He wants to be president so bad but can he make the tough calls?
Maryland Democratic Gov. Wes Moore is facing a defining political test as a controversial immigration bill advances toward his desk — one that could force him to choose between his party’s activist base and voters concerned about public safety.
The legislation, recently approved by both chambers of the Maryland General Assembly, would terminate the state’s participation in the federal 287(g) program. That program currently allows local law enforcement agencies in eight Maryland jurisdictions to cooperate with federal immigration authorities by identifying and transferring criminal illegal immigrants already in custody to Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE).
If signed into law, the bill would sharply limit cooperation with federal immigration enforcement — effectively pushing Maryland closer to full sanctuary-state status.
The timing could not be more politically sensitive. Border security and immigration enforcement remain among the top concerns for voters nationwide, particularly as President Donald Trump continues pressing Democrats to take a clear stand on deporting criminal offenders.
Moore, who has repeatedly branded himself as a “moderate” Democrat, now finds himself caught in the middle. While progressive activists are demanding an outright rejection of ICE cooperation, many independents and working-class voters still support removing illegal immigrants with criminal records from American communities.
In recent weeks, Moore has grown more vocal in criticizing federal immigration enforcement, joining other Democratic leaders who have condemned ICE operations under the Trump-Vance administration. Those criticisms intensified following widely reported enforcement encounters in Minnesota that sparked protests and renewed media scrutiny.
A Moore spokesperson, Rhyan Lake, said the governor has serious concerns about ICE operations in Maryland and nationwide.
Lake claimed that federal authorities have prioritized enforcement in ways that “create chaos” rather than focusing exclusively on violent offenders, adding that Moore believes Maryland should not tolerate agents who are “untrained, unqualified, and unaccountable.” The spokesperson emphasized that the governor will formally review the legislation once it reaches his desk.
Despite Moore’s public insistence that he is “not running for president” in 2028 and intends to serve a full term if reelected, speculation about his national ambitions has not faded. His careful positioning on immigration, law enforcement, and partisan politics continues to attract attention well beyond Maryland.
Longtime Democratic strategist and former House Judiciary Committee counsel Julian Epstein warned that Democrats may be making a serious strategic error by embracing anti-ICE policies ahead of future general elections.
“These sanctuary-style laws may satisfy progressive activists, but they are deeply unpopular with working-class voters,” Epstein said. “They reflect an open-borders ideology that plays poorly outside heavily blue states.”
Epstein also cautioned that Democrats underestimate how immigration enforcement resonates with voters concerned about safety, stability, and the rule of law. He argued that widespread resistance to ICE cooperation risks alienating moderate voters who decide national elections.
“At some point,” Epstein said, “the party has to wake up and recognize political reality.”
As President Trump continues challenging Democrats on border security and immigration enforcement, Moore’s decision on this bill could become a defining moment — not just for Maryland, but for Democrats testing whether sanctuary policies can survive a national spotlight.
