Some states have banned the agreements allowing local law enforcement officers to help ICE arrest and detain illegal immigrants.
Some states are banning their police departments from entering into specific agreements with U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) to apprehend illegal immigrants.
The bans followed two separate shootings that killed Alex Pretti and Renee Good, both U.S. citizens and protesters in Minneapolis during ICE removal operations in January.
Criticism by lawmakers from the Democratic Party has increased as federal officers continue immigration enforcement, one of President Donald Trump’s campaign promises.
Here’s what to know about these agreements, the states that have banned them, and how Republicans have responded.
Agreements
The agreements are between ICE and state and local law enforcement agencies. They are known as “Section 287(g)” agreements, referring to a section of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) that permits them.
Under such agreements, ICE can partner with state, local, and tribal law enforcement agencies to identify and remove illegal immigrants. To identify suspects in jails, state and local law enforcement may question inmates about their immigration status, which is then reported to ICE under the agreements.
These agreements do not allow state and local police to independently arrest people for immigration law violations. ICE supervision is required when executing arrest warrants, and an ICE officer is generally present to direct the operation. An exception exists for agencies on Indian reservations, where federal law allows tribal police officers with such agreements to independently arrest those suspected of immigration law violations.
On the day he began his second term, Trump signed an executive order directing ICE to increase such agreements. According to the Department of Homeland Security, 1,255 new agreements were signed in the first year of Trump’s second term, with 12,500 officers completing ICE training to fulfill them.
Since Trump’s return to office, several Republican-led states have mandated that their police departments sign such agreements. Texas passed a law in 2025—Senate Bill 8, which took effect on Jan. 1—requiring all sheriffs in the state to sign such agreements with ICE. In states without mandates, local law enforcement agencies can voluntarily join such agreements.
Orders directing local police to accept these agreements were issued by governors in Virginia and Florida.
A study by the Prison Policy Initiative (PPI) showed that the number of ICE arrests is higher in states where there is cooperation with law enforcement.
“States like Florida, Texas, Louisiana, and Georgia have required local law enforcement to deputize staff to serve ICE, leading to high numbers of arrests,” PPI said in the Dec. 11 report. “Others like Illinois, New York, and Oregon have managed to suppress arrests by limiting cooperation and blocking access to sensitive areas of public buildings.”
ICE frequently conducts raids with state law enforcement under these agreements to arrest illegal immigrants. The agency announced on Jan. 30 that it had arrested 650 suspects in West Virginia that month, in partnership with 14 agencies in that state that had signed such agreements.
By Arjun Singh
