An extensive in depth report details how organized activist networks are combining digital coordination, rapid-response mobilization, and long-standing protest tactics to disrupt federal immigration enforcement.
By yourNEWS
A coordinated network of anti-ICE activists is employing encrypted communications, rapid-response deployments, and traditional protest tactics modernized for the digital era to interfere with federal immigration enforcement operations, according to findings outlined by The Epoch Times, in an extensive in depth report.
In St. Paul, Minnesota, civilian patrol groups monitor neighborhoods for vehicles they believe may belong to Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents. Participants use dispatch-style communication systems, conduct license plate checks against databases of suspected ICE vehicles, and mobilize others when agents are believed to be present.
Independent reporter Cam Higby revealed elements of the monitoring effort after infiltrating an ICE-watch network and publishing details of its operations. Activists have used encrypted messaging platforms such as Signal to track agents in real time, issue alerts, and assign roles to participants. According to posts and screenshots Higby shared publicly, organizers routinely delete chats and recreate new ones daily to limit traceability.
FBI Director Kash Patel said investigators have made “substantial progress” examining the organized resistance to ICE. “We’ve actually found groups and individuals responsible for funding it,” Patel told podcaster Benny Johnson in late January.
Investigations intensified after President Donald Trump issued a presidential action directing federal agencies to identify funding sources behind what he described as “domestic terrorism and organized political violence,” referencing prior attacks on ICE officers in Los Angeles and Portland. The directive was outlined in a formal White House order.
Testimony before a Homeland Security subcommittee in February further spotlighted financial backing behind certain activist groups. Seamus Bruner of the Government Accountability Institute told senators that his organization traced at least $60 million to more than a dozen anti-ICE groups operating in Minnesota and nationally. The institute’s data was not independently reviewed.
Bruner described what he called a “professionalized protest-industrial complex,” alleging that funding structures obscure donor identities and create what he termed “the illusion of spontaneous public outrage.” He urged lawmakers to investigate and dismantle what he characterized as coordinated networks.
Progressive organizations have rejected claims of centralized orchestration. Media Matters for America stated on its website that assertions of foreign involvement are baseless and accused critics of searching for a “bogeyman” to blame.
Minnesota state Rep. Pam Altendorf said she believes both local participants and outside organizers are involved in demonstrations in her state. “It’s being almost staged,” she said, adding that agitators appear to position themselves deliberately to provoke reactions. “They’re on the verge of being pushed to a breaking point,” she said.
Organizers nationwide have adopted reporting methods derived from military practice. One common template uses the SALUTE mnemonic—Size, Action, Location, Uniform, Time, and Equipment—to standardize field reports about ICE activity. Activists also coordinate “rapid responders” who arrive at enforcement sites to document operations, alert nearby individuals, and create disturbances intended to delay or deter arrests.
A New York City training session recently highlighted physical disruption tactics known as “de-arresting,” in which activists attempt to free detained individuals. Manhattan Institute analyst Stu Smith shared a video from that session, describing techniques such as opening vehicle doors or physically separating officers from detainees.
Retired Green Beret Eric Schwalm wrote on social media that the development of “parallel intelligence and rapid-response networks” signals what he called a “seismic shift” in protest strategy, comparing it to special operations-style coordination.
Some groups openly articulate broader political objectives. Revolutionary Communists of America stated in March 2025 that it seeks “to build a communist party that can lead the working class to power, tearing down not only Trump but also the liberals and the entire capitalist system.” The Sunrise Movement has advocated removing Trump from office and expanding its “No Sleep for ICE” campaign to disrupt hotels believed to house ICE agents.
Aru Shiney-Ajay, executive director of Sunrise Movement, said during an online meeting that activists aim to make immigration enforcement actions “backfire.” She stated that thousands had participated in ICE-watch training sessions following fatal confrontations in January involving federal officers and two protesters, Renee Good and Alex Pretti. Published reports described both as protesters and U.S. citizens. Their alleged training roles within ICE-watch groups could not be independently verified.
As activism escalates, the Trump administration faces a strategic decision, according to J. Michael Waller, a senior analyst at the Center for Security Policy. If federal authorities withdraw from contested areas, Waller said, it could be perceived as a retreat. Conversely, sustained enforcement could intensify tensions.
“After someone is killed, the public typically responds with anger toward the government,” Waller said, noting that public narratives often emphasize personal identities over activist affiliations.
The size and scope of the anti-ICE movement continue to grow, with some organizations claiming hundreds of thousands of supporters. Federal investigators, lawmakers, and advocacy groups remain divided over whether the movement represents grassroots resistance or a coordinated national campaign designed to obstruct law enforcement.
Original article
Comments