Which national networks coordinated the “ICE Out for Good” protests alongside local groups like PSL?

1. Who the national coordinators publicly named were

Organizers publicly billed ICE Out for Good as a broad, national coalition and the ACLU’s press release listing partners names Indivisible, MoveOn Civic Action, the American Civil Liberties Union itself, Voto Latino, United We Dream, 50501, and the Disappeared in America campaign of the Not Above the Law coalition as national participants in coordinating the weekend of actions ^[1]. Major news outlets covering the wave of over 1,000 planned events repeated much of that roster, with The Guardian and Metro citing Indivisible, the ACLU and the National Day Laborer Organizing Network among coordinating groups ^{[2] [5]}.

2. Labor and immigrant-rights networks that played coordinating roles

Worker- and immigrant-centered national networks were visible in reporting: the National Day Laborer Organizing Network (NDLON) is repeatedly cited as part of the sponsoring coalition and spokespeople from NDLON were quoted in coverage, and United We Dream was named among coalition partners in press materials ^{[6] [1]}. Those groups have histories of mobilizing regionally and nationally on immigration enforcement issues, and their inclusion in coalition statements and local sponsorship lists supports their role in coordination ^{[1] [6]}.

3. Civic, electoral and digital activism partners

Digital and civic-engagement organizations were also central to coordination: MoveOn Civic Action and Indivisible—both national networks that maintain infrastructure for rapid-response actions and online event-tracking—were listed as coalition partners and were cited by outlets tracking the protests nationwide ^{[1] [2]}. Voto Latino’s presence in the coalition list indicates explicit outreach to Latino voter-engagement networks as part of the mobilization ^[1].

4. Local groups and left-organizing networks that amplified the national call

Local collectives, including chapters of the Party for Socialism and Liberation (PSL) and groups referenced on movement wikis such as 50501 Missouri, helped translate the national call into street-level events—an arrangement the Wikipedia reporting records for prior anti-ICE mobilizations and for the January actions ^{[3] [7]}. Independent left outlets and community newspapers likewise reported local coalitions led or co-sponsored by grassroots organizations alongside the national partners ^[6].

5. How centralized was the coordination? Limits and competing interpretations

Reporting is explicit that while there were named national partners, the protests were not centrally commanded by a single headquarters; scholars cited by the Christian Science Monitor emphasize that what appears to be happening is the rapid emergence of new networks and volunteers responding locally to ICE deployments rather than a strictly top-down campaign ^[4]. Major outlets such as Reuters and AP documented both national messaging and highly localized tactics and volunteer monitors, underscoring a hybrid model of national coalition-building plus decentralized local initiative ^{[8] [9]}.

6. What the sources do not—and cannot—confirm

The public coalition statements and mainstream coverage identify several national networks (Indivisible, ACLU, MoveOn, Voto Latino, United We Dream, NDLON, 50501, Disappeared in America/Not Above the Law), but none of the sources provide a single exhaustive roster of every national actor or detail the precise operational roles each played in every city ^{[1] [2]}. Scholarly and press commentary also leaves open questions about how campaign infrastructure and grassroots volunteers balanced responsibilities; existing reporting documents partnership lists and local sponsorships but does not map command-and-control structures in granular detail ^{[4] [8]}.