Tensions Flare as Former White House Official Reacts to New Jersey’s ICE Restriction: “This Is a Direct Challenge”

A former White House official reacted with visible frustration Thursday after New Jersey Governor Mikie Sherrill signed an executive order restricting U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement’s use of state-owned property—a move that immediately reignited fierce debate over federal-state tensions on immigration enforcement.

The order, signed Wednesday in Trenton, prohibits federal immigration agents from entering or using nonpublic areas of state property to launch or execute operations without a judicial warrant . The restrictions apply to locations including government offices, child care centers, residential medical facilities, and state university dormitories .

According to multiple sources, the former White House figure—who served in a senior advisory role during the Trump administration—expressed dismay at what they characterized as an escalation beyond typical policy disagreements.

“This isn’t just about property access,” the former official said during a private call that was later described to reporters. “This is a direct challenge to federal authority. When a state tells federal law enforcement they cannot use state-owned parking lots or roads to conduct lawful operations, they’re not making a policy statement—they’re creating jurisdictional chaos.”

The reaction underscores how quickly a routine executive action can transform into a national flashpoint. Sherrill, a Democrat and former U.S. Navy helicopter pilot who took office last month, framed the order as a constitutional imperative.

“Trump has turned law enforcement agencies into militias loyal to him, not our constitution,” Sherrill said at a statehouse press conference. “We see agents hiding behind masks, no insignias, constantly changing license plates—breaking the core principles of what good policing needs to be to keep people safe” .

A Carefully Calibrated Policy

The executive order does not amount to a blanket ban. ICE agents may still access public areas of state property and can make lawful arrests there. What they cannot do is use state property as a “staging area, processing location, or operations base” without a judicial warrant .

The distinction matters legally but may matter less politically. For critics, the order represents obstruction of federal immigration enforcement. For supporters, it’s a necessary check on what they view as overreach.

“ICE agents will be like anyone else, allowed in those public spaces—and then in state property that is limited and non-public, they will not be allowed in without a judicial warrant,” Sherrill explained to reporters .

Federal Pushback

The Department of Homeland Security responded sharply, with a spokesperson calling the order “legally illiterate.”

“While New Jersey sanctuary politicians continue to release pedophiles, rapists, gang members, and murderers onto their streets, our brave law enforcement will continue to risk their lives to arrest these heinous criminals and make New Jersey safe again,” the DHS statement read . “How does this serve the people of New Jersey? The biggest losers are the people these politicians were elected to serve.”

The heated rhetoric reflects broader national divisions. New Jersey joins other Democratic-led states—including New York, California, and Virginia—in taking steps to limit cooperation with or access by federal immigration authorities .

Beyond Property Lines

Sherrill’s order is part of a three-pronged initiative. Alongside the property restrictions, the state launched an online portal where residents can upload videos and photos of interactions with ICE agents, citing concerns about excessive force, warrantless searches, racial profiling, and wrongful detentions .

The state also introduced a “Know Your Rights” website available in 22 languages, providing information about legal protections during encounters with federal immigration authorities .

Acting Attorney General Jennifer Davenport defended the approach: “When federal immigration officers violate the law and sow fear in our communities, they undermine public trust in law enforcement and make it harder for us to keep the public safe” .

A Broader Context of Confrontation

The New Jersey action comes against a backdrop of intense national scrutiny of ICE tactics. Just this week, the Trump administration announced it was ending “Operation Metro Surge”—a massive immigration enforcement operation in Minnesota—following the fatal shootings of two U.S. citizens by federal officers and weeks of protests .

During a contentious Senate hearing Thursday, Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wisc.) blamed Minnesota Attorney General Keith Ellison for the deaths, saying: “Two people are dead because you encouraged them to put themselves into harm’s way” . Ellison denied the accusation, calling it a “theatrical performance” based on “all lies” .

The Minnesota operation resulted in more than 4,000 arrests but also drew condemnation for its impact on immigrant communities, with children staying home from school and businesses reporting tens of millions in losses .

What Comes Next

Whether New Jersey’s order leads to legal action remains unclear. Federal immigration enforcement remains primarily under federal jurisdiction, and the executive order could face court challenges .

Legal scholars note that while states generally cannot block federal law enforcement from operating within their borders, they do have authority over state-owned property. The question is whether restricting access to that property—including roads and parking lots—effectively impedes federal operations in a way that courts will find impermissible.

For now, both sides appear dug in. The former White House official’s frustrated reaction reflects a broader administration view that such state actions amount to obstruction. Sherrill’s office, meanwhile, shows no sign of backing down.

“In the end, this is about the Constitution,” Sherrill said. “As public servants, we’ve sworn to defend it. We are going to defend those rights here in New Jersey” .

With immigration certain to remain a central issue in national politics, New Jersey’s order may prove less a resolution than an opening salvo in what promises to be a prolonged legal and political battle.