Activists Demand Target Bar ICE from Stores Amid Solidarity with Minneapolis
Philadelphia advocacy group No ICE Philly has launched a campaign pressuring retail giant Target to ban Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents from its properties, citing solidarity with ongoing struggles in Minneapolis. Demonstrators gathered outside Philadelphia locations, demanding the company take a public stance against what they describe as “horrible” enforcement tactics employed by federal agents.
“What ICE is doing, what they have been doing, is horrible and we stand with the people of Minneapolis,” stated one activist during a recent demonstration. The group is calling for Target to refuse ICE access to store parking lots for staging operations and to deny entry to agents without a judicial warrant.
The Minneapolis Connection
The focus on Target is strategic, stemming from the corporation’s headquarters in Minneapolis, a city currently at the center of intensified immigration enforcement debates. Activists allege that Target has historically allowed ICE and Customs and Border Protection (CBP) agents to utilize its parking lots as staging grounds for operations in the Twin Cities. Reports from Minneapolis indicate recent incidents where agents reportedly detained individuals on or near retail properties, fueling claims that the company is complicit in these enforcement actions. By targeting Philadelphia stores, No ICE Philly aims to nationalize the pressure on the corporate leadership to leverage their influence in their home state.
Tactics and Demands
Beyond banning agents, the group’s demands include specific policy changes:
- Posting signage at all entrances explicitly stating that immigration agents are not permitted without a warrant.
- Implementing staff training protocols to handle interactions with federal agents.
- Publicly lobbying for the defunding of ICE.
To emphasize their point, some protesters have employed disruption tactics, such as purchasing small, low-cost items like salt and immediately returning them to bog down customer service lines and impact store metrics.
Corporate Constraints and Legal Realities
Target has not publicly committed to the activists’ demands to ban federal agents. In past statements regarding similar protests, the company has emphasized that the “safety of our team and guests is our top priority” and that they respect the right to peaceful protest.
However, industry analysts point to significant hurdles in implementing such a ban. While retailers are private entities, their parking lots and sales floors are generally considered spaces open to the public. Legal experts note that barring federal law enforcement could invite complex litigation or federal scrutiny. Furthermore, major retailers often strive to maintain political neutrality to avoid alienating a diverse customer base, making a hardline stance against a federal agency commercially risky. Critics of the protest also argue that store employees should not be placed in the position of confronting armed federal agents to enforce corporate policy.
