Wisconsin Democrat Vows “Force and Fury” Against Federal ICE Agents
The Democratic Party’s candidate for governor of Wisconsin, Democrat Socialist Francesca Hong, stood before supporters at a rally on Sunday and delivered a line that should stop every voter in the state cold. She said she would meet ICE agents with “the force and fury required to keep us all safe.”
Let that statement land. A major party’s nominee for governor — a person who wants the authority to command the Wisconsin National Guard, the Wisconsin State Patrol, and the entire executive branch of state government — has publicly promised to use force against federal law enforcement officers performing their lawful duties.
This was not a private conversation. It was not an off-the-cuff remark later walked back. Hong said it at a rally, on camera, in front of an audience that responded by chanting “Block ICE.” The moment was deliberate, and the reaction from her supporters was enthusiastic.
A Campaign Built on Opposition to Immigration Enforcement
Hong has not hidden her positions. She has already promised to make Wisconsin a sanctuary state. She has floated the idea of deploying the National Guard against ICE. And now she has escalated the rhetoric by using the words “force and fury” to describe what her administration would bring against federal immigration officers.
This is not the language of nuance or measured disagreement over policy. It is the language of confrontation. When a candidate for the state’s highest office speaks this way about federal agents whose job includes removing criminal aliens from American communities, voters are entitled to take her at her word.
The Hypocrisy of Selective Outrage
The same Democratic Party that spent years accusing political opponents of inciting violence with heated rhetoric has nominated a candidate who openly talks about meeting federal officers with force. The same party that held lengthy January 6 hearings, launched congressional investigations into political speech, and treated concerned parents at school board meetings as potential domestic threats is now standing behind a nominee who promises “force and fury” against ICE.
That contradiction is not subtle. For years, Democrats argued that certain kinds of political language created a dangerous climate. They demanded accountability for words. Yet when one of their own gubernatorial nominees uses the word “force” in reference to federal law enforcement, the response from the party establishment is silence or active support.
Hong is not a fringe candidate who somehow slipped through. She won the Democratic primary. A plurality of Wisconsin Democrats looked at her record, her rhetoric, and her platform and chose her as their standard-bearer.
A Pattern of Radical Positions
Hong’s “force and fury” comment did not appear in isolation. She has previously called for defunding the police during a debate — a moment captured on video that circulated widely. She has staked her entire campaign on aggressive opposition to immigration enforcement. These are not moderate positions that accidentally sound extreme when taken out of context. They are the core of her political identity.
When a candidate simultaneously calls for defunding local police and promises to meet federal immigration agents with force, the through-line is clear. The hostility is not limited to one agency or one policy. It reflects a broader view of law enforcement that many Wisconsin voters will find deeply troubling.
The Real-World Climate Around ICE Officers
The timing of Hong’s remarks makes them even more significant. Assaults against ICE officers have increased by 1,300 percent during the period of intensified anti-ICE rhetoric from the left. A federal building in New York City was firebombed last month. A federal building in Portland has been attacked repeatedly.
The political environment that produces “Block ICE” chants at rallies and promises of “force and fury” from gubernatorial candidates is the same environment in which individuals have shown up at federal facilities with flammable liquid. Rhetoric does not exist in a vacuum. When prominent political figures frame federal immigration officers as a threat that must be met with force, it contributes to a climate in which some people feel justified in taking matters into their own hands.
Border Czar Tom Homan has repeatedly warned about the dangers facing ICE officers and the consequences of political leaders normalizing hostility toward them. His concerns are not theoretical. They are grounded in the sharp rise in attacks and the increasingly aggressive tone of anti-enforcement activism.
What “Force and Fury” Would Mean in Practice
Voters should consider what Hong’s words would mean if she actually became governor. The governor of Wisconsin controls the National Guard and the State Patrol. Promising to meet ICE with force raises the prospect of state resources being used to obstruct federal law enforcement.
Sanctuary policies already create friction between state and federal authorities. Escalating that friction into language about force crosses a different threshold. It moves the conversation from passive non-cooperation into active confrontation. That is a serious proposition for any state, and it deserves serious scrutiny from voters.
The Democratic Establishment’s Response
So far, there is little indication that Democratic leaders intend to distance themselves from Hong. The party needs the governorship. Progressive and DSA-aligned candidates have become increasingly difficult to challenge inside the Democratic coalition. As a result, the establishment is likely to endorse her, fund her, and send surrogates to Wisconsin to campaign on her behalf.
That decision will carry its own political cost. Every time Democratic leaders stand with a candidate who talks about meeting ICE agents with force, they own that position. They cannot simultaneously claim to support law and order while elevating candidates who frame federal immigration officers as adversaries to be confronted.
A Clear Test for Wisconsin Voters
Republicans have an obvious opportunity. Hong’s “force and fury” clip should run in every competitive Wisconsin legislative race between now and November. Every Republican candidate in the state should be prepared to answer one simple question: Do you agree with Francesca Hong that the state should meet federal agents with force?
The question is fair because the statement was public, recorded, and delivered in a political setting. Voters deserve to know where every candidate stands. Soft-pedaling or changing the subject should not be an option.
National Implications of State-Level Defiance
What happens in Wisconsin will not stay in Wisconsin. Other states are watching. Progressive activists are watching. Federal immigration officers are watching. If a major-party nominee can promise force against ICE and still receive full party support, it sets a precedent that other candidates in other states may try to follow.
President Trump’s administration has made clear that immigration laws will be enforced. Border security and interior enforcement are central priorities. Candidates who pledge to obstruct that enforcement with state power are choosing a direct collision course with federal authority. Voters should understand the stakes before they cast their ballots.
Accountability Before Election Day
Francesca Hong has done Wisconsin voters a favor in one respect: she has been clear. She has not hidden her views behind vague language. She has said she wants to make Wisconsin a sanctuary state. She has talked about using the National Guard. And she has now used the words “force and fury” to describe her intended posture toward ICE.
That clarity creates an obligation for everyone else in the race. Democrats who support her should be prepared to defend the statement. Republicans should make sure every voter hears it. Independents and moderates should weigh whether this is the kind of leadership they want in the governor’s office.
The choice is no longer abstract. It is on video. It was delivered at a rally. And it now defines the Democratic nominee for governor of Wisconsin. Voters will decide in November whether “force and fury” against federal immigration agents is the direction they want their state to take.
Benjamin Harris is a RapidReports front page contributor and editor,proud father of four.
