Nonviolent direct action may again be called on to counter aggressive immigration enforcement practices expected under Trump

By Herbert Rothschild for Ashland.news Relocation Column

Nonviolent direct action, often called by the less precise term civil disobedience, can be a powerful political tool. Steve York gave the name “A Force More Powerful” to his 1999 feature-length documentary about six successful nonviolent direct action campaigns. You can access it on YouTube here. It’s well worth viewing.

Civil disobedience is an effective way to bring widespread public attention to injustice, pressuring public officials and lawmakers to rectify it. Mohandas Gandhi and the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr. were masters at that use of civil disobedience campaigns. It can galvanize a community to sustain other forms of political action. In some cases, by itself it can effect the necessary change, such as occupations of construction sites.

Occasions for civil disobedience are likely to present themselves in the next four years. As I try to foresee how the second presidency of Donald Trump is most likely to affect those of us living in Jackson County, what first comes to mind is Immigration and Customs Enforcement roundups of our undocumented neighbors. We didn’t experience those during his first term, although ICE targeted cities elsewhere in Oregon, such as Woodburn, a mostly Latino community about 30 miles south of Portland. But Trump has promised to take strong actions immediately after his inauguration against the supposedly dire threats that illegal immigrants pose.

There’s a personal benefit as well to engaging in civil disobedience. It helps overcome the fear of state power. To take a stand that says to the agents of state power, “I am not afraid of what you may do to me,” is liberating.

Last month, Oregon Public Broadcasting produced a report titled “How Trump’s immigration policies could impact Oregon.” It explains the broad sanctuary laws in place in this state, among the most protective in the nation. Among other things, they prohibit local and state law enforcement from doing any of ICE’s work. They can’t ask people whom they arrest about their immigration status or house ICE detainees in state or county penal facilities. However, they can’t prohibit ICE from exercising its lawful authority.

The OPB report includes remarks by Matt Adams, legal director of the Seattle-based Northwest Immigrant Rights Project. He told OPB that he expects aggressive enforcement: “The question is, are they going to do it in a way that violates the Constitution or are they going to do it in a lawful manner?” He said that if ICE doesn’t follow the law, organizations like his “will step in, filing lawsuits, just like they did during the first Trump administration.”

Part of the preparation for what’s to come is to train people on their rights and what to do when the raids happen. That’s what Reyna Lopez, executive director of Pineros y Campesinos Unidos del Noroeste, an advocacy group for Oregon farmworkers, said her organization is focusing on.

But what if ICE agents do follow the law? Those are the occasions that prompt civil disobedience, which refuses to respect the law when the law is unjust or is being enforced to advance an unjust purpose.

During Trump’s first term, there were notable examples of people answering that call. In 2018 in Portland, people surrounded an ICE van, chanting and refusing to move until the agents released their detainee. The same thing happened in Queens, New York, in 2019. In Nashville, Tennessee, that year, an ICE target was sitting with his son in his own van. Neighbors formed a human cordon around the van and brought water and food to those inside. After about four hours, the ICE agents left without making an arrest.

In Springfield, Missouri, that year, when ICE agents attempted to arrest a man at a gas station, bystanders intervened by filming the incident and questioning the agents about their warrant, ultimately preventing the arrest. In 2020 in Bend, bystanders surrounded ICE buses with two detainees. That intervention didn’t succeed; after several hours, federal law enforcement arrived and cleared the area. Even when such actions fail to prevent arrests, though, the inconvenience to federal agents and the bad publicity serve as a deterrent.

Less confrontational actions have thwarted ICE arrests. One is to issue warnings in advance of raids, giving the undocumented time to prepare or flee. Usually, civil society sets up the warning systems. In Oakland, California, though, in 2018 Mayor Libby Schaaf issued a public warning about impending raids. Offering sanctuary to people evading ICE is still another way. Under ICE’s “sensitive locations” policy, agents hesitate to make arrests in churches, schools or hospitals.

Consider all that I have written in this column as merely informative. What readers might do with the information is not something I would presume to say.

Herbert Rothschild’s columns appear Fridays. Opinions expressed in them represent the author’s views. Email Rothschild at herbertrothschild6839@gmail.com.