Democrats Demand Cameras For ICE Agents — But Voted Against Cameras To Secure The Border

The party responsible for 10 million+ invaders shouldn’t be lecturing on border security.

My work is always free. But if you can afford just $5/month, it helps me keep writing these important stories.

From the Democrats that brought you “walls don’t work,” these open border zealots has a new policy hill to die on: ICE wearing body cameras.

“Body cameras need to stay on,” demanded Senator Chuck Schumer.

But Democrats’ newfound endorsement of cameras on ICE agents to prevent them from becoming - in the words of Schumer - “secret police” is curious.

For decades, the Democrat party has blocked cameras on the border, for border security, or immigration enforcement to get and keep illegals out. They only like cameras if they can keep illegals in.

1️⃣ The Secure Fence Act of 2006 — When Border Surveillance Was on the Line

The Secure Fence Act explicitly authorized surveillance equipment and advanced technology along the southern border including cameras, sensors, and monitoring systems.

When the House voted on September 14, 2006 (Roll Call 446), the bill passed 283–138. But a majority of House Democrats voted against it. One hundred and thirty-one Democrats voted no. Only 64 voted yes.

Nancy Pelosi, Jerrold Nadler and Adam Schiff were just some of the high-profile “nays.”

Two weeks later, the Senate passed the bill 80–19. Of those 19 no votes, 17 were Democrats. Dick Durbin, John Kerry, Harry Reid, Bob Menendez, Pat Leahy, Ted Kennedy, Barbara Boxer all voted against authorizing surveillance technology at the border.

2️⃣ The 2017 “Make America Secure Appropriations Act” (H.R. 3219)

More than a decade later, border enforcement funding returned to the floor.

In July 2017, the House voted on H.R. 3219 — a DHS appropriations vehicle that included border infrastructure and enforcement funding, including technology components.

The bill passed 235–192.

Democrats voted 187 no, 5 yes. Nearly the entire Democratic caucus opposed the package.

3️⃣ The 2017–2019 DHS Appropriations Fights — The “Virtual Wall”

During the Trump administration, Republicans increasingly framed border security not just in terms of physical barriers but what they called a “virtual wall.”

Integrated Fixed Towers. Remote video surveillance systems. Radar. Sensors. Technology-heavy border monitoring.

Democrats frequently insisted they preferred “smart technology” over physical walls. But when appropriations bills containing those technology investments came up — bundled with broader enforcement funding — Democratic opposition remained overwhelming.

The rhetorical position was technological modernization.

The voting behavior was resistance to enforcement expansion, even when that expansion relied heavily on cameras and sensors rather than steel.

4️⃣ Opposition to Surveillance Expansion Beyond the Wall

The skepticism extended beyond border towers.

When Border Patrol expanded license plate reader networks and predictive monitoring systems, Democratic lawmakers publicly criticized the programs as invasive surveillance networks and demanded limitations and transparency.

The objection was not limited to concrete barriers. It included digital surveillance tools as well.

The pattern suggests that when surveillance strengthens deterrence capacity, Democratic support becomes conditional at best.

5️⃣ And Then 30% of the Cameras Went Dark

Recently, internal Border Patrol documentation revealed that roughly 150 of the 500 cameras in the primary border surveillance system were broken — nearly one-third offline.

Thirty percent of the government’s border monitoring system was down.

There were no emergency hearings led by Democratic leadership demanding immediate restoration. No coordinated campaign declaring that operating blind across vast stretches of the southern border was unacceptable.

Cameras aside — we shouldn’t be taking immigration enforcement advice from the party that invited (at least) 10 million illegal aliens into our country over just four years.

I don’t hide my reporting behind a paywall because the fight to Save America requires the truth to be accessible to everyone. But if you’re able — and you believe this work matters — consider supporting it for less than the cost of a cup of coffee a month.