Denver, Colorado, Mayor Mike Johnston has intensified his opposition to potential mass deportation policies under a future Trump administration, outlining an uncompromising stance that has sparked national debate. Johnston proposed mobilizing local law enforcement and tens of thousands of residents to resist federal immigration enforcement, a move he framed as a defense of Denver’s core values.
“We’re not going to sell out those values to anyone. We’re not going to be bullied into changing them,” Johnston stated in a November 2024 interview, reaffirming Denver’s commitment to its immigrant community. He suggested that, if necessary, Denver police and as many as 50,000 residents could actively resist federal deportation efforts.
The proposal has drawn mixed reactions, reflecting the tension between local and federal authorities over immigration policy. Aurora City Councilwoman Danielle Jurinsky criticized Johnston’s approach, describing it as counterproductive. “This will just further show how unproductive he is,” she remarked, highlighting such a stance’s potential political and logistical challenges.
Johnston’s rhetoric also stirred controversy over his characterization of the conflict. In a statement that drew widespread attention, he likened the potential resistance to a “Tiananmen Square moment,” referencing the historic 1989 pro-democracy protests in China. Xi Van Fleet, a survivor of China’s Cultural Revolution, sharply rebuked the comparison. “He is either profoundly ignorant of the history or he did the false analogy on purpose,” Van Fleet said.
Despite the heated debate, Johnston insisted that Denver would remain “a welcoming, open, big-hearted city that’s gonna stand by our values.” The mayor’s stance reflects a broader national debate over the role of sanctuary cities and local government in immigration enforcement, with Denver positioned as a flashpoint in this contentious issue.
Undocumented immigrants in Denver have had a notable financial impact on the city. Over the past two years, Denver has provided food, shelter, education, and healthcare to more than 41,000 individuals, resulting in expenditures of up to $340 million. This financial strain has required the city to reallocate its budget, including reductions in essential services such as police and fire departments, to meet the increased demand. The growing costs underscore Denver’s challenges in balancing its sanctuary city commitment with the practical realities of limited resources.
Johnston’s plan comes as cities across the United States brace for potential shifts in federal immigration policy, highlighting the delicate balance between protecting community members and navigating federal mandates. As the conversation continues, Denver’s resistance could set the stage for legal and political battles that may shape the future of immigration policy nationwide.