I’m excited to share the story of Will Stancil and his unique approach to addressing ICE activities in Minneapolis.
I met Will just before his expulsion from a local Signal chat group. This chat was crucial for members trying to keep their communities safe from ICE enforcement. Will’s participation landed him in hot water because he often invites journalists along on his “commuting” trips to observe and document federal agents in action. This openness raises concerns among some community members who fear increased attention could jeopardize their efforts.
During our meeting, Will was chatting with former NYC comptroller Brad Lander, who had come to learn about Minneapolis’ grassroots response to federal actions. When I joined them, Will was eager to share his experiences. Armed with a phone camera, he records ICE activities, aiming to create awareness about what he calls “abductions.” This approach has led to him facing aggressive responses, including pepper spray and tear gas.
Critics claim Will’s attention-seeking behavior may endanger others. In a previous run for State House, he had hopes of raising his profile. Nonetheless, Will insists his focus is on helping his community. Despite the risks, he feels a strong obligation to document what he sees.
Interestingly, there’s been a shift in the community’s response to ICE presence. Will shared a hopeful perspective, highlighting how old political rivals are working together against a common threat. This unity among different factions has “inspired” many, he said. He believes if the community can come together to address this issue, it can tackle other challenges too.
He also expressed concern about how the group operates—favoring secrecy over openness. “It’s not a guerrilla organization,” he remarked, emphasizing that collaboration amplifies their efforts.
Throughout the day, Will and I drove around Southside Minneapolis. We encountered sporadic ICE sightings, which meant a lot of downtime for Will to recount past interactions and reflect on the challenges of community vigilance. Not every day provides action, and the tension between ICE and civilians creates a constant undercurrent of anxiety for many.
In a recent twist, the Department of Homeland Security has targeted activists, dubbing them “domestic terrorists.” This naming has stirred fear and resulted in arrests among those involved in anti-ICE activities. Such pressures underline the need for safety while still fostering activism.
Will highlighted the toll on community members engaged in these efforts. He expressed that while grassroots responses may prove effective in the short term, relying on individuals to police their neighborhoods is not sustainable. It takes significant resources and is prone to errors—something that may not hold up long-term.
Despite the slow moments and the challenges ahead, Will remains committed to documenting ICE’s actions. On a slow day, he still pursued leads and reluctantly navigated through erratic traffic in hopes of spotting a known ICE vehicle. His determination illustrates both the urgency of the situation and the complexity of managing safety while advocating for change.
This blend of activism and personal commitment offers a window into how citizens can mobilize against federal actions. The struggle is ongoing, but through collaboration, they hope to build a safer community for everyone.
If you’re interested in understanding how activism shapes local politics and community safety, you might want to look at recent surveys or stats from sources like the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) on the impact of community-led initiatives against ICE.
Source link
Policy
