Gov. Ned Lamont earlier this month urged U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement to stay out of Connecticut, gaining praise from fellow Democrats and criticism from Republicans on a controversial issue that has divided the nation as well. The governor, who is running for a third term, mentioned th e national political issue during his State of the State address on the first day of this year’s legislative session earlier this month. The comments came in response to ICE’s monthslong deployment in Minnesota for Operation Metro Surge, a large-scale immigration crackdown. Immigration officers’ killing of U.S. citizens Renee Good and Alex Pretti in Minneapolis have sparked nationwide protests and fear in residents of other states. Here’s what you need to know about the governor’s comments and the political divide in Connecticut. What did the governor say about ICE during his State of the State address? Lamont had strong words for ICE during his speech.  “Go home. We’re keeping Connecticut safe without you,” Lamont said.  The governor praised state and local police officials and said they were “the best-trained police force in the world,” which he called a strong contrast to ICE. “They see the world as us versus them. They are not trained to deescalate — I think they are barely trained at all. They hide behind a mask. They come to Connecticut, and Minneapolis, to arrest people outside of schools, courthouses, and often based upon the color of their skin.” How did members of the legislature respond? As Lamont praised the Connecticut state and local police, he received bipartisan applause and lawmakers on both sides stood in support of his message. When the governor spoke about ICE, though, Republicans no longer stood and one lawmaker, Rep. Kurt Vail, R-Stafford, who is a retired correction officer, walked out.  Then, when Lamont said “ICE, everywhere you go uninvited, violence follows. Go home. We’re keeping Connecticut safe without you,” Rep. Cara Pavalock-D’Amato, R-Bristol, stood and turned her back on the governor, revealing a political message on the back of her blazer: “ICE IN.” The following day, Speaker of the House Matt Ritter, D-Hartford, chastised House members after the incident with Pavalock-D’Amato. “Think about the fact that you represent the town and represent your state. You’re lucky to be one of 151 people that can engage in debate and pass laws. Think about that. Have pride in that. But don’t turn this place into a circus,” Ritter said.  More broadly, Democratic lawmakers have long been critical of ICE. “I’ve heard from many of my constituents who are concerned that this could happen here and who are looking to the state and our state leaders and to provide some assurance that Connecticut is doing what we can to protect our residents,” said Sen. Matt Lesser, D-Middletown, in response to the death of Pretti, a nurse who was shot and killed by a U.S. Border Patrol officer in Minneapolis. “I think the position he struck today in the building actually should send a signal to folks that the governor and the legislature are more aligned than they probably were in the last session, and that’s a good thing,” said Sen. Gary Winfield, D-New Haven. Is this the first conflict over ICE between state Democrats and Republicans? No. Recent legislation related to ICE interactions with the public have been passed along party lines, with Democrats — who have a majority in the legislature — voting in favor and Republicans opposed.  Last session, lawmakers battled over the Trust Act. Connecticut’s Trust Act outlines the circumstances in which local and state officials can work with the federal government to detain unauthorized migrants. The Trust Act prohibits Connecticut law enforcement from following through with an arrest based only on a detainer — a request from ICE that police hold a person for up to 48 hours so federal agents can pick them up. More recent changes to the law now allow residents to sue for violations of the law. Lawmakers also expanded the situations in which officials can comply with federal immigration detainers and not be subject to litigation. In a special session in November, state lawmakers also passed a law that limits ICE from making arrests at courthouses. Can we expect more talk about ICE in Connecticut this session? Yes. Connecticut Democrats said that they will propose a bill that will allow state residents to sue federal law enforcement agents for violation of their constitutional rights. A 1971 Supreme Court case Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of the Federal Bureau of Narcotics found that individuals do have the right to sue federal law enforcement and officials in the event of any violations of their constitutional rights. However, the court hasn’t allowed any lawsuits to proceed in over 30 years. Senate leadership said they welcome debate over the proposal. “Anyone who breaks state or federal laws should be held accountable for their actions. In the meantime, the amped up rhetoric and the violence must end. Anyone who doesn’t like how the law is enforced is free to advocate for different laws, and to protest peacefully,” said Senate Minority leader Stephen Harding, R-Brookfield. ...read more read less