Democratic Governor Declares War On ICE

Border patrol agents inspecting group of individuals in line.

New Jersey’s Democratic governor just created a state-run surveillance system to track and report federal immigration agents—turning everyday residents into informants against law enforcement officers doing their jobs.

Story Snapshot

Governor Mikie Sherrill announced an online portal for New Jersey residents to upload videos and images of ICE agents conducting operations
Sherrill urged citizens to “get your phone out” and film federal agents, comparing ICE to “secret police”
The portal mirrors similar initiatives in New York and California, escalating state resistance to federal immigration enforcement
State Democrats frame the move as transparency and accountability, while critics see obstruction of federal law enforcement

A State-Sanctioned Informant Network Against Federal Agents

During a Wednesday night appearance on Comedy Central’s The Daily Show, Governor Sherrill unveiled her administration’s plan to create what amounts to a state-run tracking system for federal immigration agents. The portal will allow New Jersey residents to upload photos and videos of ICE operations throughout the state. Sherrill’s message was direct and unambiguous: if you see ICE agents on the street, pull out your phone and start recording. The state wants to know where federal law enforcement officers are conducting their legally authorized operations. This represents an extraordinary escalation in the conflict between Democratic-led states and federal immigration enforcement.

Framing Federal Agents as the Enemy

Sherrill employed inflammatory rhetoric in her announcement, characterizing ICE agents as operating like “secret police” and accusing them of detaining individuals without proper documentation or transparency. She cited incidents involving U.S. citizens and even a five-year-old child allegedly detained without clear legal justification. Her spokesperson, Sean Higgins, emphasized the administration’s priority of “keeping New Jerseyans safe”—a curious formulation that positions federal law enforcement as a threat to state residents rather than criminals living illegally in the country. The framing reveals how thoroughly this administration has embraced sanctuary-state ideology, treating immigration enforcement itself as the problem rather than illegal immigration.

Following the Blue State Blueprint

New Jersey is not pioneering this approach. New York Attorney General Letitia James launched a similar portal in October, designed to review uploaded videos for potential ICE violations. California followed in December with its own reporting system. What distinguishes Sherrill’s initiative is its explicit encouragement of active surveillance and filming of federal agents. While grassroots immigrant advocacy groups have long operated informal alert networks, this represents formal state government machinery dedicated to monitoring and potentially obstructing federal operations. The state plans to review submissions for possible legal violations, positioning itself as an oversight body with authority to second-guess federal enforcement actions.

Legislative Support and Expanded Restrictions

Assemblywoman Annette Quijano issued a statement the day after Sherrill’s announcement, applauding the portal as an important step toward transparency and accountability. Quijano has sponsored legislation prohibiting ICE agents from concealing their identities during operations and restricting state investments in companies providing immigration surveillance technology. Acting Attorney General Davenport plans to announce additional protective measures alongside the governor. The coordinated effort reflects a comprehensive state strategy to hamstring federal immigration enforcement through multiple mechanisms—technological, legislative, and bureaucratic. The question reasonable citizens should ask is why their state government views protecting illegal immigrants as a higher priority than cooperating with federal law enforcement.

The Constitutional Conflict Nobody Addresses

The portal raises profound questions about federalism and state obstruction of federal law enforcement that Sherrill and her allies conveniently ignore. Immigration enforcement represents a core federal responsibility, not a state prerogative. While states can certainly decline to actively assist federal operations, actively surveilling and tracking federal agents crosses into territory that looks remarkably like interference. Imagine if a Republican governor created a portal to track FBI agents investigating January 6th participants or ATF agents conducting firearm inspections. The outcry from Democrats would be deafening, with accusations of obstruction and lawlessness dominating headlines. The double standard is glaring. Federal agents enforcing immigration law deserve the same respect and operational security afforded to any other law enforcement officers.

Who Benefits and Who Pays

Sherrill positions the portal as protecting vulnerable communities and preventing federal overreach. The reality is less noble. The initiative protects individuals living in the country illegally from the consequences of their unlawful presence. It creates an environment where immigration enforcement becomes practically impossible, transforming New Jersey into a sanctuary state in all but name. Law-abiding citizens who followed legal immigration processes receive no special protections or portals. Neither do victims of crimes committed by illegal immigrants. The social impact favors one group—those violating federal immigration law—at the expense of public safety and the rule of law. The political calculation is transparent: solidify support among immigrant advocacy groups and progressive activists while federal immigration policy remains a contentious issue.

The Precedent and the Future

If this model spreads beyond New York, California, and New Jersey, federal immigration enforcement will face systematic obstruction across blue states. The long-term implications extend beyond immigration. State governments tracking, filming, and creating dossiers on federal agents conducting lawful operations establishes a dangerous precedent. What prevents future administrations from applying this approach to other federal enforcement priorities? The portal represents Democratic resistance to the Trump administration’s immigration policies, but the mechanism could easily be repurposed for other political objectives. Details about the portal’s launch remain forthcoming, but the direction is clear: New Jersey intends to make federal immigration enforcement as difficult, dangerous, and monitored as possible within its borders. Common sense suggests this ends poorly, with either federal preemption or escalating confrontations between state and federal authorities.