Across the country, a growing number of local law enforcement agencies are working alongside U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) as part of stepped-up efforts to detain undocumented immigrants.
These partnerships, which vary in scope and formality, are contributing to a noticeable increase in immigration-related arrests.
Through shared resources, detention agreements, and information exchanges, local jurisdictions are playing a more active role in federal immigration enforcement—drawing both support and criticism from different sectors of the public and legal community.
Local Agencies Increasingly Enforce Immigration Laws Through Expanding ICE Partnership
Across the U.S., local law enforcement agencies are increasingly taking on immigration enforcement roles through a federal initiative aimed at enhancing public safety—though critics argue it spreads fear and damages community trust.
This initiative, known as the 287(g) program, was established under the 1996 Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act. It allows U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) to deputize local and state officers to carry out certain immigration enforcement tasks under ICE’s direction.
Supporters of the program view it as a key tool in stepping up immigration enforcement, particularly under former President Donald Trump, who made immigration control a cornerstone of his administration.
The Justice Department under Trump also pursued legal action against state and local officials seen as obstructing federal immigration policies.
The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) recently showcased this collaboration, highlighting a four-day enforcement operation called “Operation Tidal Wave,” during which nearly 800 undocumented immigrants were detained.
DHS described this as a model for future large-scale operations involving joint efforts with local law enforcement to remove non-citizens accused of criminal activity.
Understanding the 287(g) Framework
The 287(g) program has been in place for nearly three decades and saw a resurgence during Trump’s second term as part of his broader immigration crackdown.
The program allows ICE to collaborate with local agencies through three specific models:
Task Force Model: Enables local law enforcement, under ICE supervision, to enforce immigration laws in the course of their regular duties.
Warrant Service Officer (WSO) Program: Trains local officers, at ICE’s expense, to serve ICE-issued administrative warrants on detainees already in custody.
To participate, state and local law enforcement agencies must sign Memorandums of Agreement (MOAs) with ICE.
These agreements grant officers access to federal systems and allow them to perform actions such as placing immigration holds (detainers), entering data into ICE databases, and conducting status interviews with detainees, as outlined by the American Immigration Council.
Recent Growth and Rising Controversy
As of April 24, ICE reports over 450 active agreements spanning 38 states, with most participants being sheriff’s departments and local police forces.
Florida leads the nation in participation, with multiple agencies including the Florida Highway Patrol, Florida Department of Law Enforcement, Florida State Guard, and others engaged under MOAs. Governor Ron DeSantis confirmed these collaborations earlier this year.
A January executive order emphasized that these partnerships are not meant to replace federal action but to reinforce it.
Advocacy groups such as the Immigrant Legal Resource Center argue that the expansion—particularly of the Task Force Model—fuels an aggressive deportation campaign. They contend that by broadening local law enforcement’s role in immigration, the program funnels more individuals into what they describe as a “pipeline from arrest to deportation.”
Supporters claim the program improves coordination and helps remove individuals with criminal records from communities.
Opponents, however, warn that it blurs the line between local policing and federal immigration duties, potentially undermining trust between immigrant communities and local police—a factor that could discourage victims and witnesses from coming forward.
Critics Raise Alarms Over 287(g) Program’s Impact on Communities and Policing
Opponents of the controversial 287(g) immigration enforcement program argue it undermines local policing, fosters fear in immigrant communities, and diverts valuable resources from addressing serious crime.
Juan Cuba of the Miami Freedom Project voiced concern that these agreements between ICE and local law enforcement are “fundamentally incompatible with the goals of community policing.”
He warned that such partnerships deter undocumented individuals and mixed-status families from seeking help or reporting crimes. “This program makes everyone less secure.”
One notable example involved former Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio, who faced a lawsuit over immigration sweeps that were later found to involve unconstitutional racial profiling.
Following a Department of Justice investigation, the Department of Homeland Security suspended its 287(g) agreement with Arpaio’s office and restricted its access to immigration databases, according to the American Immigration Council.
Civil rights organizations, including the ACLU, argue that the program enables racial profiling and promotes discriminatory policing. The ACLU, which has long campaigned to end 287(g), has characterized it as a tool used by sheriffs with histories of racism and xenophobia to target immigrants.
Beyond ethical concerns, the program also imposes financial burdens on participating localities. Although ICE covers training costs, local agencies are responsible for paying officers, administrative expenses, and legal fees.
A 2018 Center for American Progress report noted that jurisdictions have spent hundreds of thousands of dollars settling lawsuits related to ICE detainers. For instance, the North Carolina Justice Center cited cases where local governments paid up to $255,000 in settlements related to enforcement under the program.
“This is Washington forcing local police to do its dirty work,” said Cuba. “It puts civil liberties at risk and leaves communities more vulnerable.”
Widening Impact Across the U.S.
The large-scale sweep, carried out with multiple local agencies, has sent shockwaves through immigrant communities.
Governor Ron DeSantis celebrated the outcome as a model of successful federal-state collaboration, declaring Florida a national leader in immigration enforcement. On social media, he wrote that the operation exemplified how the state was “delivering big results” in deportation efforts by partnering with the federal government.
However, in places like Doral, Florida, which has the largest population of Venezuelan immigrants in the U.S., residents expressed concern that such agreements would sow fear and discourage victims of crimes from speaking out.
City Attorney Lorenzo Cobiella noted that officials had little room to object: “We’re being mandated by the state, and if we don’t comply, we face criminal consequences,” he said during the April 16 meeting.
Florida’s Republican leadership, led by DeSantis, has applied political pressure on local governments to sign onto 287(g) agreements, even threatening to remove officials who refuse to comply with federal immigration enforcement.
The bill’s sponsor, Senate President Warren Petersen, denounced the veto, calling it an insult to Arizonans dealing with border security issues.
As debate intensifies, the 287(g) program remains at the center of a national conversation over immigration policy, public safety, civil rights, and the role of local law enforcement in federal mandates.