Tensions rise, NC protests grow against ICE activity
Several advocacy organizations in Charlotte met Monday in Uptown to rally against ICE raids. Dozens of attendees from the airport workers' union 32BJ SEIU, Housing Justice Coalition CLT, and other groups called for the release of David Huerta from federal detention.
Huerta, a California labor leader, was arrested while protesting outside a business where ICE agents were investigating. He was released from custody on a $50,000 bond and now faces charges of
Rallies are scheduled in Charlotte, Monroe, Concord, Waxhaw and Rock Hill for Saturday, June 14 in connection with the national .
The event was planned in early May, before the activity in Los Angeles, . The organization noted working with a coalition of partners to declare Flag Day a 'Nationwide Day of Defiance.' The date also lines up with the U.S. Army's celebration of its 250th year, and President Donald Trump's 79th birthday.
Organizers in Charlotte said the interest in the event has increased in the past several weeks, prompting them to move the rally to They plan to have a series of speakers and a 1.4-mile march.
Groups in Raleigh intend to gather outside the Capitol building on Tuesday as lawmakers discuss legislation to strengthen enforcement efforts. would compel local law enforcement agents to verify any detainee's immigration status and notify Immigration and Customs Enforcement Agents if the person is not a documented citizen.
NC Republicans push forward two immigration enforcement bills
Advocates with the North Carolina Democratic Party told Queen City News' reporting partner in Raleigh that they're calling for an end to ICE raids nationwide.
'It's no longer deportation, right? That is a system,' said Anderson Clayton, chair of the North Carolina Democratic Party. 'What we're seeing right now is people being kidnapped, honestly, across the country, people being taken from their homes, their communities, people being racially targeted and profiled across the country right now.'
U.S. Representative Alma Adams (NC-12) expressed similar sentiments in a statement Monday, denouncing the president's decision to deploy National Guardsmen to Los Angeles.
'This decision was fueled by the president's ego, not by what was best for the people of Los Angeles, and we cannot let him continue to weaponize the executive branch against our communities,' Adams said. 'Republicans in Congress should join Democrats in standing up for our citizens and reining in the executive overreach from the White House.'
, along with U.S. Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth and Army Secretary Dan Driscoll, to commemorate the 250th Army anniversary.
Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Hill
25 minutes ago
- The Hill
How foreign policy could crash Republican midterm prospects
This summer's MAGA revolt over the Epstein Files has challenged the longstanding assumption that President Trump has an unbreakable bond with the Republican base. Trump loyalists from Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.) to Steve Bannon to Tucker Carlson have recently criticized the president not just on the Epstein disclosures but also on Medicaid cuts in the 'One Big Beautiful Bill.' Yet new polling shows that another issue could cost Trump crucial support and substantially lower his standing among independent voters whom Republicans need in order to win future elections. While Republicans largely rallied around Trump following the June 22 bombing of Iranian nuclear facilities, recent YouGov polling commissioned by the Center for Economic and Policy Research demonstrates substantial political risks for the president and his party if he supports an expanded war involving Israel and Iran. When respondents consider the economic consequences of a broader conflict, as well as their trust in the justifications offered for involvement in such a war, Trump faces overwhelming dissent among Independents. These voters are about one-third of the electorate and currently about evenly split between Democrat-leaning and Republican-leaning. If an issue becomes important in an election and the Independent voters move strongly in one direction, that can swing the election. A clear majority of voters — 65 percent — reported they would hold Trump responsible if gasoline prices rose to $6 a gallon as a result of expanded U.S. military involvement. Among Independent voters, this sentiment rises to 69 percent. Further, when informed that economists would expect a significant rise in mortgage interest rates to result from an expanded conflict — potentially adding over $100,000 in lifetime payments for a typical home — 72 percent oppose U.S. military involvement, with two thirds of those expressing 'strong' opposition. Most polls treat foreign policy decisions as isolated events, simply asking whether voters support or oppose military action. But major interventions do not occur in isolation — they can impact gas prices, mortgage rates and overall confidence in politicians and their political parties. A true measure of public sentiment on expanded military involvement must account for these potential and even likely consequences, which often drive voter attitudes more than abstract strategic considerations. Donald Trump rose politically by highlighting Americans' declining trust in institutions, from government regulators and health experts to traditional media. But the polling shows that Trump himself faces serious accusations from his base of breaching public trust and caving to wealthy donors advocating unconditional support for Israeli policies that millions of voters view as wrong and dangerous. Sixty-three percent of respondents expressed concern that Trump's decision to attack Iran could be influenced by major campaign donors, a concern particularly strong among Independents. And two-thirds of voters — including nearly one-third of Republicans — feel that intervening in an Israel-Iran conflict contradicts Trump's core 'America First' promise. In June, Tucker Carlson accused Trump of being 'complicit in the act of war' following Israel's attacks on Iran, and influential MAGA voices like Steve Bannon echoed similar skepticism. Yet commentary alone is unlikely to shift conservative public opinion. People respond to tangible impacts in their lives. If Trump once again follows Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu into major military action in the Middle East, the consequences may extend beyond geopolitics and significantly impact the president's party in next year's midterm elections. Consider some midterm math. On all five questions related to U.S. intervention in Iran, voters who identify as Republican or Democrat overwhelmingly aligned with their respective parties. For example, by a ratio of 88 percent to 12 percent, Democrats said they did not believe that 'Trump is getting involved in this war for the sake of U.S. national security.' Republicans held the opposite view, with 77 percent believing national security was the reason and 23 percent not believing it. This leaves Independent voters as potentially decisive. According to current polling data, Independents are evenly divided between 'Republican-leaning' and 'Democrat-leaning,' generally indicating close national elections. However, on questions regarding U.S. participation in a war against Iran, Independents are solidly opposed, by a margin of two to one. This leads to an overall result of 63-37 saying that they do not believe that U.S. involvement in such a war is 'for the sake of national security.' While the June war between Israel and Iran appears to be over, another Israeli attack in the near future remains quite possible. Should Trump decide to join such an operation before the next election, it could significantly undermine Republican chances of retaining Congress. Mark Weisbrot is co-director of the Center for Economic and Policy Research. He is the author of 'Failed: What the 'Experts' Got Wrong About the Global Economy (Oxford University Press). Justin Talbot Zorn is a senior adviser at the Center for Economic and Policy Research, a Truman National Security Fellow, and served as legislative director for three members of Congress.
Politico
27 minutes ago
- Politico
‘More like a blue trickle': Dems are hoping for a blue wave that might not happen
That suggests Democrats are having trouble capitalizing on what they say is Republicans' shaky handling of economic and foreign policy. Around this time in 2017 — ahead of Democrats' monster 2018 blue wave year in which they gained a net of 41 House seats — Democrats were up about 6 percentage points in the generic ballot, noted Taglia, the Emerson pollster. That doesn't mean the blue wave dream is dead. Election Day is still 15 months away, and that same Emerson poll shows about a quarter of voters are currently undecided on the congressional ballot. Americans could start feeling the impacts of the megabill and other marquee policies like mass deportations well into campaign season, which could offer Democrats an opportunity to win back some voters who swung right in 2024. 'If we get to March of next year and we still see Democrats at 2 or 3 points up in the generic ballot, that is alarm bells for them,' Taglia said. 'They're going to want to be at least 4 points up. For their ideal result, probably more like 6 points … Then you're starting to look a little bit like a blue wave.' Redistricting could bite into Democrats' opportunities Texas Republicans unveiled a new congressional map Wednesday that, if enacted, would carve out five additional red-leaning districts. Those efforts, done at the behest of Trump, could throw a monkeywrench in Democrats' plans to reclaim the House. Now Democrats are trying to reforge relationships with voters in four newly created majority-Hispanic districts in Texas who swung right in 2024. 'Donald Trump and Texas Republicans are playing a dangerous game, and we're ready to defeat now-vulnerable Republicans next November,' said CJ Warnke, a spokesperson for House Majority PAC, Democrats' top House super PAC. 'We're bringing the full weight of our operation to the Lone Star State to make this backroom deal backfire and take back the House in 2026.' Republicans also hope to squeeze out a few more red districts in other states. Control of the House hinges on razor-thin majorities, and those redistricting efforts alone could significantly stymie Democrats' ability to retake the chamber. Some Democratic governors, including California's Gavin Newsom and New York's Kathy Hochul, have threatened retaliatory gerrymandering crusades ahead of midterms, though it's unclear how feasible these efforts will be because those states have ceded redistricting power to independent commissions, unlike Texas. Those states would have to rely on voter referenda or court orders to claw back this power, and they only have until early 2026 to pull it off. Tanden says she's optimistic California can counter Texas's gerrymandering by 2026. 'If someone was like, 'while Trump is president we're going to get rid of the commission,' people would be down with that.' Democrats are facing down messy primaries House Democrats are facing crowded primaries across the map. Some in the party worry that months of fighting over intraparty tactics or thorny issues like Israel's war in Gaza could splinter voters and drain resources that could be used in the general election. Democratic infighting over the idea of challenging incumbents has roiled the Democratic National Committee, where former Vice Chair David Hogg lost his position amid consternation over his plan to primary 'asleep at the wheel' Democrats.
Politico
41 minutes ago
- Politico
What It Will Take to Get U.S. Citizens to Work the Farm — According to Dolores Huerta
And the 95-year-old Huerta has seen a lot. She first began lobbying the California legislature on farm labor issues when she was just 25, and she founded an agriculture workers union soon after. In her early 30s, she partnered with civil rights leader Cesar Chavez to create the National Farm Workers Association, now the United Farm Workers. For years, she and Chavez worked in tandem, delivering major victories to protect farm workers from exploitation and exposure to dangerous pesticides. President Barack Obama awarded her the Presidential Medal of Freedom in 2012. The Trump administration is now struggling to reconcile its mass deportation efforts with the need to keep farm production going. Huerta is not optimistic about how it will all play out, though she was able to poke at Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins' recent suggestion that automation will soon replace human laborers. 'I guess I could just wait until they get enough robots to do the farm work,' Huerta joked. This conversation has been edited for length and clarity. The Trump administration has launched farm raids targeting undocumented immigrants, which has sent a chill through the labor force and industry. You've advocated for farm workers for decades. Does the current climate feel familiar, or are we in a really different place? Oh, it's a very, very different place. Because in the past, in the '50s, when we had this 'Operation Wetback,' they were not putting people in jail. They would repatriate people. They would deport them, take them to the border. Somewhere along the way, I think during Newt Gingrich's time, they started putting people in jail, but then they would let them go. It was not putting people in prisons, like we're seeing right now. The kind of brutality, the horror, the kidnapping, endangering people's lives, separating the families — the way that Trump did in the last administration, and they're doing now, leaving all of these missing children — it's an atrocity, what they've been doing to the immigrant community. Many of those people that they have been picking up and arresting are farm workers. Here in Bakersfield, California, we were the first city to be hit. When Border Patrol came in, they arrested [78] people, and only one person had any kind of criminal record. And when they talk about a criminal record, it could be a traffic stop. It could be just that they came in, and they were deported, and came back in again. These are not violent crimes that we're talking about. They are, you might say, civil infractions, and yet they're being treated like they were criminals. This administration says it wants to get to a '100 percent American workforce.' It also has discussed rapidly expanding migrant visa programs, like H-2A. Do you see those two goals in conflict? How might that play out? Well, I think it would be really great to have American workers to work on farms. Farm work has been denigrated for so many years by the growers themselves, and they did this because they never wanted to pay farm workers the kind of wages that they deserve. Farm workers were essential workers during the pandemic. They were out there in the fields. So many of them died because they never got the proper protections that they needed. But they were out there every single day, picking the food that we needed to eat. Farm workers don't get the same kind of benefits or salaries that others get. We just recently did a study with the University of California Merced. Their average wage is $30,000 a year, $35,000 a year. And on that, they have to feed their families. A lot of them, unless they have a union contract, they're paid minimum wage. They're not respected. The whole visa program, the H-2A program, it's always been there. Cesar Chavez and I, when we started the United Farm Workers, one of the first things that we did was end the 'Bracero Program,' which was a similar [guest worker] program. Now they've increased these H-2A workers in agriculture. This is a step above slavery. They can't unionize. They don't get Social Security. They don't get unemployment insurance. Farmers save money by having these H-2A workers. They cannot become citizens. There is no way for them to even get a green card. If you were trying to get to a 100 percent American workforce, what's the solution here? Does it start with paying more competitive wages for workers? Or is it something else? Well, right now, we're trying to stop a detention center here in California City, which is up here in the Mojave Desert. They are offering the people to work in that center $50 an hour. In California, our minimum wage is $16. That's what a lot of workers get. Let's offer farmworkers $50 an hour, the same kind of a salary that you offer the prison guards, and you'll get a lot of American workers. We have very high unemployment in the Central Valley. We have the prison industrial complex, where a lot of our young people are going to prison. So many of these young people don't have to go to prison if they were paid adequately. I'm sure a lot of them would go and do the farm work, especially if they had good wages to do it. And we still have a lot of young people here in the valley that go out during the summers and they do farm work to help their families. I'm sure a lot of people that we now see that are homeless on the streets and that are able to work would go to work if they were paid $50 an hour. So it's just a matter of improving wages? And training, too. Because farm work is hard work. I mean, you've got to be in good physical shape to be able to do farm work. Why are undocumented workers such a large part of the agricultural workforce? Is it just that these are low-paying, hard jobs that Americans don't want to do, or is there more going on? Well, like I said earlier, the growers have denigrated the work so much that people don't realize that this work is dignified. Farm workers are proud of the work that they do. They don't feel that somehow they're a lower class of people because they do farm work. They have pride in their work. If you were to go out there with farm workers, you would be surprised to see that they have dignity, and they care about the work. They care about the plants. When we started the farm workers union way back in the late '50s and early '60s, you would be surprised how many American citizens were out there. Veterans were out there. The Grapes of Wrath was filmed here. All of those workers in that camp were white. It was the 'Okies' and 'Arkies,' the people that came from Oklahoma and Arkansas and those places to work in the fields. They were all white workers. There were some Latino workers, and then over the years, you had the Chinese, you had the Japanese, and different waves of immigrants that came in to do farm work. When did it change? Well, the growers always fought unionization, as they still do to this day. I'll give an example. There's a company called the Wonder Company. When you watch television, you see all of their ads for pistachios. They're billionaires. The United Farm Workers just won a recognition election, and they refused to recognize the union. When you have a union out there, you have a steward out there in every single crew, and their job is to make sure that there's a bathroom out there in the fields, which farm workers never had before. We had a big movement to get farmers just having toilets in the field and hand washing facilities, cold drinking water, risk periods, unemployment insurance, et cetera. This is the thing that we fought for, and the growers fought against it, right to the end. The Farm Bureau Federation fought against all of these improvements for farm workers, and they continue to fight. You supported the 1986 Reagan amnesty, when 1 million farm workers received legal status. The Trump administration has been adamant, for political purposes, that there will be 'no amnesty.' Do you think the administration could get to some sort of mass legalization for farm workers? If not, what happens next? The problem with this administration is, they're so racist. Racism rules, fascism rules with this administration. I don't know, I guess I could just wait until they get enough robots to do the farm work. What about pesticides? You've long fought against pesticide use in agriculture because of the effect of exposure on farm workers. Now, there's this 'Make America Healthy Again' push to get rid of pesticides. What do you make of that? Well, I think maybe that's one good thing that Robert Kennedy Jr. might do. His father was a champion for the farm workers. The pesticides — we should have gotten rid of those a long time ago. We didn't have pesticides until after World War II. There's a pesticide called paraquat. Paraquat is banned in Europe. It's banned in almost every country except the United States of America, and it is used right here in Kern County in California. It causes cancer. It causes leukemia. It causes Parkinson's disease, and we cannot get it banned in California. We know that when plants are planted, when food is planted, the pesticide is already in the seeds. We were trying to stop that in Washington, D.C., and were unable to. We were even just trying to get them to put information on it, so when you go in to buy your fruit, it would have a sticker on it that said, 'This particular fruit or vegetable has been treated with this pesticide.' It's in the fruit when you eat it. Just recently, we had about four or five young people in their late 40s, early 50s, all have died of cancer, and they're from Delano, California. Are these farm workers? No, but when they spray this stuff, it also goes into the towns. So nobody's really safe from it. Is this pesticide issue something you could collaborate or find some common ground with the Trump administration? Yeah, we would love to. But you know what? It's not going to happen, because pesticides really come from the petroleum industry. Have you discussed this with Robert F. Kennedy Jr., or would you be open to meeting with him? I know his father was a friend of yours and a great champion of your cause. I imagine, maybe, when we talk about this issue. I wouldn't agree with Robert Jr. on the issue of vaccinations, or fluoride in our drinking water, et cetera, and some of the issues that he espouses. I know him. I've known him for many, many years. I haven't spoken to him. He did try to contact me when he was running, and I didn't respond. I knew that the family, that Kerry and Ethel and the rest of them, were not happy about his supporting Trump. But you haven't spoken to him since he became HHS secretary? No. I know people that have spoken to him. The labor movement as a whole has an unusual relationship to Donald Trump, who claims to champion the working class. Do you think union leaders have more to gain by working with Trump, or by opposing him? What explains his appeal to many union members? Well, I can't speak for the Teamsters. I think there was a kind of a betrayal of the working people, because I know the majority of the labor unions went against Trump and endorsed Biden [in 2024]. I think that was very damaging. I think a good comparison is if you look at what they've done in Mexico with Claudia Sheinbaum and the president before her. They've done incredible work in Mexico right now because it has been very labor-focused, very working people-focused, in contrast with what's happening here in the United States, where we are very billionaire- and millionaire-focused. And so you can see in Mexico they've been able to increase pensions, increase the minimum wage, increase benefits for the working people. I'm a vegetarian, and I just stay busy. I think you just have to stay busy.
