All Democratic Presidential Candidates In 2028 Should Commit To Dismantling ICE

Since its inception, ICE has been designed to conflate issues of immigration with terrorist threats against the U.S.

By Sam Rosenthal

On Wednesday, a still-unknown ICE agent murdered a 37 year old woman, Renee Nicole Good, while she attempted to drive away from officers. By now, video of the incident has circulated widely, as have the outrageous lies members of the Trump administration have told, many of which are clearly contradicted by that video footage. While the fallout from this particular incident is still playing out, one thing has become abundantly clear: any legitimate contender for the Democratic nomination for president in 2028 must commit to permanently dismantling Immigration and Customs Enforcement.

ICE has only existed since 2002, when it was created as part of the post-September 11th shakeup of the national security state. Since its inception, ICE has been designed to conflate issues of immigration with terrorist threats against the U.S. In the post-9/11 atmosphere, extreme anxiety over who was entering the country, and for what purpose, gave prima facie cover to the idea that immigration issues were terrorism concerns. Following the same line of thinking, it made sense to treat ICE as a paramilitary organization, with all the accoutrement necessary to fight violent, extreme threats against the U.S.

In the decades since, ICE’s broad mandate and ill-defined mission have paved the way for an organization that now operates largely outside the bounds of legality. This mission creep has culminated in the Trump administration’s frothing embrace of the agency as a private military for the president and his coterie of racist ultranationalists, exemplified by Homeland Security advisor Stephen Miller. Miller and others around the president have backed ICE and encouraged its excesses, rewarding it with praise and, most importantly, handed it the largest budget of any federal law enforcement agency. ICE agents, many unqualified to work as law enforcement officers in other agencies, now engage in open racism and xenophobia, while operating in an atmosphere of apparent legal impunity, all abetted by the president’s tough guy rhetoric. Simply put, ICE has become emblematic of everything that is rotten and corrupt about the second Trump administration.

That is why it is critical that any Democrat who earnestly hopes to win the party’s nomination in 2028 commits to dissolving the organization. Pledging to abolish ICE is good policy and good politics. Polling late last year showed that a majority of Americans disapprove of ICE and believe its enforcement tactics are too harsh. Among Democrats, the numbers are even more striking: nearly 80% of Democrats surveyed last summer disapproved of the agency. These polls were both taken before Good was murdered, an event which is sure to tank ICE’s favorability even more. It is important to note, too, that ICE’s favorability was up 15 points in February 2025, at the very beginning of Trump’s second term. That the agency has shed so much public support, so quickly, is a testament to how intensely most Americans reject the agency’s brutal and lawless approach. Democrats should expect this trend to continue; that is, betting against ICE is a smart play.

Beneath the favorability argument is a more fundamental dynamic. Since 2016, Democrats have called Donald Trump a threat to democracy. This claim has sometimes had an indistinct quality, though, and Democrats have been rightly criticized for prioritizing this line of attack over speaking to kitchen table issues that might resonate more with voters. Here, though, is a concrete example of how Trump’s relentless erosion of norms has consequences in the real world. His disdain for legality and common decency has unleashed a paramilitary organization with little governmental oversight on communities throughout the U.S., terrorizing and occasionally murdering people. ICE’s modus operandi over the last year is a perfect encapsulation of the difference between living in a state with civil liberties and one where rights are given and taken at the whim of an autocrat.

If Democrats want to truly leverage this moment to help defeat Trumpism in 2026, 2028, and beyond, they will have to be unqualified in their criticism of ICE. That means that Democrats must go beyond calling for investigations, and follow the lead of those like Rep. Rashida Tlaib, who has called for abolishing ICE. It also means that Democrats must become more vociferous and visible in their rejection of ICE. They will soon get the opportunity: partial government funding expires at the end of January, including for the Department of Homeland Security, which houses ICE. Some Democrats are already calling for holding up ICE funding, and potentially shutting down the government, unless its mandate is substantially reduced. Democratic leadership, though, has thrown cold water on that approach so far. Both Chuck Schumer and Hakeem Jeffires, de facto leaders of the party, have said that they don’t support holding ICE funding as leverage to extract concessions on reining in the agency. This is a political and moral mistake; this is precisely the moment for Democrats to take a stand against an agency that is increasingly at odds with Americans’ sense of what reasonable immigration and law enforcement in the country should look like.

In 2028, many Democrats with national ambitions will throw their hats into the primary ring. For a party that has seemed adrift and without political direction for much of the last eight years, this presidential primary will be an important opportunity for the party’s most prominent members to reestablish what it stands for. For any candidate serious about turning the page on Trumpism, that should include a permanent end to ICE.

Sam Rosenthal is the political director at RootsAction. He formerly served on the steering committee of the Democratic Socialists of America’s National Political Commission.