The question hanging over California politics just got a whole lot more complicated, and it speaks to the deeper fracture in how Americans view federal law enforcement and immigration policy.
Representative Eric Swalwell, the Democratic congressman from California’s 14th District, has thrown his hat into the ring for governor with a platform that would have seemed unthinkable just a generation ago. His promise? To use the full power of the state to obstruct federal immigration enforcement, including stripping Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents of their driver’s licenses.
Speaking before the Empowerment Congress, Swalwell laid out a vision that puts him on a collision course with federal authority. When asked about his plans to shield certain populations from ICE operations, the congressman did not mince words. He pledged to direct state law enforcement to pursue criminal charges against federal agents, including allegations of battery, false imprisonment, and even murder.
“They’re gonna lose their immunity,” Swalwell declared, adding a crude flourish about federal agents walking to work without their licenses.
This is not the first time Swalwell has staked out this territory. In a December interview, he expanded on his vision for what amounts to a state-level resistance campaign against federal immigration enforcement. He insisted that ICE agents would be required to remove masks, display identification, and face criminal prosecution for actions he deems unlawful during immigration operations.
The constitutional implications here are substantial. Federal agents typically operate under sovereign immunity when conducting their duties. The notion that a state governor could unilaterally strip federal law enforcement officers of basic privileges like driver’s licenses raises serious questions about the balance of power between state and federal authority.
Swalwell’s campaign announcement came during an appearance on a late-night talk show in November, where he confirmed his intention to replace Governor Gavin Newsom. The timing is significant. California has long positioned itself as a sanctuary state, but Swalwell’s proposals represent an escalation in the ongoing tension between state and federal immigration enforcement.
The practical mechanics of such policies remain unclear. Driver’s licenses are typically issued based on residency and competency, not as leverage in political disputes. Whether a governor possesses the legal authority to selectively revoke licenses from federal employees performing their duties is dubious at best.
What is clear is that Swalwell is betting California voters want confrontation over cooperation when it comes to immigration enforcement. He is wagering that enough Californians view ICE operations as inherently criminal to support a governor who would treat federal agents as lawbreakers rather than law enforcers.
This approach raises fundamental questions about federalism, the rule of law, and whether states can simply nullify federal authority they find disagreeable. Those are not small questions, and they deserve more than applause lines and profanity-laced promises at political rallies.
The race for California’s governorship just became a referendum on something much larger than state policy. It has become a test of whether we remain one nation under law, or a collection of jurisdictions picking and choosing which federal authorities they will recognize.
Related: Twin Cities Residents Report Aggressive Federal Tactics During Immigration Surge
