Skip to content

U.S. House candidate Ala Stanford suggests Congress could enforce immigration laws if ICE is abolished

In an interview with NBC10, Stanford said ICE is a "paramilitary organization that is taking human life."

Physician Ala Stanford at a forum hosted by the 9th Ward Democratic Committee Dec. 4, 2025. She is a Democratic candidate running to represent Philadelphia's 3rd Congressional District.
Physician Ala Stanford at a forum hosted by the 9th Ward Democratic Committee Dec. 4, 2025. She is a Democratic candidate running to represent Philadelphia's 3rd Congressional District.Read moreTom Gralish / Staff Photographer

Should Congress be in charge of enforcing immigration laws?

Physician Ala Stanford, a first-time candidate seeking to replace retiring U.S. Rep. Dwight Evans (D., Philadelphia) in Congress, seemed to suggest as much in an interview with NBC10 that aired Friday and has attracted attention to her stance on immigration in the days that followed.

Stanford and her top rivals in the Democratic primary for the deep-blue 3rd Congressional District have all said they support abolishing U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, or ICE.

When NBC10 journalist Lauren Mayk asked Stanford how immigration laws would be enforced if the agency is disbanded, Stanford stumbled through her answer, at point asking for a pause.

“That’s a good question,” Stanford told Mayk in the interview, which circulated widely on social media. “And you can pause because I just want to think about it.”

After Mayk insisted the interview continue, Stanford suggested federal lawmakers would have a role in replacing ICE.

“Who do I think should be in charge of enforcing immigration laws?” she said. “Not the executive branch, so not the president. So it belongs with Congress. It belongs with Congress because the executive branch and specifically the president is self-serving, and many of the decisions that he is making is not about the American people. It’s not about our safety.”

Stanford said ICE needed to be replaced because it is a “paramilitary organization that is taking human life” and could not be reformed — a sentiment shared by her fellow contenders in the race, State Rep. Chris Rabb and State Sen. Sharif Street.

She then clarified that while she did not yet know “the people who would lead” immigration enforcement, she had identified “values” the effort should abide by.

“I would put the subject matter experts around me who are more knowledgeable in this space to say, ‘How do we not repeat the errors of the past and build?’” said Stanford, who has been endorsed in the race by three local Congress members, including Evans. “And with the goal being that not only do we protect our borders, we’re also preserving human life; we’re not taking it.”

Asked for comment, a Stanford spokesperson pointed to a statement the campaign posted Tuesday evening on social media.

“ICE should be abolished, but instead this Congress has given it $150 billion to fund its disgusting campaign of terrorizing people of color and murdering Americans in the street,” Stanford said in the post. “In Congress, I would abolish ICE and hold Trump accountable. Democrats in Congress should not fund ICE until it has the authority to re-write immigration enforcement laws in this country and pass real immigration reform, allowing a pathway to citizenship.”

With three weeks to go before the May 19 primary, the race for the Philadelphia congressional seat is seen as a tight contest between the three top contenders. Stanford, a pediatric surgeon who founded the Black Doctors Consortium to reach underserved communities during the COVID-19 pandemic, has largely focused her messaging on that experience and on improving the healthcare system.

In an interview with former WURD host Andrea Lawful-Sanders on Tuesday, Stanford clarified her position on a post-ICE future by saying other federal law enforcement agencies could handle immigration enforcement. (ICE is part of the Department of Homeland Security, a cabinet-level department of the executive branch. Both ICE and DHS were created in the aftermath of the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks.)

“Abolishing ICE is not immigration enforcement... ICE, many people, know was created in 2003. We had immigration enforcement for 227 years before ICE ever existed,” Stanford said in the Lawful-Sanders interview, which was posted on YouTube. “Border security, Customs and Border Protection, legal status led to U.S. citizenship and immigration services, interior enforcement, a reformed agency built around due process, judicial oversight, and humane treatment — we can protect our borders without taking people’s lives."

That stance is similar to the positions held by Street and Rabb, who also said the federal government could handle immigration enforcement without ICE.

In a statement, Rabb noted that the “Constitution tells us Congress makes laws for the Executive branch, not the other way around.”

“Congress has had immigration laws before ICE and [the Department of Homeland Security], those laws were enforced before ICE and DHS, and we can absolutely build a system that recognizes that immigration is not a crime and sees the humanity of people who come here,” Rabb said.

Street spokesperson Anthony Campisi said that other federal law enforcement agencies are capable of enforcing immigration laws.

Campisi also criticized Stanford for her original response, saying it is a “bare minimum qualification” to understand the “separation of powers,” noting that Congress is “not a law enforcement agency.”

“Philadelphians deserve a member of Congress who is ready on Day 1, who understands the issues,” Campisi said. “It’s not enough to just spout a slogan. You actually have to understand how to implement policy, which is something Sharif has been doing all his time in the legislature.”

Campisi said Street, the former head of the state Democratic Party, “will not be heading down to the border to personally enforce immigration laws when he is elected.”

In the interview with Lawful-Sanders, Stanford noted that she served in President Joe Biden’s administration as a regional health and human services official, and said that despite being new to electoral politics, she is a “quick study.”

“All I can do is tell the truth, and so if I pause, it’s because I’m thinking. I’m not just going to regurgitate something,” she said. “I’m thinking. I’m a solver of complex problems. I’m detail-oriented.”

    Sean Collins Walsh
    I report from the City Hall bureau, covering the mayor and City Council and searching for stories about Philly politics.