> On Dec 26, 2025, at 14:12, Charles via groups.io > <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Fri, Dec 26, 2025 at 04:11 PM, Mark Baugher wrote: > in the so-called "sanctuary cities" where city, county or state policy is to > not allow local or state police to assist ICE. > New York City has a sanctuary law. These laws generally say the City cannot > assist ICE, such as by sharing information on a targeted victim, by releasing > a victim in jail custody to ICE, etc. The laws do not forbid police smashing > protests that make life a little difficult for ICE. That's what we see in > practice.
Sanctuary-city police do not cooperate with ICE without violating sanctuary-city laws, which are laws that have been won through the efforts anti-ICE activists, as in my city: https://www.portland.gov/police/documents/immigration-faq/download. The efforts of these activists should be respected; they help to the extent that they can, but they cannot stop federal police from apprehending people. That said, this entire message is tangential to the topic of this thread and doesn't answer the questions I asked in my response to your previous posting, Charles. I hoped to solicit informed comments on troop deployment and not agitprop on the Democratic Party and their sanctuary cities. As far as the Trump strategy of getting troops in the streets, ICE was just a provocation, and there can be others. Besides, we have been unable to disrupt their ICE and CPB operations to date. > > For another example, Illinois. People protested at the ICE Broadview > Processing Center in Chicago on October 12, 2025. Illinois state troopers in > riot helmets and with bill clubs attacked them. And all the while, the > ultimate boss of the state troopers, Gov. Pritzker, protests in words against > ICE. How are the protests _at ICE locations_ stopping, slowing, or significantly disrupting ICE operations? What are the strategy and tactics for stopping ICE? The local police do not intervene in Portland demonstrations at the local ICE facility, but the facility continues to operate. The demonstrations managed to (1) redirect some detainees to Tacoma, farther from their support systems, and (2) give Trump a pretext for sending troops to the city. > > It is definitely the fact that Democratic officials deploy police to ensure > that ICE terror continues. You seem to think that there is a mass movement that would somehow stop or disrupt ICE operations if the local police did not repress local demonstrations front of ICE buildings. You don't say which demonstrations or explain how this strategy makes any difference to ICE operations. Mark -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Groups.io Links: You receive all messages sent to this group. View/Reply Online (#39889): https://groups.io/g/marxmail/message/39889 Mute This Topic: https://groups.io/mt/116950047/21656 -=-=- POSTING RULES & NOTES #1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message. #2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived. #3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern. #4 Do not exceed five posts a day. -=-=- Group Owner: [email protected] Unsubscribe: https://groups.io/g/marxmail/leave/13617172/21656/1316126222/xyzzy [[email protected]] -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
