Portland activists are pushing back on Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) as the agency escalates its aggressive detainment and deportation of immigrants, including people seeking asylum and those who have established legal status to be in the US. But over the past few weeks, as protesters have faced off with federal agents at nightly demonstrations at Portland’s ICE facility, some advocates have been divided on the best way to deal with the agency’s presence in the city. 

During protests at ICE’s field office on South Macadam Avenue, activists chant “ICE out of Portland”— and they mean it. As of June 23, nearly 15,000 people have signed an online petition calling for Portland City Council to appeal and revoke the conditional use permit that allows ICE to operate a holding center in the South Waterfront. Those calling for the permit to be revoked say ICE’s local operations are harmful to the neighborhood and conflict with Portland’s status as a sanctuary city. 

Others have warned that pulling ICE’s permit in Portland is unlikely to result in fewer raids and arrests, but it could lead to unintended consequences for people who are detained by the agency. 

Both groups are up against the powerful and well-resourced federal government, which is currently intent on arresting as many immigrants as possible in order to meet absurdly high quotas established by the Trump administration. In the face of such a Goliath, many advocates hope to avoid infighting among people with similar intentions. But with so much at risk, the discourse has revealed philosophical differences that may prove difficult to resolve. 

“ICE out of Portland!”

In 2011, city leaders approved ICE’s application to move its offices and holding facility from a former site in Northwest Portland to its current location in the South Waterfront. Initially, a city hearings officer had rejected the agency’s application to include a detention center at its South Macadam building, citing safety concerns. On appeal, however, Portland City Council gave ICE the green light to build the holding facility—with conditions. The permit’s conditions include a requirement that no detainees be held at the facility overnight or for more than 12 hours. 

This isn’t the first time activists in Portland have attempted to get the ICE facility’s permit revoked. In 2018, protesters reacted to President Trump’s family separation policy by camping out at the building for weeks, leading what would become the national Occupy ICE movement. The Occupy ICE protesters also called on Portland City Council to revoke ICE’s permit to use the building. Their demand wasn’t heeded, with city leaders saying they didn’t have the legal grounds to rescind the permit, but seven years later, the protesters’ message has made a comeback. 

Susan Anglada Bartley, who created the online petition and has long advocated for the ICE permit to be revoked, said she is hopeful the story will end differently this time around. She credited the anti-ICE organizers, who she said are working strategically to get the agency out of Portland. 

“I feel like we have a chance to actually accomplish this goal and close this detention center because of the way that a lot of the [activists] are organizing,” Anglada Bartley told the Mercury. 

Anglada Bartley’s partner, Pedro Anglada, is another longtime anti-ICE activist who wants to see the Portland facility’s closure. He says while the “long-term goal is to abolish these institutions and not have these detention centers anywhere,” activists want to do what they can to get in ICE’s way. 

“This place facilitates ICE to be able to do the arrests, the raids, the violence. It facilitates their work, which we know is based on violating human rights, and allows them to do it swiftly,” Anglada said. “For the time being, the absence of this detention center will make it very difficult for ICE to conduct arrests or raids.” 

But not everyone agrees the facility should close—at least, not right now. Skeptics include leaders at several local immigrant advocacy groups, who say closing Portland’s facility would not make it more difficult for ICE to conduct raids and arrests in Oregon. This is in part due to the agency’s current detainment quotas, but also because closing the Macadam office wouldn’t be a major disruption for the agency, as ICE can conduct business elsewhere. But, some say, it would make it more difficult to track and advocate for people who are detained.  

Advocates in this camp also emphasize that the Portland ICE facility is not a “detention center,” despite its capacity for short-term holding. 

Asylum Seeker Solidarity Collective (ASSC) PDX, a mutual aid group that organizes with people in Portland seeking asylum in the US, has been openly skeptical of the effort to revoke the ICE building permit. They point to the Colombian man who had been seeking asylum in the US and was arrested by ICE in Portland last week after appearing in federal immigration court. When the man’s lawyer went to the ICE facility on  Macadam to see her client, she was told  the building wasn’t open to the public due to ongoing protests outside, and that her client wasn’t there. According to the Oregon US Attorney’s Office, the man was taken to the Northwest Detention Center (NWDC) in Tacoma, also known as the Northwest ICE Processing Center. 

The NWDC is one of the largest immigration detention facilities in the US, with more than 1,500 beds. In recent years, the NWDC has faced increased scrutiny—and several lawsuits— for its alleged mistreatment of detainees and lack of transparency. Advocacy groups in Washington, notably the organization La Resistencia, have long fought to get the Tacoma detention center shut down. 

Those involved in immigrant legal defense work say once people leave Oregon and are detained in the NWDC or other similar detention facilities, their chances of prompt release dwindle. 

“Right now ICE is saying their building is closed. While that may feel like a win, ICE is still here, but now in a less predictable or accessible way,” ASSC wrote in a social media post. “A man was denied timely due process because of this closure. That means ICE presence with no avenue for accountability.” 

ICE did not respond to the Mercury’s request for clarification about whether or not the building is open. Reporting in Street Roots indicates Mayor Keith Wilson and other city leaders have confirmed its closure. 

Earlier this month, two men seeking asylum were detained after attending immigration court hearings, under similar circumstances as the arrest of the Colombian man last week. The outcomes for these two men were different, however, as quick legal intervention mandated they remain in Oregon. They were released from Portland’s ICE facility that day. 

“As folks organizing with people in deportation proceedings, we prioritize harm reduction and rapid response as we work to abolish ICE and build the society we all deserve,” ASSC’s posts continued. “We will sacrifice speed and optics for that. Folks have different priorities/strategies—that's part of a diverse movement.” 

Those supportive of the effort to revoke ICE’s permit say it’s not enough to focus on the few people who might be aided by swift legal intervention, especially during a time when federal immigration authorities have demonstrated indifference to the law and made seemingly arbitrary judgments. Two other asylum seekers who were arrested in Portland in early June, including a trans woman known as O-J-M who is currently in solitary confinement at the NWDC, were not released. All of the asylum seekers arrested in Portland were detained after attending mandated immigration court hearings. 

“We were only able to save a few people [through the legal process], so that shouldn’t be used as a defense. We’re not able to save everybody that goes through the Portland ICE facility,” Beatriz Ibarra, an organizer with the group Portland Contra las Deportaciones, told the Mercury. “We’re trying to keep ICE out of Portland, then we can move to the Tacoma facility, or fight both battles at the same time. We don’t have to choose one or the other.” 

“We will not remain silent in the face of such harm.” 

Those pushing to get “ICE out of Portland” also argue the facility is no longer in compliance with the conditions of its permit. Back in 2010, when city leaders were mulling the Department of Homeland Security’s (DHS) plan to consolidate its local ICE operations in the South Waterfront, a spokesperson for ICE told the Oregonian it was “not going to be a large-scale operation.” 

“We really don’t expect many people to even know that we are here,” the spokesperson said. 

Portland City Council seemingly wanted to ensure that would remain true. One of the conditions for ICE’s 2011 permit approval was that the “facility and operations will not pose an unreasonable safety threat to nearby uses and residents.” The Council even considered the possibility of demonstrations occurring outside the facility, as many opponents submitted public comments outlining their concerns about frequent protests in their neighborhood, but determined such arguments were “speculative and [did] not identify a likely or unreasonable safety risk to the nearby uses and residents.” 

A lot can change in 15 years. In addition to ICE generally maintaining a larger and more public presence, the ongoing protests—and the federal agency’s response to them—have made it impossible for people who live and work in the area to forget the facility is there.

ICE and DHS agents have not been shy to use pepper balls and tear gas in their attempts to disperse the crowds of protesters, leaving chemicals lingering in the air. Some people who live in nearby apartment buildings are now wearing gas masks in their own homes. The Cottonwood School, a K-8 charter school located directly next to the ICE building, released a statement condemning the agency’s use of “chemical and projectile munitions…in direct proximity to our playground and school.” The statement also called on people to support the petition to revoke ICE’s permit.  

“The full extent of the damage to our campus is still being assessed. However, what remains indisputable is the violation of safety and security that our students, staff, families and ecosystem have experienced,” The Cottonwood School’s statement says. “We will not remain silent in the face of such harm.” 

Strategic resistance? 

Activists on both sides of the issue say they are working to center the people most impacted by the escalating ICE activity. They all say their ultimate goal is to abolish the federal agency. But they disagree on how to get there. 

In Los Angeles, perhaps the epicenter of ICE’s current escalation and the resulting backlash,  well-organized advocates have formed community defense groups to warn and protect their vulnerable neighbors. In some cases, these efforts have been successful deterrents against ICE raids. 

Immigrant advocates in Portland are encouraging all local ICE protesters to consider similar tactics. Groups including ASSC, the ACLU of Oregon, and Portland Immigrant Rights Coalition are working to spread the word about “ICE watch” trainings, among other actions. Leaders of these organizations have been cautious when speaking about the effort to revoke the building permit, and in conversations with the Mercury, they emphasized their support for the anti-ICE protesters. But they have implied getting the facility shut down isn’t their preferred strategy right now.

“In a period of aggressive fascism, we have to think about if our resistance is strategic and effective, and if it supports the impacted communities,” Sandy Chung, executive director of the ACLU of Oregon, told the Mercury. “It’s also important to read between the lines of what organizations are and aren’t saying publicly.” 

Many protesters have called on City Council to take explicit action to get the ICE building permit revoked, a move they say would be in alignment with Portland’s sanctuary city status. 

“We do not want hearing sessions so [City Council] can tell us the type of sanctuary we’re going to have, with a detention facility in the city,” Pedro Anglada told the Mercury. “If that’s a sanctuary, if that’s our friend, I don’t even want to think about our enemies.” 

In such a contested environment, the path forward for Portland leaders is muddy, and councilors appear to be trying to walk a tightrope with their public statements. 

“I am tracking every single thing happening at ICE and watching all the footage… I am also working with people to be as strategic as possible to protect my community. I will not seek impulsive statements or solutions,” Councilor Angelita Morillo, the sole immigrant on Portland City Council, wrote on social media. “If I am quiet, it is not for lack of action.”

Advocates hope a conversation about sanctuary cities at today’s City Council Community and Public Safety Committee meeting will be clarifying. Protesters working to get the permit revoked plan to attend the meeting en masse. Then, they plan to go back to the ICE facility in the South Waterfront, like they have every night for more than two weeks. In a recent Instagram post, the group Ice Out of Portland, which publishes frequent updates about anti-ICE protests in the area, put it simply. 

“We’re going to keep showing up,” the post says, “because we want ICE out of our city.”