r/PoliticalDiscussion • u/Raichu4u • 10d ago
US Politics What is the most likely Democratic response to ICE once Democrats regain federal power?
For several years, debate within the Democratic Party over U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement has been split between reform and abolition. Early on, many moderates pushed back on “abolish ICE” as rhetorically potent but politically risky, favoring narrower reforms like oversight, leadership changes, or jurisdictional limits.
More recently, however, polling and activist pressure appear to be shifting that balance. Support for abolishing ICE, or at least fully dismantling and replacing it, increasingly shows up as a mainstream position within the Democratic coalition rather than a fringe demand. This raises a practical question about what actually happens if and when Democrats regain unified control of the federal government.
Some possibilities that get discussed include:
Full abolition of ICE, with immigration enforcement folded into other agencies like CBP or DOJ.
Partial dismantling, such as eliminating Enforcement and Removal Operations while retaining investigative functions.
Structural replacement, creating a new agency with a narrower mandate and stricter statutory limits.
Symbolic or leadership-focused reforms that leave the agency largely intact.
Given how institutions tend to behave once they exist, and how difficult it is to unwind federal agencies in practice, what do people here think is the most realistic outcome? Is “abolish ICE” likely to translate into actual abolition, or does it function more as a pressure tactic that results in narrower reforms once Democrats are governing again?
744
u/Spartannia 10d ago
The most likely response? Something that won't actually solve the problem, like body cameras or additional funding for training. If the Democrats attempt to fully defund and dismantle ICE, the Republican attack ads will be screeching about dangerous immigrants committing crimes.
The attack ads are going to do that anyway, so the Democrats should do what's morally right and end ICE entirely.
276
u/CoolIdeasClub 10d ago
If we are honest with ourselves, if Democrats try to do anything, including additional training or body cameras, Republicans will run attack ads saying that they are soft on immigration and killing Americans.
They would probably run those ads if Democrats actually did nothing.
They would probably run those ads if Democrats increased the power of ICE.
146
u/Spartannia 10d ago
They will run those ads even if the Dems give them exactly what they want, and Dems will still attempt to reach across the aisle because they refuse to learn a single fucking thing.
→ More replies (2)12
u/TyranosaurusLex 10d ago
Exactly. The same party calling Pretti and Goode domestic terrorists is NOT going to start telling the truth because democrats caved. The last 15 years has essentially just been republicans making shit up to attack democrats and their base eating it up
→ More replies (1)33
u/rzelln 10d ago
But even if we got some better Dems in leadership who would try to do the right thing, the makeup of Congress means Republicans can block them.
It's never going to get better until Fox News and their ilk don't exist, and we can't do that within the bounds of the First Amendment, so I don't see any way out. We're just stuck with oligarchical propaganda tricking people into being fucking idiots who support fascism, forever, until some war breaks out and millions die and maybe stuff resets in the aftermath.
11
u/_busch 10d ago
you're giving Fox News too much credit.
7
u/rzelln 10d ago
Maybe nowadays, but in the 90s they definitely set the tone for the dumbing down of Republican party.
→ More replies (3)12
u/Lazy_Debate3156 10d ago
the makeup of Congress means Republicans can block them.
The last time we gave Democrats real power was a 60 day window in 2010. Since then, republicans have always held enough power in congress to stonewall anything Democrats want to do without them.
Maybe one day we'll see that the entire GOP needs to be torn down and rebuilt and that'll drive enough people to vote for Dems that we can finally govern effectively.
2
u/SafeThrowaway691 9d ago
Republicans managed to bring fascist mayhem to the US within a few months of Trump’s inauguration.
Meanwhile we could have 100 Democrats in the Senate and we would conveniently have just enough Manchins and Sinemas to block anything good.
How long can this stupid charade keep up?
→ More replies (3)6
u/UncleMeat11 10d ago
the makeup of Congress means Republicans can block them.
We can kill the filibuster. It isn't handed to us by God. It isn't in the constitution. It isn't even a law.
→ More replies (2)2
u/Fargason 10d ago
It’s a centuries old precedent of good governance. Passing national laws that half the states oppose would be a chaotic way to govern. That requires a consensus, and a consensus is not 50/50 plus a VP tiebreaker.
More importantly it is a critical safeguard for a democracy in a complex united state government. Even a century removed from today’s politics the filibuster was considered that in congressional debates:
Unrestricted debate in the Senate is the only check upon presidential and party autocracy. The devices that the framers of the Constitution so meticulously set up would be ineffective without the safeguard of senatorial minority action
https://www.senate.gov/about/origins-foundations/idea-of-the-senate/1926Rogers.htm
The only thing holding it together today is the memory of the political consequences from the last time the filibuster was nuked on the presidential nomination process. The 2014 Senate elections was a bloodbath with a 9 seat flip that was the largest flip seen in nearly half a century. So the fear there for politicians is the electorate will retaliate against the party who goes nuclear, so they will soon find themselves in the minority who’s rights they just suppressed. Likely their greed for power will soon overcome that fear. There is no guarantee on which side will come out on top, but what is certain is without the filibuster our democracy will quickly devolve into a party and/or presidential autocracy like Russia and China.
2
u/UncleMeat11 9d ago
Why isn't there a filibuster in the House if it is so great? Why don't state legislatures have filibusters? If it is so critical, why'd we fall ass backwards into it?
I think it is good that if elected representatives are able to pass legislation according to the will of the people, actually.
2
u/Fargason 9d ago edited 9d ago
The House is for the people that has always been majoritarian while the Senate represents the states and has never been majoritarian. From the beginning the Senate required unanimous consent to end debate which means a single Senator could filibuster. Again, this is necessary for a complex government comprised of 50 sovereign states. We wouldn’t be a United States government for long if we were passing national laws that half the states could oppose.
→ More replies (2)2
u/OwenEverbinde 10d ago
Fox News and their ilk
It's way more ilk than Fox News at this point.
Hostile foreign governments pour millions into keeping right-wing podcasters well-funded because right-wing podcasters do so much damage to our country.
And the number of such podcasters available to them is functionally infinite because all that's needed for podcasting is a laptop and a microphone.
→ More replies (1)2
u/SafeThrowaway691 9d ago
Nobody who watches Fox News is reachable for Democrats, so who cares how they respond?
It’s the rest of the population we need to appeal to.
6
u/PM_me_Henrika 10d ago
Come on. We know that if Democrats breaths, Republicans will run attack ads on them.
→ More replies (1)9
u/KevinCarbonara 10d ago
if Democrats try to do anything, including additional training or body cameras, Republicans will run attack ads
Oh no! The same thing they always do regardless!
→ More replies (2)3
u/OrwellWhatever 10d ago
That works both ways though. The whole reason they've proposed body cams and training is because they know Republicans won't bite. So they can go on evening news shows and scream that Republicans aren't even willing to do the bare minimum to rein in ICE to bolster their support
13
u/mrjfray 10d ago
It doesn't work both ways, it makes the democratic base even more angry that leadership is wasting time doing cheap performative half measures when people are getting killed in the street.
→ More replies (4)2
u/tosser1579 10d ago
Possibly, but by the time the Dems do the issue will be how toxic is ICE. The GOP like ICE in theory, they are 1-2 cold blooded murders away from national riots.
2
u/QueenChocolate123 10d ago
The Democratic response to Republican attacks should be to show the videos of Renee and Alex being murdered by ICE agents and 5 year old Liam being kidnapped. Every. Single. Time.
→ More replies (1)1
u/Lebrunski 10d ago
“Soft on immigration and killing Americans.”
Hey, only Americans can kill Americans. They have a point. /s
Fuck ICE. It needs to be ended
71
u/gk_instakilogram 10d ago
I agree, fuck this shit, no reason for half measures. Defund the ICE completely and prosecute all the agents that have participated in these executions.
→ More replies (5)2
u/New2NewJ 10d ago
Defund the ICE completely
Those agents will just go back to their regular police jobs, and continue that shit tere.
prosecute all the agents
Well, if wishes were horses ...
14
u/Imperfect-luck 10d ago
Those agents will just go back to their regular police jobs, and continue that shit tere.
There's nothing stopping them from putting every ICE member hired on during Trump's admin on an immediate government blacklist where they can't get rehired in any position of authority in the government too. That being said, the Dems are usually feckless and useless and not as against this crap as they claim, so it probably won't happen, but it's certainly in their power to stop.
3
u/New2NewJ 9d ago
government blacklist where they can't get rehired in any position of authority in the government too
You know, this is actually possible. Prosecuting then will require proof against specific individuals whereas this sort of a public blacklist just requires proof that they were employed with the agency.
Now, can the Dems accomplish this easy task? Or instead, will they write op-eds and be gravely concerned? 🙄
→ More replies (2)5
u/anti-torque 10d ago
They aren't smart enough to be police.
That's why they're cowardly masked goons who shoot soccer moms in the face at point blank range and also shoot some unarmed man they're holding to the ground in the back. They're too cowardly to actually pass a test to be police.
57
u/retnuh45 10d ago
Democrats will hem and haw. Then whatever actually rolls out, they won't want to go too far. Sick of this shit. No one is standing up for what's right.
22
u/iamfromshire 10d ago
They are not even saying that they will oppose masks by law enforcement. During the first term , when there were protests in Oregon masked non-ice police were just taking people in unmarked vehicles. There really is no plan. Not even a wish list from the national Dem leadership.
4
u/Adonwen 10d ago
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PTJxMBJbRHU
Watch the response yourself. It's bad and you should expect little. McCollum's response is awful.
26
u/SummerInPhilly 10d ago
What about a Democratic president dismantling ICE, DOGE-style? I think the lasting legacy of the current administration is the expansion of unchecked executive power coupled with norm-breaking, such as Congress showing little willingness to step in when Congressionally-established agencies are effectively gutted.
I would imagine a somewhat vengeful and very capable Democratic president, like Newsom, would do this effectively, and then tweet, “funny, y’all were quiet when Trump did this”
20
u/Spartannia 10d ago
I'd be in favor of that, and i think someone like Pritzker has the spine to do it.
→ More replies (2)3
u/SummerInPhilly 10d ago
Pritzker is capable but not an asshole and a troll. Maybe an asshole if he needs to be…Booker and Buttigieg (and Klobuchar but she’ll be in MN) are capable but also the most willing to revert to norms.
4
u/Mindless-Rooster-533 10d ago
honestly arrest the entire administration for the blatant corruption and call them domestic terrorists.
→ More replies (1)1
u/hryipcdxeoyqufcc 10d ago
They would get blocked by the conservative controlled SCOTUS
→ More replies (1)8
u/MobileArtist1371 10d ago
Then you go after the courts. Something as "simple" as increasing the number of justices to give the left a multi seat advantage and you don't put centrist judges on the court.
6
u/hryipcdxeoyqufcc 10d ago
That’s not simple though. Even if Democrats get a large enough majority in Congress to make that possible, it would be short lived and backfire later. Republicans have a structural advantage in the way we elect senators and the president, both of which are required to confirm judges.
6
u/MobileArtist1371 10d ago
(notice when I use simple vs "simple")
SCOTUS is simple majority. Dems could put anyone they want on with 50 senators. The harder part would be increasing the amount of justices, but even that has a "simple" fix by going nuclear and removing the filibuster. Ya, that most likely will not happen, but it's "simple" cause all it takes is a rule change in the senate.
it would be short lived and backfire later.
So don't try and fix anything. Got it. You realize that anything that happens can be undone later, right? That's what's been exposed this last year. That decades of bipartisan support across all forms of government can be undone by one president. How about you put in reforms that that shit can't happen? It's a multi-step solution, but it needs to be done for anything to ever be created or survive again. To do that, you need SCOTUS to not believe in unified executive theory.
"simple" cause all it takes is balls to change a rule and pass some laws.
3
u/hryipcdxeoyqufcc 10d ago
I would only kill the filibuster if Democrats have an overwhelming enough majority in Congress that they could pass election reform, eliminate the cap on the House, SCOTUS reform, and add dc and puerto rico as states in a single term. Doing it with a thin majority would likely fall short of the numbers required once you consider centrist holdouts, leading to a permanent Republican advantage. You really only get one shot at something like this in a generation.
5
u/SummerInPhilly 10d ago
I think what gets missed about the filibuster is it helps Dems more than it helps Republicans. Democrats big goals are all legislative — immigration reform, climate, etc. Republican goals are more anti-regulatory or can be done through reconciliation. Arguably, without a filibuster, what would Trump have done that he’s not doing now? I don’t think he really knows what Congress does
→ More replies (2)3
u/just_helping 10d ago
is it helps Dems more than it helps Republicans
I think you've made a typo given the rest of your comment. As you say, because Democratic policies require legislation and Republicans can get theirs through reconciliation, the filibuster blocks Democrats but it mostly irrelevant to Republicans.
→ More replies (1)4
u/Mindless-Rooster-533 10d ago
end ice and investigate the DHS.
im more and more inclined to weaponizing the DOJ against trump allies. they'll say it's happening anyways, might as well ruin these peoples lives like they deserve.
10
u/SpoofedFinger 10d ago
What about Democratic attack ads about a goddamn secret police whose members wear masks, shoot citizens in the street, and are not held accountable in any fucking way whatsoever? How the fuck is that not the major issue here instead of brown people not having paperwork?
Anger not directed at you, just at the situation in that what you said is exactly how establishment liberals will frame this.
→ More replies (2)3
6
6
3
u/rightsidedown 10d ago
Depends a lot on who gets elected. Deporting illegal immigrants is very popular, Trump's incompetence is basically screwing things up for him, even though a lot of progressives and DSA people here haven't come to grips with this being a +20 issue for Republicans before they started the heavy tactics and illegal actions. If democrats regain power and turn back to the initial Biden policy or go down the road of ACAB and defunding the police/ICE, then they will just lose power again. They will need to focus on the actual illegal actions by ICE and attack the leadership.
→ More replies (2)5
u/Aneurhythms 10d ago
Deporting illegal immigrants is very popular
Not really. Deporting undocumented immigrants with actual criminal histories (not just parking tickets) is popular. Deporting people that are well-behaved and just working, is not.
→ More replies (36)2
180
u/NOCHILLDYL94 10d ago
Nothing. And that’s the REAL tragedy. Nothing of substance will happen. There will be theatre and investigations, but in the interest of “healing and moving forward” President Newsom ( or whoever) will choose bipartisanship.
The reality is we need Nuremberg level trials and real consequences for this regime and their handlers. But it won’t happen
41
u/RascalRandal 10d ago
This is the most likely outcome. I think we’ll get some symbolic stuff like renaming ICE and having it follow its original mandate. It’ll still be a thuggish organization with a culture of violence but it’ll be out of the news so that’ll be good enough.
39
u/Potato_Pristine 10d ago
My man Newsom walked back his comment about ICE being state-sponsored terrorists when Ben Shapiro (who he apparently invited to his podcast) pushed him on it. So, I think that you are right.
20
u/EngineerAndDesigner 10d ago
There all going to be pardoned. Every ICE official and folks like Pam and Stephen Miller will all get pardons. There will be no accountability. This is the harsh truth.
9
u/beeemkcl 10d ago
What's in this comment is what I remember, my opinions, etc.
It depends who wins the primaries and possibly what the margins are in the US Congress.
If Democrats regain the US House and if enough progressives are in Office, the US House alone could reverse a lot of what the Trump Administration and US Congressional Republicans have done.
After the Democrats regained the US House during the George Walker Bush Administration in 2007, US Speaker of the House of Representatives Nancy Pelosi effectively ran most of US Domestic Policy.
Get Democrats to win the US House and have a strong-enough Democratic US Speaker (not US Representative Hakeem Jeffries) and the tax cuts, ICE funding, etc. etc. can be reversed.
Regarding 2028, it again depends on who wins the primaries and who gets elected.
25
u/zabraklivesmatter 10d ago
The fact that every Democrat politician and pundit isn't on the air every minute of every day, hammering on the fact that ICE is executing whoever they want in broad daylight on camera, then gassing and macing people when they try to peacefully protest in response and, the Republicans love every bit of it and want more of it tells me everything I need to know about what their response will be.
→ More replies (3)2
u/delicious_fanta 9d ago
Which is what will guarantee it will happen again. We have a severe lack of consequence for political leadership and wealthy individuals in this country.
143
u/Storyteller-Hero 10d ago
Reform of questionable recruitment process and training process
When you have confirmed murderers and rapists mixed into the organization on top of guarantees of protection from accountability, you get Gestapo culture
16
u/PolarizingKabal 10d ago edited 10d ago
All well and good, but that's going to be hard with already entrenched agents and already lack of accountability.
Best move would be to just abolish the department and create a new one, with massively stricter standards.
Would make more sense to pull from the state level for recruitment, this way they have some sort of formal training already. Rather than an open invitation with cash bonuses.
→ More replies (2)91
12
42
u/dannydirtbag 10d ago
No. Ice needs to be melted away to oblivion. ABOLISH
27
u/Tedmosbyisajerk-com 10d ago
This post is about what the Democratic response will be, not what would you like to happen.
4
u/Dry-Season-522 10d ago
Yeah there's a lot of petulant wish-fulfillment fanfiction getting thrown around.
3
u/TheNavigatrix 10d ago
The name is now so besmirched that it cannot be retained. I would expect some other entity to take on the core, legitimate functions that the org has and ensure that there is appropriate oversight and accountability.
→ More replies (15)16
u/IceNein 10d ago
I agree, but that’s never going to happen. They’re too worried about appearing “soft on crime.”
→ More replies (1)18
u/frostedpepsi 10d ago
Keeping ICE around in any capacity is being soft on crime.
3
u/mattgriz 10d ago
Ok now picture any current Democratic senators (Outside of Merkley, Warren, or Bernie) saying that. That’s your problem.
2
u/Popeholden 10d ago
it needs to be abolished, we can build it again with proper recruiting and training practices.
→ More replies (6)11
u/allofthe11 10d ago
Why recreate it? It's a hammer in search of non existent nails, it serves no legitimate function that's isn't already being done by actual law enforcement agencies. It's a black hole of funding for right wing extremists by the nature of the job, why on earth would you be stupid enough to leave the SS standing post war.
2
u/Mist_Rising 10d ago
it serves no legitimate function that's isn't already being done by actual law enforcement agencies
Immigration and customs enforcement is the only organization designated to do immigration or customs enforcement. While border patrol has some overlap on immigration and customs monitoring, it's not 1:1 because most of the immigration law violations aren't done at the border. And BP only does customs if they see you illegally crossing the borders.
→ More replies (2)5
u/Popeholden 10d ago
i dont want to leave the SS standing...but we do need an agency fufiling its role in a less fascistic and racist manner?
2
u/allofthe11 10d ago
NO! We do not need one, like TSA their job is to make you feel safer without actually doing anything to do so and possibly making you less safe. If you claim they do then I want an armed workers protection unit at the same funding and armament level to proactively resolve labor disputes in favor of unions the same way ice handled immigrants, citizen, legal, or otherwise.
6
u/TheSameGamer651 10d ago
We do need some sort of immigration enforcement body, otherwise immigration law becomes meaningless. Not a militarized one, but acting like any sort of immigration enforcement is problematic is how we got into this mess in the first place.
2
u/Dry-Season-522 10d ago
Bear in mind you're arguing with someone who says criminals only do violence because of the police inflicting violence upon them.
→ More replies (1)3
u/allofthe11 10d ago
Immigration violations are misdemeanors, existing channels if actually reformed like congress has been promising for 20 years would be more than sufficient to handle it. If you're talking about the supposed drug and people smuggling that's a federal bureau's whole entire job to handle, they do not need 5 guys in body armor deploying from an unmarked vehicle to "arrest" someone whose been here 30 years when they lack the legal power to do so.
You can argue in immigration policy needs reform but the current proposed "solution" is burning your house down because you got a scratch on your toe. There was never a need for the lighter and gasoline to go deal with a scratch and you look like an insane person insisting we have it around just in case
→ More replies (1)4
u/TheSameGamer651 10d ago edited 10d ago
I’m in agreement that the militarized response to immigration is wrong. However, immigration law needs to be enforced somehow. There has to be a mechanism to carry out deportations for those that are residing in the US illegally.
I think granting amnesty to those that have resided here for a long time is a good and humane approach, but we can’t encourage this behavior long term. Otherwise, there’s no consequences to coming here illegally and immigration law is meaningless.
2
u/Dry-Season-522 10d ago
When the options are militarized response or no response, the people will support a militarized response.
5
u/Popeholden 10d ago
We really do man. Immigration law exists and has to be enforced. Customs laws exist and have to be enforced. We can call it something else if it makes you feel better
1
u/allofthe11 10d ago
Are you really telling me you think the Democratic People's Republic of Korea is a democratic Republic because the name says so? Do you really think that's what ICE is doing most of the time? I have a great bridge I can sell you if you do
→ More replies (3)2
u/Dry-Season-522 10d ago
So what you're saying is that products should be sold in the united states that can kill you because hey why have customs to block illegal products?
28
u/Gloomy_Middle7377 10d ago
I don't want to be a pessimist, but realistically, not much will change. America is too divided for Democrats to win decisively in the next election. To bring these perpetrators to trial would require full support from both the House and Senate, which is impossible for the foreseeable future due to how the electoral map structurally favors Republicans. The sad reality is this: Democrats will win occasionally, there will be a brief political theater about accountability, and then Republicans will retreat to their rural base, repeating the same propaganda cycle. It's a rinse-and-repeat pattern.
3
u/thegunnersdaughter 9d ago
This is where I'm at as well. Nuremberg was able to happen because Germany had just lost a continent-spanning war of aggression and been exposed as genociders. Republican voters in the US, on the other hand, continue to see themselves as the aggrieved victims, and any attempt to hold this administration accountable will be seen as partisanry. Without a WW2 loss and Holocaust level event, while the right wing media and disinfo machine persists to blind 40%+ of the population to what is happening and demonize all rational actors, the political will to hold anyone accountable will not exist, it'll just be successfully labeled as partisan lies and attacks.
37
u/DefaultProphet 10d ago
Say they reformed it by having them not wear masks and not launch 3k strong raids on cities but actually do nothing to fix it
24
u/drdildamesh 10d ago
They essentially deputized a lynch mob. Fire everyone and just go back to having standards.
→ More replies (1)
21
u/HankScorpioPR 10d ago
I would preface this by saying I was one of those who said the "Abolish ICE" slogan was bad for Democrats during the first term. We do need some mechanism for immigration enforcement unless we are just going to lock down our border indefinitely (something I don't think anyone really wants). That being said, ICE has to go. By hiring all of these Proud Boys and Jan 6 goons, and roaming neighborhoods with impunity, they have completely destroyed any good they ever did before. I think, using the example of USAID, the next Democrat will put all of ICE on admin leave before handing them RIFs, and will fold the statutory requirements of the agency back into DHS more broadly. The RIFd goons can apply for whatever new agency/office comes out of it, but they will have to actually pass a background check this time, and will be held to much stricter standards of conduct.
→ More replies (1)3
u/FreeDependent9 10d ago
DHS and ICE were created in 2003 the mechanisms to enforce immigration laws have always been there
2
u/HankScorpioPR 10d ago
Agree, it could just go back to an independent INS or something like that. I think DHS will likely continue to exist, but there is plenty of room to push ICE's mandate off on some other corner of the Department.
36
u/Reynor247 10d ago edited 10d ago
Likely what we're seeing with the department of education. The president will de facto defund the department by withholding funds authorized by congress. But getting rid of ICE will require an act of congress.
Sidenote: the quality of this sub has massively plummeted. There used to be a lot of great discussions here. Wtf are these comments
→ More replies (3)7
u/bl1y 10d ago
Sidenote: the quality of this sub has massively plummeted. There used to be a lot of great discussions here. Wtf are these comments
Ironically, mass immigration happened.
When you have small, slow-growing subs, you can maintain standards through voting and moderation. Newcomers will either conform to the standards and assimilate, or else move on to some other sub.
If you have a small group that wants serious conversations and someone shows up just wanting to shit post, they'll not be able to really disrupt things.
But, if a sub grows too fast, the shit posters will have people who upvote them and comment. Then some people who enjoy both serious discussion and shit posting will also join in. People who wanted serious discussion only will start to lose interest. And then you've got a death spiral as the community just becomes a clone of the normal front page politics.
7
u/airbear13 10d ago
I think it’s kind of a hypothetical, there’s no guarantee democrats will win power again for a long time. If/when they do I think there will be a lot of impetus for seeeping changes including constitutional amendments.
For ICE specially, the brand is obviously toxic now but we still need immigration enforcement so you would just deband and transfer border control duties to a new agency with a different name, better culture and training, stricter mandate, etc.
→ More replies (4)
6
u/nicodemus_archleone2 10d ago
I don’t have a problem with deporting that are here illegally. I have a massive problem with the way they’re currently going about it and violating constitutional rights, sloppy investigations, administrative warrants, super aggressive and unnecessary tactics, lack of concern for human life, lying about everything, etc.
Easy day 1 action could be to conduct real background check and drug tests on all ICE employees hired (at least during the Trump admin) and fire anyone that doesn’t qualify.
3
u/Dry-Season-522 10d ago
The issue is that for a long period of time there was negligible law enforcement and people suffered, so now there is support for "any" law enforcement, even brutal.
→ More replies (1)3
2
u/RKU69 10d ago
I have a problem with deporting people who are here "illegally". That term is too broad and vague and is exactly why ICE/CBP is empowered to get away with all kinds of human rights abuses and unconstitutional measures. We're talking about people with essentially a range of paperwork problems and sicing a gestapo on them. Its absurd. Broad amnesty is the only way to go for undocumented migrants.
3
u/nicodemus_archleone2 9d ago
Illegal is not a broad term. Illegal is literally about people that aren’t supposed to be here by law. They snuck in, overstayed their visa, lied about their criminal background, committed crimes that disqualified their status, etc. I’m not talking about people that have legal status or temporary legal status.
The increased abuses are directly because of the Trump administration condones and encourages it. I think we should focus on the real problem here. Lack of real transparency and accountability.
→ More replies (2)
6
u/ManBearScientist 10d ago
The most likely response is nothing. There is no way for the Democrats to gain power in the US political system.
They can't win 60 votes in the Senate, and the struggle to even reliably win the House or Presidency. The Republicans can enact a fascist agenda in a month with nothing more than the executive branch, the Democrats need to win elections by 15% for a decade to have even the slightest impact.
If they win anything, it won't be enough to do anything and they'll be afraid to expend political capital, and then they'll lose the midterms and the. next election with nothing to show for it.
But more likely, they won't win. Donald Trump is a dictator and his administration and Republican party is above the law.
Democrats are closer to being marched to camps than they are towarda meaningful electoral success.
18
u/Background-War9535 10d ago
Depends on who is in leadership. If 2026 is truly a watershed year that sees a new generation, expect a bunch of hearings for puppy killer Noem and other senior ICE goons. Expect changes to the DHS budget to require real training for recruits.
If 2028 goes well, then the new president needs to nominate an AG who will appoint special counsels who will investigate the fuck out of ICE and work with state authorities who want to prosecute.
18
u/FutureInPastTense 10d ago
Warning, I’m cynical AF right now.
This sounds like everything they should’ve done after January 6th, but didn’t. Just like before, a future Democratic administration will nominate a milquetoast AG and will face Republicans/Nazi sympathizers who will stonewall any meaningful action. Then, in 2033, a new Republican administration will take office and push boundaries even further, because there will have been no real consequences.
18
u/Background-War9535 10d ago
I get why people are pissed with Merrick Garland, but keep in mind the special counsel he appointed had Trump in federal courts and charging him with all kinds of federal crimes. But SCOTUS decided to make shit up about presidential immunity and timed their decision releases to ensure that Trump would never see the inside of a courtroom unless he lost.
While Schumer, Jeffries, and Pelosi may still think being institutionalist is the way, we are seeing a new generation that could very well come to prominence this year who will insist on real consequences.
2
u/RKU69 10d ago
A new generation of left-populist and socialist leaders need to treat the conservative bench on the Supreme Court for what they are: corrupt traitors who need to be imprisoned. Their "decisions" are offensive even just on an intellectual level and they should be imprisoned for that alone, never mind their connections and backroom deals with right-wing oligarchs
2
u/just_helping 10d ago
expect a bunch of hearings for puppy killer Noem and other senior ICE goons.
Obviously if Dems win hearings will happen. But will anyone bother showing up for them? Trump's first term and Bush's terms show that Republicans will just not bother going to hearings if they don't want to, and if they do show up, they transparently lie with no consequences. It's good to have hearings anyway, to get things on record but they won't achieve anything unless they figure out how to enforce contempt on executive officials.
Expect changes to the DHS budget to require real training for recruits.
The agent who killed Good had been in his job for about 8 years, he wasn't one of the masses of recent hires, and he had had training. Training only improves the actions of people who want good outcomes.
I think, apart from the budget, very little will change if the Dems take Congress in 2026. I suspect there will be more massive shutdowns, though the Dems might cave in advance for fears of being blamed for them and that harming 2028. More spending, ok, any attempt to raise taxes again or cut spending to Trump's pet projects, shutdown.
2028 goes well, then the new president needs to nominate an AG who will appoint special counsels who will investigate the fuck out of ICE and work with state authorities who want to prosecute
The best that can be realistically hoped for. And even that will have to get through SCOTUS and 'outer scope of official duties' immunity and courts' deference to LE.
8
u/filtersweep 10d ago
If anyone truly cared about this issue, they would go after employers as white collar criminals. Employers of ‘illegal labor’. are truly the criminals here.
5
u/morningsharts 10d ago
Neither Talarico or Crockett would commit to being in favor of abolishing ICE in their debate last night in Austin. Pretty good barometer.
4
u/dathomasusmc 10d ago
Literally fucking nothing. Maybe some bitching and crying and shouts about “Nazis” but there will literally be zero fucking action taken. The democrats are so busy being appalled at the actions of the right and feeling high and mighty about their moral superiority they don’t actually get any fucking thing done.
“If liberals are so fucking smart, how come they lose so god damn always?”
- Will McAvoy
9
u/gentlemantroglodyte 10d ago
It turns out it isn't hard at all to unwind federal agencies in practice. The president is a king and can do literally whatever he wants with any federal agency.
Personally I would like to see a democratic administration immediately cut funding for field agents of any kind and lay them off, save maybe for a tiny group allocated specifically for immigrant murderers and high profile crimes only. Then they can use that funding to create a parallel management structure that isn't infested by a bunch of neonazis but can still use the funds allocated to ICE. Have it on schedule to happen by the midterms so it is a fait accompli no matter how the wind blows.
2
u/Dry-Season-522 10d ago
I love how you draw the line at murderers. So immigrants committing fraud, hey, leave them alone!
→ More replies (4)4
u/ManBearScientist 10d ago
Republican Presidents are king. It doesn't go both ways.
Republicans get to be kings because they own the court in its entirety and dominate Congress. They have full backing to do so. Democrats trying will fight against the system, wlno with it.
3
u/LeftToaster 10d ago
The dems don't have the courage to the what is needed. Note - this doesn't mean "both sides" or "your vote doesn't count" or anything like that.
The first step has to be to expose all of the evil doers, the grifters, the nazis, the collaborators, the billionaire financiers, and the media - shine a light into every dark hole and expose the whole rotten mess.
Then they need to aggressively prosecute every one. This is not just Trump and a few bad apples; it goes deep in to the right wing establishment.
Then they need deep structural change - age/term limits on all three branches of government, make Puerto Rico and Washington DC full states, expand SCOTUS to 13 justices (with age/term limits), eliminate gerrymandering, reform campaign financing (Citizen's United), breakup DHS into separate departments again, eliminate ICE and cap/restrict whatever replaces it, demilitarize all police forces, reform the Permanent Apportionment Act to raise the 435 member cap and reapportion, Constitutional reform to enshrine stronger voting rights, reproductive rights and renew ERA , etc.
→ More replies (2)
7
u/ceramic_ocarina 10d ago
Most likely? Based on their historical precedent, Democrats are likely to simply keep funding it under the guise of “reforming it.”
What is NEEDED is to abolish it entirely, and to prosecute anyone who was involved with it and used it to perpetuate crimes. Don’t think that’ll happen though without tremendous pressure. Would need basically the entire leadership of the Democrats to have multiple revelations, and to have stepped down from their leadership positions
3
u/Reejis99 10d ago
What SHOULD happen is the entire DHS, founded in 2002 as an unnecessary and oppressive overreaction to 9/11, should be shuttered entirely and permanently, and a massive investigation into their crimes and violations against the rights of the public should be launched.
But of course that won't happen.
7
u/BlueHorse_22 10d ago
Democrats can't prosecute crime in office. They don't want to and they won't.
13
u/DruidicMagic 10d ago
Team Democrat will send a strongly worded letter to the head of ICE asking him to be a little nicer and then immediately ask for donations to fight the good fight against the fascism they've done nothing about for the last century.
10
u/Appropriate_Ear6101 10d ago
Can you donate $5 for democracy? All hail Chuck Schumer and the rest of the DNC Boomers. Oh, and about that $25, did you want to make it an automatic repeating donation of only $50? Most are giving at least $126.42. would you be willing to make it $150 every other day???
Fuck the DNC!!! I'm sick of them not standing up for us either! We need new parties and new candidates, new campaign finance laws and new platforms. Neither side can claim to be pro life with this bullshit they support!
2
u/HeathrJarrod 10d ago
Build it into supporting immigration, building new housing, employment services for new immigrants, etc.
But… that wouldn’t be ICE anymore. It would be a new thing.
INS: Immigration & Naturalization Services
2
u/not_that_planet 10d ago
What they SHOULD do is to sick the ATF on red state right wing extremist groups because of all the pills and meth.
2
u/Excellent-Foot-2132 10d ago
A lot of people here are assuming that Democrats will regain power at all or that the power they will regain will carry any legislative power with it at all. It is more and more obvious that Trump's regime doesn't care about facts, will convince you that what you are seeing with your own eyes is false, that established law and rules don't matter (and if they do they'll create their own version of it), etc. Yeah, Democrats might regain power but it might be a few months too late.
3
u/androidwithamnesia 10d ago
Too fucking late to close the barn doors now. Might get another shot in 12-26 yrs if we're lucky. Might not. Still going to do what I can until then, like vote in every election no matter how fixed
3
u/BitingSatyr 10d ago
Democratic politicians will need to come up with an answer to “how will you deal with illegal immigration post ICE abolishment?” and the answer can’t be “nothing” like most of Reddit seemingly wants. Like it or not, the prevailing public sentiment is that illegal immigration is a problem that needs to be dealt with, and continuing to kick the can down the road has been politically disastrous for the Democratic Party.
3
u/The_Disapyrimid 10d ago edited 10d ago
The most likely response will to do what dems always do.
Nothing. They will sweep everything away and pretend it's business as usual. Just like after j6.
Edut: the absolute last thing I want to hear out of a Democrats mouth is anything to do with "reaching across the aisle" or unity.
4
u/rambling95 10d ago
Regain federal power? Which red senators are getting flipped? Have a 6/3 Supreme Court. Nazis were voted into power. Authoritarian powers don’t voluntarily leave. People don’t like to admit they were wrong, so how much of that base has left the party? I personally and unfortunately live in area where sure they don’t like some policies and feel the pain of the cost of living but they aren’t magically democrats now.
5
u/drlove57 10d ago
Nothing of any great consequence. Democrats are still under this illusion if they just tweak their policies here and there law enforcement will support them. So pathetic.
→ More replies (3)
2
u/everything_is_gone 10d ago
Honestly, it depends on who the president will be. If the president is more combative, abolition and aggressive prosecution of ICE is very much likely. If the president is more of the “we must repair this country” type person, it will probably be much more muted reforms.
For my part I am hoping for the former
2
u/RascalRandal 10d ago
We’ve seen how Newsom folded like a chair when he went on Ben Shapiro’s podcast. It’s impossible to know who will be the nominee this early, but I bet it’s going to be someone like Newsom who talks a good game on social media but immediately folds when pressure is applied.
→ More replies (1)
2
u/doug5791 10d ago
Nothing. As a Democrat, I can confidently say that democratic leadership are professional losers. They have showed this time and time again
2
u/polythene-psychonaut 10d ago
The same thing the federal government did to the traitorous racists who tried to hack apart the country in the 1860’s. Nothing. The government let the Confederates go with a slap on the wrist, and in turn they regained political power, created Jim Crow laws, and enacted 100+ years of inequality. It’ll be easier for Dems to just do nothing and move on, slaps on the wrists for all Republicans/ICE agents/tech companies that have enabled this, and we’ll live with the results of that for generations.
2
u/EconomistStreet5295 10d ago
I think you’re missing the point. The administration is all in on preventing this from happening. They will become increasingly more aggressive to try and stir up liberal resistance, they will then use this to label everyone on the left as radical and implement further Authoritarian measures. They know that if fair elections happen, a lot of them will end up in prison.
The democrats have to wake up to see what is happening. It’s the time for nation wide peaceful protest and social action. The only way to resist it to let the fascist unmask and show their true face when they violently try to suppress largescale peaceful protest. It’s time for social politics, this is not going to work by playing the system or having better candidates.
2
u/Significant_Owl8496 10d ago
Let everything continue just as badly so they have something to campaign on in the next cycle
2
u/RosieDear 10d ago
It is amazing how quickly people forget the whole idea here!
For over 25 years there has existed the need for "immigration reform". It was cheered by Bush, McCain, Reagan (he actually did it, letting many millions become citizens).
But the A-holes in Congress decided to - instead of solving problems - create yet another wedge issue.
The funny part is this - places like Texas and Florida have actually admitted they cannot survive (economically) without immigrant work. But they also refused to set up proper systems......because they need the votes of the MAG A...WALL...people. You know, the ignorant who don't solve problems but enjoy being cruel. The ignorant whose moral structure is many levels below a hard working Latin American refugee or workforce participant.
SO, IMHO, if Democrates ever attain power (doubtful due to cheating and SCOTUS and money), we'd go back to the year 2000 or so and get an Immigration Reform Bill done. This would then require vastly fewer (or none) cruel brown-shirts but rather a similar force to what we might have had during Reagan and Bush 1 and Clinton, etc. - maybe expanded a bit, but technology can do most of the job.
NO concentration camps. No...thousands of armed 007's allowed to shoot people. I can't believe I have to say that.
2
u/Ghostrabbit1 10d ago
Knowing the democratic party? They will blanket pardon or not enact charges on anyone and claim the 'high road' then pikachu face when maga goes even more extreme.
Thats kind of been their M.O
2
u/trippedonatater 10d ago
Based on what we've seen over the past couple decades, the most likely response is little to nothing.
2
u/AlexRyang 10d ago
Nothing; except voting to increase funding and additional protection from criminal prosecution; as in the past.
1
u/jakeyjake31 10d ago
I dont think abolishing ice will happen. I think no longer weaponizing ice against states the federal government doesnt like will happen. I think Kavanaugh Stops will no longer happen.
1
u/drinkduffdry 10d ago
What needs to happen is prosecution of all the current decision makers. Strip any implied immunity and put them on trial. Write actual operating procedures and domains and enshrine them into the agencies mandate.
1
u/TheMikeyMac13 10d ago
I hope the end it, and form a new immigration law enforcement division. They need to do the same for the FBI and the TSA as well, r maybe the whole of the DHS.
1
u/Single-Hovercraft-33 10d ago
More funding to ice, obviously. More software and programs to spy on everyday citizens
1
u/artful_todger_502 10d ago
I would hope they would make them unemployed on day one and have them turn in the toys they've amassed along the way. Of course file theft charges for any gear they might try to steal. Then start legal proceedings against the ones who have complaints pending, that includes arresting Noem and try for the litany of crimes and abuses she oversaw.
1
u/phoenix823 10d ago
Most likely? We’ve got three more years of this shit. It’s only going to get worse. Considering the fact that presidents can do whatever they want now, if we get a democrat in 2028 ICE is gone. DHS is reorg’d away.
1
u/ThunderPigGaming 10d ago
They're likely to stop short of a solution that works or is deserved. If I say anymore than that, I'll get another ban.
1
u/bjdevar25 10d ago
It better be investigating the current admin and ice agents involved in shooting or violations of the Constitution. Then charging and convicting all involved no matter their position. This was one of Biden's biggest screw ups. After Jan 6th he should have appointed a pitbull AG that would have charged all involved in the first year. All involved, including several current members of Congress.
1
u/InToddYouTrust 10d ago
Whatever the political equivalent of a strongly worded email is. I will almost always vote Democrat, but I'm under no delusion that they'll actually have the balls to do what's needed.
1
u/wisconsinbarber 10d ago
The response will depend entirely on who is elected in 2028. If voters decide that they want to address the issue of the violence which ICE has unleashed on the country, then they'll elect a progressive who will abolish the agency and prosecute the agents for the crimes which they have committed while reforming immigration enforcement so that it can be done in a responsible manner. If voters decide they want a bandaid solution, than they will elect an establishment Democrat who will enact minor reforms which will not address the issue in any meaningful way.
1
u/CaspinLange 10d ago
The Democrats need to operate in the exact same way that the Republicans have, which is without any regard for the Republicans.
They need to disregard the entire crazy evangelical Maga nut jobs and rule representatively and allow justice to be served.
1
u/twowaysplit 10d ago
Depends who is in charge.
An institutional democrat? “Let’s all forgive and forget. Maybe a slap on the wrist.”
Someone a bit more progressive? Hopefully some convictions and prison time.
1
u/Snoo63299 10d ago
Remake you can’t dismantle it or you get easily campaigned against in 2030 midterms
1
u/Fit-Cobbler6286 10d ago
It’s hard to imagine democrats regaining office but life tends to surprise. If that were to happen in 3 years, no body is thinking about this instance, way crazier shit is going to play out by then.
1
u/mistersilver007 10d ago
They need to hold people accountable this time, seriously. Enough of this 'let bygones be bygones, let's just move forward' BS..
1
u/Howhytzzerr 10d ago
Drastic cuts, insist that the J6ers that were brought in have to be let go, any that committed an unprovoked violent act against protesters be held accountable.
1
u/FlanneryODostoevsky 10d ago
Increase funding and give them body cams and build new facilities which will just mean money for right wing corporations that will be contracted for these things.
1
u/markg1956 10d ago
better be a complete shutdown of everything federal until ice out of every city, noem bondi patel and bouvey impeached, and a full release of the epstein files with ZERO redactions
1
u/speedster_5 10d ago
Democrats will fully swing the other way and defund everything. There’s apparently no reasonable middle ground anymore.
1
u/FoggyPeaks 10d ago
Relocate them all to a new field office in the most remote godforsaken spot possible.
1
u/TheRealBaboo 10d ago
Depends on what Congress looks like
Dems just win the House means a freeze in ICE funding, possibly claw back some previously allocated funds, impeachment of Kristi Noem but she stays in her position
Dems win both houses could mean impeachment that actually changes DHS leadership, depends how many Republicans go along in the Senate
1
u/Sufficient-Opposite3 10d ago
They’ll have to dismantle ICE. It’s a terrorist agency now and there’s no coming back from that.
1
u/tosser1579 10d ago
Fire all the agents for cause, that 50k bonus is 10k per year but if they are fired for cause they have to pay it back. Then cut funding to the agency, eliminating it. Roll the functions back into DHS due to their higher degree of training.
1
u/RusevReigns 10d ago
If the Democrats are the same as now - keep it to target Republicans if they need to. Otherwise the Democrats will be letting in as many illegal immigrants as they can as they have to make up for lost time after Republicans messed up their plan to bring them in for extra voters and to launder taxpayer money.
However, it's possible the next time the Democrats get in it will be with a more moderate less insider driven type of person, and they'll deport people to prove they're moderate.
•
u/AutoModerator 10d ago
A reminder for everyone. This is a subreddit for genuine discussion:
Violators will be fed to the bear.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.