Exclusive: ICE agent cites sanctuary policies and protest interference as biggest fear after deadly Dallas shooting
New England ICE operative warns sanctuary jurisdictions and politically charged protests complicate deportations amid rising assaults on agents.
An immigration agent who works on deportations in New England described the biggest fear facing frontline officers as being unable to operate effectively in sanctuary jurisdictions, where protesters sometimes disrupt arrests. The remarks come after a deadly anti-ICE shooting in Dallas earlier this week and amid heightened demonstrations against immigration enforcement. In an interview with Fox News Digital, the agent said interference by protesters influenced by political rhetoric has become a routine challenge, with some local and state law enforcement agencies constrained by sanctuary policies. The result, they said, is a tense operational environment in which officers must balance safety with the duties of enforcement as crowds gather during a removal operation.
The agent indicated that the foremost fear is the possibility that third parties could mischaracterize an ICE operation as kidnapping or an attack on someone’s rights, prompting aggressive crowds to intervene and potentially endanger officers. They described scenarios in which a small team intends to detain a suspect but is met by a turning point in a crowd—where the situation could become violent or chaotic. The Department of Homeland Security has cited a sharp rise in assaults against ICE personnel, a trend the agent said is especially pronounced in sanctuary jurisdictions where local police involvement is not guaranteed.
In New England, the agent said some law enforcement agencies are reluctant to assist, and cooperation can vary based on location and the political climate surrounding each facility. “It’s very dependent on where that ICE facility sits, how it’s going to be treated,” they explained. The result is a stressful dynamic for agents who must execute warrants, conduct interviews, and determine alienage in environments where outside help is not consistently available.
The agent also framed ICE work as investigative within the bounds of federal law. They described their role as using tools such as search warrants, grand jury subpoenas, interviews, surveillance, and record checks to build cases, stressing that the job is not about fomenting violence. “I prove and disprove allegations; I have tools to do it. I have search warrants. I have grand jury subpoenas, I do interviews, I do surveillance, I do record checks, that's what I do. When you boil everything down in the simplest terms, I'm not trying to do riots,” the agent said.
Another moment of tension described in the interview involved a colleague explaining to a protester what ICE actually does with detainees. The protester reportedly warned that detainees would “disappear,” prompting the colleague to explain the due-process rights: detainees have the opportunity to call family, speak with a lawyer, and appear before a judge. The protester acknowledged not knowing all of that prior to the discussion.
The interview also touched on the broader political debate surrounding ICE. While some Democrats have criticized ICE’s tactics and accused agents of racially profiling or using heavy-handed methods, the agent defended the agency’s mission and emphasized that officers work within the law and with respect for due process. The discussion echoed a broader narrative in which immigration enforcement is increasingly entangled with political messaging rather than solely law-and-order concerns.
U.S. Attorney for Massachusetts described interference with ICE operations as disturbing and said it threatens arrests, underscoring that the legal process depends on orderly enforcement and the ability to proceed with investigations.
The remarks from the New England agent come as immigration policy remains a flashpoint in U.S. politics, with ongoing debates over sanctuary policies, border security, and the balance between public safety and civil liberties. The interview serves to illuminate the on-the-ground tensions that accompany enforcement decisions in jurisdictions with divergent approaches to immigration policy.
As officials, advocates, and communities continue to grapple with how best to handle immigration enforcement, the account from a frontline ICE agent provides a window into the daily realities faced by officers—a dynamic shaped by sanctuary laws, political rhetoric, and the potential for disruption during critical operations. The broader policy debate persists, with calls for reform and questions about how best to protect both public safety and due process rights for those subjected to deportation proceedings.