Momentum in the Movement to Abolish ICE

August 13, 2018

This past Fourth of July, activist Therese Patricia Okumou climbed the Statue of Liberty, refusing to come down until “all the children were released,” referring to the detained and separated migrant families that the Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agency continues to hold. Prior to this, she and other activists from Rise and Resist displayed an “Abolish ICE” banner in front of Liberty Island. Just a few weeks ago, immigrant youth, mothers, childcare providers, and members of different organizations—such as the United We Dream Foundation, the Florida Immigrant Coalition, Women Working Together USA, among others— protested in front of an ICE facility in Miramar, Florida, demanding city officials shut it down. Recent actions across the U.S., like these two, are actively calling to “Abolish ICE.”

But why is ICE the target and what would it mean to “abolish” ICE? Who is at the forefront of the movement, what are they actually calling for, and how do they hope to achieve a more humanitarian immigration system? This post explores these questions through the perspective of grassroots organizations, campaigns, and actions that are gaining ground in response to rapidly changing immigration policies.

Recently, Attorney General Jeff Sessions announced a renewed commitment to the “zero-tolerance policy:” an immediate prosecution of anyone who crosses the border without authorization, even if they are children. While not new, family separations skyrocketed between May 5, 2018 and June 9, 2018 as, according to the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), more than 2,300 minors were separated from their families. These children are expected to represent themselves in immigration proceedings. The increasing number of family separations under the “zero-tolerance policy,” as well as the absurdity in seeing toddlers represent themselves in court, has only fueled the movement to “Abolish ICE.”

The “Abolish ICE” campaign stems from the work of community organizers and activists from the #Not1More campaign that emerged in 2014 from organizations like PUENTE, the Georgia Latino Alliance for Human Rights, and JUNTOS, among others. Led by undocumented folks, the #Not1More campaign represents an abolitionist call to action. As Juan Prieto from the California Immigrant Youth Justice Alliance (CIYJA) explains, “We’re glad many have since joined the movement to ‘Abolish ICE’; we just ask that the undocumented people who led these efforts for years now not be erased and that it’s our voices that define what a world without ICE and mass detention looks like.” More recently, organizations like Mijente, the CIYJA, and the Coalition for Humane Immigrant Rights (CHIRLA), have themselves set forth demands in policy platforms and manifestos to replace this enforcement system.

In Free Our Future: An Immigration Policy Platform Beyond the Trump Era, Mijente sets forth detailed policy demands aimed at decriminalizing the ICE-led immigration system. Some of their policy demands call for abolishing ICE, repealing laws that criminalize migration, defunding the border patrol, among others. Mijente’s aim is a humanitarian policy proposal that is inclusive of all immigrant communities. CIYJA published First We Abolish ICE: A Manifesto for Immigrant Liberation, detailing demands for abolishing ICE, opening borders, and ending global capitalism. More immediately, CIYJA and their partners have sought to force ICE officials to use prosecutorial discretion to allow immigrants to file their cases outside of detention; once they are released, CIYJA ensures they have the legal representation they need outside of detention.

CHIRLA also released a document titled, Abolish ICE Just the Tip of the Iceberg: Immigration Enforcement is Inhumane and Out of Control, which highlights the DHS’s escalating budget. CHIRLA calls for a restructured approach to immigration to counter the funneling of money into deportations rather than addressing the root causes of immigration. This includes demands on ensuring due process in detention centers, disassembling the system by dismantling DHS, prioritizing family reunification, ending indefinite detention, and protecting immigrant rights.

In short, those who propose abolishing ICE see it as only the first step in dismantling a broken immigration system. Apolonio Morales, CHIRLA’s Political Director, shares, “The current detention and deportation system is a large beast that has run amok under the current administration. This is the result of yearly increases in our Federal Budget and lack of oversight and transparency. Our values, especially the idea that our nation is a welcoming nation of immigrants has been compromised. Family separation happens in the interior and at our border in increasing numbers which is tragic and heartbreaking. It has become clear that the more we feed this beast, the more it terrorizes those who seek refuge and inclusion.”

While the “Abolish ICE” campaign originates from activists and grassroots organizations, some politicians are also on board and have proposed legislation. This past July, Representative Mark Pocan of Wisconsin, and Representative Pramila Jayapal of Washington, co-sponsored the, “Establishing a Humane and Immigration System Enforcement Act” to eliminate and restructure the agency on the grounds that ICE was targeting people with minor violations. While the proposed bill was never allowed to go up for a vote, it did highlight critical issues with the agency. In June, congressional candidate Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez made “Abolish ICE” a central tenant of her campaign, taking a victory over incumbent Jim Crowley in the Democratic Primary for New York’s 14^th Congressional District.

It also appears that some public officials are paving the way for at least a disassociation with ICE. In California, Sheriff David Livingston of Contra Costa County also announced the end of the West County Detention Facility’s contract with ICE to house federal immigration detainees. Just a few weeks ago, Mayor Jim Kenney announced that Philadelphia will no longer allow ICE access to the real-time arrest database, which includes information on victims and witnesses, on the grounds that the agency is misusing the information simply to conduct sweeps. Mayor Kenney added that ICE generated fear among immigrant communities and interfered with police ability to solve crimes.

Some analysts have questioned why ICE has become such a target for those in the movement. For one thing, the agency is relatively new, having only been around since 2003; the idea of rethinking its function and even its existence is not departing with long-standing tradition or policy. And while it is U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) that is the agency responsible for separating children at the border, ICE’s “interior enforcement” has been disrupting families for some time. The impact on families is even worse now since as Representative Jayapal contends, ICE has effectively become President Donald Trump’s “own mass-deportation force.” Moreover, conditions in detention centers and the well-being of detainees are concerning, as ICE contracts with private companies for detention facilities that generate profit from each confinement.

In general, supporters of the movement, like Representative Pocan and Mayor Kenney, argue that ICE is deviating from its intended function and should be reworked. Yet it is important to realize that “Abolish ICE” refers to both a specific decision to eliminate an agency and a call for a more humane immigration enforcement system, one which would likely require a different set of governmental institutions. As Elizabeth Cuna, UWD’s National Field Director, states, “Our communities deserve to live in a world where we are able to hold our government accountable and the rights of all truly apply to all. Abolish ICE means living in communities where violence and abuse are not the standard.”

In that broader context, what we have learned from our partners is that the “Abolish ICE” movement is more than just a demand to dismantle the current enforcement structure; it is also a call for policy makers to fashion a more humane immigration system that, among other things, seeks to:

1. Repeal laws and actions that criminalize migration, such as the “zero-tolerance” policy
2. Allow immigrants to fight their cases outside of detention centers
3. Enforce human protection and security
4. Refocus public and policy debates to consider actions that stem the root causes of migration, like violence or displacement

As CHIRLA so concisely puts it, “Abolish ICE is just the tip of the iceberg.”

In addition to the organizations cited above, if you are interested in more on this topic and/or would like to help, you can stay-up-to date on news and actions through:

• Freedom for Immigrants
• Immigrant Legal Resource Center (ILRC)
• National Immigration Law Center (NILC)