On the heels of new federal immigration enforcement measures and intensifying political debate, cities and states across the U.S. are grappling with how to balance public safety, civil rights, and the expectations of their diverse communities. Nowhere is this tension more apparent than in Boston and Florida, where recent developments have put the spotlight on both local and national immigration policies.
In Boston, Mayor Michelle Wu announced on August 15, 2025, that the city would apply for a $12 million federal grant. The catch? At least 10% of the funds must be dedicated to "supporting collaboration between state and local law enforcement and U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE)," according to the Bay State Banner. This requirement, part of the Urban Area Security Initiative (UASI), immediately raised eyebrows among city officials and community advocates who recall Boston’s 2015 Trust Act. This law, championed by Wu herself as a city councilor, prohibits local law enforcement from engaging in civil immigration enforcement, though it still permits the sharing of criminal history information with ICE.
“Nothing in the 2025 new documents can compel the City of Boston to violate our own city laws or state laws in using this grant money,” Wu told reporters. “We’ve done our own internal legal analysis and feel that we are on solid ground applying for these grants and we’ll use them as we have for the last 22 years — keeping the residents of Boston safe, because there is nothing that this new paperwork can do to compel us to violate city and state law.”
Yet, the city’s own Boston Regional Intelligence Center (BRIC), funded for over two decades by UASI grants, is at the heart of the debate. BRIC, a so-called fusion center established after September 11, 2001, to enhance cooperation between federal and local agencies, has a history of sharing information not just about criminal activity, but also about protest movements. According to Bay State Banner, BRIC has monitored and shared details on Occupy Wall Street demonstrations in 2011, Black Lives Matter protests following the 2014 police killing of Michael Brown, and more recently, demonstrations against Israel’s siege of Gaza.
Critics argue that this information pipeline, though legal under the Trust Act, exposes immigrant activists to potential targeting and deportation by federal authorities. Fatema Ahmad, executive director of the Muslim Justice League, voiced concerns: “This should expose to community members and progressive elected officials that our sanctuary policies are very limited. The fact that the Boston Police Department is participating in BRIC should raise red flags.” Ahmad pointed out that multiple federal agencies, including the FBI, now participate in civil immigration enforcement raids, increasing the risk for those involved in peaceful protest or activism.
Boston isn’t alone in its unease. At a meeting on August 14, 2025, representatives from neighboring municipalities—Brookline, Cambridge, Chelsea, Everett, Quincy, Revere, Somerville, and Winthrop—said their own bylaws prohibit compliance with the ICE collaboration requirement. “Our bylaws will specifically not allow us to comply with that with ICE,” Brookline Fire Department Chief John Sullivan stated. He added, “If it’s all coming out of the BRIC, then that’s a Boston problem.”
Ultimately, if federal officials approve the grant, the Boston City Council will have the final say on whether BRIC accepts it. Some councilors, like Julia Mejia, have already staked out firm opposition. “It’s a hard pass for me,” Mejia said. “I think right now, given the relationship we have with the federal government, anything that gives them a loophole is a recipe for disaster.”
Mayor Wu, for her part, remains adamant that Boston “will not be a direct point of information sharing or contribute to a pipeline for federal immigration enforcement.” She maintains that recent reforms to controversial police databases and other information-sharing practices have put the city on more solid ethical footing.
Meanwhile, in Florida, the politics and policies of immigration are playing out on an even larger stage. On August 19, 2025, Democratic candidates gathered in Tampa to criticize what they see as Republican overreach. The forum, hosted by the Hillsborough County Democratic Hispanic at the Cuban Club in Ybor City, became a platform for denouncing the state’s increasingly aggressive approach under Governor Ron DeSantis and President Donald Trump.
“Republican leaders are fighting communities, not crime,” said David Jolly, a Democratic gubernatorial candidate. He argued that the GOP’s strategy conflates undocumented immigration with criminality, fueling public fear and division. “This is a contrast of values and, fundamentally, the American people understand, regardless of party registration, cruelty and broken promises,” Jolly said. “And we’re living through an era of cruelty and broken promises.”
Governor DeSantis, for his part, has not shied away from tough rhetoric or policy. He often highlights crimes committed by undocumented immigrants and has championed legislation requiring local law enforcement to cooperate with ICE. Florida has even constructed its own immigration detention camp, nicknamed “Alligator Alcatraz,” with a second facility set to open in North Florida, according to Bay State Banner.
But critics say the numbers tell a different story. As of June 29, 2025, ICE detained 57,861 people nationwide, with 71.7% having no criminal convictions. That includes thousands with pending charges and more than 27,000 with no known criminal convictions or pending charges at all.
Attorney Danielle Hernandez, a former assistant chief counsel for the Department of Homeland Security, explained that a January 2025 executive order dramatically expanded the use of expedited removal. Previously, this process was limited to those caught within 100 miles of the border and within two weeks of arrival. Now, anyone who entered the U.S. after April 2023 is “fair game to absolutely any arrest,” she said. “They can go into any court, terminate your asylum proceedings, and arrest you outside. So that’s what you see on the news.”
Public sentiment appears to be shifting. A Suffolk University/WSVN-TV 7 News survey of Miami residents in July 2025 found that 61% believe ICE enforcement raids have gone too far, and 52% said recent deportations of Venezuelans, Cubans, and Argentinians made them less likely to support President Trump. Nationally, a YouGov survey published August 13, 2025, found that 53% of Americans, including 56% of independents, believe Trump’s approach to immigration is too harsh. Two-thirds say the administration has wrongfully detained U.S. citizens in immigration detention centers.
The political fallout is being felt on both sides. Tampa Bay U.S. Rep. Kathy Castor blamed Trump for blocking a bipartisan immigration reform effort that would have balanced new pathways to citizenship with stronger border security and investment in immigration courts. “He was the one who blocked a bipartisan immigration reform effort where we would ensure those pathways to work in citizenship exist while strengthening border security and investing in the immigration courts, to make sure things moved smoothly,” Castor said. “But what they’re doing now goes far beyond that.”
As the debate rages, some Democrats warn against focusing solely on immigration when reaching out to Latino voters. “The way we get them back is we speak to their true concerns that will inform their votes,” Jolly said, noting that issues like education, jobs, and health care weigh just as heavily.
With both Boston and Florida at a crossroads, the coming months will test whether local and state leaders can navigate the increasingly fraught intersection of public safety, civil rights, and political pressure. For many, the stakes couldn’t be higher.
