Citizens Recruited to HUNT Federal Officers Daily

A sitting governor just launched a state-run surveillance system targeting federal law enforcement agents doing their jobs, urging citizens to grab their phones and track ICE operations like criminal suspects.

Story Snapshot

New Jersey Governor Mikie Sherrill announced an online portal for residents to upload videos and images of ICE agents and operations
Sherrill instructed the public during a Comedy Central appearance to film federal immigration enforcement officers in the streets
The initiative follows similar portals launched by New York and California, escalating state resistance to federal immigration enforcement
State officials claim the portal promotes transparency while critics see it as obstruction of lawful federal operations
Additional state actions against federal immigration enforcement to be announced in coming days

When State Government Declares War on Federal Law Enforcement

Governor Mikie Sherrill stepped onto Comedy Central’s The Daily Show and delivered instructions that would have seemed unthinkable a generation ago. She told New Jersey residents that if they spot an ICE agent on the street, they should pull out their phones and start recording. The state wants to collect these videos through an official portal, reviewing footage of federal agents performing their lawful duties. Sherrill framed ICE operations as secretive and overreaching, comparing them to secret police tactics, despite these agents enforcing laws passed by Congress and signed by presidents from both parties.

The Mechanics of State-Sponsored Surveillance

The portal allows residents to upload videos and images directly to state officials who will review them for potential ICE violations. Sherrill spokesperson Sean Higgins confirmed details would be released in coming days, with Acting Attorney General Davenport set to announce additional protective measures. Assemblywoman Annette Quijano applauded the initiative, linking it to her legislative efforts prohibiting ICE agents from concealing their identities and restricting state investments in immigration surveillance firms. The state positions this as promoting accountability, but the practical effect creates a chilling atmosphere for federal law enforcement operations within New Jersey’s borders.

OUTRAGE: New Jersey Gov. Mikie Sherrill Announces “ICE Tracking Portal” — Urges Public to Film and Report Federal Agents https://t.co/eJsrVWdqoV #gatewaypundit via @gatewaypundit

— Debra Dosch (@DebraDosch) January 30, 2026

Following the Blueprint from Blue State Resistance

New Jersey isn’t pioneering this approach. New York Attorney General Letitia James launched a similar portal in October for residents to submit ICE videos that her office would review for legal violations. California followed in December with its own reporting system for ICE wrongdoing. These state-led initiatives differ from grassroots immigrant alert networks by carrying the weight of official government resources and legal review. The escalating pattern suggests coordinated resistance among Democratic-led states to federal immigration enforcement under the Trump administration, transforming what were once localized sanctuary policies into active surveillance and potential interference with federal operations.

The Constitutional Collision Nobody Wants to Acknowledge

Sherrill cited incidents of ICE detaining U.S. citizens and a five-year-old child without providing documentation, suggesting agents lack transparency in their operations. She referenced killings by immigration agents in Minneapolis involving Renee Good and Alex Pretti, though these claims remain unverified beyond her statements. The governor’s rhetoric paints federal immigration enforcement as inherently suspect, requiring state oversight. This framing ignores the constitutional supremacy clause giving federal government authority over immigration enforcement. When states actively work to monitor and potentially obstruct federal agents executing lawful duties, they venture into territory that previous generations would have recognized as nullification, the discredited doctrine that states can invalidate federal law.

What Happens When Law Enforcement Becomes the Hunted

The short-term impact of such portals includes increased public reporting of ICE activities, potentially deterring operations or enabling state legal challenges to federal enforcement actions. Communities with significant immigrant populations may view the portal as protection, bolstering trust in state government while reducing cooperation with federal authorities. The long-term implications prove more troubling. ICE agents performing dangerous work now operate under state surveillance, their movements tracked and reported by citizens encouraged to view them with suspicion. This environment makes it harder to enforce immigration law, which remains on the books whether state officials approve or not. The precedent invites other states to surveil and impede federal agents enforcing laws those states find politically inconvenient.

The Uncomfortable Questions Nobody’s Asking

Sherrill’s announcement raises issues that transcend partisan politics. If New Jersey can create portals tracking ICE agents, what prevents other states from doing the same with FBI agents investigating civil rights violations? Could a conservative state launch a portal tracking ATF agents during firearm investigations? The principle that state governments can officially surveil and collect intelligence on federal law enforcement opens doors that most Americans, regardless of political affiliation, might prefer remain closed. The absence of pro-ICE perspectives or independent expert analysis in news coverage of Sherrill’s announcement reveals how one-sided the conversation has become. Federal agents enforcing duly enacted laws now face treatment typically reserved for suspects under investigation.

Where This Goes From Here

New Jersey officials promise more details about the portal’s operation in coming days, along with additional actions from Sherrill and Acting Attorney General Davenport designed to protect residents from what they characterize as federal overreach. The initiative may influence the 2026 elections, serving as a rallying point for immigration activists while potentially energizing voters who believe federal law enforcement deserves support rather than surveillance. The fundamental question remains unanswered: at what point does state resistance to federal immigration enforcement cross from political disagreement into active obstruction of justice? The answer may ultimately come from federal courts, but by then, the damage to cooperative federalism and respect for law enforcement may prove difficult to repair.