>> Continued From the Previous Page <<
Other high-profile progressives wasted no time lining up behind him. Rep. Ayanna Pressley openly endorsed the idea in media interviews.
“I believe it should be abolished,” Pressley told MS NOW.
Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, who made abolishing ICE a central theme of her 2018 insurgent campaign, has never retreated from the position. Rep. Ilhan Omar also publicly promoted “Abolish ICE” on social media last fall, reinforcing the message that the progressive wing is not backing down.
For many Democrats, the strategy feels eerily familiar—and deeply concerning.
Veterans of the 2020 election remember how Democrats entered that cycle confident they would expand their House majority, only to lose at least seven seats after Republicans blanketed the airwaves with ads tying vulnerable incumbents to “defund the police.” The slogan became political poison in suburban and working-class districts, even for candidates who never supported it.
Now, centrist Democrats are sounding the alarm again.
The center-left think tank Third Way issued a stark warning, urging party leaders to shut down the “Abolish ICE” push before it metastasizes into another election-cycle disaster.
“The impulse is emotional. The slogan is simple. But politically, it is lethal,” the group wrote.
Third Way directly compared the movement to the post-George Floyd “defund the police” surge, noting how Republicans weaponized the phrase against Democrats in competitive races.
“Every call to abolish ICE risks squandering one of the clearest opportunities in years to secure meaningful reform of immigration enforcement — while handing Republicans exactly the fight they want,” the memo warned.
Adam Jentleson, a top aide to Sen. John Fetterman, was even more blunt. Any call to abolish ICE “is and always will be a political albatross,” he wrote.
Democrats don’t need to imagine how this plays out—they’ve already lived it.
After the 2020 election, Rep. Abigail Spanberger erupted during a closed-door call with fellow Democrats, blaming the “defund the police” rhetoric for nearly costing her re-election.
“Defund the police almost cost me my race because of an attack ad,” Spanberger said.
House Majority Whip Jim Clyburn echoed that assessment, saying the slogan devastated Democrat Jaime Harrison’s Senate bid against Lindsey Graham.
“That phrase — ‘defund the police’ — cost Jaime Harrison tremendously,” Clyburn told Axios.
Despite those warnings, progressives are again charging forward, convinced public opinion is on their side. They point to polls showing dissatisfaction with ICE’s operations. A Quinnipiac University survey found 57% of respondents disapproved of ICE’s performance, while CNN polling suggested more Americans believe ICE enforcement makes cities “less safe” rather than “more safe.”
But Republicans understand something Democrats repeatedly miss: elections are decided in swing districts, not activist Twitter feeds.
In those districts, calls to abolish a federal law enforcement agency sound extreme, destabilizing, and reckless—especially at a time when border security remains a top concern for voters.
History only sharpens that contrast. ICE was created in 2003 under the Department of Homeland Security in response to the failures exposed by the 9/11 attacks. While progressives argue the agency lacks accountability, many voters hear “abolish ICE” and conclude Democrats want no immigration enforcement at all.
Republicans have already proven how effective that message can be. In 2024, the GOP poured $741 million into immigration-related advertising, devastating Democrats in key races. Attacks tying candidates to abolishing ICE were a central theme—and party leaders are eager to run the same playbook in 2026.
Even within the Democratic caucus, divisions are growing. While some House Democrats call for body cameras and oversight reforms, others have escalated their rhetoric. Rep. Pete Aguilar accused ICE agents of “terrorizing people in the streets of this country,” while Rep. Angie Craig likened ICE operations to “the 1930’s in Germany” during an MS NOW interview.
Those statements may thrill the progressive base, but they are tailor-made for Republican attack ads.
Third Way warned Democrats that doubling down now would be self-inflicted political sabotage.
“It would be a tragedy built upon a tragedy if Democratic overreach allowed the inexcusable killing of Renee Good at the hands of ICE to be used to the advantage of Donald Trump,” the group wrote.
The warning appears to be falling on deaf ears.
Progressives are doubling down on a slogan that already failed once—and Republicans are more than happy to let them.
