California Democrats onstage at the recent gubernatorial debate pushed a hardline pro-immigration message, with several candidates calling for sweeping changes to federal immigration enforcement and others stopping short but agreeing on limiting ICE’s role in the state.
The debate leaned heavily into immigration and public safety, and it exposed a clear split between those demanding abolition of federal agencies and those who prefer incremental changes. From calls to expand access to health care for undocumented people to outright vows to dismantle enforcement bodies, the candidates made immigration the centerpiece of their pitch.
“People are afraid to even see a doctor. When I am governor, I will restore universal health care for all, including undocumented immigrants in the state of California because we know health care is a right,” said State Schools Superintendent Tony Thurmond, framing public services as unconditional rights. That argument appeals to compassion, but it raises serious questions about state resources and legal responsibility. Californians who worry about law and order hear the promise and worry about unintended costs and incentives.
“I will work with Congress until we abolish ICE. We [will] create a pathway to citizenship, a better California is possible,” Thurmond added, pledging federal action as if the state can reshape enforcement at will. Republicans would argue federal immigration policy must prioritize national security and clear legal frameworks. Promises to abolish federal agencies overlook the gaps enforcement left behind and the need for practical alternatives.
The tone on stage ranged from polished billionaire rhetoric to blunt moral outrage. Tom Steyer told the audience, “This country was built by immigrants. This state doesn’t work without immigration. Of course, we need to have a fair, just system, but this is the exact opposite of that,” appealing to economic and historical arguments for immigration.
“You really can’t reform an organization which is absolutely wrong and criminal from top to bottom,” he continued, taking a totalizing stance that many voters will find extreme. Sweeping condemnations are emotionally powerful but politically risky for a state still dealing with crime, housing strain, and infrastructure shortfalls.
BORDERS STATE SENATOR WANTS ICE TO BE ‘TOTALLY TORN DOWN’
Xavier Becerra promised to “police the immigration police,” signaling a focus on oversight rather than cooperation with federal agents. Republicans note that oversight is welcome, but active obstruction creates enforcement vacuums and complicates coordination with federal partners. Californians who value public safety want both accountability and effective enforcement, not only rhetoric.
TRUMP-ERA ICE AGENTS TARGETED FOR ‘IMMORALITY’ BY DEM TRYING TO BLACKLIST THEM FROM COP, CLASSROOM JOBS
San Jose Mayor Matt Mahan spoke about threats to “rights and civil liberties,” stopping short of abolition but criticizing federal tactics. Antonio Villaraigosa went further, comparing ICE officers to the “Ku Klux Klan,” describing them as “dressed from head to toe, all covered up like the Ku Klux Klan with assault weapons, flash bang grenades, beating up on women, children and innocents.” That kind of rhetoric is intended to mobilize emotion, but it also risks demonizing entire agencies and the people who enforce border laws.
Former state controller Betty Yee took a softer approach, urging “know your rights” training and emphasizing immigrants as taxpayers. “When people understand that immigrants are such a contributor to our economy and to our society here in California … and that’s what we’re going to build together. We are a sanctuary state,” Yee said. “Ice has no business coming in and tearing up communities, tearing up families.” Her sanctuary stance highlights the policy divide: prioritize sanctuary protections or prioritize enforcement cooperation.
For voters focused on public safety and the rule of law, the debate posed a stark choice about priorities and practicalities. The primary election remains set for June 2, and these competing visions will shape the Democratic field as Republicans continue to push for stronger border security and accountable, effective immigration enforcement.
