Showing posts with label mending walls. Show all posts
Showing posts with label mending walls. Show all posts

Sunday, August 23, 2026

Democrats found their border message. ICE is another story.

 

Democrats found their border message. ICE is another story.

https://www.politico.com/news/2026/08/22/democrats-ice-midterms-01045482 

Democrats found their border message. ICE is another story.

They’re trying to balance a base furious at ICE with swing voters wary of abolishing the agency — a divide that could influence the midterms and the party’s path in 2028.

By Samuel Benson, Lisa Kashinsky and Eric Bazail-Eimil

08/22/2026 10:00 AM EDT

Democrats have figured out how to talk about the border. They still haven’t reached a consensus on ICE.

In battlegrounds across the country, moderate and progressive Democrats alike are calling for a secure border and admitting the Biden administration’s policy there led to political backlash in 2024. But with less than three months until Election Day, they still aren’t on the same page in how far to go in reining in Immigration and Customs Enforcement — with some high-profile candidates pushing reforms, and others calling to dissolve the agency altogether.

Many in the party see an opening: Half of Americans view President Donald Trump’s deportation push as too aggressive. But some Democrats are starting to worry that going too far on ICE could again kneecap their electoral chances in key battlegrounds now and in the future.

“The party is still struggling to get its footing on this issue and talk to voters about this,” said Daniel Delgado, a senior career Department of Homeland Security official who left the department after Trump took office in 2025 and now works as a senior fellow at the center-left Searchlight Institute think tank in Washington. “Trump’s actions are pushing people to adopt a more extreme position, but reform is what’s sticking with voters in the middle.”

Democratic candidates are pulled between a fired-up base that wants to see ICE abolished or dramatically reined in, and an undecided voter bloc that’s much less likely to support drastic measures — all while continuing to distance themselves from the Biden administration’s border policies that become political kryptonite for Vice President Kamala Harris in the 2024 race.

A new POLITICO Poll — conducted by Public First between Aug. 8 to 12 — found that just 21 percent of undecided midterm voters say they support abolishing ICE, while 51 percent of self-described moderate Democrats and 67 percent of progressive Democrats say they do.

Those findings track with other polling this year from Navigator Research and NBC News/SurveyMonkey that found Democrats are much more likely than independents to support abolishing ICE, though support for full abolition falls across all groups when respondents are given the option to “reform” the agency.

“A Democratic primary electorate represents less than 25 percent of general election voters,” said Democratic strategist Chuck Rocha, a former Bernie Sanders campaign veteran now advising Texas state Rep. James Talarico’s Senate campaign and numerous other candidates this cycle. “The electorate is really pissed, and the Democratic electorate has been very energized, but also these are different electorates from state-to-state.”

Battleground candidates running in border states like Arizona and Texas are calling for ICE officers to be held accountable and guardrails to be installed for the agency — like Talarico, who wants ICE to focus on violent criminals and be banned from using face coverings. Meanwhile, progressive nominees in key Senate contests in Maine and Michigan say the agency is beyond saving, and have used the potent catchphrase “abolish ICE.”

The intraparty divide was on display in Austin last weekend, where Democratic National Committee members could not reach a consensus on whether ICE should be abolished or reformed, eventually approving dueling resolutions that called for both.

That disunity comes as Democrats’ 2028 path to the White House will run straight through two early primary states with significant Hispanic populations — Nevada and border-state New Mexico — all but guaranteeing that immigration enforcement will be a central point of contention.

Immigration enforcement is an issue where Democrats in 2024 “really missed the opportunity to be who we are: smart, fair, and can deliver aggressively through Congress the things that really make a difference. And we couldn’t say it. We didn’t deal with it,” said New Mexico Gov. Michelle Lujan Grisham, who has called for more accountability regarding ICE but argues abolishing it is not a winning message. “Shame on us then. We better not make these mistakes again — now, in ’26, in the midterms, and certainly not in 28.”

Some of the party’s battleground Senate nominees, even as they support securing the border, see a path to victory with an abolish-ICE message.

Troy Jackson, Democrats’ nominee in Maine, called to eliminate the agency in response to a federal immigration agent killing a man in the state in July and has used the incident to hammer his opponent, GOP Sen. Susan Collins, for voting to further fund ICE.

And Michigan Democratic Senate nominee Abdul El-Sayed has called to abolish ICE and likened the agency’s hardline tactics to “normalizing paramilitary force.”

“There’s no question we need a safe, secure southern border. And there’s also no question that we have a responsibility to enforce immigration policy, but to do that in a way that does not supersede the Constitution itself,” El-Sayed said in an interview.

But he also acknowledged “different communities” around the country “are going to think differently about these things.”

Minnesota Lt. Gov. Peggy Flanagan, the Democratic nominee for Senate, has avoided explicitly calling to abolish ICE, but has tiptoed up to the line: “We need to rip ICE apart,” she said in her primary-night victory speech. She won a hard-fought primary in Minnesota’s Senate race by castigating her Democratic rival’s votes with Republicans on a pair of immigration-related measures. She opened her general-election clash against Michele Tafoya by accusing the Republican of supporting the Trump administration’s violent tactics in her state.

Border-state Democrats sound different.

Moderate Rep. Henry Cuellar (D-Texas), who currently sits as ranking member on the Homeland Security Appropriations subcommittee, frequently tells voters during stump speeches that he will chair the subcommittee should Democrats retake control of the House — and he’ll use that position to push reforms in the next DHS funding bill, like mandatory use of body cameras, requiring judicial warrants before entering a home or worksite, and reinstalling guidance on avoiding enforcement in sensitive areas like churches and hospitals.

“Let me just say this: I don’t believe in abolishing ICE. I don’t believe in defunding the police. There’s a role for them,” he told reporters last month after meeting with Sister Leticia “Letty” Ugboaja, a nun detained by ICE while walking to Sunday Mass. “But they have to have the right safeguards. What ICE is doing right now is not right. It is not correct.”

The South Texas Democrats pay little heed to the loudest voices in the party calling to abolish ICE. “I personally don’t follow what national Democrats are saying on this,” said Abel Prado, the campaign manager for Bobby Pulido, the Democratic nominee in Texas’ 15th District.

Some other candidates are altering their message now, too. William Lawrence, the Sunshine Movement co-founder who won the Democratic primary in Michigan’s swingy 7th District, called in January to abolish ICE. But he sidestepped when POLITICO asked this week if that was still his position.

“I don’t care what our immigration enforcement agency is called,” Lawrence said in a statement. “What I care about is immigration policy that adheres to the Constitution and lives up to our country’s highest values.”

Frank Sharry, a longtime Democratic immigration activist, said Democrats would be wise to avoid the phrase.

“I don’t think that ‘abolish ICE’ gets you much more than a little bit of play in a primary and a round of applause in the blue bubble,” said Sharry, a senior fellow at Third Way who advised both Biden and Vice President Kamala Harris during their 2024 campaigns on immigration policy. “Democratic candidates who want to win the seats that are going to deliver a majority of the House and the Senate, and then the White House in 2028, would be wise to steer clear of a rally slogan.”

 

Tuesday, July 28, 2026

Records Reveal How Homeland Security Agents Surveilled ICE Protesters

 

Records Reveal How Homeland Security Agents Surveilled ICE Protesters

https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2026/07/dhs-ice-surveillance-database-protest-public-records-spokane-hsi/ 

Records Reveal How Homeland Security Agents Surveilled ICE Protesters

Spokane police documents show a DHS task force officer tracing protesters’ cars, identities, and whereabouts without alleging any wrongdoing.

A black-and-white photo illustration of ICE agents confronting protestors. The bodies of two protestors are cut from the photograph and replaced with green background of zeroes and ones.

Mother Jones illustration; Ryan Murphy/AFP/Getty

Get your news from a source that’s not owned and controlled by oligarchs. Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily.

Over the past year, ICE agents have scanned the faces of protesters, photographed their license plates, and collected samples of their DNA.

But the agency hasn’t said how or where it’s storing that information.

As President Donald Trump’s administration boosts its arsenal of surveillance technologies—and a growing number of Trump’s critics report unsettling experiences after encounters with ICE—many Americans fear they’re being tracked for exercising their First Amendment rights. In February, one ICE agent told a Maine legal observer that he’d added her information to “a nice little database,” since she was now “considered a domestic terrorist.” 

The Department of Homeland Security disavowed that agent’s statements and has vehemently denied maintaining a “domestic terrorist” database of US citizens who protest ICE. But the agency has also included vague carve-outs for law enforcement investigations, telling Congress in an April letter that when “individuals decide to go beyond protected speech and commit crimes against federal personnel and property … ICE remains steadfast in exercising its authority to investigate and prosecute violators.”

And the administration’s definition of such crimes has grown extraordinarily expansive, with the Justice Department aggressively pursuing federal charges against anti-ICE activists in a string of cases that attempt to reframe protest activity as criminal conspiracy.

Public records shared with Mother Jones appear to contradict DHS’ statements about protester surveillance. A July 2025 report reveals that at least two officers affiliated with Homeland Security Investigations (HSI) systematically collected vehicle, license plate, and social media information from everyday people last summer, and at times entered that data into a digital evidence management platform. Some of the surveilled individuals attended an anti-ICE protest. Another simply drove his Jeep around a public parking lot. Yet another took photographs of a musician’s tour bus, mistakenly believing it to be an ICE transport vehicle. The report does not state that any of these people were under investigation for any wrongdoing.

The July 2025 report was filed by Stacey Carr, a member of the Spokane Police Department’s special victims unit, who also serves as an HSI task force officer investigating internet crimes against children (ICAC) in Washington state. As a task force officer, Carr is deputized to carry out ICAC investigations on behalf of HSI and works directly out of ICE’s Spokane field office, a building that became a flashpoint for mass protests against ICE in June of that year.

HSI is normally tasked with investigating serious crimes, like human trafficking, narcotics smuggling, war crimes, and child exploitation. But in September 2025, then-acting ICE Director Todd Lyons told right-wing podcast host Glenn Beck that the agency would use HSI agents to investigate anti-ICE protesters, claiming that protesters in Chicago were “paid professional agitators” engaging in “domestic terrorism.”

Carr’s July 2025 report offers an unprecedented look into the thought process and surveillance activities of an HSI task force officer.  

The report begins with an incident on May 22, 2025, weeks before Spokane erupted with anti-ICE protests. That day, Carr’s SVU unit was at the Spokane ICE field office assisting state troopers with an arrest unrelated to immigration enforcement. An outdoor music amphitheater lies across the street, and later that day, Willie Nelson, Bob Dylan, and other artists were set to play at the 10th anniversary tour of the Outlaw Music Festival. 

“A large white bus, which I assumed with [sic] a bus with the Willie Nelson band was parked in front of the building,” Carr wrote. “To an unknowing person this could have been mistaken for an immigration transport vehicle.” Carr watched as “an older white man” began photographing the bus and the Washington State Patrol vehicle. When he saw Carr watching him, he began filming her. Carr then “turned [her] back to him and watched him through the reflection in [her] window,” noting that she “work[s] undercover regularly and did not want [her] picture made public if possible.”

“I regularly work undercover and drive an undercover vehicle. I am not easily recognizable as a police officer and blend well with crowds.”

Carr did, however, attempt to make the older man’s information known within law enforcement circles, combing through social media pages in an attempt to identify who’d been filming her. She found some names but, unable to verify them, seemingly did not save that information.

A Spokane Police Department spokesperson said Carr is the only SPD detective assigned to HSI’s ICAC division, but she “cannot and will not engage in immigration enforcement per [the 2019 Keep Washington Working Act],” which limits state and local police from assisting ICE with civil immigration enforcement. The spokesperson added that, while HSI runs ICAC, the office “is located on a different floor and section than ICE.”

Over the following weeks, more people visited ICE’s Spokane field office to observe operations. By the week of June 8, they were “standing around the building with protest signs,” Carr’s report notes, “but they remained peaceful.”

On the morning of June 10, Carr was in her vehicle in the ICE office parking lot, getting ready to go in to work. “While speaking on the phone, I saw a silver Jeep Gladiator slowly pull into the public parking lot with the windows rolled down,” Carr wrote. She watched as the Jeep “backed into a spot across from [her].” She noted that “the driver did not get out or take any action,” but she still looked up the plate. The driver briefly drove away, then returned to the lot, at which point Carr approached the driver of the vehicle and asked if she could help him. “He startled and shook his head,” Carr wrote.

Carr called a state police detective to ask him to keep an eye on the vehicle, which had left and didn’t return. Carr described looking up the vehicle license plate number, confirming the registered owner’s photograph matched the driver, and uploading a photo she’d taken of the vehicle to Evidence.com, an AI-powered, cloud-based digital evidence management system.

The following day, June 11, a large protest broke out outside of the ICE Spokane field office. When Carr left work in the afternoon, she observed HSI analyst Ryan Lid “recording license plates from the protesters.”

“There were a couple he could not see,” Carr wrote. “I told him I would get them for him before I left. I regularly work undercover and drive an undercover vehicle. I am not easily recognizable as a police officer and blend well with crowds.”

Carr described driving through the protest and making “a short video to record the license plates,” which she then uploaded to Evidence.com. The police report lists three license plate numbers, descriptions of the vehicles, and the names and addresses of the registered owners, though Carr noted that two of the plate numbers appeared to be inaccurate. “There were enough people and activity that I was not able to safely and discreetly record the plates,” she added.

Evidence.com is owned by Axon Enterprise, the company behind Taser and a leading supplier of police body cameras. A 2025 Mother Jones investigation found at least 21 police departments had used Axon software to turn body camera footage into AI-generated police reports—and in some cases eliminated human oversight.

Last month, CNBC reported that Trump had purchased between $1 million and $5 million worth of Axon Enterprise stock, just two weeks before ICE sought a $220 million Taser contract. Evidence.com has long been used widely by law enforcement agencies—including DHS—but Carr’s report is the first confirmed use of the platform to log the license plate information of protesters.

The report doesn’t distinguish whether Carr was acting in her capacity as a local officer or federal task force agent, but it states that she “shared this information [about the Jeep] with Homeland Security Agents and Washington State Patrol partners in the building.” Lid, meanwhile, is listed in a 2023 document from the state of Washington as an employee of “Homeland Security Investagations/ICE” [sic]. A Spokane Police Department spokesperson said the data uploaded by Carr is only accessible to SPD employees and added that the department is “currently investigating why the detective was engaged in these activities.” ICE did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

In recent months, the civil liberties–focused Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (FIRE) and The Intercept have each filed Freedom of Information Act lawsuits against DHS in an attempt to shed more light on the government’s alleged “domestic terrorism” watchlist of protesters. But Carr’s report highlights that a standalone database need not exist for law enforcement to surveil First Amendment activity, and raises new questions about the government’s use of the Evidence.com system.

FIRE senior attorney Adam Steinbaugh said that “writing down license plates in the context of speech and protests is a throwback to the 1960s era,” when FBI agents would do just that while staking out a “subversive political meeting.”

“When you are recording information about people’s political activities, you know that that is the first step towards acting on that speech,” Steinbaugh said. “And what the government then does with that information can have a real chilling effect.”

On July 24, the Electronic Privacy Information Center and three legal observers filed a First Amendment lawsuit against DHS, alleging the agency has “adopt[ed] a secret Protester Surveillance Policy enabling its agents to first collect records on Americans engaging in First Amendment exercise and then maintain them in DHS systems, where they can be used to retaliate against those Americans.”

Owned by no one—except you.

We just keep seeing it happen: Newsrooms owned by billionaires and corporations are spinning their own narratives, overwriting the truth, following only stories that keep them in the pocket of those with even more power.

Not here. We’re not owned by anyone. We’re not part of any cult that demands our allegiance to a bottom line. We’ve spoken up and spoken out while other newsrooms changed their stories—or cut them altogether—to keep the C suite happy.

Our mission is to find the truth and amplify it. That’s why we’re independent, nonprofit, and, crucially, funded by readers. The investigations on our website will always be free to read, watch, and listen to, but our newsroom is powered by readers who pitch in what they can so we can keep asking the hard questions.

Can you chip in today?

We Recommend

Latest