The surge of ICE harassment, raids and deportations in the second Trump administration has focused unprecedented attention on the problem of anti-migration enforcement. In the wake of the murders of Renee Goode and Alex Pretti in Minneapolis, we have not seen the likes of this mobilization on any major political question since the peak of the Black Lives Matter Movement. A recent opinion poll shows that nationally, a near-majority of the population now supports abolishing ICE. We need to seize this moment and keep the momentum going to make sure that this is achieved.
As the idea of abolishing ICE gains new levels of popular support, so does the broader demand to abolish the whole of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS). The slogan “Abolish ICE” is powerful and has existed since at least 2018. It remains the primary slogan of the current movement, both nationally and in Connecticut DSA. However it is clear that ICE is only one of several arms of repression that are characteristic of DHS as a whole. The officers who killed Alex Pretti were Border Patrol, a separate DHS agency. In a recent social media post, Illinois Congresswoman Delia Rodriguez recognized that abolishing ICE alone is not enough because the whole of DHS “was built to violate our rights”. Even staunchly pro-capitalist libertarians have long recognized that DHS poses an unacceptable threat to fundamental individual liberties. It is long overdue that we not only abolish ICE, but the whole of the DHS.
Understanding the moment
The dynamics of the current moment are complex and rapidly shifting. This brief article cannot present a comprehensive analysis and if it did, key points could quickly be obsolete. It is indispensable that in the coming weeks and months, we all analyze and discuss as we act. A few key themes will likely be central to these discussions.
As we ask what is happening and why, we need to “follow the money” and the relationship of financial resources to political power. Aside from simply appealing to the xenophobia of Trump’s base, Trump’s escalation of immigration enforcement is most immediately about building political power for himself and his allies through brazen corruption. ICE has become a vehicle for patronage jobs, pushed out nationwide with expensive mass media campaigns and absurdly generous signing bonuses. For private prison companies and other contractors—many of which have faced setbacks over recent years due to our incremental victories against mass incarceration—immigration enforcement has become a lucrative replacement. There is a very real possibility that Trump’s ICE surge is part of a strategy to control the mid-term elections.
This project of repression through ICE expansion is not guaranteed to work as planned. There is a fundamental contradiction inherent to the militarization of migration enforcement. While the escalating reign of terror does energize part of the MAGA base, it also disrupts key sectors of the economy that the Republican coalition depends on. The agriculture and construction sectors rely heavily on undocumented workers and are already strained by tariffs and economic instability. Unlimited raids and deportations threaten to put small farmers and firms out of business. This may be at least part of the reason that even some key Republicans who normally refuse to criticize Trump have begun to voice concern about the most extreme and incompetent aspects of his current anti-migration enforcement policy.
As Trump is now making a partial retreat in Minneapolis, moderate Democrats are happy to reach an agreement and seize this opening for themselves. Democrats deserve no credit here; they helped create the conditions for this crisis. Obama’s immigration policies earned him the title “deporter in chief,” and the Biden administration went even further, forcing some 4.4 million workers out of the country in a single presidential term. We need to be clear that Democrats have repeatedly expanded the legitimacy and capacity of DHS rather than dismantling it.
The mainstream of both Republican and Democratic parties are eager to go back to the quieter and less visible mass deportation regime of recent decades. We cannot allow this. Without escalation through nonviolent but disruptive mass mobilization, the crisis will either fade or be absorbed into weak reforms that leave the underlying system intact. That is precisely why clarity about our demands matters now.
The bigger picture
The rapid shift in public opinion means that many people are waking up on this issue for the first time. The current repression is so brazen that all people of conscience are outraged. As democratic socialists, we understand that this crisis isn’t just about Trump or either political party. We need to help the general public also see that while abolishing ICE and DHS is a necessary step forward, the brutal regulation of labor and mobility is inherent to the rule of capital.
From the historical beginnings of capitalist society, uneven development has driven the displacement of people from land and community, forcing them to move in search of survival. This displacement alone does not create a stable, disciplined workforce; capitalist order and discipline has always depended on violent force. Marx described this powerfully in his analysis of the “bloody legislations” of early modern England, through which displaced peasants were driven from their land and then punished into submission to wage labor. Enforcing restrictions on worker’s mobility was central to that original process of so-called primitive accumulation. Today, migration enforcement performs an identical function on a global scale. The displacement that drives people to migrate to the United States is largely shaped by dynamics in which advanced capitalist countries like the U.S. plays a central role and whose elites are the primary beneficiaries. As long as there is demand for cheap labor that draws people across borders, it is wealthy states—not migrants—who decide which forms of movement are illegal.
It would be difficult to exaggerate the range of critical issues that are at stake here. Spending billions to deny basic rights to migrant workers hurts all workers. Immigration enforcement lowers wages by making workers deportable, strengthens employer power, and expands surveillance technologies that are then used against broader segments of the working class. The massive increases in spending on this repression under Trump have come with cuts to a wide range of basic services working people depend on. DHS is not simply a “border issue” that we need to oppose in defense of our most vulnerable neighbors. It is a key pillar of labor discipline and political repression in general. In a world of increasing geopolitical rivalry, climate crisis and AI-based surveillance, the future of DHS will contribute to shaping the future of the global order.
What it means for CT DSA
Abolishing DHS will not, by itself, produce a just or humane world overnight. Some of the broader goals articulated in the DSA national platform—such as full freedom of movement, demilitarized borders, and universal amnesty—are not immediately winnable at the national level. We shouldn’t be naive about how much further we have to go to make that happen. If these goals are ever to become winnable, abolishing DHS is one necessary step in that direction.
Calling this demand “winnable” does not mean it is easy or guaranteed. Achieving it would require sustained national disruption and far greater mass participation than we have seen so far. Asking how we can get there raises complex questions about minimum and maximum demands, non-reformist reforms, and how moments of crisis can be turned into lasting victories. These questions need to be discussed and deliberated on in DSA chapters around the country, including ours.
Our chapter individually has a specific concrete role to play in the national struggle to abolish ICE and DHS. Alongside our state-level partners, we recently helped win a campaign against Avelo Airlines, which has pledged to stop participating in deportations. This victory demonstrates that state-level action can meaningfully constrain DHS and its collaborators. Our national elected officials are not yet fully on board with abolition, but have called for at least some meaningful reforms on the national stage and may be open to pressure to go further. In the state legislature, there have been recent moves towards banning ICE agents from wearing masks in Connecticut. These small steps are necessary, but they are not enough. Anything we achieve at the state level to limit the reach of DHS will have real, material impacts on working people’s lives and will strengthen our capacity for future struggles. Now is the time to fight for a different vision of the near future—one that weakens the state’s capacity for repression, expands freedom of movement, and builds power for the working class as an organized whole.