Police Union Rejects Socialist Mayor’s Order Targeting ICE
A growing rift between Seattle’s political leadership and its police force came into public view this week after the city’s police union rejected a new directive from Mayor Katie Wilson involving federal immigration enforcement.
The order instructs Seattle police officers to investigate, verify, and document activities conducted by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) within city limits, with the stated goal of determining whether federal agents could be subject to local or state prosecution. The directive mirrors similar efforts in other progressive-led cities, including Chicago under Mayor Brandon Johnson.
But the response from the Seattle Police Officers Guild (SPOG) was swift and unequivocal.
Police Union: “We Will Not Be Political Pawns”
Mike Solan, president of the Seattle Police Officers Guild, publicly rejected the mayor’s directive, calling it dangerous and irresponsible. In a statement posted on social media, Solan warned that encouraging one law enforcement agency to scrutinize or interfere with another could escalate into real-world confrontations.
He “The concept of pitting two armed law enforcement agencies against each other is ludicrous,” Solan wrote, adding that he would not allow union members to be used for political signaling.
Solan referenced recent fatal incidents tied to immigration enforcement operations in the Upper Midwest, arguing that rhetoric portraying ICE actions as criminal has already contributed to heightened tensions and loss of life. While details of those incidents remain under investigation, Solan’s broader concern centered on officer safety and operational clarity.
Federal Enforcement, Local Resistance
The mayor’s directive comes amid heightened scrutiny of immigration enforcement nationwide, particularly following reports of large-scale welfare fraud involving daycare providers in Minnesota. Those reports—first brought to public attention by investigative journalists and independent media—prompted the Department of Homeland Security to deploy federal agents to the Minneapolis–St. Paul area.
The issue gained further visibility after a viral video by independent journalist Nick Shirley documented visits to multiple daycare facilities, fueling public debate about oversight, fraud, and federal response. While those events occurred outside Washington state, they appear to have influenced the broader political climate surrounding ICE operations in progressive cities.
Mayor Wilson, however, has consistently rejected the premise that such investigations are about fraud prevention. In a January interview with a Seattle television station, she argued that the controversy is being used to stigmatize immigrant communities rather than address legitimate wrongdoing.
“This isn’t really about fraud,” Wilson said at the time. “It’s about dividing and conquering and making an immigrant community a target.”
A Pattern of Conflict With Law Enforcement
The clash over ICE enforcement is not the first time Wilson and Seattle’s police union have found themselves at odds. Earlier disputes centered on changes to how police handle drug possession, with new policies emphasizing diversion to social services rather than arrest.
Solan previously described those policies as “suicidal empathy,” arguing that they removed consequences while placing officers and the public at greater risk. The mayor’s office, for its part, downplayed the characterization and denied that enforcement standards had materially changed.
These disagreements reflect a deeper philosophical divide between City Hall and rank-and-file officers over public safety, enforcement priorities, and the role of police in advancing broader political goals.
Campaign Positions Resurface
Wilson’s current approach is also drawing renewed attention to positions she took during her mayoral campaign. She previously endorsed the concept of government-run grocery stores, supported restrictions on private businesses closing locations, and emphasized the need for a mayoral cabinet selected explicitly to meet “equity” benchmarks.
Critics argue these ideas signal an expansive view of government authority that now extends into federal–local conflicts over immigration enforcement. Supporters counter that the mayor is standing up for immigrant communities and pushing back against what they see as overreach by federal agencies.
Unresolved Questions Ahead
For now, the police union’s refusal raises practical questions about how—or whether—the mayor’s directive can be implemented. While city leaders can set policy priorities, police unions retain significant leverage over day-to-day operations and officer participation.
As federal immigration enforcement continues and political pressure mounts, Seattle may become a test case for how far local governments can go in opposing ICE without triggering legal, operational, or safety consequences.
What is clear is that the standoff highlights a growing national tension: the collision between progressive municipal policies and the realities of law enforcement on the ground—a collision that shows no sign of easing.