A California mayoral candidate publicly called on 55 gang leaders to unite and forcibly remove federal immigration agents from his city, raising questions about whether a political campaign just crossed the line into something far more dangerous.
Story Snapshot
- Long Beach mayoral candidate Rogelio Martinez called on all 55 gang leaders in the city to unite and remove ICE agents
- Martinez urged gang leaders to meet at City Hall on February 3, 2026, to make Long Beach “ICE free”
- Commentators and legal observers question whether the statements constitute recruiting a militia for insurrection against federal authorities
- No official law enforcement response or investigation has been publicly confirmed as of February 1, 2026
When Political Strategy Meets Street Power
Rogelio Martinez, a real estate professional running for mayor of Long Beach, California, delivered a message that sent shockwaves through political and law enforcement circles. Martinez addressed his appeal directly to the leaders of all 55 gangs operating in Long Beach, urging them to work together toward a single goal: removing Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents from the city. He framed the action as needing to be done “peacefully, but with strong force,” a phrase that raises immediate red flags about his actual intentions and understanding of peaceful assembly.
The timing of Martinez’s call adds urgency to the situation. He reportedly requested gang leaders to gather at City Hall on Monday, February 3, 2026, setting a specific time and place for this unprecedented coalition. For a political candidate to publicly solicit criminal organizations as a mobilization force represents a dramatic departure from conventional campaign tactics. The statement went viral on social media, generating intense scrutiny and widespread condemnation from observers who see the move as reckless at best and potentially criminal at worst.
The Legal Minefield Martinez Just Walked Into
Legal commentators wasted no time dissecting the implications of Martinez’s statements. The core concern centers on whether his public call to gang leaders constitutes recruiting a private militia to oppose federal law enforcement. One observer put it bluntly: recruiting violent gang members to fight federal agents amounts to insurrection and open rebellion against the federal government. The distinction between protected political speech and illegal coordination with criminal organizations becomes critical when a candidate crosses from advocating policy changes to organizing armed resistance against federal authorities.
Federal law prohibits interfering with federal officers executing their duties, and recruiting others to do so carries serious criminal penalties. If the FBI investigates this matter, they would likely focus on whether Martinez’s statements constitute more than shared political goals with gang members. Evidence of actual communication, collaboration, or coordination between the candidate and gang leadership could transform controversial rhetoric into prosecutable conspiracy. Martinez’s status as a registered political candidate does not shield him from criminal liability if his actions violate federal statutes protecting government operations.
What This Means for Long Beach and Federal Authority
The immediate fallout centers on Martinez’s credibility as a viable candidate. Political analysts characterize him as a fringe candidate with minimal chances of electoral success, but his statements carry consequences beyond his personal campaign. Long Beach residents face questions about public safety when a mayoral candidate publicly aligns with gang leadership rather than law enforcement. The city hosts significant gang activity, and any legitimization of gang leaders as political actors undermines efforts to reduce violence and criminal activity in vulnerable neighborhoods.
The broader implications touch on fundamental questions about federal authority and local resistance. Cities cannot unilaterally declare themselves sanctuaries from federal law enforcement, and elected officials cannot recruit criminal organizations to enforce such declarations. ICE operates under federal authority that supersedes local preferences, regardless of how politically unpopular immigration enforcement may be in certain communities. Martinez’s approach conflates legitimate policy disagreement with immigration law and illegal obstruction of federal officers, a distinction that matters greatly under the Constitution’s Supremacy Clause.
The Verification Gap and What Remains Unknown
Significant gaps remain in the available information about this incident. No direct interview or official statement from Martinez explains his full position or clarifies his intent. The phrase “peacefully, but with strong force” appears in quotes but lacks complete context about what Martinez actually envisions. No confirmation exists about whether any gang leaders responded to his call or attended any meeting at City Hall. Federal law enforcement agencies have not issued public statements confirming or denying any investigation into Martinez’s conduct.
The claim that Long Beach has exactly 55 gang leaders remains unverified through independent sources. Martinez’s background as a real estate professional offers limited insight into why he would pursue this extraordinary political strategy. Without Martinez’s own explanation, observers can only speculate about whether he understands the legal jeopardy his statements may have created. The absence of mainstream media coverage beyond social media commentary raises questions about whether additional context exists that might clarify or contradict the current narrative surrounding his remarks.
Sources:
WATCH: Long Beach Mayoral Candidate Rogelio Martinez Calls on the Gangs to ‘Take Back the City’
