Washington grapples with ICE’s growing footprint — and future

Even before Minnesota emerged as the latest flashpoint in the Trump administration’s anti-immigrant agenda, the president’s deployment of thousands of Department of Homeland Security agents to predominantly blue states was already one of this White House’s most controversial domestic planks. In the wake of the shooting death of Renee Good and the government’s enthusiastic claims of “absolute immunity” for Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) officials, some in Washington have begun moving to address what many critics contend is an agency acting far beyond its mandate. As deportation operations continue to expand, so too does the long-simmering debate over how to address the president’s preferred domestic force.

Abolish ICE?

In a shift from the sentiment during Trump’s first term, it’s “not just progressives taking up the ‘defund ICE’ banner,” said Axios. Now, the notion of significantly reining in Trump’s immigration actions is “proliferating even among the more moderate and establishment wings of the party.” And not only for Democrats, either. “Even” commentator Bill Kristol, the “erstwhile Republican turned Trump critic,” had a simple, straightforward message,” said The Atlantic: “‘Abolish ICE.’” New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani’s recently televised statement in “support of abolishing ICE” has also been seen as “revitalizing” the abolitionist rhetoric that became “popular in progressive discourse” and which has “gained steam” after Good’s death, said Bloomberg.

There are signs that the abolish ICE movement may be gaining traction among the broader public, as well. A YouGov poll taken in the days following Good’s death showed that 46% of respondents supported abolishing the agency, while 43% opposed. The debate over funding ICE and DHS is not merely rhetorical, either. Good’s death “proved that ICE is out of control and beyond reform,” said Rep. Shri Thanedar (D-Mich.) in a recent statement introducing his “Abolish ICE Act,” which would dismantle the agency within 90 days of its passage.

The Week

Escape your echo chamber. Get the facts behind the news, plus analysis from multiple perspectives.

SUBSCRIBE & SAVE

Sign up for The Week's Free Newsletters

From our morning news briefing to a weekly Good News Newsletter, get the best of The Week delivered directly to your inbox.

From our morning news briefing to a weekly Good News Newsletter, get the best of The Week delivered directly to your inbox.

Sign up

As funding deadlines approach, some Democrats have “eyed negotiations over the yearly Homeland Security budget as a leverage point to incorporate their demands,” said the Los Angeles Times. Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries’ (N.Y.) opposition to the current DHS funding package before Congress comes as Democrats “both inside and outside of Congress” are “lining up” against a bill that they feel “isn’t nearly sufficient to constrain ICE,” said Axios.

‘Reform and retrain’

While support for abolishing ICE has grown, some Democratic lawmakers have nevertheless opted for a more incremental approach, floating policy recommendations such as an “end to qualified immunity” and “withholding support for an appropriations package” that would include more funding for the Department of Homeland Security, said The Hill. Sen. Catherine Cortez Masto (D-Nev.) has proposed a measure to “redirect nearly $75 billion in ICE funding from the GOP’s 2025 megabill rather than defund the agency,” said Semafor. The redirected funds would instead be applied to Justice Assistant Grant programs and the DOJ’s COPS hiring program. Sen. Cory Booker (D-N.J.) has likewise sponsored several bills aimed at curbing (but not shuttering) ICE operations, including through “tougher hiring and training standards,” and mandated body cameras, said Newsweek.

The slogan “Abolish ICE” is not “some proxy for more humane immigration enforcement,” or a call to “change ICE’s culture to adhere to due process, or to impose accountability on rogue officers,” said centrist think tank Searchlight in a memo to Democratic Party figures obtained by The Bulwark. “Itʼs advocating for an extreme.” Instead, Democrats should “adopt an alternative approach toward ICE,” the memo said. Searchlight has dubbed the sentiment “Reform and Retrain.” The fear, said The Atlantic, is that the “maximalist demand” of full abolition “plays directly into Republicans’ hands” by casting Democrats as “unserious about immigration.”

At the same time, a “handful of GOP lawmakers are showing an openness” to calls for refining ICE’s operations, said Politico, even if they’re “not going so far” as to condemn the administration’s immigration enforcement “outright.” There are also “influential voices in Trump’s coalition” who have “become critical of how ICE is operating,” including podcaster Joe Rogan. “You don’t want militarized people in the streets just roaming around, snatching people up,” Rogan said in a recent podcast episode. “Are we really gonna be the Gestapo?”