A progressive star wants a ‘moratorium’ on deportations

This conversation has been edited for length and clarity.

Dave Weigel: You ran on your experience as an “organizer,” versus how other people get to Congress. What does that mean – what work are you going to do that most other members don’t?

Analilia Mejia: Barack Obama and John Lewis were organizers before they started their political careers. It hard-wires the idea that you should meet people where they’re at – speaking with folks and understanding their self-interests, their concerns.

I applied that to my campaign, right? I was very intentional in making sure that we were connecting with folks across the community; I made a point to hold town halls, where I would introduce myself as a candidate, and also create space for ICE trainings. In order to be an effective representative, you have to be able to engage people.

Dave Weigel: You’ve said that you’re not ready to support Leader [Hakeem] Jeffries in a speaker election. What does he need to do to win you over? What’s Democratic leadership not doing that it should be doing?

Analilia Mejia: I want to clarify: I hadn’t had an opportunity to speak to the leader, and I was looking forward to engaging him on what I’d heard on the campaign trail. I’ve since talked with Leader Jeffries, and we talked about how concerned our communities are about ICE overreach — how concerned we are about the data collection and surveillance that is happening without any transparency, how they’re using data to target not only immigrants, but American citizens who are upholding and practicing their constitutionally protected right to dissent.

We’re looking for a time for him to come to New Jersey and feel the energy that we’re creating up here. And I want to work in close partnership with the leader — with, obviously, whoever ultimately gets elected, which I believe will be Leader Jeffries.

So many people feel dejected at what they are seeing coming out of the Trump administration, and so many people feel like the response has been anemic at best. I’m heartened by the tougher stance that members of the Democratic Party leadership — and this is not only at the federal level, but across the board — are taking in what is clearly a moment of democratic backslide.

You were very clear, on the trail, about abolishing ICE. If you could achieve that, if ICE was gone, what sort of internal immigration enforcement do you support?

It’s a complicated problem that requires a multi-pronged solution. I do believe that ICE cannot be reformed. The cruelty that’s happening across the country puts us all in danger. I believe that we need to claw back the $75 billion that was essentially stolen from the American people and from safety net programs in order to empower a rogue agency for a despotic president.

I believe that we need to stop, and then have full transparency on the surveillance and data collection that ICE agents have practiced on immigrants and citizens alike. I believe that we need to tackle the issue of qualified immunity for ICE agents.

At the same time, we need to invest in a fair, just, efficient, effective immigration system that allows new Americans to integrate into our society, instead of lingering in it for 10 or 11 years like the current system does. That means, fully fund our immigration courts.

Who should be deported now? Under the last Trump administration, there were calls for a deportation moratorium. Do you support that?

In this moment, I think we do need a deportation moratorium, because ICE has operated with such impunity. They are in violation of constitutional protections and rights. To allow that to proceed without a stop and evaluation is unconscionable.

Another issue that the leadership isn’t always clear on is the Trump administration’s intervention against foreign governments. If this administration tries to remove the government of Cuba, or it attacks Iran, will you oppose it? What will you be doing in Congress?

I believe in people’s rights to self-determination. I believe that the rights that that we so dearly hold for ourselves, we should uphold for other people globally. Now, embedded in your question is the fact that the president is usurping the constitutionally defined powers of Congress. Congress is the final decider on whether or not we enter into war or conflict with other nations – not rooted in the personal enrichment and avarice of a president who seems to be negotiating with despotic leaders and pardoning criminals and breaking our Constitution and undermining the will of the people.