On the 252nd anniversary of the Boston Tea Party a Boston group staged a symbolic protest by tossing environmentally safe ice into the harbor to protest Immigration and Customs Enforcement, drawing roughly a thousand people and sharp reactions from both sides about law, symbolism and public theatre.
Instead of tea, the crowd brought ice and slogans, trying to tie a founding-era rebellion to a modern dispute over immigration enforcement. The stunt was framed as a moral protest, but many saw it as a theatrical gesture that misunderstood both history and the rule of law. Organizers openly cast the action as opposition to ICE and federal deportation policies.
The group behind the event promoted the image of a mass, conscience-driven moment and said about 1,000 people attended. They compared colonists resisting taxation to people who flout immigration rules, a stretch that raised eyebrows across the city. ‘This is a symbolic measure saying we want ICE to leave our communities alone.’
Martha Laposata spoke for the organizers and offered a claim meant to broaden the appeal: “This is not left or right. This is not progressive or conservative. It’s being American,” she said, pushing the protest as a nonpartisan moral stand. That framing ignores the clear reality that enforcing immigration law is a core function of sovereign government, not a partisan hobby. When civic rituals are repurposed to challenge basic enforcement, it exposes the protest’s real aim: political theater, not policy design.
Organizers emphasized that the ice was safe and cleared with environmental officials, a detail meant to head off criticism about pollution or public harm. They said the state Department of Environmental Protection approved the project, and that claim was repeated in statements to the crowd. Still, the optics of dumping anything into a historic harbor invited ridicule as much as concern.
People chanted historic-sounding lines as the ice hit the water, trying to recreate drama and rally attention for their cause. Video from the event chanting, “No Kings! No Tariffs! No ICE!” as they tossed the ice into the harbor. The crowd wanted a photo-op and a soundbite more than a substantive policy debate, and the cameras obliged.
A longer clip of the action circulated online and showed chanting and the scattered ice drifting in the twilight. The visuals were unmistakable: a crowd at the wharf, signs, and a ritualized toss meant to parallel a much more consequential and violent historical protest. The comparison drew criticism from people who argued the founders fought a literal empire, not immigration enforcement.
“This is a symbolic measure saying we want ICE to leave our communities alone,” Alex Rikleen, a candidate for the U.S. Senate who lists his pronouns in his profile. His appearance tied the protest back into local politics and underscored how demonstrations like this can be used to build name recognition. Critics pointed out that political candidates courting such crowds risk endorsing a position that rejects legal channels for change.
Speakers urged attendees to do more than watch televised outrage and to mobilize politically. “Anybody who understands the nature of our country should be doing something. This is not the time to sit home and watch TV,” one activist declared, calling for action beyond symbolic gestures. For those who favor secure borders and orderly legal processes, the event read as a reminder that political theater will not substitute for coherent immigration policy or the enforcement that supports public safety.
https://x.com/OnlyInBOS/status/2001133619230728580
