Protesting ICE at Broadview
- Alexander Lang
- 22 hours ago
- 8 min read
Updated: 11 hours ago
Over the last few months, I have participated in protests with my pastoral colleagues at the Broadview ICE facility in Illinois. I have joined them because I believe strongly that the actions of ICE (Immigration and Customs Enforcement) have crossed a line between enforcing laws and committing sanctioned civil rights violations.
After presenting evidence to support this claim, we’ll examine some historical analogs for how the sacrifice of civil liberties constitutes a critical yield point in our democracy. Finally, I want to discuss the protests themselves and why this moment represents one of the most important tests of my Christian faith.
Crossing the Line
In the latest spending bill, congress appropriated $170 billion for immigration enforcement. Within this package, ICE's budget was raised to approximately $29 billion, making it the highest-funded federal law enforcement agency.
The Trump administration’s reason for this marked increase is the belief that illegal immigration in the United States is out of control. Not only are these undocumented migrants taking American jobs, but more importantly, the majority are violent criminals who threaten the safety and security of our communities.
ICE is ostensibly focused primarily on rounding up these illegal immigrant criminals and deporting them back to their home countries. Those who are going through the process of legal immigration are supposedly spared this fate. Unfortunately, the data shows that 65 percent of people arrested by ICE have no convictions and 93 percent no violent convictions.
Many have been arrested during check-in procedures required by the courts for seeking legal status through the proper channels. In other words, immigrants are being arrested even though they are navigating legal pathways to citizenship.
Dragnets of Racial Profiling
Perhaps even more disturbing are the methods by which ICE is making these arrests. In many instances, rather than arresting a specific individual, they are arresting large groups. Once processed in an ICE detention facility, they determine who should and should not be released.
The criterion for these arrests is clearly ethnicity. This is evidenced by the fact that 170 United States citizens have been arrested in these raids. One such example is George Retes, a US Army Veteran who was beaten and arrested during a dragnet operation at a legal cannabis farm in California where Retes is employed.
When this error came to light, the Department of Homeland Security later claimed Retes assaulted ICE agents and refused to comply. If this was true, he would have been charged with assault. However, Retes was released with no charges because there was no evidence supporting their claim as helicopter footage captured the entire incident.
Once in the ICE detention facility, Retes was strip searched and placed in cell. He requested to make a phone call and to speak to a lawyer. Both requests were ignored. Retes was thrown in a cell. When he requested a shower to wash off the tear gas and pepper spray that was burning his skin, the ICE officers said he would get over it. Three days later, when they realized their error, Retes was released.
Retes sought restitution for assault, false imprisonment and damage to his vehicle, but as federal law enforcement, ICE officers have near total immunity from any legal recourse. The only mechanism of enforcement would be charges brought by the Department of Justice, which in the current environment, will never happen.
A Lesson from History
Even if you subscribe to the narrative that illegal immigration is a major problem in the United States, arresting people en masse based on racial profiling with no due process is not only unconstitutional, but also sets a dangerous precedent.
This was the exact strategy utilized by the Nazi regime. Beginning in 1933, the German Gestapo was created to enforce anti-Jewish laws passed by the Nazi party. The initial goal was to intimidate German Jewish citizens to such a degree that they would be inspired to self-emigrate away from Germany to another country.
They did this by passing the Law for the Restoration of the Professional Civil Service in 1933, which dismissed Jews and other “non-Aryans” from government jobs. It was followed by numerous decrees banning Jews from various professions, including law, medicine, teaching, and journalism.
Hitler passed these laws because he knew they would play well with his base who believed that Germany had not only lost WWI because of the Jews, but they also blamed the Jews for the economic ruin of Germany. The erosion of the civil liberties was tacitly accepted by the non-Jewish citizenry for the sake of “solving” this problem.
This sounds incredibly familiar when you consider how Trump has named illegal immigration the collective scapegoat for all the ills facing the United States. Beyond ICE, there are commercials on television (see below) where the Secretary of Homeland Security, Kristi Noem, is encouraging immigrants to self-deport back to their homeland. Trump’s desire to dismiss any career civil servant from the federal government who is not loyal to his cause is also a direct parallel.
What history teaches us is the moment a country releases their collective grip on civil liberties in service to the elimination of a perceived threat, that’s the same moment fascism steps in to become the law of the land.
The Pontius Pilate Analogy
Jesus lived in a time where the civil liberties of the Jewish people hung in the balance. As a province of the Roman Empire, Judea was known for being difficult to control. This is exactly why Pontius Pilate was assigned to govern Judea.
Appointed prefect over Judea in 26 C.E., Pilate arrived in Jerusalem carrying standards of the emperor’s image (The Jewish War 2.9.2-3). Rather than defer to Jewish religious custom, Pilate placed votive shields on the walls of his palace (Philo, On the Embassy to Gaius (Legatio ad Gaium), Sections 299–305).
When Pilate was informed that Jerusalem’s aging aqueduct system required repair, rather than raise taxes, he robbed the Temple treasury to pay for the construction. When Jews gathered to protest this decision, Pilate sent a detachment of soldiers to blend in with the crowd and murder the protestors in the street (The Jewish War 2.9.4).
Pilate was no friend of the Jews and detested his assignment to this remote corner of the Roman Empire. Where Pilate seemingly enjoyed his job was having the authority to sign death warrants for those found guilty of high crimes against the state.
Pilate becomes an integral figure in the gospels as the judge overseeing Jesus’ trial for treason. Pilate is portrayed in the gospels as being very sympathetic to Jesus’ plight. However, we know from historical evidence outside of the Bible that this is unlikely. For instance, in 36 C.E. the Samaritans lodged grievances with Vitellius, legate of Syria, complaining that Pilate was putting his subjects to death without holding a trial (The Antiquities 18.4.2).
Therefore, the likelihood that Pilate even held a trial for Jesus is extraordinarily low. If Jesus did go to trial, you can be sure that Pilate never took the time to defend Jesus as is commonly portrayed in the gospels. The point I’m trying to make is that there was no due process. Pilate hated the Jews so much that anyone who came before him was presumed guilty.
This is not unlike the Trump administration’s attitude towards immigrants living in the United States. Just as Pilate viewed the Jews as a problematic people who needed to be put to heel, the attitude of our government is that migrants are a blight that need to be eradicated from the United States.
Action vs. Inaction
When I was in 5th grade, a 7th grade bully on our bus targeted my childhood friend, Mike. This bully would harass and threaten him. One day, the harassment was particularly egregious. Rather than speak up, I just sat there and let it happen. As we exited the bus, I remember Mike turned to me with watery eyes, “Why didn’t you defend me?”
For years, his words echoed in my mind. Why didn’t I stand up for him? Honestly, I was scared I would become the object of the bully’s attention, so I said nothing.
This instinctive cowardice is what people who abuse power depend on to maintain control. They assume that most people, even if they disagree, will be too afraid or too apathetic to let their voice be heard for fear of becoming a target themselves. This is true whether we’re talking about the Emperors of Rome, the Chancellor of Germany or the President of the United States.
I have always looked back on that day in 5th grade with immense shame for not defending my friend. Yet, what I have discovered is that shame is not enough to inspire courage. If you didn’t defend your friend in 5th grade, you likely won’t defend him as an adult.
Courage is similar to the physics of inertia: the natural tendency of objects in motion is to stay in motion and objects at rest to stay at rest. Unless a force causes its velocity to change, the object will remain in a static state. Humans are no different. If you are not used to raising your voice when you see injustice, then the likelihood of that spontaneously changing is low.
One has to be intentional to go from a state of rest to a state of motion. In my experience, this happens by taking small chances that build our confidence. When the protests against ICE began at Broadview, I was reticent to get involved. My mind filled with excuses: I work on Fridays. I live too far away. I don’t want to get hurt.
What was the force that changed my intertia? When I found out my close colleagues, Rev. Quincy Worthington and Rev. David Black, were leading the charge, I realized I needed to support them in their efforts. See their interview on MSNBC below.
I will admit that I was anxious attending my first protest. The pictures and videos of ICE officers firing tear gas into the crowds, macing protestors and shooting pepper balls made me nervous. Gasmasks were recommended.
My goal was to sit back and observe. I wanted to understand the emotions of the crowd and how the protests functioned. There was definitely a frenetic energy. Hundreds of protestors from every religious and secular background you could imagine.
That particular day, Kristi Noem, the Secretary of Homeland Security, visited the Broadview ICE facility. As a publicity stunt, she stood atop the building next to a prone sniper aiming at the crowd.
The second time I returned, I brought friends with me so they could observe. Each time I return, I feel more comfortable using my voice. On my latest trip, a reporter from Le Point magazine in France interviewed me along with other pastoral colleagues about our thoughts on the protests and the detention of migrants.
What I have come to realize is that fighting tyranny requires a long, sustained effort. One protest is not enough. Ten protests will not be enough. It will only be enough when families are no longer being torn apart.
Conclusion
Have you ever asked yourself the question: If I was alive in Nazi Germany during the Holocaust, would I have participated in the resistance effort by hiding Jews or would I have been complicit in the Nazi efforts to eradicate the Jews either by doing nothing or actively participating in their demise?
I think most of us would like to believe that we would have acted on behalf of those who were being persecuted, but the historical reality is very few people acted.
Today there are government sanctioned civil rights violations happening all around us. People are being taken off the streets never to be seen again. If you’re not raising your voice now, you wouldn’t have raised your voice back then.
You might argue that we are in a very different kind of situation. You’re right, we’re not in the Germany of 1939. We’re in the Germany of 1933. We’re at the beginning and, as someone with Hungarian Jewish ancestry whose extended family died in the Holocaust, I'm acutely aware of how we are on the precipice of a very slippery slope.
My faith directs me to stand up and give voice to those who do not have one.
I hope you will join me so that when your grandchildren ask, “What did you do when immigrants were being taken from the streets never to be heard from again?”
You can say, “I protested. I raised my voice, and I let my government know in no uncertain terms: This is unacceptable, un-American, undeniably wrong.”