Democrats Divided on Immigration Enforcement — Again

The fatal shooting of Renee Good, a 37-year-old American woman killed by an Immigration and Customs Enforcement agent in Minneapolis on Jan. 7, has suddenly forced Democrats into a high-stakes political and messaging crisis over immigration enforcement.

Good’s death has fueled national protests, deepened public skepticism of ICE, and triggered calls for accountability from Democrats — and has reignited the long-standing debate within the party about how to navigate the politics of immigration in a Trump administration. Some remember the debate ahead of the 2018 midterms when some on the left called to “defund the police” and “abolish ICE,” while centrists running in competitive districts stressed support for law enforcement.

Progressives are seizing the moment following the national focus on Minneapolis to renew that push for a bold agenda: abolish ICE entirely. Michigan Rep. Shri Thanedar introduced legislation last week to dismantle the agency. Outspoken advocates such as New York Mayor Zohran Mamdani, a Democratic socialist, called to kill the agency Thursday in an interview on ABC’s “The View.”

Caucus Chair Pete Aguilar was far more measured, telling reporters Wednesday: “The message for us is that we need to reform this lawless agency that is out of control.”

Aguilar is the most senior Hispanic Democrat in the House, and when pressed about other Democrats calling for ICE to be abolished he stuck with a focus on reform instead.

“The tools that we have are to pass laws, pass laws that reform this agency,” he said.

A significant bloc of Democrats said they fear that resurrecting the slogan “abolish ICE” could play into Republican narratives of the party being weak on law-and-order issues in a critical election year. Many worry the attack could resonate with swing voters.

Instead, Democrats say the focus should be on holding the Trump administration accountable on immigration enforcement and highlighting the brutality of what’s taking place in Minneapolis since Good’s death.

“I think we’re all getting there. We believe in law enforcement, but we believe in law enforcement that follows the rules, follows the policies on use of force,” Rep. Henry Cuellar, a centrist Democrat, said to reporters. “Abolishing ICE is not a good message for Democrats.”

Another Democrat in a battleground district echoed the sentiment.

“You need to have border security and you need to have immigration enforcement and so the answer is ‘fix it’,” Rep. Greg Landsman told NOTUS in a brief interview. “I think that the response has to be about the safety of American citizens.” But he added, “Obviously, there’s a huge issue as it relates to how they’re treating non citizens, and no one should overlook that.”

Several Democrats running for higher office have made this debate a central one in competitive primaries, where they are working to attract support from the party’s base. The most recent example where it is a political issue is in the Illinois Senate race. Rep. Raja Krishnamoorthi, who’s running against Illinois Lt. Governor Juliana Stratton. The two sparred about who has the toughest stance on addressing ICE.

“No surprise that the guy who thanked ICE and took tens of thousands from an ICE contractor...doesn’t actually want to abolish ICE,” Stratton posted on X on Tuesday about Krishnamoorthi.

Krishnamoorthi hit back: “Juliana, this is why people hate politics. You’re misrepresenting my position and included only a snippet of my answer. My position on abolishing Trump’s ICE is clear: Not a single dollar more for Kristi Noem, ICE, and her rogue agents.”

Another Democrat who’s running for Senate, Rep. Seth Moulton of Massachusetts, slammed his party for not figuring out a coherent message ahead of the midterm elections.

“I’m very clear on my policies, and I think the rest of the party should be too,” Moulton said in a brief interview. “It’s a party-wide problem. But there’s definitely a problem with the establishment being afraid to take on challenging issues like immigration, and as a result, everyone in America knows that we’re opposed to Trump on immigration, but they don’t know what we stand for and for such an important issue, our party needs to have a position.”

The divide inside the party is playing out as the House is slated to vote this week on the annual Department of Homeland Security appropriations bill. Most Democrats are expected to oppose the bill, but it’s likely to garner some support from Democrats who represent purple or red-leaning districts.

“We were able to put some oversight (for ICE), not everything we wanted,” Cuellar said, who is planning to support the bill as the ranking member on the Appropriations subcommittee on Homeland Security.

The debate over immigration messaging also picked up last week when a group of frustrated Democrats pressed forward with their effort to try to impeach Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem over her role in Good’s killing. But Democratic leaders are working to pivot the focus to oversight.

Democratic Rep. Robin Kelly, another candidate for Senate in Illinois, has been recruiting support from her colleagues for three articles of impeachment against Noem, which is slowly growing in popularity among the caucus with more than 100 cosponsors.

But a person close to leadership told NOTUS that Jeffries and his leadership team prefer that Good’s death and immigration enforcement issues in Minneapolis be investigated through committees with jurisdiction on Capitol Hill. They favor this approach rather than using impeachment as a tool against Noem.

But Rep. Jamie Raskin, the top Democrat on the House Judiciary Committee, said he doesn’t think the priority should be about messaging on immigration enforcement when the real issue is a broken immigration system.

“My focus is on trying to get us to actually adopt a comprehensive immigration policy solution,” Raskin said. “Otherwise, the country is going to be drowning in this misery for a long time.”