For months, Chicago has been a focal point of the Trump administration’s aggressive immigration enforcement. Across our neighborhoods, families live with uncertainty and fear as loved ones are detained and separated from their communities. Few Chicagoans have escaped the emotional toll of these operations.
As a lifelong Gage Park resident and child of immigrants, these events are personal to me. My community has seen too many stories of parents dropping their children at school only to never return home, and of families being torn apart without warning or due process. No neighborhood should endure such fear.
Yet we have also witnessed something extraordinary: neighbors, faith leaders, advocates, and community organizations stepping up to support families, providing legal assistance, and exercising their constitutional right to peaceful protest. This response reflects the values that define Chicago—looking out for one another during difficult times.
As we reckon with these events, we must ask how better to protect our communities. A crucial starting point is scrutinizing the companies our local governments choose for business and how taxpayer dollars are spent.
That conversation is especially important when it comes to surveillance technology.
In 2019, the ACLU of Illinois warned that Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) could use automatic license plate reader data to locate immigrants. Given recent operations, these concerns about privacy and government surveillance deserve renewed attention.
Axon Enterprises, a company that many Chicago-region municipalities already contract with for body cameras and TASER devices, raises significant questions. As communities consider expanding these partnerships to include artificial intelligence and integrated surveillance, residents deserve transparency regarding the long-term implications.
Axon is a major technology contractor for federal immigration and homeland security agencies, securing contracts worth hundreds of millions of dollars for equipment used in enforcement. Recent public financial disclosures indicate that President Donald Trump purchased between $1 million and $5 million in Axon stock shortly before ICE announced a new five-year contract with the company. Additionally, a former Axon executive responsible for the company’s Department of Homeland Security strategy now holds a senior leadership position at U.S. Customs and Border Protection after serving as Acting Director of ICE.
Whether viewed individually or together, these developments underscore why greater public scrutiny is warranted.
The larger question extends beyond any single contract: Do we want private companies collecting and storing vast amounts of data about our communities?
Axon’s vision reaches far beyond body cameras. The company is investing heavily in AI and integrated surveillance platforms like Fusus, which aggregates video from body cameras, fixed cameras, third-party systems, and building data into a single real-time awareness platform. While supporters argue these tools enhance public safety, critics warn they could expand surveillance, erode privacy, and exacerbate policing disparities without strong oversight.
Those are questions every community should confront before expanding these technologies—not after.
Local governments have a responsibility to ensure public safety while protecting civil liberties. As municipalities weigh future technology investments, they must evaluate who builds these systems, how data is used, and whether these partnerships reflect community values.
Today’s decisions about surveillance technology will shape the relationship between the public and law enforcement for years. Chicago and communities across Illinois should lead by ensuring these choices are guided by transparency, accountability, and a commitment to protecting the rights of every resident.
The Price of “Situational Awareness”: Protecting Immigrant Families from Over-Surveillance was first published by Illinois Latino News and is republished with permission.Aarón M. Ortíz is a Democratic member of the Illinois House of Representatives for the 1st district.




















U.S. President Donald Trump boards Air Force One on August 14, 2026 at Joint Base Andrews, Maryland. Trump is traveling to Long Island to tour law enforcement facilities in Nassau County and rally support for local Republican candidates ahead of the upcoming midterm elections
Travel Far Enough, You Meet Yourself
Is it possible that our President has simply not traveled enough?
Born and raised in Queens and attending Fordham University in the Bronx, Donald Trump has no record of traveling outside New York until he was over 20, when he transferred to a college in the neighboring state of Pennsylvania. Were his formative years amiss, then, in his learning about other places and other people?
Is his view akin to the famous New Yorker cover by Saul Steinberg, an illustration of the United States with New York City as the epicenter of the country and the Hudson River the border of the known world? We can now at least add Washington, D.C., and Mar-a-Lago to the map of “the realm.”
Our President has now traveled some, but what we recommend is another kind of travel. Not a state-sponsored trip or a venture to scout locations for future Trump Towers. This would be a genuine travel experience, enriching and eye-opening, showcasing other cultures and ways of living.
It will extend far beyond viewing military parades, hobnobbing with such “understanding” world leaders as Kim Jong Un, or taking tea with the King.
WHERE, then, should the President go? As Elon Musk’s Starship spacecraft is not yet ready to take passengers to Mars, perhaps he could explore our own vast country?
Maybe he could travel to “flyover country,” the farming states, where his ying-yanging tariffs and trade restrictions have played havoc with rural economies. Or possibly to California, number one in homeless U. S. citizens, and while there, regale homeless veterans (approximately 32,500 nationwide) with tales of his brave exploits invading and bombing foreign countries.
Or he might tour the Great Lakes, and rename the other four?
WHEN should he go? This will be tough, as he is very busy building his ballroom and renaming bodies of water.
How about a trip in early November, around the midterm elections? Despite the long-discredited accusation of widespread voter fraud, it would be reassuring to know he might be so caught up divvying out ladles of soup in a soup kitchen somewhere that he wouldn’t remember to deploy the military for “election security.”
HOW will he travel? He should definitely not take his Qatari-donated, newly renovated 747, especially after last time, when he had to be smuggled off clandestinely in a catering truck. It’s unlikely any traveling companions, like the Secretary of State or of the Treasury, are going to fall for the ruse a second time. Besides, we may need those people. No more decoys!
Perhaps the President could fly commercially, although this likely would expose him to undue suffering. Without gold bathroom fixtures and maple wood floors, the trip will be no “Luxury Experience.” If only he still had his “Trump Shuttle,” bought with a massive loan he later defaulted on, saying then, “I’m smart. I got out at a good time.”
Considering the potential pitfalls, maybe it’s best the President travel incognito, disguised perhaps as an elderly woman wearing a lot of bronzer.
Wherever, whenever, however: our President needs a vacation.
Moreover, we need a vacation from him.
If the President refuses our travel suggestions, here’s another idea:
Let’s get him a pet! He has never owned a pet. As we know with our children, pets teach essential life lessons: compassion and empathy; they instill a sense of responsibility. There is a well-established connection between those who can care for a pet and those who can care for people.
So, which pet should we choose? A puppy? A kitten? A boa constrictor?
Imagine, the President may even decide he likes having a pet. After all, what is more obedient than a well-trained dog, besides possibly the Cabinet? And what is more docile than a sweet kitten, other than plausibly the Supreme Court?
The President may even become more mellow with a pet afoot and less likely to slap tariffs on our allies, or attempt to annex our neighbors, or bully our Congress. (Realizing, of course, a bully requires active participation from the bullied to maintain his status.)
Maybe we should do both: get the President a pet and devise a travel plan for him. (Do you think we could possibly convince him to leave his phone at home?)
Let’s go for it! After all:
Travel far enough, you meet yourself. (David Mitchell)
And for our President, that would likely be the most profound discovery of all.
Amy Lockard is an Iowa resident who regularly contributes to regional newspapers and periodicals. She is working on the second of a four-book fictional series based on Jane Austen’s “Pride and Prejudice."