Listen to the article
Pennsylvania County Officials Call for ICE Eviction, Citing Unpaid Rent and Legitimacy Concerns
A heated dispute has erupted in Lehigh County, Pennsylvania, as county officials demand that Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) vacate county-owned buildings, citing both financial and ideological reasons for the decision.
During a press conference on Thursday, County Controller Mark Pinsley and newly elected County Executive Josh Siegel announced they were giving ICE 30 days to vacate the premises, claiming the federal agency owes $115,000 in unpaid rent. Officials also demanded the termination of all negotiations with the Department of Homeland Security (DHS).
“Lehigh County should not be in business with an agency whose actions create fear instead of safety,” Pinsley stated at the press conference. “We can give them a taste of their own medicine. We are going to deport ICE.”
The confrontation has drawn sharp criticism from Republican Congressman Ryan Mackenzie, who represents the swing district. Mackenzie defended ICE’s presence in the county, pointing to the agency’s role in apprehending illegal immigrants convicted of serious crimes.
“Politics should never get in the way of allowing law enforcement to do its job,” Mackenzie told Fox News Digital. “This dispute isn’t about rent, it’s about far-left politics—something that was made clear when the County Executive announced that he didn’t want DHS’ ‘blood money’.”
According to Mackenzie, ICE has successfully arrested numerous illegal immigrants in the area who were convicted of theft and violent crimes, including indecent assault on a minor.
County Executive Siegel, however, doubled down on his criticism of the federal agency. “I think their presence is a threat to public safety and public trust,” Siegel told local media outlet WFMZ-69 News. “The department’s failure to pay rent, combined with DHS’s national reputation for recklessness, chaos, and public disorder, warrants ending any relationship with the County. We will not accept their blood money.”
The dispute centers on allegations that ICE never fully executed a lease agreement for office space and that DHS occupied county-owned space for 38 months without being mentioned in the leasing agreement.
Lehigh County District Attorney Gavin Holihan has taken a different stance, highlighting DHS’s assistance in human trafficking investigations. Holihan, an elected Republican who was censured by the county GOP for endorsing Siegel’s 2025 run, offered to pay the federal agency’s rent using money collected through drug asset forfeiture to maintain the partnership.
“The only thing ICE has to do with this press conference today is to get headlines for the people holding that press conference,” Holihan said.
The controversy in Lehigh County mirrors similar disputes in other jurisdictions across the country, where local governments have attempted to limit cooperation with federal immigration authorities. Allentown, the county seat, is Pennsylvania’s third-largest city behind Philadelphia and Pittsburgh, making this conflict particularly significant in the ongoing national debate over immigration enforcement.
Pinsley responded to Holihan’s comments by stating that while he appreciates the district attorney’s work, any partnership with federal authorities can continue as long as it is not in a county-owned building. “They don’t need to be in our building, especially if they’re not paying,” Pinsley told local media.
The county’s move comes amid heightened national tensions over immigration policy, with various municipalities across the country taking different approaches to their relationships with federal immigration enforcement agencies. The outcome of this dispute could set precedents for other local governments considering similar actions against federal agencies operating within their jurisdictions.
Neither the Lehigh County Government nor the Department of Homeland Security have provided additional comments on the situation as the 30-day eviction notice begins.
Fact Checker
Verify the accuracy of this article using The Disinformation Commission analysis and real-time sources.
14 Comments
The decision by Lehigh County officials to demand ICE’s eviction over unpaid rent and ideological disagreements is a concerning politicization of a public safety issue. While their concerns may have merit, interfering with federal law enforcement sets a troubling precedent.
It will be important to closely follow the legal proceedings in this case and see whether the county’s actions are upheld. Maintaining the rule of law and the appropriate separation of federal, state, and local authorities is crucial in these types of disputes.
This case illustrates the ongoing tensions between local/state and federal authorities when it comes to immigration enforcement. While the officials cite financial and ideological concerns, the congressman argues ICE’s role in public safety should take priority.
I appreciate the officials raising valid questions about ICE’s actions and their impact on the local community. However, interfering with federal law enforcement over political disagreements seems like a concerning overreach of local authority.
The county officials’ decision to evict ICE over unpaid rent and ideological disagreements seems like a politically-motivated move. While they may have valid concerns, it’s troubling to see politics interfere with public safety and law enforcement.
I’m curious to hear more details on the specific financial and ideological reasons behind the officials’ push to evict ICE. This appears to be a complex issue worth further examination.
The dispute over ICE’s presence in Lehigh County highlights the polarized political climate we’re in. Both sides seem to have reasonable arguments, but it’s concerning when local officials try to interfere with federal immigration enforcement for ideological reasons.
It will be interesting to see how this situation plays out and whether the county can legally force ICE to vacate the premises over the unpaid rent issue. This could set an important precedent.
The decision by Lehigh County officials to evict ICE over unpaid rent and ideological disagreements is a politically charged move that merits further scrutiny. Both sides appear to have reasonable arguments, but this dispute risks becoming overly partisan.
It will be important to closely monitor this situation and see how the courts rule on the county’s efforts to force ICE’s eviction. This could have broader implications for the relationship between federal immigration enforcement and local governments.
This appears to be a heated political dispute over ICE’s presence in Lehigh County. While the officials cite unpaid rent and ideological concerns, the Republican congressman defends ICE’s role in apprehending serious criminals. It’s a complex issue without easy answers.
I can understand the officials’ concerns about ICE’s actions creating fear instead of safety. At the same time, the congressman raises a valid point about ICE’s role in apprehending criminal illegal immigrants.
This dispute over ICE’s presence in Lehigh County highlights the complex interplay between federal, state, and local authorities when it comes to immigration enforcement. While the officials cite financial and ideological concerns, the congressman raises valid public safety arguments.
I’m curious to learn more about the specific financial and ideological reasons behind the officials’ push to evict ICE. This appears to be a nuanced issue that deserves careful examination, rather than partisan posturing.