1. United States
2. Maine
3. Letter

I’m writing as a Maine constituent to object to the Administration’s recent ICE build-ups and the way ICE is being used in American cities and towns. I’m asking you to push for immediate congressional oversight and clear limits on these deployments and tactics. From what’s being reported and observed, these actions appear targeted and politically selective: large buildups are occurring primarily in “blue” jurisdictions, including places with relatively small undocumented populations and no credible emergency that would justify a surge of federal force. In Maine, that mismatch makes the rationale especially hard to accept. The pattern looks less like legitimate enforcement and more like a blunt political instrument. I’m also deeply concerned by what these operations are becoming in practice—an unaccountable, pseudo-military “shadow force.” Masked personnel, armored gear, and conduct that obscures identity and responsibility are incompatible with democratic policing. When agents conceal who they are, it invites abuse, prevents meaningful complaints, and erodes public trust—including trust in lawful immigration enforcement. Local leaders—governors and mayors—have objected to these deployments and tactics. Regardless of one’s politics, overriding local governance with federal force absent transparency and coordination is corrosive and unnecessary. It also increases the risk of escalation and misidentification, and it makes responsible local law enforcement harder. Finally, I’m troubled by reports that evidence is being withheld or shielded from local law enforcement and the public, while internal or DOJ-linked “investigations” are cited as the reason. That’s a built-in conflict of interest. If DOJ is effectively “covering” or controlling the flow of information about DOJ-led federal operations, accountability becomes performative rather than real. I’m asking you to support and pursue concrete oversight and controls, including: • Hearings and subpoenas on the legal basis, targeting criteria, rules of engagement, and command structure for these deployments. • Mandatory transparency: visible name/ID (or unique identifier), agency markings, and a clear chain of command in any public-facing operation. • Limits on masking except for narrowly defined, documented circumstances (with after-action review). • Body-worn cameras (or equivalent recording) with retention rules and independent audit access. • Coordination requirements with local law enforcement and elected officials, except in exigent circumstances. • Independent review by the DHS Inspector General and/or an external monitor, with public reporting. • Appropriations guardrails that restrict funding for deployments that do not meet clear standards for necessity, transparency, and accountability. Immigration enforcement should be lawful, transparent, and accountable—never performative intimidation. I would appreciate hearing where you stand on these ICE deployments and what specific oversight steps you will support.