Letters to the Editor

ICE Activity

In response to the letter “Defund ICE” submitted by Anna Christensen in the Feb. 6, 2026 issue of the Beachcomber. It was a good attempt to pull at the heartstrings of the reader, but fails to include the following seven information points that will not only provide explanations, but also will, hopefully, reassure minority concerns:

1. “Random and ruthless federal enforcement actions”?

It is not random. Please know that ICE is already aware of who they intend to pick-up beforehand by data-driven methods to identify individuals for arrest. Through databases, surveillance and information sharing with law enforcement, they have specific names, addresses and workplaces before action is taken. There is no reason to feel unsafe if you have entered the U.S. legally. If anyone is picked-up by ICE in error, the vetting process will confirm legal citizenship and the person would then be released (that is part of what the term “due process” means). No one is just randomly picked up and put on a bus or a plane.

2. “State Sponsored Violence”?

Violence is always first initiated by the person ‘who chooses’ to not follow directions of ICE or law enforcement officers. We see that many times even for minor traffic stops where drivers refuse to cooperate by exiting their car, handing over their drivers license and proof of insurance, and end up being pulled out of their car and handcuffed. The use of force is only put into action with non-compliant offenders. The advice is “cooperate and follow directions”.

3. A Kafkaesque System to exert absolute social control?

That is a ridiculous notion. Under previous administrations, our open-door policy has completely ignored long-standing immigration laws that were put in place decades ago to keep our country from being overrun with people who are not citizens. Every country on Earth (the only exceptions being the Schengen area of Europe (Andorra, Monaco, San Marino, the Vatican, Liechtenstein and some Nordic areas). All maintain immigration at points of entry, and the United States needs to, also.

4. Children born here of an illegal alien parent/s:

In a situation where a woman or man enters the country illegally, later has a child born here, and then later the parent/s are deported (and yes, the child has a U.S. birth certificate, etc.), but what’s to be done with the child now? Does mommy and/or daddy want the child with them back in their country? Yes, of course. Would they rather leave the child with a relative or friend here in the U.S. without them? Probably, no. How does the child feel? Would a child want to stay here and be raised with by a relative or friend while mommy and/or daddy is sent back to their country? Definitely not. Would a child want to go with mommy and/or daddy wherever they go? Definitely yes. Maybe an age limit on a child would be the answer (i.e., children 20 years and under goes with the deported parent, and those 21 and older born here stays (21 being an age where they can support themselves but not eligible for welfare). What is clear and also ironic, is that the social-justice believers among us get upset when children are kept ‘with’ a deported parent, but if that same person was arrested at the time while sneaking across the border and has their child with them at the time, they get upset that the child is ‘separated’ from the parent (same goes if a U.S. citizen robs a liquor store and has their child with them. Of course the child gets separated so relatives or Social Services can temporarily take the child until a relative can be contacted. You can’t have it both ways. Believing that whatever is more advantageous for the criminal is the way to go, also goes against common sense.

5. Defund ICE?

Whether it’s basic law enforcement agencies or ICE, we instead, need to fully fund any department that ensures our laws, immigration laws, “all” laws, are upheld and enforced. Being against that is opening us all up for a martial law existence.

6. Demand basic human rights.

Yes, we are in favor of human rights. Those rights come to us from our citizenship in this country, our U.S. citizenship obtained “legally.” There is a difference. Christensen advocates for efforts to remove all federal immigration enforcement and not limit efforts regarding (among listed) ‘those with no criminal record’. Those entering illegally, when caught, now have a criminal record. Illegal, by definition, means ‘not legal’. By entering a country illegally, you are committing a crime. That fact seems to elude many. Through the media, the government has advised people that have entered illegally to avoid deportation by “self-deporting” (meaning exit the country on your own). Good advice.

7. None of us feel safe? Christensen doesn’t feel safe from deportation? My guess is that she (or her 42-year-old son she referred to with a U.S. birth certificate, drivers license and Social Security card) won’t be deported, nor the rest of us who are here legally.

I’ll end with this: Last summer, a Hispanic man who came to my house to remove a bee hive. Afterward, we got to talking, and he told me about his family. He said, “For people to sneak in is a slap in the face to my grandparents who did all the requirements several years ago, to come here legally and get citizenship.” And, yes, it was indeed, a slap in the face. Do the right thing, leave now and register to enter again “legally.” Legal immigrants (of any race) will always be welcome, by me, and the majority of us.

Patricia Kelly