Resisting ICE
Last week, a PhD student at Tufts was apprehended by plainclothes federal officers with Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) after they spent a few days surveilling her. The arrest was caught on camera, and ICE shortly thereafter shipped her off to a detention center in Louisiana. This event was followed by an impromptu protest that saw around 2000 people turn out. This is just one of many instances of ICE’s recent activity in Massachusetts, which the head of ICE has admitted includes “Collateral Arrests.”
Even though she did nothing illegal, the Secretary of State announced that he revoked this student’s visa, vaguely implying she was guilty of something even though the only thing anyone could find was an op-ed she co-authored last year in the Tufts Daily. These detentions are always followed by the implication that the people being detained are all criminals, but recent reporting found that ICE had been detaining brown people on sight, including US Citizens, and only checking their identification later. A woman in one of their detention centers described it as “hell on earth”, with conditions so poor that two men died in custody in a processing center in Miami.
From what I can tell, the modus operandi of ICE in most cases is to hang out in places where they think immigrants may appear, or follow anyone they can get any information on, detain anybody who looks like they might be an immigrant, and then use the flimsiest legal justification possible to deport those who they do detain. While they’ve deported immigrants for overstaying a visa ten years before, ICE themselves are only publicizing the few instances where they actually do deport a violent criminal. There's a book called "Three Felonies a Day", which outlines how the average person breaks numerous laws incidentally. Enough analysis of anyone’s record will reveal a slip-up. It’s like giving out life sentences for jaywalking. And, again, this ignores their detention of US Citizens, including cases where they’re creating warrants after the arrest.
What can local government do?
State and local authorities don't have to spend resources to cooperate with ICE, but they also can't actively obstruct a federal agency. In terms of official actions, this Council covered its bases before the inauguration by passing Sanctuary City legislation.
Messaging and education is a different matter. There is some disagreement within Medford about how public we ought to be in comdemning actions like this, and that's rooted in the fear that our already-underfunded city might lose federal funds. While there is a streak of practicality to that line of thinking, I’ve personally been moving away from fear-based decision-making — thinking of every possible consequence of every statement and action has its own pitfalls, and this timidity is a big reason that the Democratic party hemorrhaged whole groups of voters in 2024.
What can you do?
First, fear is poison, so don’t be afraid to speak out. A critical part of the national strategy is intimidation. That’s why the head of ICE has been putting out strongman language targeted at Michelle Wu and Maura Healey. I’m proud of my colleague for writing an Op-Ed against this (in prose far more eloquent than I can manage); I’m glad that the Mayor of Somerville condemned it; and I’m glad to see Michelle Wu’s response to this nonsense at Congressional hearings. The more people feel emboldened to speak out against it, the less this strategy works.
Second, educate yourself, and educate your neighbors. Right now, local resistance to ICE is rooted in tracking their whereabouts and avoiding them where ever possible — they're not omnipotent, after all, and you can help by joining organizations like the Luce Massachusetts ICE watch:
The QR code links to lucemass.org
Third — and this is more of a long-term plug — get involved in political organizing, and organize for new candidates, not against potential allies that you may disagree with. While I understand the tension between the progressive movement and mainstream Democrats, I really don’t like it. After all, all of this is happening because of an election. Elections have consequences. The Democratic Party needs to change, and I believe this is best done from the inside. It lost voters this past election cycle, and to avoid losing so often in the future, it needs to pivot itself away from overly corporatized communications and present a simple, long-term vision rooted firmly in closing the wealth gap. Politics will only change by having people encourage, fundraise for, and get behind new candidates who can present this vision to the voters.
