| Aspect | Ilhan Omar | Pramila Jayapal | Shri Thanedar |
|---|---|---|---|
| Unqualified Affirmation of ICE Enforcing Laws | No; calls it “lawless” and pushes abolition | No; says it strayed from mission, focuses on cruelty | No; calls it “beyond reform” and out of control |
| Proposed Abolishing ICE | Yes (supports movement, opposes funding) | Yes (2018 bill, 2025 support) | Yes (2026 Abolish ICE Act, H.R.7123) |
| Called ICE “Terrorizing” Communities | Yes (e.g., “terror to stop,” “state-sanctioned violence”) | Yes (e.g., “reign of terror,” “terrorizes our communities”) | Yes (e.g., “Americans are being terrorized”) |
| Sanctuary City Context | Criticizes ICE in Minneapolis (sanctuary) as occupying force | Joins Minnesota protests against ICE “terror” | Bill triggered by Minneapolis shooting in sanctuary area |
| Aspect | Omar | Jayapal | Thanedar |
|---|---|---|---|
| Recent Stance on Laws/ICE | Calls ICE “state-sanctioned violence”; supports no funding for enforcement. | Frames ICE as “out-of-control” targeting citizens; backs restructuring. | Introduces bill to abolish ICE entirely, citing citizen death as proof laws need overhaul. |
| “Wrong Side” Critique | Accused of prioritizing immigrants over laws in sanctuary MN. | Seen as defying will via progressive caucus pushes against deportations. | Labeled “treasonous” for bill amid public support for enforcement. |
| Moral Claim | “Abolishing ICE is not enough—hold them accountable.” | “Fight back” against cruelty. | “Step toward justice and humanity.” |