"Our caucus members will oppose all funding for immigration enforcement in any appropriation bills until meaningful reforms are enacted to end militarized policing practices,” the caucus’s deputy chair, Ilhan Omar, who represents most of Minneapolis, told a press conference at the US Capitol.
“We cannot and we should not continue to fund agencies that operate with impunity, that escalate violence and that undermine the very freedoms this country claims to uphold.”
Pramila Jayapal, the top Democrat on the House judiciary subcommittee on immigration, said the caucus wanted provisions included in the homeland security appropriations bill that would prevent ICE agents from wearing masks, require warrants for them to make arrests and end the use of private detention facilities, which have been criticized for keeping detainees in squalid conditions.
“Because the abuses are so widespread and occur in so many different places, we have to address all of them,” Jayapal said.
The opposition from the progressives – who number about 100 members, all but one of whom are in the House – could complicate passage of the homeland security funding bill, which is still under negotiation between House and Senate appropriators. The legislation is one of 12 bills that Congress, which is controlled by the Republican party, must pass to fund the government, and is typically enacted with bipartisan support.
The top House Democrat, Hakeem Jeffries, echoed the progressives’ demands at a Monday press conference, saying: “Clearly, there are some commonsense measures that need to be put in place so that ICE can conduct itself in a manner that is at least consistent with every other law enforcement agency in the United States of America.”
On Tuesday evening, Democratic senators joined with hundreds of protesters outside the Washington DC headquarters of Customs and Border Protection, where they signaled support for using the homeland security appropriations bill to force changes at ICE.
“We must stop funding DHS and ICE thugs, and we must demand that ICE leave Minneapolis and other communities to prevent further escalation and tragic death,” Massachusetts’s Ed Markey told the crowd.
Chris Murphy of Connecticut was one of the first Democratic senators to back the strategy, and has described it as a way both to impose reforms on ICE and ensure that resources from other federal law enforcement agencies aren’t diverted to immigration enforcement.
"It is not too much to ask for the Congress to say this: if we are going to fund the Department of Homeland Security, we want to fund an agency that is simply complying with the law,” he told demonstrators.
Good’s death came after DHS agents fanned out across the Minneapolis area in an operation that was initially directed at its Somali community. Minnesota’s attorney general on Monday filed a federal lawsuit seeking to stop the operation, while Kristi Noem, the homeland security secretary, announced that hundreds more agents from ICE and other federal law enforcement agencies would be sent to the area.
Administration officials have defended the killing of Good, with Noem accusing her of “an act of domestic terrorism”.
The Democratic congresswoman Robin Kelly has announced she will file articles of impeachment against the homeland security secretary for “obstruction of justice, violation of public trust and self-dealing”.
Delia Ramirez, a member of the progressive caucus whose Chicago-area district was targeted by an ICE campaign last fall, said she supported impeaching Noem but argued for going further.
“We need to prosecute the criminals in masks. We need to cut and claw back ICE’s funding as natural consequences for DHS’s disregard for the rule of law and violations of our rights,” she said.
“We have to use every single tool, including the power of the purse, to end the campaign of terror.”
Or is he just a standard politician? Because AOC is a Democrat. Omar is a Democrat. Sanders is a Democrat.
Standard politicians are a bipartisan problem, and neither party has what can be considered a clean slate in context of all of American history.
•Following the civil rights movement, the majority of people who refused to pretend that a law righting a systemic injustice was somehow also forcing an unjust burden on society were mainly Democrats, but that was also because a lot of people switched parties due to Republicans embracing the southern strategy.
The Republican party at the time justified the use of the southern strategy to gain votes. Even though there were some Republicans who had legitimately previously supported desegregation, they ultimately decided winning an election was more important than their own values.
•Before the civil war, southern Democrats were primarily the main supporters of slavery and claimed states rights should allow them to continue slavery even after it was abolished. Many southern Democrats actually switched to the Republican party following the Republican party’s embrace of the southern strategy.
•Since 2025, the Republican party has been weaponizing the federal government to stir up a second civil war, while also undoing what they claim are allegedly “unfair burdens to society and communities.” They claim the civil rights act caused these “unfair financial burdens” by forcing public schools to obey the civil rights laws that were created to address discrimination. (It’s a bullshit argument, but it’s especially fucking dumb when you’re also shutting down the department of education, and all other federal resources available to the schools you claim are being unfairly burdened. However, since the actual goal is to destroy America, why expect anything to make any fucking sense).
They are also using the civil rights act as a shield to do other bullshit (like demanding states hand over voter registration rolls along with last 4 digits of ssn and drivers license numbers) by claiming it grants the federal government sweeping authority and the right to strip away autonomy from state and local governments.
Aside from the fact that anyone should sort of inherently understand the difference between a federal government justifying intervening at a state or local level to protect equality for all of it’s citizens (bc if a government isn’t doing this, then why the fuck do you think it’s supposed to exist in the first place?) vs intervening to undo those protections, and violate the constitutional rights and privacy of all of it’s citizens. This passive aggressive bullshit also really glosses over the fact that the modern day conservative movement including the roots of Project 2025, can be boiled down to the supreme court and federal government finally telling wealthy individuals who ran private segregation academies, fine, you can continue to discriminate and be shitty but we can’t keep giving you tax exemption while you do it. You have to pick one or the other.
Two things wealthy people in this country hate more than anything else: 1. Being told they can’t be rewarded for discrimination and 2. Paying their fair share of taxes like everyone else.
And so began the past 50+ years of advertising lies, disinformation, and culture wars which brings us right back into the absolute stupidity that is present day America, and once again on the brink of a civil war.
To this very day, the wealthiest people who continue to exploit and bleed America and all Americans dry while destroying our constitutional rights, civil rights, and civil liberties along with our standard of living, will gladly dump insane amounts of money into an advertising campaign spreading lies and misinformation, in order to fight the “unjust burden” of just paying their fucking taxes and being told they have to follow the law like everyone else.
Sanders is literally not a Democrat.
…🐶…