WASHINGTON — The three-way battle among Democrats running for Senate in Illinois has evolved into an argument about the best way to combat President Donald Trump’s deportation agenda.

A Party Divided on Immigration Strategy

Is it better to “abolish ICE,” as Lt. Gov. Juliana Stratton offers, or to “abolish Trump’s ICE,” as Rep. Raja Krishnamoorthi promises?

The contest’s third candidate, Rep. Robin Kelly, said the country could not just abolish U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement without a plan to replace the agency’s border enforcement function, but she introduced legislation last month to impeach Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem — a bill Krishnamoorthi quickly signed onto.

The tenor of the Illinois race had a focus on immigration when the Trump administration sent federal agents to Chicago last fall and then shifted fully to deportation policy after Border Patrol agents shot and killed Alex Pretti in Minneapolis in January. The three Senate candidates, who aren’t split by major ideological or policy differences, now offer a window into how Democrats could approach dismantling Trump’s immigration enforcement structure if they win back full control in Washington.

‘Abolish ICE’ vs. ‘Abolish Trump’s ICE’

Early voting has begun for the March 17 primary race, and there is evidence in other contests that a strong anti-ICE agenda can work in low-turnout Democratic primaries. This past week in New Jersey, Analilia Mejia won a 13-candidate special primary election running as the most progressive candidate in the field on a pledge to abolish ICE. Democratic anger over Trump’s deportation policies led to a shutdown of the Department of Homeland Security when its funding expired this weekend.

And yet ambitious Democrats who saw how calls to “abolish ICE” and “defund the police” hurt the party in recent years are concerned that running on a definitive message to abolish the agency is risky politics — if not in 2026 then beyond.

Political Risks of the ‘Abolish’ Message

“They’re all out there attacking ICE — they’re all saying, ‘Abolish or change the department,’” said William Daley, a former White House chief of staff who is the son and brother of longtime Chicago mayors and who has endorsed Krishnamoorthi. “‘Do away with ICE’ is closer to defunding the police that got Democrats in trouble. So they’re all a little uncomfortable with that.”

Krishnamoorthi is calling to “abolish Trump’s ICE,” a phrase he has used in television ads and debates and on the campaign trail. He is using the same language as Gov. JB Pritzker, the state’s top Democrat, who has endorsed Stratton and funded a super political action committee for her.

And yet it is not evident that voters differentiate between the two “abolish” messages.

“It’s checking the box,” said Rep. Mike Quigley, a Chicago Democrat who has not endorsed a primary candidate. “No one is going to say, ‘Oh, you hate ICE more than she does, I’m going to vote for you.’ You say ‘abolish,’ the magic word, and I don’t think voters can discern the difference.”

Krishnamoorthi, a five-term House member long seen as ambitious in a state full of sharp-elbowed politicians, has a decided financial advantage. He has spent $25 million on television and digital advertising, compared with $1.1 million by Kelly and $63,000 by Stratton, according to AdImpact, a media tracking firm.

Stratton, in an interview Friday, said she was getting her campaign message out without paying for advertising — though she said she would begin buying television time “soon.”

“There’s lots of ways people get their information,” she said, citing engagement with social media creators and grassroots activists. “I’m really proud of the way that we have engaged people by using some of those nontraditional methods.”

The winner of the Democratic primary is expected to become the next Illinois senator: Republicans have not won a statewide election since 2014 and do not have well-known or well-financed candidates in their primary. The seat is being vacated by Sen. Dick Durbin, a Democrat who is retiring after five terms in the Senate.

Money, Endorsements and Old Rivalries

When the race kicked off last spring, it was expected by many Illinois Democrats to serve as a test of Pritzker’s clout in the state. Stratton, his chosen candidate, has proved to be a lackluster fundraiser despite her charismatic presence.

In recent weeks, Stratton has claimed momentum in the race from her performances in the campaign’s many debates — there are three debates scheduled for next week alone. She has attacked Krishnamoorthi for voting in July for a House resolution that both condemned antisemitism and expressed gratitude for law enforcement, including immigration officers.

“The congressman can use whatever words he wants, but the bottom line is that Congressman Krishnamoorthi can’t be trusted to stand up to ICE or to hold them accountable because he voted to thank ICE,” Stratton said.

In an interview, Krishnamoorthi defended his vote on the resolution as being about antisemitism. Stratton, he argued, was going after him to mask her own lack of ideas about how to improve people’s lives.

“If you’re just attacking, attacking, attacking on the debate stage, I think people start to conclude that maybe you don’t have specific ideas for helping them with all of their challenges,” he said. “They just conclude that looks like business as usual and we need something different.”

And then there is Kelly, whose talk about immigration has focused on her effort to impeach Noem. She is widely seen in the state as running to continue a yearslong grudge with Pritzker. She defeated his chosen candidate to be chair of the Illinois Democratic Party in 2021, and he then engineered her ouster in 2022.

Kelly, who is Black, remains behind Stratton in polling, and many Illinois Democrats say that her presence on the ballot was likely to take some Black votes away from Stratton, who is also Black — and, by proxy, from Pritzker.

“I know people say that mess, but he’s not that big in my life, quite frankly,” Kelly said. “This is the rubber match, you know — I’ve won one, he won one. It should be about her, not about JB, but he’s definitely, with all of his money, gotten into the race. I don’t even think about it, to be honest with you. I could say the same thing, that she’s taking votes away from me.”

Pritzker, through an aide, declined to comment.

—

This article originally appeared in The New York Times.

By Reid J. Epstein
c.2026 The New York Times Company