Fort Worth councilmember urges caution over fearmongering possible ICE raids
With U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement raids happening in Los Angeles and around the country, many in North Texas are on edge because of immigration enforcement.
Several business owners in Fort Worth said that business has been slow since Friday, and again on Monday, when many thought there was an ICE raid happening at a business on Main Street and Long Avenue, which was confirmed to be untrue. Despite the false alarm, it is bringing concerns.
Eva Maria Levario Talamantes, the owner of Las Tres Marias food truck, said business for her is slow right now. Normally, during lunch, Levario Talamantes said they would see order after order, but she believes the lag in business is due to concerns people have surrounding ICE.
"It's been affecting us this week, and now to hear they [ICE] were close by, we've been seeing less customers. I'd imagine people are scared to be in the streets, to go out," Levario Talamantes said. "That was like at 6 in the morning, and there were a lot of police… El Rancho was slow that day, and it affects us."
Fort Worth Councilman Carlos Flores released a letter cautioning people from sharing unconfirmed ICE activity.
"A lot of this is mere speculation, and it has the unfortunate effect of causing fear in some parts of our community, and that's what I don't want to happen," Flores said.
Flores said while he understands the fear many people in North Texas are feeling, people should vet those posts before spreading misinformation.
SMU Dedman School of Law professor Natalie Nanasi said whether real or not, ICE concerns have a trickle effect on the community.
"This is going to bring our communities to a standstill," said Nanasi. "Because whenever you hear a rumor like that, you're going to have people who are afraid to go to work, you're going to have people who are afraid to take their kids to school, people who are afraid to go out in and seek medical treatment, reach out to the police if they're victims of crime. And so, it has a huge chilling effect. Whether or not there is an enforcement action, these rumors can be really powerful disincentives for people to be out in the world and do the things that, honestly, we rely on them to do, and the things that make our communities work."
Flores said people can vet law enforcement activity in the area or social media posts that are circulating by contacting his office, so they can investigate the matter. He also said the community can contact the non-emergency police line or reach out to the Mexican consulate.
As for Levario Talamantes, she said she understands the concerns, and she just hopes people stay cautious.
"Try to live a normal life, go out and everything, but be alert," she said.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
CBS News
9 minutes ago
- CBS News
Protests against immigration raids continue to spread across the U.S. Here's a look at many of them.
Protests over federal immigration enforcement raids and President Trump's mobilization of the National Guard and Marines to Los Angeles continue to spread nationwide. While many have been peaceful, with marchers chanting slogans and carrying signs against the Immigration and Customs Enforcement agency, some protesters have clashed with police, leading to hundreds of arrests and the use of chemical irritants to disperse crowds. Activists say they will hold even larger demonstrations in the coming days with "No Kings" events across the country on Saturday to coincide with Mr. Trump's planned military parade through Washington, D.C. Here's a rundown of many of them: LOS ANGELES A group of demonstrators who'd gathered outside the federal buildings in the city's downtown marched out of the curfew zone just after it went into effect for a second night. A smaller crowd of people nearby was seen being taken into custody about 20 minutes after curfew, with the CBS News Los Angeles helicopter overhead. SEATTLE Police say the demonstration began with a peaceful march but officers intervened when some people set fire to a dumpster at an intersection late Wednesday night. As police waited for the Seattle Fire Department to arrive, some people "from the group confronted them, throwing bottles, rocks, and concrete chunks at them," police said. "A protestor threw a large firework at officers, but no one was injured. Police issued dispersal orders and moved the crowd out of the area making eight arrests for assault and obstruction." Protesters stand in front of a dumpster that was set on fire in front of the Henry M. Jackson Building in Seattle during a June 11, 2025 demonstration against federal immigration raids Ryan Sun / AP SPOKANE, WASH. More than 30 people were arrested in downtown Spokane Wednesday night as anti-ICE protesters clashed with police, CBS Spokane affiliate KREM-TV reports. The station says community members gathered at the Spokane ICE office Wednesday afternoon to protest the detainment of a 21-year-old Venezuelan man seeking asylum. Mayor Lisa Brown imposed a curfew in the city's downtown after the demonstration at the ICE office. Police Chief Kevin Hall said protesters were arrested and officers deployed "pepper balls" on the crowd. LAS VEGAS Hundreds of people gathered outside the Las Vegas Federal Courthouse in the downtown area, CBS Las Vegas affiliate KLAS-TV reported. The protest remained peaceful until around 9 p.m. when police issued a dispersal order and declared an unlawful assembly "due to protestors engaging in illegal activity." The crowd dispered 15 minutes later.
CNN
12 minutes ago
- CNN
Fireworks explode during protests in Seattle
While most of the march was peaceful, Seattle police officers intervened in anti-ICE protests Wednesday after some individuals set fire to a dumpster, police said. Other videos show fireworks going off. Police say they detained eight protesters in the city.
31 minutes ago
Trump's deployment of troops to LA prompts host of legal questions -- and a challenge from California
Remarkable images are emerging of Marines training and National Guardsmen armed with rifles accompanying ICE agents on raids in Los Angeles. It's a scene President Donald Trump and Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth say can be replicated in any other American city where there are protests against the administration's immigration crackdown. It's also raising a host of legal questions regarding what Trump can and can't do with regards to the military on U.S. soil, and whether he's crossing the line. A first hearing on some of these issues is set for Thursday as California Gov. Gavin Newsom, a Democrat, challenges the federal deployment and seeks emergency relief. How Trump mobilized the troops To send thousands of National Guardsmen to Los Angeles, Trump invoked Section 12406 of Title 10 of the U.S. Code. The statute allows the president to call on federal service members when there "is a rebellion or danger of rebellion against the authority of the Government of the United States" or when "the President is unable with the regular forces to execute the laws of the United States." In his order, Trump said the troops would protect federal property and federal personnel who are performing their functions. Trump, however, did not invoke the Insurrection Act -- a clear exception to the mandates of the Posse Comitatus Act, the law that limits the military from being involved in civilian law enforcement. "Instead, he's using authorities in a very novel way," Elizabeth Goitein, a senior director of the Liberty and National Security Program at the Brennan Center, said on ABC News Live. Goitein noted how broad Trump's memorandum is in nature, saying it's not limited to Los Angeles and allows for troops to be sent anywhere protests "are likely to occur." "This is a preemptive, nationwide, potentially, deployment of the federal military to effectively police protests. It is unheard of in this country," Goitein said. California seeks emergency relief California leaders claim Trump inflamed the protests by sending in the military when it was not necessary, and did so illegally. Newsom argues the situation, which has been relatively confined to a few square blocks in downtown Los Angeles, doesn't justify the use of Section 12406 in Title 10. "To put it bluntly, there is no invasion or rebellion in Los Angeles; there is civil unrest that is no different from episodes that regularly occur in communities throughout the country, and that is capable of being contained by state and local authorities working together. And nothing is stopping the President from enforcing the laws through use of ordinary, civilian mechanisms available to federal officers," the state contended in an emergency motion. The state's lawsuit also lambasts Trump for bypassing the governor and local leaders who objected to the mobilization of the National Guard and active duty Marines. However, some legal experts say Section 12406 in Title 10 does not on its face require a request from the governor. There is also precedent for the president sending in the National Guard without governor support: in 1965 President Lyndon B. Johnson sent the National Guard to deal with civil unrest in the South without cooperation from state leaders. Immigration raids raise more questions "If this ultimately gets to the Supreme Court, I don't think they're going to find that the president unlawfully federalized the National Guard troops," said Rachel VanLandingham, a professor at Southwestern Law School in Los Angeles and a former active duty judge advocate in the U.S. Air Force. "A different issue is if these federalized troops, either National Guard or Marines, cross the line into law enforcement and therefore violate Posse Comitatus," she said. National Guard members joining ICE on raids marks a significant escalation, she said. "It's getting dangerously close to law enforcement," VanLandingham said. California made that argument in its emergency motion. "Defendants intend to use unlawfully federalized National Guard troops and Marines to accompany federal immigration enforcement officers on raids throughout Los Angeles," the motion states. "They will work in active concert with law enforcement, in support of a law enforcement mission, and will physically interact with or detain civilians." The Trump administration has steadfastly defended the moves and is urging a federal judge to block California's request for a temporary restraining order. "The extraordinary relief Plaintiffs request would judicially countermand the Commander in Chief's military directives -- and would do so in the posture of a temporary restraining order, no less. That would be unprecedented. It would be constitutionally anathema. And it would be dangerous," lawyers with the Department of Justice said in a court filing. The DOJ lawyers argued that California should not "second-guess the President's judgment that federal reinforcements were necessary" and that a federal court should defer to the president's discretion on military matters.
