- Immigrant Times
- 1 hour ago
- 8 min read
American cities and mayors confront Trump’s immigration crackdown
National mayoral organisations, labour unions, civic rights organisations and faith leaders have warned that federal tactics risk eroding trust between local people and law enforcement.
By The Immigrant Times
American city mayors like Jacob Frey from Minneapolis and Katie Wilson from Seattle are using local powers to reign in the activities of the federal agency ICE (United States Immigration and Customs Enforcement). ICE agents have been accused of using indiscriminate force against civilians. (ICE photo: AP/Alex Brandon)
February 2026: A standoff is building across America. Cities are increasingly becoming frontlines in a political confrontation between local leaders and President Donald Trump’s immigration agenda. As the administration pushes ahead with plans to carry out what Trump has called the largest deportation campaign in American history, mayors from ‘California to the New York Island, from the redwood forest to the Gulf Stream waters’ are openly challenging federal enforcement tactics, warning that aggressive operations are destabilising communities and undermining public safety.
The flashpoint came in Minneapolis, where the fatal shootings of mother-of-two Renee Good and nurse Alex Pretti led to mass protests and eventually to emergency talks between state leaders and the White House. The events attracted international attention, amplified by Bruce Springsteen’s protest song Streets of Minneapolis. But Minneapolis was not an isolated case. Similar tensions have been emerging across the country as cities fear expanded federal activity.
At the centre of the crackdown is US Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), supported in some operations by US Customs and Border Protection (CBP). Under Trump’s second term, both agencies have been given expanded resources and broader operational mandates, allowing them to conduct large-scale interior enforcement operations far beyond the southern border.
The confrontation between ICE and city governments has triggered an unusually broad coalition of responses. Labour unions warn that workplace raids destabilise industries and intimidate workers. Faith leaders have condemned enforcement-related deaths as moral failures. Civil rights groups continue to demand stronger oversight and accountability.
While the administration argues that tougher enforcement restores ‘law and order’, many mayors, including leaders of sanctuary cities and several Republican-run municipalities, say the reality on the ground looks very different. They describe chaotic raids, poor coordination with local authorities, heightened fear in immigrant communities and growing pressure on city services. National mayoral organisations, such as the US Conference of Mayors and the African American Mayors Association, have warned that federal tactics risk eroding trust between residents and law enforcement, while civil rights groups and faith leaders have called for greater oversight and restraint.
The debate has also reached Capitol Hill, where Senator Bernie Sanders forced a vote on blocking proposed increases to ICE's budget, arguing taxpayers shouldn't fund what he called a militarised domestic force. The measure failed, but it exposed deepening political fractures over the agency's role and who, if anyone, holds it accountable.
As federal immigration enforcement expands, city responses have become more visible. Some mayors are confronting ICE head-on, while others are blocking detention facilities or severing federal partnerships. Even several Republican-led cities are publicly questioning the methods being deployed by federal authorities. Taken together, these reactions show how immigration enforcement has become a controversial local issue in all of America.
Cities at the centre of direct ICE confrontation
Minneapolis (Minnesota)
Mayor: Jacob Frey (Democrat)
Federal targeting: Minneapolis became the national focal point after the launch of Operation Metro Surge, a large-scale interior immigration enforcement campaign involving ICE and CBP agents across the metropolitan area. The operation included heavily armed raids, traffic stops and coordinated federal deployments in residential neighbourhoods.
Deaths and escalation: On 7 January 2026, Renée Nicole Good, a 37-year-old American citizen and poet, was shot and killed by an ICE agent during a federal operation. Weeks later, Alex Pretti, a 37-year-old ICU nurse who had been attending protests and filming enforcement activity, was fatally shot during a confrontation involving federal agents. Both deaths became symbols of what critics described as reckless enforcement tactics.
City and state response: Mayor Frey publicly condemned the federal operation, describing it as destabilising and dangerous, and demanded that federal agencies scale back their presence. Minnesota Governor Tim Walz echoed those concerns and held emergency talks with the White House. Following these discussions, President Trump adopted a noticeably softer tone toward Minnesota officials, and federal leadership changes followed, including the departure of Border Patrol commander Gregory Bovino from the Minneapolis operation. Tactical adjustments were also made, including efforts to reduce the visibility and intensity of armed patrols.
Public response: Protests in Minneapolis drew thousands of demonstrators despite freezing winter conditions. Marches, candlelight vigils and sit-ins were held outside federal buildings and city hall. Demonstrations spread nationally, with solidarity protests in cities such as New York, San Francisco and Chicago. Activists adopted the names of Good and Pretti as rallying cries demanding accountability and oversight.
Impact: Minneapolis has become the defining case study of Trump’s second-term enforcement strategy, triggering nationwide mayoral mobilisation, congressional scrutiny, federal leadership changes and a shift in public debate over ICE’s role in American cities.
Chicago (Illinois)
Mayor: Brandon Johnson (Democrat)
Federal targeting: Chicago has long been a sanctuary jurisdiction and was again placed under pressure as ICE expanded operations in the metropolitan area.
City response: Johnson issued an unprecedented executive order instructing Chicago police to document and investigate alleged misconduct by federal immigration agents, preserve body-camera footage and report potential violations of city and state law. The order was framed as a transparency and accountability measure rather than a refusal to enforce the law.
Public response: The move was welcomed by immigrant rights organisations and civil liberties groups, while conservative commentators accused the city of obstructing federal enforcement. Protests and neighbourhood monitoring efforts expanded following Minneapolis-related solidarity demonstrations.
Impact: Chicago’s actions signalled that large cities are willing to create institutional oversight mechanisms aimed directly at ICE behaviour.
Seattle (Washington)
Mayor: Katie Wilson (Democrat)
Federal targeting: Although Seattle did not experience a Minneapolis-style surge, growing concern over federal enforcement tactics prompted pre-emptive action by city leadership.
City response: Wilson issued an executive directive barring ICE and other federal immigration authorities from conducting civil enforcement on city-owned property such as parks, plazas and public facilities. She also ordered the Seattle Police Department to track reported ICE activity, verify federal agent identification when requested and document encounters using body cameras.
Public response: Immigrant advocacy groups praised the measures as protective and forward-looking. The Seattle Police Officers Guild criticised the policy, arguing it politicised policing and placed officers in difficult positions.
Impact: Seattle became one of the clearest examples of a mayor using administrative power to physically restrict federal enforcement space within city boundaries.
Los Angeles (California)
Mayor: Karen Bass (Democrat)
Federal targeting: Los Angeles experienced intensified workplace raids and coordinated federal enforcement actions, particularly affecting construction, hospitality and service-sector workers.
City response: Bass publicly condemned the tactics and expanded city-funded legal defence programmes. The city also launched large-scale ‘Know Your Rights’ campaigns and emergency legal advice centres in affected neighbourhoods.
Public response: Major protests involving labour unions, students, immigrant groups and faith organisations followed renewed enforcement actions. Demonstrations regularly drew thousands of participants.
Impact: Los Angeles reinforced its role as a national centre of organised resistance to federal immigration crackdowns.
San Francisco (California)
Mayor: Daniel Lurie (Democrat)
Federal targeting: Increased ICE activity in the Bay Area triggered renewed concern about courthouse arrests and targeted detentions.
City response: Lurie reaffirmed San Francisco’s sanctuary status, expanded municipal legal defence funding and issued directives strengthening coordination between city agencies and immigrant-support organisations.
Public response: Civil liberties groups organised protests and public forums, warning residents about enforcement activity and legal rights.
Impact: San Francisco remained a symbolic sanctuary stronghold while adapting operationally to increased enforcement pressure.
New York City (New York)
Mayor: Zohran Mamdani (Democrat)
Federal targeting: New York continued to face sustained political pressure because of its sanctuary framework and its large immigrant population.
City response: Mamdani reaffirmed sanctuary protections and backed proposals to restrict ICE access to sensitive locations such as schools, hospitals and municipal buildings. He also expanded city funding for immigrant legal services.
Public response: Large pro-sanctuary rallies were held in Manhattan and Brooklyn, while business groups and conservative organisations warned about potential federal retaliation.
Impact: New York’s stance reinforced the idea that major US cities are prepared to confront federal enforcement politically and legally.
Cities resisting detention centres and federal expansion
Kansas City (Missouri)
Mayor: Quinton Lucas (Democrat)
Federal targeting: Plans to site an ICE detention ‘warehouse’ near Kansas City sparked strong opposition.
City response: Lucas publicly opposed the detention centre, calling it harmful to community trust, and joined national coalitions of mayors filing legal briefs challenging aspects of federal immigration enforcement.
Public response: Community organisations organised protests, town halls and petitions opposing detention expansion.
Impact: Kansas City became a focal point in the debate over the growing network of immigration detention centres.
Denver (Colorado)
Mayor: Mike Johnston (Democrat)
Federal targeting: Denver faced scrutiny due to its migrant shelter programmes and sanctuary-style policies.
City response: Johnston challenged federal threats to penalise sanctuary jurisdictions and defended Denver’s approach as necessary to protect public safety and humanitarian obligations.
Public response: Rallies and community meetings were held in support of migrant protection policies.
Impact: Denver highlighted the financial and logistical pressures placed on cities managing migrant arrivals while facing federal enforcement criticism.
Southern and Sun Belt cities under enforcement pressure
Houston (Texas)
Mayor: John Whitmire (Democrat)
Federal targeting: Houston experienced sustained ICE activity due to its large immigrant population and proximity to the southern border.
City response: Whitmire adopted a cautious approach, supporting lawful enforcement while urging federal authorities to avoid aggressive tactics that inflame community tensions.
Public response: The city saw divided reactions, with immigrant organisations protesting raids and conservative groups calling for stricter enforcement.
Impact: Houston reflects the political tightrope faced by southern cities balancing federal pressure and local stability.
Atlanta (Georgia)
Mayor: Andre Dickens (Democrat)
Federal targeting: ICE expanded workplace and regional enforcement operations across metropolitan Atlanta.
City response: Dickens criticised the lack of coordination between federal agents and local authorities and warned of erosion in community trust.
Public response: Civil rights groups, churches and immigrant organisations organised legal aid drives and protest actions.
Impact: Atlanta shows how non-sanctuary cities are also affected by federal enforcement spillover.
Dallas (Texas)
Mayor: Eric Johnson (Republican)
Federal targeting: North Texas saw heightened scrutiny following violence linked to ICE facilities and enforcement activity.
City response: Johnson emphasised cooperation with federal authorities while expressing concern about public safety risks associated with enforcement-related unrest.
Public response: Political divisions surfaced, with competing demonstrations and media debate.
Impact: Dallas illustrates how Republican-led cities are also being drawn into the enforcement controversy.
Republican-led cities are also raising concerns about ICE tactics
Oklahoma City (Oklahoma)
Mayor: David Holt (Republican)
Federal targeting: While not subject to a large federal surge, Holt became a prominent national voice among GOP mayors.
City response: Holt warned publicly that tactics used in Minneapolis could be repeated elsewhere and stressed the importance of maintaining public trust and civic stability.
Public response: His remarks generated national attention and debate within conservative mayoral circles.
Impact: Oklahoma City demonstrates that concern over ICE tactics now crosses party lines.
Mesa (Arizona)
Mayor: Mark Freeman (Republican)
Federal targeting: Mesa’s long-standing cooperation agreements with ICE placed it in the national spotlight.
City response: Freeman defended structured cooperation while acknowledging community concerns and the need for oversight.
Public response: Divided reactions between enforcement supporters and immigrant advocacy groups.
Impact: Mesa highlights the internal tensions within Republican-run cities over federal partnerships.
Fresno (California)
Mayor: Jerry Dyer (Republican)
Federal targeting: Regional ICE activity affected Fresno despite its non-sanctuary status.
City response: Dyer criticised federal tactics and poor coordination, warning they undermine community trust.
Public response: Mixed reactions reflecting the city’s political and demographic diversity.
Impact: Fresno illustrates growing Republican mayors’ unease about federal enforcement methods.
Methodology
The research was carried out in late January / early February 2026
Sources used include
Associated Press: coverage of Minneapolis enforcement operations, protests and court challenges
Reuters: reporting on ICE expansion, Chicago mayoral actions and federal responses
Politico: reporting on Republican mayors criticising federal immigration tactics
CBS News: mayoral panel interviews on immigration enforcement and local government responses
The Guardian: coverage of Chicago, Minneapolis and sanctuary city reactions
PBS NewsHour: reporting on federal leadership changes and Minnesota legal challenges
Al Jazeera: coverage of Minneapolis protests and state-level reactions
Fox News: reporting on Seattle mayoral directives regarding ICE monitoring
Stateline: interviews with mayors describing ICE presence in their cities
The Immigrant Times: coverage of sanctuary cities
Further reading from The Immigrant Times: Immigration detention reaches record levels || Undocumented immigrants make America much richer || Trump favours immigrants with money over those with skills || American’s sanctuary states and cities ||
COMMENTS
FOLLOW