
Some Maryland deputies oppose bill that would end local partnerships with ICE
Members of the law enforcement community in Maryland joined the Maryland Sheriffs' Association Thursday afternoon, rallying against a proposed bill that would limit state and local involvement in federal immigration enforcement.
Most notably, the
Maryland Values Act
, one of three bills in immigrant rights group CASA's legislative package, would prohibit new 287(g) agreements between local agencies and federal immigration authorities.
According to an Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) spokesperson, three counties in Maryland have an agreement with immigration agencies -- Harford, Frederick, and Cecil counties.
Frederick County Sheriff's Deputy Chuck Jenkins called the bill a "terrible and dangerous piece of legislation."
Jenkins said it will encourage criminals who have illegally entered the United States to establish themselves in Maryland.
Jenkins said Frederick County has the oldest 287(g) program in the history of the United States.
"Since 2008, we've removed 1,795 criminals - many of them dangerous felons. We've removed them because of our partnership with ICE and the 287g program," Jenkins said.
Opponents of the Maryland Value Act say the measure would release dangerous criminals back into the community, since it would require existing 287(g) agreements to be terminated by July 1, 2025.
"I don't think there's anyone who would argue that making sure criminals do not get released back into the community is not a public safety issue," said Matt Elliston, Maryland's ICE deputy assistant director.
Elliston said "sanctuary" communities, or jurisdictions that limit local law enforcement cooperation with federal law enforcement in immigration cases, are dangerous.
Officials in sanctuary jurisdictions such as San Francisco have defended the protections for immigrants, saying that immigrants are less likely to commit crimes.
Some supporters of sanctuary laws have also said that threatening undocumented immigrants with deportation erodes the trust between the community and law enforcement.
Deputy Jenkins said it's an argument he said he disagrees with and hears "all the time".
"The distrust of law enforcement comes with the people from the countries they're coming from," Jenkins said. "They can't trust law enforcement in the countries where they were born and raised. The real fear is not law enforcement, the real fear in these communities are the criminals that are in these communities."
The Maryland Values Act has already passed the House. The other two bills, a part of CASA's legislative package -- the Protecting Sensitive Locations Act and the Maryland Data Privacy Act -- have each passed the Senate.
The 287(g) program, named after Section 287(g) of the Immigration and Nationality Act, authorizes the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) to deputize selected state and local law enforcement officers to enforce federal immigration law.
According to the ICE website
, the 287(g) program operates in three models. The Jail Enforcement Model (JEM) allows local officers to identify and process removable aliens with criminal charges, while the Warrant Service Officer (WSO) program permits officers to serve administrative warrants on aliens in their jails. The Task Force Model (TFM) serves as a "force multiplier for law enforcement agencies to enforce limited immigration authority with ICE oversight during their routine police duties," the ICE website reads.
Since entering office, President Trump has prioritized a crackdown on illegal immigration.
On January 20, Mr. Trump issued an executive order, "Protecting the American People Against Invasion" requiring ICE "to authorize State and local law enforcement officials, as the Secretary of Homeland Security determines are qualified and appropriate, under section 287(g) of the Immigration and Nationality Act to the maximum extent permitted by law."
In a memo issued a day later, Acting Deputy Attorney General Emil Bove directed prosecutors and law enforcement to consider charging state and local officials who attempt to impede Mr. Trump's immigration efforts.
Maryland, along with 11 other states,
joined a lawsuit
challenging Mr. Trump's order, alleging that the U.S. Constitution prevents the federal government from commandeering states to enforce federal laws.
Immigrant rights advocates and other supporters of the bill say 287(g) agreements extend ICE's reach, target those with low-level offenses, and heighten the risk of racial profiling.
"No person is gonna call the police if that police officer is also an ICE agent. What we wanna do is make sure that people feel confident calling 911, making sure they're reaching out if they're victims of crime," said Cathryn Jackson, CASA's public policy director. "Also, just collaborating with police as a whole."
Officials denied that 287(g) programs are discriminatory or targeting low-level criminal offenses.
Elliston shared that in the last five years in Prince George's and Howard counties, 600 immigration detainer holds were lodged. Of those, 50 were for homicide, and 15 were for traffic-related offenses.
Mr. Trump's immigration crackdown has had a significant impact on Marylanders. Members of immigrant communities
expressed fear
of mass deportations after the president revoked a policy that prohibited immigration arrests near schools, places of worship, and other sensitive locations.
Maryland lawmakers and immigration advocates have shown support for
several proposed bills
to protect immigrants, including the Protecting Sensitive Locations Act and the Maryland Data Privacy Act, which aim to limit ICE's access to certain locations and information.
Immigration advocacy groups like CASA have been
pushing for legislation
to protect immigrant communities and protesting against what they claim are inhumane conditions in ICE detention facilities.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles

Wall Street Journal
33 minutes ago
- Wall Street Journal
The Deportation Wars Begin
Rounding up and deporting millions of illegal migrants was never going to go down without protest. But President Trump is determined to do it, and no one can say he didn't tell voters during the campaign. But there are risks for both sides of this dispute, and especially for the country if it turns violent and triggers a military response from the White House. The weekend's clashes in Los Angeles are a sign of what could be ahead. Immigration and Customs Enforcement has been staging raids around the city hunting for migrants, including at businesses where they are thought to work. Workers, union leaders and pro-migrant activists hit the streets in protest. The clashes turned nasty in some places, some officers were hurt, and ICE and local police made arrests, including of a prominent union leader for interfering with federal officers. President Trump then invoked a little-used law to override what is typically state control and sent in 2,000 troops from the California National Guard. Cue the outrage from Democrats and cries of law-breaking on both sides.


Chicago Tribune
an hour ago
- Chicago Tribune
What to know about President Donald Trump's deployment of National Guard troops to LA protests
President Donald Trump says he's deploying 2,000 California National Guard troops to Los Angeles to respond to immigration protests, over the objections of California Gov. Gavin Newsom. It's not the first time Trump has activated the National Guard to quell protests. In 2020, he asked governors of several states to send troops to Washington, D.C., to respond to demonstrations that arose after George Floyd was killed by Minneapolis police officers. Many of the governors he asked agreed, sending troops to the federal district. The governors that refused the request were allowed to do so, keeping their troops on home soil. This time, however, Trump is acting in opposition to Newsom, who under normal circumstances would retain control and command of California's National Guard. While Trump said that federalizing the troops was necessary to 'address the lawlessness' in California, the Democratic governor said the move was 'purposely inflammatory and will only escalate tensions.' Here are some things to know about when and how the president can deploy troops on U.S. soil. Generally, federal military forces are not allowed to carry out civilian law enforcement duties against U.S. citizens except in times of emergency. An 18th-century wartime law called the Insurrection Act is the main legal mechanism that a president can use to activate the military or National Guard during times of rebellion or unrest. But Trump didn't invoke the Insurrection Act on Saturday. Instead, he relied on a similar federal law that allows the president to federalize National Guard troops under certain circumstances. He federalized part of California's National Guard under what is known as Title 10 authority, which places him, not the governor, atop the chain of command, according to Newsom's office. The National Guard is a hybrid entity that serves both state and federal interests. Often it operates under state command and control, using state funding. Sometimes National Guard troops will be assigned by their state to serve federal missions, remaining under state command but using federal funding. The law cited by Trump's proclamation places National Guard troops under federal command. The law says that can be done under three circumstances: When the U.S. is invaded or in danger of invasion; when there is a rebellion or danger of rebellion against the authority of the U.S. government, or when the President is unable to 'execute the laws of the United States,' with regular forces. But the law also says that orders for those purposes 'shall be issued through the governors of the States.' It's not immediately clear if the president can activate National Guard troops without the order of that state's governor. Notably, Trump's proclamation says the National Guard troops will play a supporting role by protecting ICE officers as they enforce the law, rather than having the troops perform law enforcement work. Steve Vladeck, a professor at the Georgetown University Law Center who specializes in military justice and national security law, says that's because the National Guard troops can't legally engage in ordinary law enforcement activities unless Trump first invokes the Insurrection Act. Vladeck said the move raises the risk that the troops could end up using force while filling that 'protection' role. The move could also be a precursor to other, more aggressive troop deployments down the road, he wrote on his website. 'There's nothing these troops will be allowed to do that, for example, the ICE officers against whom these protests have been directed could not do themselves,' Vladeck wrote. The Insurrection Act and related laws were used during the Civil Rights era to protect activists and students desegregating schools. President Dwight Eisenhower sent the 101st Airborne to Little Rock, Arkansas, to protect Black students integrating Central High School after that state's governor activated the National Guard to keep the students out. George H.W. Bush used the Insurrection Act to respond to riots in Los Angeles in 1992 after the acquittal of white police officers who were videotaped beating Black motorist Rodney King. National Guard troops have been deployed for a variety of emergencies, including the COVID pandemic, hurricanes and other natural disasters. But generally, those deployments are carried out with the agreements of the governors of the responding states. On Sunday, Trump was asked if he plans to send U.S. troops to Los Angeles and he said, 'We're gonna have troops everywhere. We're not going to let this happen to our country. We're not going to let our country be torn apart like it was under Biden.' Trump didn't elaborate. In 2020, Trump asked governors of several states to deploy their National Guard troops to Washington, D.C. to quell protests that arose after George Floyd was killed by Minneapolis police officers. Many of the governors agreed, sending troops to the federal district. At the time, Trump also threatened to invoke the Insurrection Act for protests following Floyd's death in Minneapolis – an intervention rarely seen in modern American history. But then-Defense Secretary Mark Esper pushed back, saying the law should be invoked 'only in the most urgent and dire of situations.' Trump never did invoke the Insurrection Act during his first term. But while campaigning for his second term, he suggested that would change. Trump told an audience in Iowa in 2023 that he was prevented from using the military to suppress violence in cities and states during his first term, and said if the issue came up again in his next term, 'I'm not waiting.' Trump also promised to deploy the National Guard to help carry out his immigration enforcement goals, and his top adviser Stephen Miller explained how that would be carried out: Troops under sympathetic Republican governors would send troops to nearby states that refuse to participate, Miller said on 'The Charlie Kirk Show,' in 2023. After Trump announced he was federalizing the National Guard troops on Saturday, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth said other measures could follow. Hegseth wrote on the social media platform X that active duty Marines at Camp Pendleton were on high alert and would also be mobilized 'if violence continues.'

Associated Press
an hour ago
- Associated Press
US-Immigration-Raids-Los Angeles-Photo-Gallery
Tear gas was fired at protesters in Los Angeles when some demonstrators moved close to National Guard troops and police and shouted insults at them. President Donald Trump deployed the Guard after protests erupted when federal immigration authorities arrested dozens of people across the city. ___ This is a photo gallery curated by AP photo editors.