Two Arizona sheriff's offices among wave of new 287(g) agreements
The big picture: Arizona has eight of the nearly 650 active 287(g) agreements in the United States.
ICE has initiated 514 new 287(g) agreements in 40 states since Trump took office in January, ProPublica and Arizona Luminaria reported Monday.
Zoom in: The Navajo and Yuma county sheriff's offices applied for their agreements with U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) this year, though Yuma's remains pending.
Before that, the only agencies in the state with 287(g) agreements were the Arizona Department of Corrections, Rehabilitation and Reentry (ADCRR); the city of Mesa; and the La Paz, Pinal and Yavapai county sheriff's offices. La Paz County has two agreements.
Context: 287(g) is a provision of federal law under which state and local agencies can be certified to enforce aspects of immigration law. There are three types of agreements:
The jail enforcement model: Agencies can identify and process immigrants subject to removal from the country following arrests.
The warrant service officer program: ICE trains and authorizes law enforcement to serve and execute immigration warrants in jails.
The task force model: Local agencies can enforce immigration laws in the community. That was phased out by the Obama administration but was renewed this year by Trump.
ADCRR, Mesa, and Pinal and Yavapai counties have jail enforcement agreements; Navajo and Yuma counties signed up for warrant service officer agreements; and La Paz County has both.
What they're saying: Incoming Mesa police chief Dan Butler recently posted a video online emphasizing his department has a jail enforcement agreement.
"This means we do not go out into the community and actively search for people based on immigration status," said Butler, currently the department's executive assistant chief.
State of play: No Arizona agency has a task force agreement, though ICE sent emails earlier this year encouraging many to apply.
"We have a limited number of resources at ICE," border czar Tom Homan told Axios. The 287(g) agreements are "a force multiplier."
Why it matters: The nationwide increase in 287(g) agreements comes amid a massive immigration crackdown by the Trump administration.
In Phoenix and other cities, that's included ICE agents recently detaining people outside immigration courts as they left their hearings.
Zoom out: An Axios review found law enforcement agencies in Texas, Florida, Georgia, North Carolina and Virginia have been most active in using 287(g) agreements to detain people.
There were 42,000 removals of immigrants ordered in March.
The intrigue: Arizona Senate President Warren Petersen (R-Gilbert) this year sponsored legislation, dubbed the Arizona ICE Act, that would have forced law enforcement agencies to enter into 287(g) agreements.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
USA Today
23 minutes ago
- USA Today
Mexico, under pressure from Trump, sends 26 cartel members to US
MEXICO CITY, Aug 12 (Reuters) - Mexico sent more than two dozen suspected cartel members to the U.S. on Tuesday, amid rising pressure from President Donald Trump on Mexico to dismantle the country's powerful drug organizations. Authorities shipped 26 prisoners wanted in the U.S. for ties to drug-trafficking groups, Mexico's attorney general's office and security ministry said in a joint statement. Mexico said the U.S. Department of Justice had requested their extradition and that it would not seek the death penalty for the accused cartel members. The transfer is the second of its kind this year. In February, Mexican authorities sent 29 alleged cartel leaders to the U.S., sparking a debate about the political and legal grounds for such a move. More: State Department updates Mexico travel advisory for Americans That Mexican President Claudia Sheinbaum permitted yet another large-scale extradition of Mexican nationals underscores the balancing act she faces as she seeks to appease Trump while also avoiding unilateral U.S. military action in Mexico. In a statement, the U.S. Embassy said among those extradited were key figures in the Jalisco New Generation Cartel and the Sinaloa Cartel, which are Mexico's two dominant organized crime groups. 'This transfer is yet another example of what is possible when two governments unite against violence and impunity," U.S. Ambassador to Mexico Ronald Johnson said in a statement. "These fugitives will now face justice in American courts, and the citizens of both our nations will be safer.' More: Mexican President rules out Trump's reported military plan against Mexico's drug cartels Trump has tied tariffs on Mexico to the deadly fentanyl trade, claiming the country hasn't tackled drug cartels aggressively enough. Last week, he directed the Pentagon to prepare operations against Mexican drug gangs that have been designated global terrorist organizations. Sheinbaum has said the U.S. and Mexico are nearing a security agreement to expand cooperation in the fight against cartels. But she has flatly rejected suggestions by the Trump administration that it could carry out unilateral military operations in Mexico. (Additional reporting by Mrinmay Dey in Bengaluru; Editing by Chris Reese, Cassandra Garrison and Lincoln Feast.)
USA Today
23 minutes ago
- USA Today
The key to success at Trump-Putin Alaska summit on Ukraine? Low expectations.
Russia's progress has limited the risk of escalation and increased Moscow's willingness to continue fighting. Trump keeps trying to find a way to end the war, but time is not on Ukraine's side. The war in Ukraine is stuck, and has been stuck for years. Despite the media frenzy over the upcoming U.S.-Russia summit in Alaska, there is little reason to expect a breakthrough, barring a dramatic change in the U.S., Russian or Ukrainian positions. When President Donald Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin meet on Friday, Aug. 15, observers should keep expectations low. Any progress would be welcome. Since February 2022, the conflict has been a slow, grinding war of attrition in which Russia has gradually seized more and more Ukrainian territory. Russia's military progress dampened its incentives to escalate the conflict, an early source of U.S. concern. For example, in the fall of 2022, the high-water mark for Ukraine on the battlefield, U.S. intelligence estimated that there was a 50% chance Russia would reach for nuclear weapons if its forces in southern Ukraine were facing collapse. Were Russia losing today, the risks for Americans would be higher. Putin's will vs. Trump's way While Russia's progress has limited the risk of escalation, it has also increased Moscow's willingness to continue fighting. Since beginning his second term, Trump has tried to find a way to end the war, but the Kremlin has not shown much willingness to moderate its demands. Putin has insisted on Ukraine renouncing aspirations to join NATO or allow NATO forces on its territory; conceding Russian sovereignty over the four provinces it annexed in 2022; the demilitarization of Ukraine; and the 'denazification' of the country, by which it means dramatic reforms to how it governs itself domestically. Putin has also rejected a temporary ceasefire that doesn't engage on these issues. Opinion alerts: Get columns from your favorite columnists + expert analysis on top issues, delivered straight to your device through the USA TODAY app. Don't have the app? Download it for free from your app store. The debate over the what to do next often obscures more than it reveals. One hears reference to Ukrainian victory or Russian defeat without defining what those terms mean or what their implications would be. Does Ukrainian victory or Russian defeat mean Kyiv regaining all territory inside its internationally recognized borders? That isn't going to happen. Could Ukraine losing territory but keeping its sovereignty and military ‒ without NATO membership ‒ be portrayed as success? Many security scholars believe that such armed neutrality is the best that can be achieved for Ukraine. Opinion: I was the US ambassador to Ukraine. Here's why I resigned. Don't forget Zelenskyy's intransigence This is where Ukraine's intransigence comes in. Even though Ukrainian public support for continuing the war has cratered, President Volodymyr Zelenskyy is using the Ukrainian Constitution as a firewall against concessions. As amended in 2019, it both prohibits the Ukrainian government from ceding any territory and somewhat clumsily commits it to pursue membership in NATO. In rejecting Trump's suggestion that there be land swaps as part of a settlement, Zelenskyy pointed at the constitution's provision against giving up territory, arguing that 'no one will step back from this, nor will anyone be able to.' The Ukrainian president's willingness and ability to end the war probably has less to do with high-minded constitutional principles and more to do with his own political survival. At this point, the war has produced total destruction in Ukraine, the evisceration of its territory, and all the ruinous human and economic costs of the war ‒ but without any U.S. security guarantees. Zelenskyy knows this would be a disastrous legacy, so he has a powerful incentive to obtain something he can portray as a benefit of the war. Gen. Wesley Clark: Trump needs to push Putin hard to end war in Ukraine – now | Opinion The question is whether Kyiv's position on the battlefield can sustain Zelenskyy's intransigence on the political issues, with or without more U.S. support. There are worrying signs that it cannot. Ukraine faces an array of manpower issues along the 600-mile front. Key towns seem to be in jeopardy. Time is not on Ukraine's side. As always, the Europeans are doing everything in their power to keep the United States at the center of the war in Ukraine ‒ and as the central provider of regional security. They called a virtual meeting with Zelenskyy and Trump two days before the Putin summit, and proposed a plan for Ukraine that would involve potential NATO membership in exchange for Kyiv conceding that it lost territory. After the meeting on Aug. 13, French President Emmanuel Macron and European Council President António Costa indicated Trump committed that the United States would participate in security guarantees for Ukraine. However, Trump has previously resisted European pleas for U.S. security guarantees to Ukraine, and make no mistake: That is just what NATO membership would be. With two consecutive U.S. administrations revealing that Washington does not perceive an interest in Ukraine worth fighting Russia over, such a commitment would be inherently incredible. In the coming days, avoiding any traps laid by the Europeans, the Ukrainians or congressional hawks is essential. From a U.S. perspective, patience and low expectations are the right course for talks with Russia. Above all, Trump must avoid backing into a reboot of the Biden administration's Ukraine policy, which involved an endless flow of weapons and hoping for a miracle. America's resources for and interests in the war in Ukraine are limited. Trump's policy should reflect that. Justin Logan (@justintlogan) is director of defense and foreign policy studies at the Cato Institute. You can read diverse opinions from our USA TODAY columnists and other writers on the Opinion front page, on X, formerly Twitter, @usatodayopinion and in our Opinion newsletter.
NBC News
24 minutes ago
- NBC News
The CEO in chief: How Trump is getting what he wants from big business
For years, conservative groups and corporate leaders argued that the U.S. government would be better if it were run like a business. For President Donald Trump, who has controlled his own businesses for decades, that looks like taking an increasingly active role in individual corporations' affairs, from manufacturing to media to tech firms. And corporations are meeting the demands of a president who is more freely exerting his powers than he did the last time he was in office. At Trump's urging, Coca-Cola said it would produce a version of its namesake soda with U.S.-grown cane sugar. Paramount paid millions to settle allegations Trump levied against CBS' venerated '60 Minutes.' Two major semiconductor makers agreed to give the government a cut of their sales in China. The CEO of Intel met with Trump soon after the president called on him to resign. 'It's so much different than the first term,' said a Republican lobbyist whose firm represents several Fortune 500 companies, who spoke on condition of anonymity to speak candidly. 'He's just acting like a businessman. In his first term, I think he was trying to cosplay as a politician. He's more comfortable in his own skin, too. He can explain deals better.' Trump's role represents a break with past administrations that may have been unwilling or unable, politically, to bring similar pressure to bear on businesses. In the past, small-government conservatives once accused previous Democratic administrations of attempting to 'pick winners and losers' by trying to regulate industries. Trump today stands downstream of a bolder right-wing movement that calls for enhanced state intervention in corporate affairs. Trump has said the corporate concessions are intended to boost the U.S. economy. And the White House, in a statement, reinforced the idea that Trump's involved approach to private-sector dealings is a key part of his economic agenda. 'Cooled inflation, trillions in new investments, historic trade deals, and hundreds of billions in tariff revenue prove how President Trump's hands-on leadership is paving the way towards a new Golden Age for America,' White House spokesperson Kush Desai said.
