Key Takeaways
• Delaware’s House Bill 58 would ban police from questioning people solely about citizenship or immigration status.
• Colorado Senate Bill 25-047 would allow increased cooperation between local police and federal immigration authorities.
• States take divergent approaches, causing confusion for police, lawmakers, and immigrants regarding immigration enforcement limits.
Several states in the United States 🇺🇸 are bringing forward new Bills to prevent local police from getting involved with people’s immigration status. This movement is not happening everywhere in the same way, but the topic is getting attention from lawmakers, police departments, immigration advocates, and the wider public. Many believe that these proposed changes draw clearer lines between local police and federal immigration authorities.
Overview of Recent Legislative Efforts
In some states, lawmakers are pushing back against having local police involved in checking or enforcing immigration status. Delaware’s House Bill 58 offers a good example. If this Bill becomes law, it will prevent the police from stopping, questioning, arresting, searching, or detaining anyone just because of their citizenship or immigration status. The Bill also makes it clear that police officers may not ask about a person’s place of birth, if they can get a Social Security number, or if they are a citizen. They would also not be allowed to arrest or hold anyone because of a civil immigration warrant. A civil immigration warrant is not a criminal warrant—it’s an order related to immigration matters, like when someone may have stayed in the United States 🇺🇸 longer than their visa allowed.
Delaware is also considering House Bill 96. This Bill would require the state’s Department of Justice to give reports every three months about any time federal agencies ask for their help with undocumented residents. With these reporting demands, the public and lawmakers can see how often such requests come and how they are handled.
Over in Colorado, there’s Senate Bill 25-047. This Bill looks to repeat parts of a 2006 law that stopped local governments from passing rules to prevent local police from working with federal immigration authorities. If this new Bill is passed, it would get rid of the current state laws that set limits on how much local police can work with federal immigration officials. In short, Colorado’s plan would do the opposite of what Delaware is trying to do.
Different Paths: Limiting vs. Increasing Local Police Involvement
Not all states are going in the same direction. A few states are making strict rules to keep local police out of immigration enforcement. For example, both Oregon and Illinois 🇺🇸 have strong laws that do not allow police to hand people over to Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) just because of their immigration status. Massachusetts is also looking into a law called the Safe Communities Act. If approved, this Act would prevent local police from asking about a person’s immigration status and stop agreements where local jails hold people for federal immigration authorities.
Meanwhile, the federal government wants local and state police to work more closely with immigration authorities. A January 2025 executive order tells the Secretary of Homeland Security to use agreements under section 287(g) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA). This means that the government can make deals with local police, so they can act like immigration officers in certain cases. These agreements allow local police to help the federal government with immigration enforcement.
Why Do Some Want Local Police Out of Immigration Enforcement?
Many who support these new Bills say that letting local police deal with immigration status creates real problems for the community. The concern comes from different directions: protecting community trust, using police resources in the right way, sticking to legal limits, and defending civil rights.
1. Community Trust
Local police chiefs often say their work depends on the trust of the people they serve. When people—regardless of their immigration status—think that the police will act as immigration officers, they may not call for help or report crimes. For example, a person worried about their own immigration status or about that of a family member might be too scared to talk to the police, even if they are the victim of a crime or have important information about something that happened in the neighborhood. In a report from the Policing Institute, police leaders stated that making local officers do immigration enforcement hurts the trust between police and the public. When people are afraid, crime becomes harder to solve, and the whole community may become less safe.
2. Police Resources
Police departments have limited money and staff. Using them for federal immigration enforcement can stretch resources thin and force police to spend less time fighting crime or responding to other calls from the public. Some experts and groups say that police should focus on local problems, not federal ones. As House Bill 58 in Delaware explains, local involvement in immigration issues can “co-opt” or take away local resources for what many see as questionable reasons. Some also note that it could lead to unfair treatment of people based on their appearance or the language they speak. This issue can strip communities of their sense of safety and fairness.
3. Legal Limits
Most local police departments are set up to deal with state and city laws, not federal laws. Agencies like the Lone Tree Police Department in Colorado know this, and they publicly state that they “are not authorized to enforce federal immigration laws.” That job is up to special federal agencies like ICE. So, some local leaders believe these new Bills only make clear what was already true according to the law.
4. Civil Rights
Americans have basic rights when dealing with police. This includes people’s right not to answer questions about their immigration status or citizenship. The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) tells people that they do not have to talk to police about where they were born or if they have papers. Being silent about these things is not against the law. These types of rights are important top protect, especially for people who might feel pressured or scared.
For more information about your rights when talking to law enforcement, you can visit the official ACLU guide.
States Move in Opposite Directions
Because different states are choosing very different approaches, the United States 🇺🇸 now has a patchwork of rules. Some states, like Oregon and Illinois 🇺🇸, are famous for keeping local police away from federal immigration enforcement. Others, like Colorado, are considering giving local police a bigger role.
VisaVerge.com’s investigation reveals this has caused confusion and tension, not just for police and lawmakers, but also for regular people, immigrants, and those wanting to understand their rights. On one side, advocates who favor more limits say these laws make communities safer and more trusting, because police will only be focused on local safety and not on immigration questions. On the other side, those who support more cooperation believe that local police are in the best position to help catch and remove people who are in the country without permission.
The Federal Perspective and Section 287(g) Agreements
At the national level, federal agencies are still pushing for more partnership with local police. Through section 287(g) agreements, the federal government can allow state and local officers to do work normally reserved for federal immigration officers. These agreements can let local police:
– Check the immigration status of people they arrest
– Start deportation paperwork
– Hold people for immigration authorities
Some local governments have signed these deals, while others have refused to join. A federal executive order in January 2025 told the Department of Homeland Security to keep making these partnerships. This is part of a larger push to improve federal and state cooperation on immigration enforcement. To read more about how these agreements work, you can visit the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) information page.
The Impact of Proposed Bills on Communities
The main change that comes from Bills like Delaware’s House Bill 58 and others is in day-to-day life for many people. Immigrants—both with documents and without—may feel safe to report crimes, seek help, or serve as witnesses. If they do not fear being stopped or questioned about their immigration status by the police, they may be more likely to work with law enforcement. This helps solve crimes and keeps everyone safer.
On the other hand, there are also worries that if local police cannot check immigration status, people who have committed serious crimes and are also in the country without permission could avoid detection. Supporters of stronger ties between local police and federal immigration authorities say that removing barriers stops dangerous criminals from slipping through the cracks.
The economic impact also matters. Local police can spend more time on public safety and less on federal matters if their duties are limited to local law enforcement. But some states and communities worry that cutting off cooperation could make them lose federal grants or funding.
Civil Rights, Trust, and Safety
Recent experience shows that when people believe police might ask about their immigration status, they often avoid getting involved with law enforcement—even in emergencies. This can keep crime hidden. It can also leave victims without help. Laws and Bills that set off clear boundaries help protect civil rights and make it clear that police must treat everyone fairly. For anyone stopped by police, it’s important to know you have the right to remain silent and not answer questions about citizenship or immigration status.
Groups like the ACLU warn that allowing local police to act on civil immigration warrants can increase racial profiling. This is when someone is unfairly targeted because of their looks or the language they speak. The hope is that, with strong Bills in place, such practices can be prevented.
Balancing Local and Federal Roles
The tension between state and federal authority is nothing new in the United States 🇺🇸, but immigration law is one of the biggest areas where this plays out. For years, Congress and the White House have struggled to agree on new immigration policies. In that time, state lawmakers have filled the gap with their own Bills about what local police should or should not do. This leads to a wide variety of laws depending on where you live.
Some parts of the country want local police to have less to do with immigration status and working with federal officials. Other states see things differently and pass Bills that encourage more cooperation with ICE. As a result, immigrants, police officers, and the broader public must learn different rules depending on their state.
What Happens Next?
The debate is far from over. Most of these Bills still have to pass through state legislatures and be signed into law. In some places, there will likely be court cases if people think these laws break federal or constitutional rules. In the future, even if certain Bills pass, future lawmakers or governors could change these policies again.
What remains clear is that the question of how local police should deal with immigration status is still open, and the answer is likely to keep changing. Lawmakers, police chiefs, advocates, and the public will continue to debate the right balance between safety, trust, cooperation, and the rights of people who live in their communities.
Key Points for Communities and Policymakers
- States are considering or passing Bills to prevent local police from acting as immigration officers.
- These laws aim to protect trust, civil rights, resources, and set clear job limits between state and federal authorities.
- Some states want stricter limits, while others, with federal support, want more cooperation through agreements like section 287(g).
- Bills like Delaware’s House Bill 58 seek to stop police from asking about or acting on immigration status.
- The outcome affects everyone in the community—from immigrants to lifelong citizens.
- Stakeholders will need to keep a close eye on these Bills and future court cases to see how things develop.
With these developments, anyone concerned about their rights or the role of local police should stay informed and seek updates from reliable sources such as ACLU’s Know Your Rights and VisaVerge.com, which provides trusted news on immigration laws and policies.
The discussion around Bills limiting local police from policing immigration status is likely to keep growing, as states steer their own course in a country where immigration remains a strong, sometimes divisive, topic. As states try different policies, people living in the United States 🇺🇸 will need to keep informed about the laws where they live and what these changes could mean for themselves, their families, and their communities.
Learn Today
House Bill 58 → A proposed Delaware law that forbids police from stopping, questioning, or detaining individuals solely over citizenship or immigration status.
Civil immigration warrant → A non-criminal order from federal immigration authorities, often related to overstaying visas or other immigration matters.
Section 287(g) agreements → Arrangements enabling local police to help enforce federal immigration laws under the Immigration and Nationality Act.
Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) → A federal agency responsible for enforcing immigration laws and deportations within the United States.
Safe Communities Act → Proposed Massachusetts legislation aiming to stop local police from asking about or detaining people for immigration status.
This Article in a Nutshell
U.S. states are debating whether local police should enforce immigration laws. Bills like Delaware’s House Bill 58 limit police involvement, aiming to promote community trust and civil rights. Others, like Colorado, consider more cooperation with federal authorities. This evolving issue impacts public safety, immigrants’ rights, and community-police relationships nationwide.
— By VisaVerge.com
Read more:
• Trump Administration Plots End of Habeas Corpus for Illegal Immigration
• Reconciliation Bill would raise immigration fees for asylum applications
• Switzerland sets new immigration curbs in deal with European Union
• IRS Criminal Investigators in Chicago tapped for immigration enforcement
• Iowa State Patrol faces calls to disband immigration task force
