Local officials grow wary of helping ICE detain immigrants
Why it matters: It's the latest sign of tension between local authorities and Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents, whose strong-arm tactics in arresting immigrants have shocked communities across the nation.
Zoom in: As part of President Trump 's push to deport "millions" of unauthorized immigrants, ICE has leaned on local agencies to help arrest and temporarily detain unauthorized immigrants.
Over the past decade most of ICE's arrests involved people who already were in law enforcement custody, according to a review of 10 years of data from Transactional Records Access Clearinghouse (TRAC).
But with ICE arrests soaring to more than 2,000 a day under Trump, local jail and prison officials are increasingly concerned about being liable for detainees' care — particularly when ICE leaves them in local facilities for lengthy periods.
The officials note that in the past, lawsuits filed on behalf of ICE detainees wrongly left languishing in local jails have cost local governments enormously — $92.5 million in one New York City case involving 20,000 people who were held in prison for ICE without due process between 1997 and 2012.
How it works: ICE can ask a local agency to hold someone they believe isn't legally in the U.S., using a request called a detainer. Usually there's a 48-hour limit on this request.
A detainer request from ICE isn't the same as a warrant issued by a judge, which local agencies require to hold their suspects.
"The ICE administrative warrant is not enough to hold somebody's liberty away," Minnesota Attorney General Keith Ellison (D) told Axios. "It's essentially holding somebody and locking them up when there's no legal, lawful authority to do so."
"The risk to the institution that's holding them is civil liability," he added. "They could end up paying a lot of money — and not just money, but injunctive relief."
The National Sheriffs' Association has asked the Trump administration to clarify how long someone should be held on ICE's behalf, and has raised the issue with Border Czar Tom Homan.
The group also has been lobbying Congress to pass a law addressing the issue for sheriffs, who often manage jails.
Between the lines: A few law enforcement officials have spoken publicly about their concerns for ICE detainees' civil liberties under Trump's deportation push — and have faced a backlash from GOP officials for doing so.
In February, Sheriff Dan Marx of Winneshiek County, Iowa, aired his concerns about cooperating with ICE detainers in a since-deleted Facebook post.
"The only reason detainers are issued is because the federal agency does not have enough information or has not taken the time to obtain a valid judicial warrant," Marx wrote.
"These detainers are violations of our 4th Amendment protection against warrantless search, seizure and arrest, and our 6th Amendment right to due process."
Marx's post led Iowa Gov. Kim Reynolds — a Republican who has ordered the state's local law enforcement to "fully cooperate" with Trump's deportation mission — to file a formal complaint against the sheriff.
Marx was investigated by Iowa's attorney general over whether he violated a state law mandating such cooperation.
He deleted his first post and issued another statement that said in part: "I do not believe law enforcement officials should have to choose between upholding their sworn duty to the Constitution and following the state statute."
He declined to be interviewed because of the investigation.
"From a constitutional standpoint, if we're going to hold somebody in jail or detain them, we want to be doing so lawfully and have legal grounds to do so. And I think for a sheriff to ask for a judicial warrant is reasonable," Michael Tupper, a former police chief in Marshalltown, Iowa, told Axios.
In a New Orleans court, the Orleans Parish Sheriff's Office is being sued by Louisiana's attorney general for not honoring ICE detainers.
Orleans Parish has a policy of honoring ICE detainers only when a detainee has a warrant for a violent offense.
The policy stems from has a legal settlement from 2010, when two men in the Orleans jail were held without due process for two months longer than their sentences, waiting for ICE.
Louisiana Attorney General Liz Murrill (R) argues it amounts to a sanctuary policy, in violation of state law. The case is ongoing.
Several other jurisdictions nationwide have faced similar lawsuits when people have been held on ICE detainers longer than their sentences or after their cases were dismissed. Some, like Orleans Parish, are changing their policies to limit their exposure to such suits.
Montgomery and Delaware counties in Pennsylvania, for example, now require judicial warrants in addition to an ICE detainers to hold immigration detainees.
What they're saying: " When a sheriff or a police chief stands up and voices concerns, they are oftentimes painted as soft on crime, or, you know, they don't care about keeping their community safe," Tupper said. "It's really the opposite. These folks are trying to do the right thing for the community."
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Forbes
29 minutes ago
- Forbes
5 Key Ways Trump's Big Beautiful Bill Transforms Corporate Taxation
Tax The House has passed the Senate's version of Trump's Big Beautiful Bill by a narrow margin (216-214), and it will now head to President Trump's desk for his signature. The bill includes significant tax cuts that dwarf the spending cuts to the tune of a $3.1 trillion increase in the deficit over the next 10 years, according to Forbes. This article highlights 5 key ways the One Big Beautiful Bill Act transforms corporate taxation. For a look at how the bill will affect individual taxation, see my companion article on Forbes. (1) Corporate Tax Rates Will Not Increase A key provision of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017 lowered the corporate tax rate by a staggering 40% (from 35% to 21%). The previous rate of 35% has been held constant since 1986. However, relative to other OECD countries, the 35% tax rate was among the highest levied on corporations in the OECD. Many companies and policymakers felt this put US corporations at a competitive disadvantage, especially given the increasingly global economy, according to the Tax Policy Center. Absent a provision allowing the corporate rates to hold steady, they would have reverted to their 35% tax rate. In a statement released by the White House, holding the corporate tax rate at 21% signals a pro-business environment for starting and growing businesses. (2) Full Expensing Of Domestic Research And Experimentation Since 2022, corporations have been required to amortize and expense their research and development (R&D) expenses over time. As highlighted by The Tax Foundation, not being able to immediately expense R&D stifles corporate innovation in the US. The One Big Beautiful Bill Act addresses this issue by allowing R&D performed in the US to be immediately expensed. Meanwhile, R&D performed by US corporations outside the US will continue to be subject to the amortization rules. While separating domestic from international R&D expenses will create other nuances that need to be addressed over time, this provision benefits corporations by allowing the immediate expensing of these costs, yielding significant tax benefits due to the time value of money. This provision enables corporations to recognize expenses earlier, rather than later, thereby benefiting from the time value of money. This provision will also benefit the US by providing financial incentives for corporations to locate their R&D activities within the US. Lastly, an important portion of this provision is that it will be retroactively implemented as of December 31, 2021. This change means that corporations that have been amortizing their R&D over the last three and a half years can now recognize these expenses. For companies with annual gross receipts of less than $31 million, the expensing can occur immediately. All other companies can recognize these expenses over the next two years. (3) Bonus Depreciation Is Back The bonus depreciation benefits, which provide an immediate expense deduction for specified types of property purchased, were introduced by the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017. These benefits have been slowly phased out in recent years and were scheduled to expire completely in 2027. The One Big Beautiful Bill Act brings back the 100% immediate expensing through 2029. The property that qualifies for bonus depreciation typically includes tangible personal property, such as furniture and fixtures, computer equipment, appliances, and certain types of vehicles. The immediate expensing allows corporations to realize significant tax benefits by accelerating their tax deductions for qualifying expenditures over many years. Being able to deduct these expenses immediately not only puts the cash flows back in the corporation's hands, but it also gives them a time value of money benefit for their tax deductions. (4) Reenactment And Amplified Opportunity Zone Tax Benefits The Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017 introduced the concept of opportunity zones, designed to utilize tax incentives to stimulate investment in underserved communities. According to the Tax Policy Center, opportunity zones had three key tax benefits: (1) temporary deferral of taxes on previously earned capital gains, (2) basis step-up of previously earned capital gains invested, and (3) exclusion of taxable income on new gains. While the benefits of opportunity zones primarily accrue to high-wealth individuals, many of these opportunity zones have flowed into real estate and operating businesses, representing a potential catalyst for companies that might ultimately become or be acquired by corporations. Importantly, these entities can only be developed and allocated in specific areas, which means that investments are flowing into areas that are most in need of economic stimulus. The One Big Beautiful Bill Act brings back opportunity zones through 2033. The key changes include that 33% of the zones must be in rural areas (an area with fewer than 50,000 inhabitants), and an increased tax incentive of a 30% exclusion of a deferred gain (previously 10%). Thus, this provision will increase the incentives for wealthy taxpayers to invest in rural areas that may be in need of an economic stimulus. (5) Less Extreme Changes To Multinational Taxation Rules Perhaps no bill in history has altered the taxation of US multinationals as significantly as the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017. In that bill, US multinationals transitioned from a worldwide tax system, where profits generated anywhere in the world were taxed in the US, to a quasi-territorial tax system, where, as long as certain conditions were met, profits were only taxed in the jurisdiction where they were generated. This lowered the complexity for multinational corporation tax laws. However, other provisions have also now become a mainstay in US multinational tax law, such as the Global Intangible Low-Taxed Income (GILTI) tax, which introduces an additional layer of US tax when companies have unusually high income relative to their assets overseas. The Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017 also introduced the Foreign-Derived Intangible Income (FDII) provision, which provides a lower tax rate for products made in the US and exported overseas. Lastly, the act introduced the Base Erosion Anti-Abuse Tax (BEAT), which adds tax liabilities to large corporations that make significant payments to foreign subsidiaries, such as royalties and interest. Each of these provisions were set to become less beneficial to US corporations starting in 2026. Under the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, the quasi-territorial tax system will remain in place. The additional layer of GILTI tax will increase from 10.5% to 10.7%. While this increase is higher than 13.1%, it is better than what it would have been absent this bill. Similarly, the lower FDII tax rate was 13.125%, and it would have increased to 16.4%. Instead, it will be 13.3% starting in 2026. Lastly, the BEAT tax rate will increase from 10% to 10.1% under the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, rather than 12.5% under the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act. While some of these changes and modifications may appear small, it is essential to consider the magnitude of the global economy and recognize that even tenths of a percent can have multi-million-dollar ripple effects. Above all else, these changes help ensure our corporations remain competitive in the global economy. These key changes are not all that is packed into the nearly 1,000-page One Big Beautiful Bill Act. However, they do represent some of the most impactful to US Corporations should President Trump sign it into office on the 4th of July.
Axios
30 minutes ago
- Axios
July 4th cookout costs sizzle with tariff pressures
Tariffs and trade tensions are pushing up the cost of summer cookouts, including Independence Day barbecues, Democratic lawmakers warn. Why it matters: Cookout costs increased 12.7% since President Trump announced the "Liberation Day" tariffs, analysis by the Joint Economic Committee's minority arm found. By the numbers: Ground beef and ice cream hit their highest prices on record since the 1980s, the analysis found citing Consumer Price Index data. Miller Lite and Coors Light six-packs are up more than 13% at Walmart since Liberation Day and through June 26, per the report. Imported beer prices also rose with Peroni increasing 10.5% and Modelo Especial 9.5%. Cookout essentials like aluminum foil, grill tools, and sunscreen saw hikes between 6% and 18%. Yes, but: Different analysis yield different results, while also looking at varying items. The Rabobank Barbecue Index found the 10-person barbecue cost 4.21% more than last year. The America Farm Bureau's annual survey found cookout staples for a 10-person meal declined less than 1% from last year's record high but are 19% higher than five years ago. Wells Fargo Fourth of July report estimates a 2.2% increase over last year for the holiday cookout. The intrigue: 32% of Americans are swapping barbecue for pizza this Fourth of July, according to Empower's survey of 2,200 people. 68% of those surveyed said barbecues are noticeably more expensive to host this year with 55% noting tariffs are making holiday celebrations more expensive.
Axios
30 minutes ago
- Axios
Washington state schools left waiting for $137M in federal funds
States are missing billions in federal education funding that was expected to be accessible on July 1 but has yet to be released by the Trump administration. Why it matters: In Washington state, an estimated $137 million is being withheld, which amounts to 15.6% of the state's federal K–12 education funding, according to the state Office of Superintendent of Public Instruction. The big picture: The Department of Education's funding delay has exacerbated the uncertainty for after-school, summer and other programs, leaving schools in limbo, advocates and policy experts say. The Education Department said in a last-minute notice that the funds would not be released while the programs were under review, according to the School Superintendents Association. What they're saying: U.S. Sen. Patty Murray (D-Wash.), the top Democrat on the Senate Appropriations Committee, said in a prepared statement that education funding uncertainty has prompted districts to delay hiring and other initiatives. "Every day that this funding is held up is a day that school districts are forced to worry about whether they'll have to cut back on after-school programs or lay off teachers instead of worrying about how to make sure our kids can succeed," Murray said. Districts have "made programming and employment commitments with the assumption that they'd be receiving this funding," Washington state superintendent Chris Reykdal said in a written statement. Zoom out: Nationwide, an estimated $6.2 billion in K–12 funds across five programs remains unavailable, according to the Learning Policy Institute, which conducts research to improve education policies. That includes funding for after-school and summer learning through the 21st Century Community Learning Centers program, money to support migratory children, educator development funds and more. The other side: The Department of Education referred Axios' questions for this story to the Office of Management and Budget. An OMB spokesperson said no decisions have been made amid "an ongoing programmatic review of education funding." What we're watching: If unreleased 21st Century Community Learning Center funds — the chief stream for academic enrichment outside school hours — remain blocked, up to 926 Boys and Girls Clubs could be forced to shut their doors, the organization's president and CEO, Jim Clark, said in a statement.
