After the first session I posted an article providing a summary of the first two sessions that I had done at Fountain Street Church about the History of US Immigration Policy. In Part I, I provided an immigration policy overview since the US was founded through the current Trump Administration.
In Part II, I talked about the importance of asking the question about the root causes of people fleeing their country to come to the US, particularly those entering the US through Mexico. I presented a brief historical overview of US military and economic interventions in Central America from the mid-19th century til today. I talked about how the US sent the Marines to invade many of those countries, plus the history of US funded and military training for the counterinsurgency wars in the 1970s and 80s, followed by some analysis of the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) and the Central American Free Trade Agreement, also known as CAFTA.
In Part III of the History of US Immigration Policy this past Sunday, I focused heavily on the anti-immigrant narrative or the xenophobic narrative(s) about immigrants that politicians and US news media companies use when talking about undocumented immigrants.
For decades now, there have been certain narratives about immigrants, especially undocumented immigrants, narratives that are false. Despite these false and unsubstantiated narratives, politicians parrot them, and most commercial news agencies perpetuate them. Here are a few of the more dominant false anti-immigrant narratives:
- Immigrants take jobs fro real Americans
- Immigrants drive down wages
- Immigrants don’t pay taxes
- Immigrants are a drain on the US economy
It is important that we create accurate narratives to counter these false narratives, so let’s do that for each of these 4 dominant anti-immigrant narrative. Much of what I am sharing here comes from an excellent book by Aviva Chomsky, They Take Our Jobs! and 20 other myths about immigration.
In the fourth and last session that I did on the history of US immigration policy at Fountain Street Church I focused on the history of immigration detention, using two chapters from Silky Shah’s book, Unbuild Walls: Why Immigrant Justice Needs Abolition.
The author provides us with a clear understanding of the evolution of immigrant detention in the US. One point that is critical to understand was that immigrant detention was an outgrowth of the further criminalization of Black communities after the Civil Rights era. Shah writes in Chapter 1:
“Since the 1980s, a combination of economic restructuring and increasing tough-on-crime policies have produced devastating results: the highest rates of incarceration in the world and the greatest number of deportations in US history.”
The author notes that immigration detention essentially began during the Reagan Administration in the 1980s. Shah argues that immigrant detention centers were meant as a deterrent for Central Americans that were fleeing by the thousands during the US funding counter-insurgency wars at that time. The detention of undocumented immigrants were mandatory, with the belief that it would minimize the number of undocumented immigrants crossing in to the US at the southern border. While the Immigration Reform and Control Act (IRCA) passed in 1986 and provided amnesty to 3 million undocumented immigrants, new undocumented immigrants were criminalized, with the administration using language that would demonize anyone coming to the US without papers.
The growth of mass immigrant detention continued during the Clinton years, with the adoption of more Neoliberal economic policies, like the end of welfare, which took away basic safety net resources to economically desperate population, including undocumented immigrants. In addition, several states were adopting policies to further criminalize immigrants, like with Prop 187 in California in 1994. The author goes on to say:
“Both the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act (AEDPA) and the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act (IIRAIRA) were passed that year. Together they changed the paradigm on immigration to one that emphasized citizenship rather than residency and laid the legal foundation for the expansion of the deportation machine that emerged following 9/11.”
The George W. Bush administration continued the further criminalization of undocumented immigrants, especially after 9/11 with the creation of the Department of Homeland Security in 2002 and the creation of Immigration Customs and Enforcement (ICE) in 2003. ICE was created with complete bipartisan support.
With the creation of ICE, which a more militarized version of the INS, this increased the number of immigrant detention centers around the country, which fit within the framework of the War on Terrorism. The Obama Administration continued much of the same criminal immigrant framework when he took office in 2009.
According to the author, the Obama Administration made the immigration system bigger and more effective, but not in a good way. His administration created new programs and partnerships and increased family detentions and creating the Secure Communities program, which got county sheriff departments involved in immigration enforcement, like what happened in Kent County in 2012.
The Obama Administration was referred to as the “Deporter in Chief”, since he deported more immigrants (3.5 million) during his tenure, which was the most at that time for any administration.
Lastly, the author makes the point, stating: “the Obama administration expanded and set up a powerful machinery for Trump to exploit by plugging in the detention and deportation system much more closely to criminal law enforcement across the country.”
As I mentioned in week #1, with the slide presentation I did, the history of US immigration policy, with all of the xenophobia and white nationalism, has been a bipartisan policy.
Monitoring the Rich and Powerful in Grand Rapids – Segment #7: DeVos on DeVos, downtown development projects and GR Chamber bedfellows
One of the 10 principles of journalism is that it must serve as an independent monitor of power.
Now, I don’t claim to be a journalist, more of a media watchdog, but I do engage in movement media. Movement media is reporting and documenting what social movements are doing, which is what I have been trying to do with GRIID since 2009.
However, since I have been monitoring what I call the Grand Rapids Power Structure for nearly two decades, it seems like a good idea to do a regular Monitoring the Rich and Powerful in Grand Rapids segment.
The Monitoring the Rich and Powerful in Grand Rapids segments will offer brief commentary on those who have power over others in this community. These segments will not replace my regular reporting on the Grand Rapids Power Structure, since those stories will offer more in depth writing.
As we navigate a second Trump Administration it seems like a perfect opportunity to shed some light on the rich and powerful of Grand Rapids, or to frame it the way that radical media from the 60s and 70s would do regarding the Capitalist Class, using the phrase, “up against the wall motherfucker!”
For Segment #7 I wanted to share 4 short examples of how the rich and powerful continue to wage war against the rest of Grand Rapids, while making sure they increase their own wealth and status.
First, on November 21st, the Grand Rapids Chamber hosted a forum with Consumers Energy entitled, POWERING GRAND RAPIDS’ FUTURE PRESENTED BY CONSUMERS ENERGY.
The forum was framed around the issues like energy and business growth, data centers and AI. Essentially, the GR Chamber of Commerce was providing Consumers Energy a platform, where the legitimacy of the monopoly energy company would go unchallenged. We know that Consumers Energy has jacked up the cost of electricity several times in recent years making to cost of electricity too expensive for thousands of families along in Kent County. In addition, Consumers Energy loves to influence state politicians to make sure that the energy industry is not regulated sufficiently to protect customers. According to a report by Bridge Magazine, 70% of all Michigan lawmakers are taking money from utility companies, which is exactly why there is a ballot initiative to to address this issue.
It is disgusting that the GR Chamber of Commerce has partner with Consumers Energy to promote business growth while ignoring consumer cost and political influence at the state level.
A second example is from a WOODTV8 post from November 19th, where the Amway Grand Plaza announced that the DeVos-owned coffee house known as Foxtail will be replacing the Starbucks in that hotel in the Spring of 2026. Channel 8 reporter failed to mention that the Amway Grand Plaza is also owned by the DeVos family and is part of their AHC Hospitality company that runs hotels resorts and restaurants.
A third example is from GR& Riverfront, the entity that promotes downtown development projects. In August I did a deconstruction of the awful music video this group produced, but they are back again with yet another terrible music video that not only promotes the numerous downtown development projects, it comes across like thirteen year old’s poem that is naive and self-absorbed.
Speaking of downtown development projects, a fourth example is from Crain’s Grand Rapids Business on November 13th with the headline, Grand River emerges as catalyst for new wave of downtown development, executives say.
The article feature several construction company spokespersons talk about the development projects they are involved in along the Grand River in the downtown area. The comments reflect much optimism, which tracks, considering how much money these construction companies are making from these projects, with a great deal of the funding coming from the public.
There were also several real state companies featured in the Crain’s article with the likes of Sam Cummings, a managing partner of CWD Real Estate Investment and member of the GR Power Structure. Cummings was not only talking about his 111 Lyon Street project, but a second building conversion project at the Ledyard Building, “where he’s seeking incentives for plans to turn three floors of the historic building into 36 apartments.” Sam loves it when public incentives (code for public money) are involved, since it allows him and his partners at CWD – Cummings, Wierda and DeVos – to expand their wealth so they can control more real estate in this city.
As billionaire Warren Buffet once said, “There’s class warfare, all right, but it’s my class, the rich class, that’s making war, and we’re winning.”
Editor’s note: For transparency sake I am a member of the core team for GR Rapid Response to ICE.
Most people are aware of all of the awful ways in which ICE is terrorizing immigrants throughout the country, especially in cities like Chicago, which the Trump Administration has targeted for immigration enforcement. There is no shortage of videos and article detailing the harm that ICE is doing, along with how communities are responding.
What people in West Michigan might not know is that the same kind of harm commitment by ICE is happening right here in Grand Rapids. As someone who has been directly involved with GR Rapid Response to ICE I wanted to share a concrete example of how ICE harms people in this community, along with how the community has responded.
In early September, GR Rapid Response to ICE received a call from a Guatemalan mother of five, who’s husband had just been picked up by ICE. The family from the southern part of Guatemala had been in Grand Rapids for the last 4 years, living in the Burton Heights area.
Clara, who had recently given birth to their fifth child told a person who answered the GR Rapid Response to ICE hotline that her husband had just been picked up while on his way to work. Picking up people after they leave their house and are in a vehicle seems to be the preferred way for ICE to apprehend immigrants who are on their list. Clara told GR Rapid Response to ICE volunteer that her husband had already been taken to an ICE detention facility, specifically the GEO Group ICE Detention Center, also know as the North Lake Prison in Baldwin, Michigan.
Clara was now forced to raise her five children all by herself, at least for the immediate future. GR Rapid Response to ICE found out that she was not employed, did not know how to drive, didn’t have a driver’s license and didn’t know how she was going to be able to support her family. In the majority of ICE arrests they take the primary income earners, leaving families is a deep economic bind.
GR Rapid Response to ICE put out a Mutual Aid request as soon as they received the information about Clara’s husband and shared it on social media. Three days later I delivered the money to Clara, enough to pay for rent, plus groceries, utilities and doing laundry at a nearby laundromat.
The family was renting a small apartment on the second floor just off of Burton St. When I went to see Clara she invited me into the apartment, where I met all five of her children, with the oldest two being in elementary school. As is customary for indigenous people from Guatemala, Clara was a gracious host who seemed to be doing as well as can be expected from someone who had their husband kidnapped by ICE. The children were also friendly and curious about who I was. Indigenous Guatemalans are small and Clara stood at 4 ft 6 inches, weighing less than 100 pounds. After taking a seat, one of the older children said to me, “do you know where my daddy is?”
Too often we don’t think about the level of trauma that families endure when I takes someone, especially how children are impacted by trauma. Family separation for children will often have a lifelong impact, even if the consequences don’t manifest immediately.
While talking with Clara I learned what part of Guatemala she and her husband were from, which was a part of the country that I had been do, but had not spent a lot of time there. She smiled when I told her I had been to that part of her country, which seemed to make her more relaxed by my presence. In addition to bringing her money GR Rapid Response to ICE had raised I asked her if there were other needs. She promptly told me that one of her children had a dentist appointment the following week, so I wrote down the details and was able to find one of the many volunteers with GR Rapid Response to ICE who was able to transport her and her children to that appointment.
Over the next few weeks, Cosecha and GR Rapid Response to ICE were able to deliver diapers on several occasions, more money to cover the next months rents and transportation for another dentist appointment. When I brought more funds a second time Clara told me that her husband was being deported back to Guatemala. After a brief moment of silence, she then told me she had no reason to stay in Grand Rapids and wanted to go back home to be with her husband.
Over the next few weeks Cosecha helped her get the necessary documents she needs to fly back to Guatemala. Clara sold her husband’s truck, which was enough to cover the costs of plane tickets, but she asked if we could cover the cost of sending back several boxes of her children’s clothing so they would not return home with just the clothes on their backs. GR Rapid Response to ICE put out another Mutual Aid request and within two days we were able to cover the shipping costs.
Once we knew the date for her flight that was leaving from Chicago, GR Rapid Response to ICE was able to find volunteers who could provide safe transportation to Chicago and make sure she and her five children got on the plane safely, especially since ICE activity in Chicago was cause for concern.
On Saturday morning, Clara and her five children flew back to Guatemala where they would be reunited with their father and Clara’s husband. Cosecha and GR Rapid Rapid Response to ICE made this happen, because that is what these groups do, they support members of the affected community who are harmed by ICE.
As a member of GR Rapid Response to ICE I want to acknowledge everyone who contributed money, shared the Mutual Aid request on social media, those who donated diaper, those who provided transportation and those who made sure that the family got to the airport safely. We often say, “This is what community looks like.”
At the same time, no family should have to experience this kind of trauma and violence at the hands of ICE agents and an oppressive detention system. This is why we need to resist ICE, so we don’t have to continue to request community support for immigrant families who have been harmed by ICE. Take a future GR Rapid Response to ICE training, get involved in the resistance, contribute to Mutual Aid requests and support the work of Movimiento Cosecha with your time, your solidarity, and your money. La Lucha Sigue!
More evidence that Rep. Scholten votes in favor of systems of power and oppression
On Friday, Rep. Scholten voted for a resolution that was introduced by Cuban-American Rep. Salazar from Florida.
Scholten voted for resolution H.Con.Res.58, also known as Denouncing the horrors of socialism. This resolution harkens back to McCarthyism, using half-truths and associating socialism with all evils in the world. Everyone really ought to read the resolution and see how ridiculous it is, not to mention that every Republican voted for it.
However, this is not the first time that Rep. Hillary Scholten voted for a resolution to condemn socialism, as she voted for the GOP proposed resolution first introduced in 2023, during the Biden Administration. At least she consistently votes for awful resolutions.
Perhaps Rep. Scholten might want to read about what the fundamental principles of socialism are by reading Bhaskar Sunkara’s important book, The Socialist Manifesto: The Case for Radical Politics in an Era of Extreme Inequality, Understanding Socialism, by Richard D. Wolff, or The Case for Socialism, by Alan Maas.
In the end it would appear that Rep. Scholten is merely wanting to appease the more Republican voter base in West Michigan, which so often equates socialism with fascism, when in fact capitalism is a necessary component of fascism, as Professor Wolfe explains in the video below.
Protection for me, but not for thee: Senate Slotkin gets round the clock police protection
For the entire time that Elissa Slotkin has been a politician in the federal government, beginning in 2019, there have been millions of undocumented immigrants living in constant fear for their lives.
Undocumented immigrants have been living in fear of being arrested by police for driving without a license or for simply being racially profiled and asked by cops to see some ID. Undocumented immigrants are afraid, they are afraid to drive, to go to the grocery store, the pharmacy or to drop their kids off at school.
Since the beginning of this year, when President Trump issued his Executive Order to arrest, detain and deport an estimated 11 million undocumented immigrants, those immigrants have been living in constant fear, since they have a target on their backs. The Trump Administration has been using the National Guard in cities like Los Angeles, Chicago, Washington DC, Charlotte and now likely New Orleans to engage in mass arrests of undocumented immigrants.
In the Greater Grand Rapids area Movimiento Cosecha and GR Rapid Response to ICE have been responding to increased calls of ICE sightings or ICE arrests, which has resulted in over 100 people that they know of who have been taken by ICE, with most of them being in detention, while others have already been deported. Family separation is real and it is a constant.
During this entire time, Senator Slotkin has not stood in solidarity with those 11 million undocumented immigrants. The Michigan Senator has not called for the abolition of ICE nor the abolition of ICE detention facilities, both public and private. Senator Slotkin has not called for an end to deportations nor has she encouraged the good people of Michigan to rise up against ICE terrorism and communities of faith to declare themselves sanctuaries for undocumented immigrants. In fact, the only position Senator Slotkin has taken on this matter is to propose weak legislation that requires ICE agents to not cover their faces.
However, as soon as Senator Slotkin was called a traitor by President Trump earlier this week, the Michigan Senator now has round the clock police protection. According to MLive, “She said the U.S. Capitol Police told her they would put her on 24/7 security. She said there was law enforcement in front of her house.” Well, this is nice for Senator Slotkin, but what about the 11 million undocumented immigrants?
Undocumented immigrants will never receive police protection, especially since cops are cooperating with ICE daily to arrest and detain these same immigrants. Senator Slotkin uses her privilege as a white politician, which gives her access to the news media to make whatever statements she wants and to demand police protection 24/7. The fact that Senator Slotkin has done nothing to protect millions of undocumented immigrants from arrest, detention and deportation, while being the target of verbal threats, demonstrates she isn’t interested in practicing solidarity with undocumented immigrants, she only wants to protect her own ass. Where I come from, we name call that person a coward.
Community demands answers from the Kent County Sheriff about their cooperation with ICE and complicity in separating immigrant families
During the lunch hour, around 15 people with Movimiento Cosecha and GR Rapid Response to ICE entered the Kent County Sheriff’s office to engage in a disruption action, since these groups have learned that the Sheriff’s office is collaborating with ICE by putting holds on immigrants who have already been bonded out of the Kent County Jail.
Two weeks ago, a similar action took place at the Kent County Sheriff’s office, where the Sheriff did not come out, instead one of her underlings spoke with those who were demanding answers.
During this action people were chanting loudly to disrupt business as usual at the Sheriff’s office, using chants like ICE and Cops go hand in hand, No Hate No Fear Immigrants are welcome here, and Up Up with Liberation…Down Down with deportation.
After about 20 minutes of chanting the Kent County Sheriff, Michelle LaJoye-Young, did come out to speak with those who were involved in the disruptive action. The Sheriff initially said that if we wanted to hold a silent vigil and peacefully protest, then we were welcomed to stay. Someone from GR Rapid Response to ICE said that they were here two weeks ago to demand some answers, and the Sheriff responded that she was not told about our presence two weeks ago.
The Sheriff was asked to give a simple response to the question, “Is the Kent County Sheriff’s office cooperating with ICE, by engaging in ICE holds with immigrants who have already been bonded out of the jail.” The Sheriff said that if we wanted answers that we should set up an appointment with her to meet. Cosecha uses the tactic of public meetings/conversations to make sure that politicians do not say one thing in private and another thing in public.
The Sheriff went on to say, “this is a place of business and I have other obligations right now.” Someone asked if they could just respond to the questions about ICE holds. Again, the Sheriff said that if we want to have a conversation that we needed to make an appointment. She went on to say that she did not have time to talk with us right now and that she was not going to speak with us because we would just take excerpts of what she said and spin it.
The Sheriff then said that we needed to be quiet or we will be asked to leave. A Cosecha organizer then shared what the Sheriff had said, followed by inviting people to chant once again. The Sheriff then came back out to the lobby, this time with two large cops and demanded that people leave or they would be arrested. Everyone slowly walked out of the building, still chanting until they were all outside.
Now, I was under the impression that the Sheriff’s office was not a business and that they existed for public safety, which is what we were all taught about cops in 8th grade civics class. In addition, they are supposed to work for us, since they are public servants, a sentiment that we were also taught in school. Those who live in Kent County and pay taxes here, pay for their salaries, which make their work in the public sphere. Despite what we were all taught, cops exist to enforce the laws created by those with power and privilege, laws there generally protect property and those with more power and privilege.
Last year I reported that Kent County Sheriff Michelle LaJoye-Young was re-elected and ran unopposed during the November 2024 election. Despite running unopposed, she raised $131,531.39, with the majority of her campaign contributions coming from the DeVos family and other members of the local power structure. It seems clear to me that she represents their interests and not that of the most vulnerable in Kent County.
Movimiento Cosecha also made it clear that this action at the Kent County Sheriff’s office was part of the larger sanctuary policy demands that they have been working on since the beginning of the year.
Michigan State Legislators have passed bills that will allow them to have police protection and conceal their home addresses
Last week, the Michigan State House and State Senate voted to adopt HB 5505, which will provide increased security for state legislators.
Michigan legislators have their own police force at the Lansing State Capitol, but now they will be able to have those same security officers to protect their families, even when they are in public and not at work as state legislators.
A recent MLive article entitled, Why Michigan lawmakers are beefing up their own security force as political violence surges, where several state lawmakers are justifying these decisions to use their own police force.
House Speaker Matt Hall was cited as talking about the Minnesota legislators that were killed in June, along with the killing of Charlie Kirk. The MLive article then states:
Michigan has seen threats against politicians as well, including recent bomb threats to the homes of state Sen. Jeremy Moss, D-Southfield, and Lt. Gov. Garlin Gilchrist. Hall’s office also pointed to protesters demonstrating outside the home of state Rep. Angela Rigas, R-Caledonia, last month.
This paragraph is talking about bomb threats against elected officials, but then says, “Hall’s office also pointed to protesters demonstrating outside the home of state Rep. Angela Rigas, R-Caledonia, last month.” For the MLive reporter to conflate bomb threats with people showing up at the home of Rep. Rigas is patently absurd. I say this, because I was a participant in the protest outside of Rep. Rigas’s home. This protest was a non-violent protest, where people came to the home of Rep. Rigas because she co-sponsored legislation that would criminalize anyone providing assistance/support to undocumented immigrants. During that protest people chanted and a few knocked on her door to have a conversation about her co-sponsorship that would punish people for being in solidarity with undocumented immigrants. Since Rep. Rigas refuse to talk with people, they left a document for her to sign on the front door.
In addition, state legislators also passed a bill to conceal their employment, property addresses and other personal information from public view, according to a separate MLive article. State legislators argued that concealing this information is a direct response to threats against politicians.
While I don’t doubt that some politicians are concerned about their safety, there are several reasons why I believe that the public is unhappy with state legislators. First, when activists or other organized efforts to engage politicians at the state level, rarely are state legislators present. More often than not people only have an opportunity to speak with staff of elected officials and they generally just take down people’s comments and concerns, but never address the reasons why people show up to the offices of elected officials.
Second, more and more elected officials do not hold in person public meetings, which minimizes any chance for people they represent to directly engage these politicians. When they do hold public meetings it is always organized to benefit the politicians. Quite often people have to register to attend a public meeting with a legislator and only then will the location of the meeting be revealed. Once the meeting starts, most politicians talk at length about what they are doing before allowing the public to speak. When the public finally gets a chance to speak they often have to write their questions on a card, which allows the staff of legislators to screen questions.
Third, the lack of availability to the public as stated in the previous points, while important, are not as significant as the issue that more and more people believe that politicians do not represent their interests, or worse, they are passing bills that will do harm to their constituents. This was exactly why people showed up to the home of Rep. Rigas, because she co-sponsored legislation that would criminalize acts of solidarity and compassion directed at undocumented immigrants.
People are pissed and disillusioned with electoral politics, especially when it seems to primarily perpetuate business as usual. And when I say business as usual I mean politics that serves the interest of the rich and not the majority of people. State legislators can pass all the bills they want to protect themselves, but the best way for state legislators to reduce public outrage directed at them would be to adopt policies that benefit working class people and families.
What are the Sanctuary policies that Cosecha and GR Rapid Response to ICE are demanding from Grand Rapids and Kent County: Part IV
This is the fourth in a series that will further examine the various sanctuary policies that Movimiento Cosecha and GR Rapid Response to ICE are demanding that the City of Grand Rapids and the Kent County Commission adopt.
In Part I, I looked at the policy that allows officers to provide assistance to federal immigration authorities when there is an emergency that poses an immediate danger to public safety or federal agents. In Part II, I looked at policies that would prevent local governments from entering into a contract with the federal government to hold immigrants in detention. Kent County used to have a contract with ICE that began in 2012, a contract you can read here. In Part III, I looked at policies that could prevent immigration detention centers from being established in Grand Rapids or Kent County.
Today I want to look at two policies that are connected, since they both have to do with local government bodies sharing information with ICE. The first is a policy restricting the police or other city/county workers from asking about immigration status. The second is a policy that will not allow the GRPD or the Kent County Sheriff’s office to share Flock camera images or any other information gathered by the city of Grand Rapids with ICE or any other law enforcement agency seeking to arrest, detain and deport immigrants.
Demanding that the City of Grand Rapids and Kent County staff not ask people about their immigration status seems like an easy demand. Why would they ever have a reason to ask people what their immigration status is? Both the City and the County have repeatedly said that immigration matters are left to the federal government and federal agents. If this is the case, then agreeing to the demand that they not ask people their immigration should be a no brainer and yet, both the City and the County have ignored this demand.
The other demand has to do with the Flock cameras that are located in Kent County, with the majority of them within the City of Grand Rapids. I reported on the exact locations of the Flock cameras within the City and the County, which you can find in this article.
To be clear, Flock cameras are being used throughout parts of the US to provide license plate information to Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) officials/agents. Now that we know the Flock camera location in the GR area, people who are vulnerable to ICE might consider alternate routes and destinations.
Automated License Plate Readers (ALPRs) are a threat to your privacy and civil liberties. They’re regularly used to track everyone’s movements without a warrant, probable cause, or reasonable suspicion. Law enforcement agencies use them for various purposes, no matter how unethical, including ICE raids and tracking abortion seekers across state lines.
The Kent County Sheriff’s Office first began using the Flock camera technology in the Spring of 2022. According to a recent article on 404 Media, Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) is now using what are called Flock cameras to obtain license plate numbers to track down undocumented immigrants.
Using the Flock technology provides an additional tool to be used by the Kent County Sheriff’s Department, the GRPD and other local law enforcement agencies to assist ICE in hunting down those who are undocumented and those that the administration are targeting, regardless of immigration status.
It is well know that ICE is constantly using numerous types of technology to track undocumented immigrants, such as:
- ICE uses systems like FALCON, Investigative Case Management (ICM), and the forthcoming AI-powered ImmigrationOS platform developed by the company Palantir to aggregate data from various sources. These platforms pull information from government databases, including passport records, Social Security files, IRS tax data, and driver’s license data, to identify patterns and flag individuals for potential enforcement action.
- ICE agents use mobile apps like “Mobile Fortify” that allow them to photograph individuals in the field and check their images against federal databases in real time. ICE has also purchased software from companies like Clearview AI and uses iris scanning technology.
- ICE is expanding its efforts to monitor social media platforms like Facebook, TikTok, and Instagram, using AI-powered tools and contractors to generate leads for investigations and deportation raids.
- ICE has contracts for spyware like “Graphite” from Paragon Solutions, which can remotely access data, location, and encrypted messages from smartphones without the user’s knowledge or consent.
What Movimiento Cosecha and GR Rapid Response to ICE are demanding is that the City and the Kent County not share Flock camera images with ICE agents to track undocumented immigrants and to not allow City or County staff to ask people about their immigration status. These demands might seem insignificant, but for members of the affected community it is vitally important that they know that local governments are not sharing information with ICE about immigration status for those who live and work in the area, along with not sharing the Flock camera images with ICE under any circumstances.
Senator Slotkin prefers to use cops as a tool of state carceral violence as opposed to the US military in US cities
Last week Michigan Senator Elissa Slotkin introduced a bill called the No Troops in Our Streets Act of 2025, SB 3167. Slotkin announced the bill in a speech at the Brookings Institution and used it as an occasion to blame Trump for soling making the decision to use US troops in cities across the country.
This proposed legislation from Senator Slotkin states in part that with a majority vote members Congress can prohibit US military personnel (including the National Guard) from being deployed domestically.
Seems like reasonable idea, but one question I have is, why now? The US Congress has supported the use of US Military personnel, especially the National Guard, to be used throughout US history, particularly to suppress popular struggles within the US. Some examples have been to suppress labor strikes, such as the Ludlow Massacre, along with National Guard troops being deployed against Black-led uprisings in numerous US cities in the 1960s (see Elizabeth Hinton’s book, America on Fire: The Untold History of Police Violence and Black Rebellion Since the 1960s) all the way up to 2020 during the George Floyd protests, even right here in Grand Rapids, Michigan. Thus, deploying US Military personnel in US cities has a long and bipartisan history.
However, the more important aspect of Senator Slotkin is proposing in her No Troops in Our Streets Act of 2025, is that the Michigan Senator wants the federal government to provided additional funding to local police departments across the country to. “fight crime in American communities,” according to Press Release from Slotkin on November 13th.
Senator Slotkin not only wants to provide additional funding to cops around the US, she is proposing $1 Billion in funding for police departments. Here is the breakdown of funding in Senator Slotkin’s proposed bill:
(1) $600,000,000, to remain available until expended, for the Edward Byrne Memorial Justice Assistance Grant program as authorized by subpart 1 of part E of title I of the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968 (34 U.S.C. 10151 et seq.) (except that section 1001(c), and the special rules for Puerto Rico under section 505(g), of title I of that Act shall not apply for purposes of this Act);
(2) $150,000,000, to remain available until expended, for a community violence intervention and prevention initiative; and
(3) $50,000,000, to remain available until expended, for emergency law enforcement assistance, as authorized by section 609M of the Justice Assistance Act of 1984 (34 U.S.C. 50101), to support any of the purposes specified in section 501 of the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968 (34 U.S.C. 10152), of which the President may direct not greater than $10,000,000 per law enforcement emergency, as defined in section 609N of the Justice Assistance Act of 1984 (34 U.S.C. 50102), with the approval of the chief executive of the State and locality, to support State and local law enforcement.
(b) Community-Oriented policing hiring.—In addition to amounts otherwise appropriated, out of any money in the Treasury not otherwise appropriated, for fiscal year 2026, there is appropriated $100,000,000, to remain available until expended, for grants for the hiring and rehiring of additional career law enforcement officers under section 1701 of the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968 (34 U.S.C. 10381).
It is instructive to see that Senator Slotkin’s response to the Trump Administration’s deployment to cities like Los Angeles, D.C., Chicago and now to North Carolina, is to just increase the funding for police departments, which essentially act as occupying forces in urban communities. It’s also worth noting that Senator Slotkin has not denounced ICE in Chicago or other cities for kidnapping people and acting as an additional police force targeting immigrants.
Senator Slotkin states that the $1 Billion in funding for cops is to fight crime, even though there is no evidence of increased crime in the US, especially violent crime. In fact, the last FBI report released in August of this year states that violent crime has decreased by 4.5% from the previous year.
Lastly, why isn’t Senator Slotkin proposing massive funding to meet people’s basic needs instead of funding the cops? Slotkin’s proposed legislation is not only deeply problematic, she demonstrates that liberals are equally committed to state carceral violence as the Republicans are.
History of US Immigration policy sessions at Fountain Street Church: Part III- Countering anti-immigrant narratives
Last week I posted an article providing a summary of the first two sessions that I had done at Fountain Street Church about the History of US Immigration Policy. In Part I, I provided an immigration policy overview since the US was founded through the current Trump Administration.
In Part II, I talked about the importance of asking the question about the root causes of people fleeing their country to come to the US, particularly those entering the US through Mexico. I presented a brief historical overview of US military and economic interventions in Central America from the mid-19th century til today. I talked about how the US sent the Marines to invade many of those countries, plus the history of US funded and military training for the counterinsurgency wars in the 1970s and 80s, followed by some analysis of the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) and the Central American Free Trade Agreement, also known as CAFTA.
In Part III of the History of US Immigration Policy this past Sunday, I focused heavily on the anti-immigrant narrative or the xenophobic narrative(s) about immigrants that politicians and US news media companies use when talking about undocumented immigrants.
For decades now, there have been certain narratives about immigrants, especially undocumented immigrants, narratives that are false. Despite these false and unsubstantiated narratives, politicians parrot them, and most commercial news agencies perpetuate them. Here are a few of the more dominant false anti-immigrant narratives:
- Immigrants take jobs fro real Americans
- Immigrants drive down wages
- Immigrants don’t pay taxes
- Immigrants are a drain on the US economy
It is important that we create accurate narratives to counter these false narratives, so let’s do that for each of these 4 dominant anti-immigrant narrative. Much of what I am sharing here comes from an excellent book by Aviva Chomsky, “They Take Our Jobs!”and 20 other myths about immigration.”
Immigrants take jobs from real Americans – In one sense, the idea that there are American jobs is somewhat meaningless, especially since the economy is increasingly a global economy. More importantly, immigrants to take jobs away from anyone, they actually do work that so few are willing to do. If we look at migrant worker jobs, where people are doing seasonal work, primarily outdoors, under harsh conditions, and for very little money, to claim that immigrants are taking migrant jobs from real Americans is ridiculous.
A narrative that we should be thinking about and promoting is, corporations take our jobs. As I have noted in previous articles, NAFTA had a huge impact on Mexican workers, but it also impacted jobs in the US. Grand Rapids was impacted by de-industrialization since the 1970s, which escalated with NAFTA being adopted in 1994. According to data compiled by Public Citizen, since NAFTA, Michigan lost over 168,000 jobs (21.3 percent) because companies had relocated. Corporations and their pursuit of profits take our jobs, not immigrants.
Immigrants drive down wages – This false narrative is similar to the first one, in that immigrants have no control over wages. Business owners and corporations set low wages and they don’t care who takes their shitty jobs. The fact that undocumented immigrants take low paying jobs has more to do with their level of desperation to support themselves, but because many of them send money back how to family members still living in their country of origin. In addition, if there was more class solidarity amongst working class people, which included a push to invite undocumented immigrants to be part of labor unions, then they might be able to improve wages for immigrants and everyone else who should earn a livable wage.
Immigrants don’t pay taxes – This might be the most absurd of the false anti-immigrant narratives. First, if people are employed and receive a paycheck, federal, state and local taxes are automatically taken out of your paycheck. The majority of undocumented workers obtain fake social security numbers, in order to find employment. However, when federal, state and local taxes are taken out of their paycheck, they can’t claim them. So what happens to the tax money taken out of undocumented worker checks? Those taxes stay in the coffers of state and federal governments. The reality is, if undocumented immigrants are part of the formal economy, they have taxes taken out, but they can’t claim them. This is why this false narrative is so awful. Can you imagine if average American workers who were paying taxes, were unable to claim those taxes? There would be an uprising amongst the working class.
Immigrants are a drain on the US economy – This false narrative is tied to the previous narrative about immigrants not paying taxes. Undocumented immigrants do pay into the system through taxes, but don’t have equal access to resources and services available to those with government sanctioned immigration status. The area that undocumented immigrants use more government services than everyone else are food assistance programs such as food stamps, WIC, and free or reduced-cost school lunches. However, it’s not the immigrants themselves who use this aid – they are not usually eligible – but rather their US-born children, who are citizens.
When we have clear and well substantiated counter-narratives to the false anti-immigrant narratives being tossed about by politicians and perpetuated by commercial news media, we can contribute to reducing the hate and harm being directed at the undocumented immigrant communities.
Grand Rapids Institute for Information Democracy 