By Cliff Potts, CSO, and Editor-in-Chief of WPS News

Baybay City, Leyte, Philippines — January 11, 2026

A Line Has Been Crossed

This is no longer a dispute about immigration policy.
It is a question of state violence, accountability, and constitutional limits.

Multiple recent incidents tied to U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) point to a disturbing pattern: severe force used against individuals who were not actively resisting, followed by delayed medical care, restricted investigations, and opaque federal responses. One case involves a man severely injured after a K-9 was released during an ICE operation. Another involves the fatal shooting of a U.S. citizen during a federal enforcement action. In both cases, local and state officials publicly challenged the federal version of events.

When armed federal agents operate with secrecy and impunity, the rule of law does not bend—it breaks.

K-9s and Use of Force: This Is Not a Gray Area

The deployment of a police or federal K-9 is not a routine tactic.
It is a serious use-of-force decision with a long record of catastrophic injury.

If an individual is not resisting arrest or attempting to flee, the legal and moral justification for releasing an attack dog collapses. This is not radical opinion; it is established use-of-force doctrine recognized across U.S. law enforcement standards.

Delayed medical care following such an incident compounds the violation. Once force is used, the state assumes an affirmative duty to preserve life. Failure to do so is not an administrative lapse—it is a civil-rights issue.

A U.S. Citizen Dead in the Street

In Minneapolis, a U.S. citizen was shot and killed by an ICE agent during a federal operation. State and city leaders disputed the federal self-defense narrative, citing witness accounts and video evidence. Jurisdictional conflict followed, with federal authorities assuming control of the investigation and limiting state access.

That sequence—deadly force, disputed facts, federal lockdown—is exactly what erodes public trust.

When citizens are killed and the investigating authority answers only to itself, accountability ceases to be credible.

This Is Why “Disband ICE” Is No Longer Hyperbole

Calls to disband ICE are not coming from the political fringe. They are emerging because the agency’s structure encourages militarized enforcement without sufficient civilian oversight.

Disbanding ICE does not mean abandoning immigration law. It means ending a model that has repeatedly failed public-safety and human-rights tests.

A serious alternative would include:

  • Ending armed workplace raids entirely
  • Independent, mandatory oversight of all detention facilities
  • Strict national limits on use of force, including K-9 deployment
  • Immediate public release of body-camera footage after serious injury or death
  • Shifting resources to immigration courts, case management, and humanitarian processing

This is not radical. It is governance.

The Pattern History Warns Us About

When political leaders normalize violence against designated “internal enemies,” democracies rot from the inside. The warning signs are well documented: dehumanization, impunity, and propaganda replacing accountability.

Former Minnesota governor Jesse Ventura has said openly what many officials are now implying—that the United States is drifting toward an authoritarian enforcement model incompatible with constitutional democracy. Sitting governors, mayors, and attorneys general have echoed that concern by publicly challenging ICE narratives.

This is not alarmism. It is recognition.

What Must Be Done—Now

This moment demands action that is forceful, lawful, and public:

  • Sustained, nonviolent protest
  • Civil-rights litigation
  • Aggressive Freedom of Information Act requests
  • Congressional subpoenas and public hearings
  • Electoral consequences for officials who enable impunity
  • Relentless documentation and journalism

Organizations such as the American Civil Liberties Union are correct: nonviolent, lawful action is not only the moral high ground—it is the most effective one.

Conclusion: This Is a Test of the Republic

A federal agency that injures non-resisting people, kills a citizen, delays medical care, and blocks transparency is operating outside acceptable democratic bounds.

If the United States is serious about equal protection under the law, then ICE must be dismantled and rebuilt—or abolished outright—under genuine civilian control.

Anything less guarantees more bloodshed, more secrecy, and a future Americans will one day deny they saw coming.

Core Commentary

This is not theoretical. People are being hurt and killed now.
Silence is complicity.

For continued analysis and social commentary, see Occupy 2.5 at
https://Occupy25.com

References (APA)

Associated Press. (2026, January 8). Federal agents face scrutiny after fatal immigration enforcement shooting.

The Guardian. (2025, December 6). US senator says ICE “attack dog” caused horrific injuries to man not resisting arrest.

Minnesota Public Radio News. (2026, January 7). ICE agent fatally shoots U.S. citizen during federal operation in Minneapolis.

Reuters. (2026, January 10). Protests spread nationwide after fatal ICE shooting and allegations of excessive force.

Washington Post. (2026, January 7). State and city officials dispute federal account of ICE shooting.

American Civil Liberties Union. (2026). Know your rights: Protest and government accountability.

Discover more from WPS News

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.