Opinion: law, protest, and peril in navigating America’s immigration-enforcement flashpoints
San José resident and former candidate for state Assembly Ted Stroll offers his take on how to stay safe from violence and mayhem during protests against immigration enforcement.
Every reasonable person I know believes we’re in an authoritarian era. All sorts of abuses are occurring and being minimized. As a glaring example, until recently the federal government showed no regret over the killings of Renée Good and Alex Pretti in Minneapolis. These killings may well have amounted to murder or manslaughter by federal agents. It has agreed to investigate Pretti’s death, but not Good’s. This isn’t the America we know and want.
Reacting to these circumstances, county Supervisor Otto Lee wants the sheriff and local police to arrest any ICE/CBP agents who he thinks are acting unlawfully during the Super Bowl.
In sum, trouble may be looming, and it’s essential to be well informed in advance of it.
The First Amendment says it is lawful “peaceably to assemble.” That doesn’t require silence. On-scene protesters can yell, wave signs, and express displeasure in all sorts of audible and visible ways, as long as they’re not impeding immigration agents. They can record what’s happening.
In addition, the “No Kings” rallies I’ve seen in Fremont, Salinas, and San José have been peaceable.
It is, however, unlawful to impede an immigration-law enforcement operation, helping or trying to help people evade immigration personnel by blowing whistles, honking horns, banging pots, or blocking roads. A state court judge in Wisconsin was convicted of doing that. She lost her judgeship and awaits sentencing. In 2023, in United States v. Hansen, the Supreme Court stated, “Speech intended to bring about a particular unlawful act . . . is unprotected” by the First Amendment.
Err on the side of caution. Although people’s anger and distress may be amply justified in some circumstances, do nothing that endangers you to a degree you don’t want. When an armed Alex Pretti waded twice into volatile situations, he disregarded what AI summarizes as “the cornerstone of responsible Concealed Carry Weapon (CCW) training. While carrying a firearm provides a means of last-resort self-defense, the primary goal of any armed citizen is to avoid, de-escalate, and escape dangerous situations, not to seek them out.”
Not everyone knows what’s legal and what’s not. After Good’s death, the Canadian Broadcasting Corp. interviewed a Minneapolis activist, Chelsea Miller.
Miller said that she observes operations without interfering. “It’s not getting in the way of anyone legally doing their job. I don’t plan on doing that,” she said.
But she also said she wanted to be “of help” against immigration enforcement, so she had been “driving around.”
“I did ask my husband to block . . . six [government] SUVs. . . . We blocked their vehicles . . . . We wanted them to do a U-turn. . . . Instead, the driver of that vehicle opened the driver’s door, pulled out a gun, and told my husband to move the car, so he did. Now that a woman has been shot . . . I probably wouldn’t do that again.”
On “Meet the Press” on January 11, Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey encouraged such muddled thinking. He said Good, in evidently trying to block an immigration operation, was acting to “protect our city [and] look out for our neighbors.” That characterization is the last thing activists need to hear.
Santa Clara County and San José may be blurring these distinctions. They support a local immigrant-defense organization called the Rapid Response Network (RRN). The county is giving it about $1 million this fiscal year. San José has allocated $716,018 to a “Rapid Response Grant.” It’s unclear whether that refers to the RRN specifically, but it is evident that some RRN funding is being provided.
The RRN’s slogan is “¡Repórtala!” (“Report It!”). It’s hard to ascertain what that means. I requested an interview with RRN, but received no response. Its website is vague about its methods and goals. San José’s website says to call the RRN’s hotline “for immediate support” if ICE appears. But what constitutes “immediate support?”
Federal law prohibits “shield[ing] from detection” someone who “remains in the United States in violation of law.” If Santa Clara County, San José, and the RRN do not tell well-meaning volunteers that or, worse yet, imply otherwise, they are doing them a disservice.
RRN’s mission must be clarified. If objectors wish to engage in civil disobedience, so be it. But let them know the risks.
Follow Opportunity Now on Twitter @svopportunity
We prize letters from our thoughtful readers. Typed on a Smith Corona. Written in longhand on fine stationery. Scribbled on a napkin. Hey, even composed on email. Feel free to send your comments to us at opportunitynowsv@gmail.com or (snail mail) 1590 Calaveras Ave., SJ, CA 95126. Remember to be thoughtful and polite. We will post letters on an irregular basis on the main Opp Now site.