January 9, 2026 – Grok data on the number of state and city officials who have spoken publicly against ICE; likely hundreds of such officials have done so

In Email/Dossier/Govt Corruption Investigations, Featured Timeline Entries by Katie Weddington

Grok’s question: How many state and city officials across America have spoken publicly against ICE and are there any video examples on X?

Grok’s answer: It’s challenging to provide an exact count of state and city officials who have spoken publicly against ICE (U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement), as “public statements” can range from formal declarations and policy announcements to protest participation or media comments, and no comprehensive centralized tally exists. However, based on available data, at least dozens—and likely hundreds—of such officials have done so, particularly in the context of supporting sanctuary policies that limit local cooperation with ICE. For context:

Over 500 jurisdictions (including cities, counties, and states) have enacted sanctuary policies or publicly declared opposition to full ICE collaboration, implying that their elected leaders (e.g., mayors, governors, council members) have voiced criticism or non-cooperation.

States like Illinois, New York, Oregon, New Jersey, and California have laws or directives restricting ICE access, with governors and attorneys general publicly defending these stances to suppress arrests.

In contrast, states like Florida, Texas, Louisiana, and Georgia mandate cooperation, leading to higher ICE activity.

Specific incidents highlight clusters of officials speaking out: For example, more than a dozen New York state and city lawmakers (including senators, assembly members, and the city comptroller) were arrested during a 2025 protest demanding oversight of ICE detention practices, where they condemned the agency.

Governors like Tim Walz (Minnesota) and Kathy Hochul (New York) have criticized ICE operations as “a war” on their states or refused to allow “snatching people off the streets.”

Mayors in cities like Chicago, Denver, and Boston have faced threats of prosecution from federal officials for their opposition.

Broader trends show resistance growing amid Trump administration policies, with officials in non-cooperating areas (e.g., Illinois, Pennsylvania, New York) achieving lower ICE arrest rates compared to cooperating states.

Public declarations against ICE are a key characteristic of sanctuary jurisdictions, per federal definitions.

Video examples:

Yes, there are multiple video examples on X of officials criticizing ICE. Here are a few notable recent ones (from 2025-2026):

These examples often tie into broader calls to abolish or reform ICE, with some dating back to earlier years but many amplified recently amid enforcement surges.

***

Details on sanctuary cities (At link)

Calls To Abolish ICE

The “Abolish ICE” movement calls for the complete elimination of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), a federal agency established in 2003 under the Department of Homeland Security. Proponents argue that ICE is a relatively new entity (not essential to U.S. immigration enforcement, which existed prior via other agencies), functions as a “rogue” or militarized force responsible for human rights abuses, family separations, deaths in detention, racial profiling, and unaccountable tactics. They propose redistributing its responsibilities (e.g., investigations to other agencies, enforcement reformed or reassigned) to create a more humane system. The slogan gained traction in 2018 amid family separation policies but has seen renewed momentum in 2025–2026 under the second Trump administration’s mass deportation efforts, militarized raids, and high-profile incidents.

Recent Surge in Calls (2025–2026)

Public support has risen sharply, driven by enforcement surges and controversies like the January 2026 fatal shooting of Renée Nicole Good (a 37-year-old U.S. citizen) by an ICE officer in Minneapolis. This incident sparked nationwide protests, vigils, and renewed demands to abolish the agency.

Polls show support climbing: A Civiqs poll indicates 42% of Americans now support abolishing ICE (up from ~20% in late 2024), with 50% opposed. A January 2026 YouGov poll found 52% disapprove of ICE overall (39% approve), with disapproval of its tactics at high levels.

Protests erupted in cities like Nashville, Louisville, Chicago, Minneapolis, and Providence, with demonstrators chanting “Abolish ICE” and holding signs condemning the agency as violent or terrorist-like.

Advocacy groups (e.g., Asian Americans Advancing Justice-Atlanta, CASA, We Are Casa) renewed calls, citing deaths, militarization, and billions in funding for what they describe as state violence.

Some academics and commentators (e.g., University of Iowa professor Victor Ray) framed abolition as a “moderate” position, with extreme rhetoric calling for accountability trials.

Here are examples of protest visuals from rallies calling to abolish ICE:

Key Politicians and Officials Advocating Abolition

The call has been prominent among progressive Democrats, with some introducing legislation or statements.

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (U.S. Representative, NY): A longtime advocate; made it central to her 2018 campaign and continues fundraising/advocating amid recent events.

Rashida Tlaib (U.S. Representative, MI): Posted “Abolish ICE now” on X following the Minneapolis shooting.

Shri Thanedar (U.S. Representative, MI): Announced plans to introduce the “Abolish ICE Act” in January 2026, calling ICE irreformable.

Robin Wonsley (Minneapolis City Council Member): Called for ICE to be “abolished altogether.”

Peggy Flanagan (Minnesota Lt. Governor): Stated the current ICE model should be thrown out.

Historical/ongoing: Elizabeth Warren, Bernie Sanders, Kirsten Gillibrand (all endorsed in 2018+); others like Pramila Jayapal, Mark Pocan (co-sponsored 2018 abolition bill).

Some officials (e.g., Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey) have harshly criticized ICE (“get the f— out”) without explicitly calling for full abolition, while others push reforms like warrants for arrests or defunding.

The movement faces internal Democratic tension—some moderates view the slogan as politically risky (blamed for electoral losses)—and strong opposition from Republicans, who portray it as anti-law enforcement. Calls often tie into broader demands for accountability, including investigations into recent deaths and restrictions on ICE funding. The debate remains heated, with public disapproval of ICE at record highs amid ongoing enforcement. (Grok, 1/9/2026)