Maine Moves Forward with Law Restricting Local Immigration Enforcement

(MAINE, UNITED STATES) Maine will soon put firm limits on how its police and jails work with federal immigration authorities after Governor Janet Mills said she will let LD 1971 become law without her signature when lawmakers return in January 2026. In a Dec. 15, 2025, op-ed in the Portland Press Herald, Mills wrote:

“LD 1971 is imperfect, and we should not need it, but the times call for it. We cannot turn a blind eye to ICE’s unacceptable actions, and so I have chosen to allow LD 1971 to become law.”

The bill originally passed both chambers on June 18, 2025 — by one vote in the House (74–73) and 20–14 in the Senate. Mills had held the measure since July 8, 2025, while weighing public pressure.

How the bill becomes law in Maine

Because the governor neither signed nor vetoed the bill during the session, it is set to take effect once the Legislature reconvenes — a rare procedural path that nonetheless carries the force of law in Maine.

The measure’s formal title is “An Act to Protect Workers in This State by Clarifying the Relationship of State and Local Law Enforcement Agencies with Federal Immigration Authorities.” Supporters stress the title’s focus on workers: the bill grew out of stories from immigrant workers and families who said routine contacts with local police ended with a transfer to federal custody.

Mills, a Democrat, framed her decision as a response to actions by the federal administration, saying the state should not be pulled into what she called political immigration enforcement. Her office said she reviewed the measure carefully before deciding to allow it to take effect.

Key provisions of LD 1971

At the center of LD 1971 is a directive that state and local law enforcement — including county jails and other correctional facilities — focus on enforcing criminal and traffic laws rather than helping federal immigration quotas.

• Officers should not transfer someone to ICE custody based only on suspected immigration status.
• The law aims to curb the use of immigration “detainers” — requests from ICE asking agencies to hold a person longer for pickup.
• It narrows when someone can be held or handed over for civil immigration reasons, while not preventing enforcement of state law or sharing information when required.

Advocates argue detainers can sweep in people who have not been charged with crimes. Critics, including some law enforcement voices during debate, warned the bill could block cooperation when ICE is pursuing people deemed dangerous. Mills did not say the law ends all contact with federal authorities but urged restraint in how local agencies respond.

Incidents that spurred the proposal

Supporters pointed to a series of incidents since March 2025 in which routine police stops for minor traffic issues resulted in transfers to ICE.

• Backers cited at least 22 stops that led to transfers.
• They said Maine officers turned over at least 50 people — including drivers, passengers, bystanders, children, and accident victims.
• Many of those taken reportedly had no criminal history and were in lawful immigration processes (e.g., seeking asylum or applying for work permission).

The source material does not name the individuals involved, but immigrant advocates said the stories spread quickly through communities, leaving families afraid to call police after a crash or to report wage theft. One organizer said some parents kept children home from school when they lacked rides out of fear.

Repeal of 2011 executive order

Mills paired her decision on LD 1971 with the repeal of a 2011 executive order signed by former Governor Paul LePage that had encouraged closer coordination between state agencies and federal immigration authorities.

• In her op-ed, Mills called that order “a broad and dangerous promise that Maine will not make” under the Trump administration.
• Her spokesperson, Tony Ronzio, said Mills had been reviewing LD 1971 since spring 2025 and remained “appalled by the tactics of the Trump administration.”

Advocates said repealing the executive order matters as much as the statute because executive orders can shape daily practice even when laws are silent. Opponents contend the state is sending a message of defiance to Washington; some Republican lawmakers warned that reduced cooperation could make removals harder even after criminal convictions.

Reactions from advocates, lawmakers, and analysts

• Sue Roche, executive director of the Immigrant Legal Advocacy Project, said the law draws “a clear line between the role of Maine’s state and local police and the Trump administration’s political immigration enforcement agenda,” and that it protects “resources, rights, safety, and dignity.”
• The ACLU of Maine applauded the move to keep local resources from supporting mass deportation efforts.
• State Representative Deqa Dhalac, the bill’s primary sponsor, argued workers are more likely to report crimes and labor abuses when they do not fear handoffs to ICE.
• Analysis by VisaVerge.com noted the close votes reflect how divided many statehouses are as federal policies spill into local life.
• The Maine Immigrants’ Rights Coalition said residents continued calling lawmakers through late 2025 in support of the measure.

National context and related proposals

The fight places Maine in a wider national clash over so‑called sanctuary policies, a label for rules limiting cooperation with federal immigration authorities. Supporters say the term can mislead because:

• The bill does not stop police from enforcing state law.
• It does narrow when someone can be held or handed over for civil immigration reasons.

Maine is not listed as a sanctuary state by the U.S. Department of Justice, though that status can change with politics and reporting.

In Washington:

• H.R. 32, introduced on Jan. 3, 2025, would withhold certain funds from jurisdictions that restrict cooperation; it remains in committee.
• A separate Maine proposal to punish towns for non-cooperation has not advanced.

Practical effects and next steps for local agencies

For immigrants and mixed‑status families, the change may ease fear during ordinary encounters with police, but lawyers stress it will not shield anyone from federal action.

• ICE agents retain authority to arrest people on their own.
• Federal courts continue to control most removal cases.

Local agencies will need to:

1. Train staff on the new rules and limits.
2. Rewrite booking procedures and intake forms.
3. Decide how to respond when ICE requests extra time to pick someone up.

Residents who have questions about ICE arrests and detention can read basic explanations on the agency’s website at U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement.

Closing note

As January 2026 approaches, Mills’ decision sets up another test of how far a state can go in drawing boundaries while still working with Washington on public safety in Maine’s courts and streets.