Sheriffs Nationwide Reject Trump Administration's Immigration Enforcement Efforts

This week, sheriffs across the country stated they will not engage in the questionable immigration enforcement practices of the Trump administration. Newly sworn-in Attorney General Pam Bondi's threats of prosecutions and funding cuts have not swayed them.

Sheriffs from Iowa, New York, and North Carolina, among others, affirmed their refusal to prioritize mass deportations, even in the face of threats from Bondi to eliminate federal funds for sanctuary jurisdictions. Acting U.S. Deputy Attorney General Emil Bove notably called for an investigation into Tompkins County, New York, Sheriff Derek R. Osborne following the court-ordered release of an undocumented immigrant from his jail. Sheriff Osborne insists that his office complied with all applicable laws, yet Bove's actions aim to intimidate other jurisdictions that limit cooperation with immigration authorities. "We will use every tool at our disposal to prevent sanctuary city policies from impeding and obstructing lawful federal operations," he stated.

However, local jurisdictions have the legal discretion to make independent decisions regarding immigration enforcement, and sanctuary policies—which limit collaboration rather than obstruct it—are legally permissible. The Trump administration is attempting to use fear and misinformation to compel local leaders into compliance.

Critics argue that attacking sanctuary policies, like those in Tompkins County, is not only unethical but detrimental to public safety. Evidence shows that when local sheriffs assume the responsibilities of federal law enforcement, it leads to decreased public safety. Communities become fearful, leading to lower crime reporting rates and diminished trust in government.

Additionally, the challenge of hiring and retaining law enforcement personnel has been a growing concern, with agencies struggling to fill positions. Terry Norris, executive director of the Georgia Sheriffs Association, highlighted the recruitment challenges faced by sheriffs across the nation. Overcrowded jails facing daily deaths cannot afford to divert resources to a federal directive that may not enhance community safety, as doing so detracts from essential services such as mental health support.

In response to the Trump administration's efforts, sheriffs from various states have reiterated their commitment to community safety, ceasing voluntary information sharing, and committing solely to lawful immigration practices. "Our sole oath and allegiance are to the Constitution and the protection of an individual's rights," wrote Winneshiek County Sheriff Dan Marx, declaring he would not honor Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) detainer requests.

Despite local law enforcement's refusal to assist with deportation goals, the Trump administration insists it knows better. Local law enforcement's cooperation remains crucial for deportation success, as during the first Trump administration, nearly half of deportations were facilitated through jails. Trump's "border czar," Tom Homan, urged sheriffs at a National Sheriff Association meeting to provide bed space and engage with 287(g) agreements that grant some immigration enforcement powers to local law enforcement.

Currently, U.S. jails are in crisis, with over 1,000 annual deaths and many detainees not having yet faced trial. The Biden administration has attempted to enhance the safety of detained individuals, but the Trump administration plans to undo this progress by reinstating problematic detention practices. Homan's statements reflect a dual strategy: incentivize sheriffs to join in mass deportations while pressuring others to concede to federal collaboration.

In some states, laws either prohibit or mandate cooperation with federal immigration authorities, yet federal law does not require local enforcement participation. Local sheriffs choosing not to engage in federal mandates do not violate federal law, as local governments cannot be compelled to enforce federal immigration regulations, according to the 10th Amendment's "anti-commandeering doctrine."

By prioritizing community safety over federal directives, sheriffs affirm their need to allocate local resources to public safety ensuring that their primary responsibility is to their communities, not the demands of the Trump administration. Nonetheless, Bove's threats of prosecution reflect an attempt to invoke fear in local leaders.

Tompkins County officials assert their actions were aligned with local laws and policies, emphasizing that ICE failed to act promptly concerning the release of the subject in question. This indictment of the DOJ’s political motives raises questions about the Trump administration's commitment to the facts over its agenda for mass deportation.

It is essential for attorneys, sheriffs, and the public to challenge these empty threats and uphold the rule of law.