Serving Connecticut’s immigrant and refugee population since 1996

Reflection from the Chairman of the Board

February 2026

As Chairman of CIRC, I want to take a moment to acknowledge the concern many of us are feeling following recent immigration enforcement incidents in Minneapolis.

Reports indicate that a federal agent attempted to enter the Ecuadorian consulate without authorization and was stopped by consular staff. Ecuador has since filed a formal diplomatic protest. This is deeply troubling. Consulates are protected under international law, and respecting those boundaries is essential to diplomacy, international trust, and the rule of law.

Even more concerning are the deaths of Alex Pretti and Renée Nicole Good during recent federal enforcement actions. Regardless of political affiliation or personal views on immigration policy, I believe we can agree on this: no one should fear for their life simply for exercising constitutional rights such as peaceful protest. While law enforcement officers must be able to protect themselves and carry out their duties safely, publicly available footage raises serious questions about whether lethal force was necessary.

That is why transparency and independent investigation are not optional — they are essential. Accountability is not anti-law enforcement. Accountability strengthens institutions, protects officers who act professionally, and preserves public trust.

I also want to note that concern about these events is being expressed across multiple levels of public leadership. Governor Ned Lamont described the killing of Renée Good as “incredibly tragic and heartbreaking” and joined voices nationwide calling for accountability. He also raised concerns about the broader impact of federal enforcement tactics on communities and constitutional values. This reinforces that the call for transparency and oversight is not partisan — it is rooted in public responsibility.

State Representative Corey Paris recently addressed these issues in an opinion piece published by CT Mirror. Whether people agree fully with every conclusion or not, his recommendations provide a constructive civic framework: encouraging engagement with federal leaders, strengthening oversight, and prioritizing due process and human dignity over enforcement approaches centered primarily on force.

At the same time, Connecticut is engaging this issue through policy leadership. Reporting from the Hartford Courant indicates that legislation is being proposed that would allow individuals to bring civil lawsuits when they believe their civil rights have been violated by federal officials. Similar measures already exist in states such as California, Maine, Massachusetts, New Jersey, and Illinois — with California’s law in place for more than 30 years. Senate President Pro Tempore Martin Looney has emerged as a leading voice supporting this proposal here in Connecticut. Whether one supports or questions this policy approach, the underlying principle matters: democratic societies depend on lawful oversight mechanisms that allow courts — not confrontation — to resolve claims of rights violations.

I also want to speak briefly from my role with the Connecticut Racial Profiling Prohibition Project. CTRP3 is preparing to publicly reaffirm the state’s unwavering commitment to prohibiting racial profiling. While a recent U.S. Supreme Court decision temporarily permitted federal immigration agents in Los Angeles to consider certain factors in enforcement actions, that ruling does not apply to Connecticut state or local law enforcement. Connecticut remains governed by the Alvin W. Penn Racial Profiling Prohibition Act. More than 8,000 officers across our state operate under laws that prohibit racial profiling and require transparency, data collection, and accountability. This framework has made Connecticut a national model for fair and professional policing.

Finally, I want to be clear about my personal commitment as Chair: enforcement alone is not immigration policy. We cannot arrest our way out of a broken system. Comprehensive immigration reform — grounded in due process, public safety, economic stability, and human dignity — remains essential if we want long-term solutions instead of repeated crises.

Call to Action

Drawing from Rep. Paris’s recommendations and Connecticut’s policy leadership, I encourage our coalition to remain focused on constructive engagement:

• Encourage federal elected officials to strengthen oversight and transparency within DHS

• Support policies rooted in due process and constitutional protections

• Defend state-level safeguards that prohibit racial profiling and promote accountability

• Continue advocating for comprehensive immigration reform beyond enforcement-only approaches

Commitment to Consensus and Leadership

As we move forward, I also want to be clear about how we will operate as a board. Any public statements or positions taken by CIRC will be nurtured through consensus. I am committed to listening carefully, respecting different viewpoints, and ensuring that our collective voice reflects the diversity of this coalition. At the same time, consensus should never become silence. When fundamental rights, human dignity, and public trust are at stake, we have a responsibility to speak thoughtfully, responsibly, and with courage.

As Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. reminded us, “Our lives begin to end the day we become silent about things that matter.”

CIRC will continue to lead with integrity — grounded in facts, guided by principle, and united in our commitment to justice, accountability, and the dignity of every person.

- Werner Oyanadel, CIRC Chairman