Police Blocked From Working With ICE?
A new immigration law in Maryland is igniting controversy across the state and drawing national attention to the ongoing debate over border security, local law enforcement authority, and federal immigration policy.
Former Maryland Governor Larry Hogan is raising concerns that local police departments may resist complying with the state’s newly enacted ban on cooperation agreements with Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE).
The issue highlights broader questions about immigration enforcement, violent crime prevention, and federal-state authority — topics that remain central to national political discussion.
What Maryland’s New ICE Law Does
Governor Wes Moore recently signed emergency legislation that eliminates so-called “287(g) agreements.” These agreements previously allowed local law enforcement agencies to partner with ICE and assist in certain immigration enforcement actions.
Under the new law:
- Local police can no longer enter into formal cooperation agreements with ICE
- State agencies are restricted in how they coordinate with federal immigration authorities
- Immigration enforcement responsibilities shift more exclusively to federal officials
Supporters argue the change ensures clearer boundaries between local policing and federal immigration enforcement.
Critics, however, say the law may limit cooperation in cases involving violent offenders already in custody.
Larry Hogan Raises Concerns About Public Safety
During remarks at a recent governors summit, Hogan suggested that some local law enforcement officials believe they are still obligated to cooperate with federal authorities — especially when dealing with individuals accused or convicted of serious crimes.
Hogan emphasized that when ICE requests the detention of violent offenders who are already being held in jail, releasing those individuals could raise public safety concerns.
He acknowledged there are arguments on both sides of the immigration debate but stressed that preventing dangerous criminals from returning to communities should remain a priority.
The tension underscores a broader national conversation: where should the line be drawn between state autonomy and federal immigration enforcement?
Governor Moore’s Position on Immigration Enforcement
Governor Moore has stated that Maryland will continue to coordinate with federal authorities on serious public safety threats, including the lawful removal of noncitizens who pose risks to communities.
He has emphasized that immigration enforcement efforts should focus on individuals who commit violent crimes or cause significant harm.
Supporters of the law say it aligns enforcement priorities more closely with those goals.
Opponents argue that limiting structured cooperation may create confusion between agencies and weaken overall enforcement effectiveness.
Calls for ICE Reform Grow Among Democrats
Several Democratic lawmakers have called for changes to how ICE operates nationwide.
Maryland Senator Chris Van Hollen recently argued that the agency needs “dramatic reform,” claiming enforcement efforts have extended beyond targeting the most serious offenders.
He cited federal data suggesting many detained individuals may not pose direct public safety threats, though critics contend that such statistics can overlook immigration violations or prior offenses.
The debate over ICE reform has intensified as immigration remains a defining national issue.
DHS Funding Fight Adds Pressure
The Maryland policy change comes amid a broader funding dispute in Washington over the Department of Homeland Security (DHS).
Lawmakers remain divided over how to fund agencies such as:
- Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE)
- U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP)
- DHS administrative offices
Some proposals seek to condition funding on operational reforms, while others argue that reducing resources for immigration enforcement agencies could create additional border security challenges.
With immigration, border control, and public safety among the most searched political topics online, the outcome of this funding debate could have nationwide implications.
Immigration Enforcement: A National Flashpoint
Maryland’s decision reflects a growing divide among states over immigration enforcement strategy.
Across the country, policymakers continue to wrestle with key questions:
- Should local police assist in federal immigration enforcement?
- Does cooperation enhance public safety — or complicate community trust?
- How should federal agencies prioritize limited enforcement resources?
As immigration policy evolves, these questions are likely to remain central to state and national political discourse.
For now, Maryland stands at the center of a high-stakes policy debate — one that may influence how other states approach cooperation with federal immigration authorities in the months ahead.
