal immigrants every year, we do not need any more illegal immigrants. Those who are here illegally should always be at risk for deportation: it will convince many not to try to come here or to overstay their visas.
It should be the left taking the lead in the fight against illegal immigration, not Trump and the right.
The left once stood with the working-classes, it now increasingly is about moralistic virtue-signalling. That is not a viable long-term electoral strategy! "Shame on ICE for enforcing the law!" is not only not going to win any converts, it is going drive all the sensible people away into the arms of the right. Makes you wonder if that's what these protesters want.
85
As has been said again and again, "eliminating ICE", ie redistributing its useful duties such as combating human trafficking etc to other federal agencies, IS NOT an
"open borders" policy. It takes ten seconds to learn that customs and border protection (CBP) is responsible for enforcing immigration law near our borders. Prior to 2003, ICE did not exist, and we did not have "open borders".
Many beyond the far left fringe would agree that a future restructuring of ICE, to increase effectiveness and bring it into line with a more compassionate and realistic attitude towards immigration enforcement within our country, is a good idea. Creating a commission to determine if redistributing its responsibilities among other agencies, and thus abolishing the agency as a standalone institution, is not an insane idea either.
I do think, however, some of the politicians and activists advocating for its abolition should be more clear about what they are actually suggesting. Immediately pressing delete on ICE, instantly eliminating ALL of its functions at once, is indeed an extreme and probably stupid idea. But that is not what most of these politicians are actually saying.
8
No, it is an open borders policy. ICE is responsible for detaining and deporting the illegal immigrants who have made it past the border patrol. We can't give people a free pass just because they've evaded the border patrol. If we do, then we don't have a border at all and really will need an impregnable physical barrier.
Local police departments, under the the thumb of the "sanctuary city" mayors, cannot be entrusted with that kind of work. The FBI has much more important things to do.
Someone has to be responsible for detaining illegal immigrants and deporting them, that's the job for ICE.
It's either ICE or Trump's wall.
Dear Democrats,
Trump has handed you the perfect issue and you are going to destroy it by talking like crazy people. Please, STOP.
103
"Abolish ICE" is a rallying cry for the extreme left-wing fringe. It's radioactive. Any Democrat that wants to be elected should stay as far away from this as humanly possible.
91
Stop! Please stop!
Reform ICE, if you must. Refocus it. Re prioritize its actions. But please stop with this talk of abolition.
I guarantee you that this single issue will ensure a 'red wave' and 4 more Trump years. There are *plenty* of other progressive issues to talk about and win: education, healthcare, infrastructure, taxation.
119
I hold out hope that the call will change from "abolish ICE" to "Change/Replace ICE". We need all of the functions of ICE to continue but perhaps there is a better way to implement these things. ICE has such an ugly reputation at this point it should be a target for "repeal and replace".
18
I am a Midwestern Democrat, and I am telling you this is a perfect way to lose the next election. What we see from our vantage point is a Democratic Party that (still) never seems to pay attention to the things that are choking and killing us, but spends its efforts and PR energy going flat out to save illegal immigrants. I am beginning to think Trump is doing all these anti-immigrant theatrics just to create division among Democrats, and it is working.
There are a lot of US citizens who live here right now, who need better jobs, health care, a path to retirement someday, a way to afford college for our kids. This so-called booming economy with full employment just means we can all get a second job at McDonald's without waiting.
67
Abolishing ICE is not the same as Open Borders! It was a terrible overreach to create this brand new secret police force in the early 00's that is unaccountable to the DOJ or any open public court. Back then I remember it was made as part of the police state measures of The Patriot Act, and raised alarm bells about secret police abuse. We lived without it during WWII, Korea, Vietnam, Desert Storm ... we don't need it. It is the second largest budget after the FBI. It could be used to detain anyone soon who amazon shows as reading say, Václav Havel.
19
No but we still had INS during WWII , Korea , Vietnam , Desert Storm ... it was still known as "la Migra " , sorry but we still need some sort of immigration oversight and ...it's Trump policy that has turned it into a secret police ... must be Putin's influence or perhaps plain ole racism . PS , It was George Bush's administration that brought about ICE and its enormous budget .
1
SMS writes of ICE, "We lived without it during WWII, Korea, Vietnam, Desert Storm ... "
SMS is wrong: Prior to 1933, there were separate offices administering immigration and naturalization matters, known as the Bureau of Immigration and the Bureau of Naturalization, respectively. The INS was established on June 10, 1933, merging these previously separate areas of administration. In 1940, with increasing concern about national security, immigration and naturalization was organized under the authority of the Department of Justice.
If you know history, you know Franklin Delano Roosevelt was elected President in 1932, and remained in the office until his death in April 1945.
Call it INS or ICE - the agency has the same function: control of US borders.
5
That is interesting information that I will have to investigate.
But I would still not be advocating for changes in government structure, while Trump is the only one with the power to do that.
Trump is attacking our very Constitution, by attacking the institutions of our Republic every day.
This is what a Constitutional Crisis looks like. The last thing we need to be doing is attacking the existing structure of the government. We need to try to keep the system intact and attack the bad policies of the Party of Trump, the politicians and their big money donors.
Some of the Justices may be corrupt. But the Supreme Court and the Judiciary are not corrupt. They are a coequal branch of government. I realize that ICE is not a branch of government. But I also know that these policies didn't come from ICE. ICE agents are being harmed by these orders that came straight down from Trump. Trump and his oligarchy are the root of the problem. Immigration is his lever, a distraction while he stacks the courts.
Keep your eye on the ball. Trump is a master of misdirection. Be precise in your language because they are turning language upside down.
1
ICE was created after 9/11. It is an unnecessary arm of the government we can do without, especially since the AG is abusing the original mission of ICE and now using it terrorize the Hispanic community. The money currently spent on ICE could be reappropriated towards administration of processing visa applications and reduce the long wait so people can come here legally. Let Border Patrol handle the rest, like we did before 2003. This is not an unreasonable proposition.
23
I am a lifelong Democrat. Never voted for a Republican in my life. Though I despise Trump, as dimwitted and mendacious as he largely is, I think he has his finger on the pulse of the majority of American voters' attitudes towards illegal aliens. The image he pushes is that illegal aliens take jobs and pay little into social services, while putting undue burden on social services and eroding the traditional American culture, willingly ignoring our laws. Whether or not his caricature is true, he is gaining support throughout the nation coast to coast with this caricature.
Democrats are going to play Trump's game--watch his support grow--if they are going to push this anti-ICE agenda. More fodder for his "Democrats want open borders" lie. Abolishing ICE is a losing cause outside outside of immigrant (often non-voting) communities.
ICE has a job to do. Why have laws if you don't have a method to enforce them?
61
Funny that many comments here focus on people seeking sanctuary as a danger to our sovereignty, instead of a foreign aggressor installing a Putin puppet as president against the overwhelming will of the people (3 million vote deficit).
Russia's intervention and manipulation is truly the danger to the sovereignty of this nation, and every other free democratic nation.
A nation that can't hold free elections, or disregards the overwhelming will of the people, is in far more danger than any posed by new immigrants.
Republicans who have joined Trump's anti-trade, anti-NATO, anti-immigrant, pro-dictator agenda will forever be tied to Putin's attempt to tear apart the post Word War II alliance of freedom and democracy.
They have become a cult of corruption, greed, nepotism and crimes against humanity in exchange for fleeting power and permanent infamy.
If they support internment camps for babies, what will they go for next?
This is a time for the remaining Republicans with a moral compass and a spine, who still love America and democracy, to support a Supreme Court Justice with the wisdom and judgment of Justice Kennedy.
28
In the age of Trump, messages requiring discernment are doomed.
Abolishing ICE doesn't mean open borders or a lack of interdiction of people crossing the border illegally.
It means reorganizing a failing government agency that would rip preschool children from parents without a plan to reunite them.
That is blind incompetence, and plain evil.
Other nations manage to control immigration thoughtfully, with deliberation, and without committing crimes against humanity.
While the president, who was installed by Putin despite losing by 3 million votes, would rather focus on immigration as the menace - the true risk to American sovereignty comes from the loss of free democratic elections.
In 6 of the last 7 elections, the popular vote of the people elected the Democrat. But only 4 elections were awarded to the popular vote winner.
It is no mistake Trump communicates through Twitter, which doesn't verify account holders. Trump has built a Potemkin village of 50 million Twits, and that fake army of trolls amplified by bots make the the foolish and weak feel he has more support than he does.
24
Eliminating ICE does not equate with opening our borders to all! Reading many of these comments leave me fuming, We need to rework this agency, from one that has way too much information and control over the citizenry (and yes, I’m talking about YOU!), is not a surveillance police force, but one that manages immigration issues. They are not doing that. They are functioning like an American style gestapo force, picking people up off the streets and detaining them. The border patrol should just be that, exerting no decisions over who gets ejected and who stays. Immigration authorities should make those decisions and they shouldn’t be part of the same agency. We need to break it up. To let ICE persist and feed on the fear and hysteria being whipped up by the media, the fools in congress and the administration is a recipe for its further expansion and tyranny. We need to cut this monster’s head off before it kills us.
20
Quote: "Eliminating ICE does not equate with opening our borders to all! "
True, but it's not relevant what the suggestion really means. Relevant is only what it sounds like to the average listener and how it can be framed by political opponents. Politics is simplified marketing with emotion. Even more so in a nation that doesn't value public education.
1