Sanctuary States Are Manufacturing the Crisis—Then Blaming ICE for Cleaning It Up

SANCTUARY CITIES ARE RUNNING AN EXCELLENT DISINFORMATION CAMPAIGN AGAINST ICE AND THE CITIZENS OF THE USA

In the battle over immigration enforcement, truth has become the first casualty. The American public is being fed a steady diet of emotional headlines about so-called “innocent” immigrants swept up in broad ICE operations—portrayed as victims of a rogue agency run amok. But the uncomfortable truth is this: the very sanctuary policies championed by states like Massachusetts are directly responsible for the chaos that ICE is now being forced to clean up.

Let’s break it down. When ICE lodges a detainer request with a local jail—asking them to briefly hold an individual suspected of being in the country illegally—sanctuary jurisdictions routinely refuse. They release the individual back into the public, often without any notice to ICE. That targeted arrest, once possible in a controlled environment, now becomes a field operation. ICE must deploy agents to track and re-apprehend the individual at home, at work, or in traffic—exposing the public, and the agents, to unnecessary risk.

And here’s where the disinformation campaign kicks in.

During those operations, other individuals in the country unlawfully may be present—roommates, coworkers, acquaintances. When ICE encounters them, they too may be detained and processed for removal. These are the so-called “collateral arrests” that the media uses to paint ICE as indiscriminately rounding up peaceful families.

But let’s be clear: these arrests are not collateral damage of ICE policy—they are the direct consequence of state and local officials obstructing lawful federal enforcement.

Sanctuary politicians like Governor Maura Healey of Massachusetts love to posture as defenders of human rights, while quietly ensuring that known criminal aliens are released from custody without federal oversight. When ICE responds with broader enforcement measures, those same politicians express moral outrage and demand investigations—into ICE, not themselves.

This is a shell game of accountability. The sanctuaries create the fire, then criticize the firefighters for using too much water.

What’s worse, the media—eager for viral outrage—rarely reports the origin of these enforcement operations. We’re told about the father of four detained outside a high school, but not that ICE was there trying to re-arrest a convicted rapist released from jail two days prior. We’re shown tearful families, but not the fact that the real disruption began when local authorities broke their legal and moral contract with federal law.

It’s not just deception—it’s engineered narrative warfare.

Americans need to understand that ICE isn’t escalating randomly. It’s being forced to adapt in hostile terrain. When local jurisdictions refuse to cooperate with detainer requests, the result isn’t “humane” immigration policy. The result is uncertainty, danger, and more aggressive enforcement carried out in public view.

And perhaps that’s the point.

If sanctuary leaders can generate enough footage of ICE officers in riot gear and crying children, they can rally support for dismantling federal enforcement altogether. They can blame Washington for doing what local politicians refused to allow quietly: uphold the rule of law.

Let’s be clear: the real cruelty isn’t that ICE is enforcing immigration law. The real cruelty is that state and city officials are deliberately sabotaging it—then pointing the finger at the agency cleaning up the mess.

We can and should debate immigration policy. But we cannot allow elected officials to manufacture crisis and then weaponize it against federal institutions. Sanctuary states are not protecting immigrant communities—they’re using them as political human shields.

And ICE? ICE is doing its job, because someone has to.