MILLER: ICE, ICE baby

As I write this, multiple news outlets have reported that the Immigrations and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agency is preparing to deploy its Special Response Teams to five major US cities, including Chicago, in the very near future. 

Chicago Mayor Brandon Johnson’s chief of staff Cristina Pacione-Zayas told reporters last week: “There will be tactical teams, mini-tanks, other tools they use in which they plan to do raids, as we saw in Los Angeles.”

Last Thursday, Department of Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem explained to reporters in Los Angeles the reasoning behind the massive federal response to sporadic violent protests against ICE in that city: “We are not going away,” Noem said. “We are staying here to liberate the city from the socialists and the burdensome leadership that this governor and that this mayor have placed on this country and what they have tried to insert into the city.”

In other words, according to Noem, the federal government intends to “liberate” those Americans from their own duly elected state and local governments. 

Immediately after Secretary Noem said that, California US Senator Alex Padilla was forcibly dragged out of her media event by federal police and handcuffed when he identified himself and attempted to address Noem.

This “liberation” argument will undoubtedly be front and center in Chicago and Illinois if and/or when Noem’s ICE fully deploys into the city.

Thursday night, a three-judge federal appeals panel put on hold an order by a district court judge hours earlier that would’ve forced the federal government to relinquish control over 4,000 National Guard troops deployed to Los Angeles.

Federal law (10 USC 12406) allows the president to federalize state national guards whenever he is “unable with the regular forces to execute the laws of the United States.” 

A hearing was scheduled on the lower court ruling, but it’s possible, perhaps even probable that we can expect the same attempt at federalizing our Illinois National Guard troops.

Gov. JB Pritzker said during a congressional committee hearing last Thursday that he would “stand in the way” of Trump border advisor Tom Homan, “going after people who don’t deserve to be frightened in their communities, who don’t deserve to be threatened, terrorized. I would rather that he came and arrested me than do that to the people of my state.”

But there may not be a whole lot the governor can do when push literally comes to shove. 

And not just this governor.

Because of ICE’s heightened presence in California, the National Guard issue and even the deployment of US Marines, Gov. Gavin Newsom is the first line of defense for sanctuary states like Illinois, New York, etc. 

Newsome filed the lawsuit to stop the federalizing of National Guard troops in his state. The governor and the Los Angeles mayor have both claimed that sending in the National Guard has inflamed the local situation. But, if President Donald Trump can maneuver himself into anything which he can convince himself is a “win,” then this tactic will surely continue. 

“They don’t get [that governing is] not like the black and white of campaigning” said one person close to Gov. JB Pritzker about the Trump White House. “They are living on election night. And now they are creating a whole lot of chaos and lighting themselves on fire on an issue they had an advantage on.”

But, holding out hope that Gov. Newsom will be an effective firewall against this expansion of traditional presidential powers has its perils.

Political writers love writing about the guy, probably because he’s good-looking and a bit of a showboating goofball. Newsom makes for great copy and visuals, but his methods aren’t always sound. 

Earlier this month, Newsom suggested via social media that the state could withhold $80 billion in federal payments – equal to the difference between what the state receives from the federal government and what its taxpayers send to DC. It’s a great soundbite, but it simply can’t be done. State governments don’t give money to the feds, taxpayers do.

“Tweeting is not policy,” explained a Newsom spokesperson two years ago when his governor tweeted that the state was “done” doing business with Walgreens after the pharmacy chain announced that it wouldn’t distribute an abortion pill to customers in states that were trying to block it. Newsom was forced to back away in the face of reality. 

This is the same Democratic governor who fawned over President Trump after the devastating southern California fires only to be denied federal help. 

He’s the same guy who President Trump said ought to be arrested last week. 

That’s some firewall.

Rich Miller also publishes Capitol Fax, a daily political newsletter, and CapitolFax.com.