NC House approves bill expanding sheriff cooperation with ICE

Key Takeaways

• House Bill 318 passed 70-45, requiring sheriffs to cooperate with ICE on undocumented inmate detention.
• The bill expands mandatory holds to cover all felonies and major misdemeanors, starts October 1.
• Officers gain immunity for compliance; bill faces likely veto from Governor Stein and uncertain Senate outcome.

The North Carolina House, in a move that is already sparking strong debate, passed House Bill 318 by a vote of 70 to 45. This new bill, named the Criminal Illegal Alien Enforcement Act, focuses on increasing the pressure on local sheriffs to work with U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) officials when dealing with undocumented people who have been arrested. The bill now moves to the North Carolina Senate for consideration, with major implications for how immigration laws are handled at the local level, especially across different counties.

What Does House Bill 318 Require?

House Bill 318 sets out to change several key things about how sheriffs across North Carolina 🇺🇸 work with ICE. Here’s a breakdown of the main requirements in simple terms:

• Mandatory Holds: Sheriffs must keep undocumented inmates in jail for up to 48 hours after they would normally be released—if ICE sends a written request (called a “detainer”). This gives ICE more time to pick up the person.
• Advance Notification: Before letting an inmate with an ICE detainer go, sheriffs now have to contact ICE at least two hours earlier. This way, ICE agents have enough time to get there if they want to take action.
• Broader List of Crimes: HB 318 doesn’t just cover serious felonies anymore. Now, it includes all felonies, certain major misdemeanors (like sexual battery), breaking or violating orders related to domestic violence, driving while drunk, burglary, theft, crimes involving fraud or forgery, and embezzlement. Anyone charged with these crimes could be subject to the new rules.
• Citizenship Checks: Police are now meant to try to check the citizenship status anytime someone is charged with one of these crimes.
• Immunity for Deputies: Officers who follow the law as written in HB 318 are now protected from being sued or punished for doing what the law says.
• New Start Date: An important change to the bill moved its kickoff earlier than first planned. Instead of starting this December, the new rules would go into effect on October 1st.

All of these points mean sheriffs and their teams could face more work and more legal steps any time an inmate with uncertain legal status is held for or released from jail.

Why Was This Bill Introduced Now?

House Bill 318 did not appear out of nowhere. In recent years, some sheriffs across the state—especially in Mecklenburg County 🇺🇸, where Sheriff Garry McFadden has spoken out—have chosen not to go along with every ICE request. In these counties, sheriffs sometimes let people go after they complete their sentences, even if ICE asked the county jail to hold them longer.

Supporters of the bill say not holding these inmates puts public safety at risk. They’ve told stories of people being released back into the community, only to commit more crimes after ICE was ignored. House Speaker Destin Hall, who supports the bill, says the law ensures “sheriffs do their job: protect citizens—not shield criminals.”

Most counties in North Carolina 🇺🇸 already work with ICE when asked, according to people backing the bill. However, those pushing for HB 318 argue that action is needed to cover every county. They see the new law as a way to make sure there are no more loopholes and to set one clear standard.

Arguments FOR and AGAINST HB 318

No issue around immigration is simple, and the debate around HB 318 shows just how split opinions are. Here’s what both sides are saying:

Supporters Say:
– Public Safety First: Keeping people in jail longer when ICE asks for it keeps communities safer, especially if the person has committed a serious crime.
– Uniform Standards: It’s important for every county to follow the same rules, so everyone is treated equally under the law.
– Reducing Risk of Repeat Crimes: With sheriffs required to hold inmates wanted by ICE, there’s a better chance that people who might otherwise harm the public will be handed over to federal authorities.

Opponents Say:
– Possible Violation of Rights: Keeping someone in jail longer than a judge says can raise big legal problems. It may break constitutional rules around due process, which says the government can’t take away someone’s freedom without following fair steps.
– Financial and Legal Burden: If sheriffs keep inmates for longer, counties might have to pay more to house them. Plus, this opens the door for lawsuits from inmates or advocacy groups.
– Ethical Concerns: Some worry that the bill asks local law enforcement to act in ways that go beyond their basic mission of community safety and may create distrust between immigrants and police.

Several Democratic lawmakers, as well as immigrant rights groups, have spoken out against the bill. They stress the risk for costly lawsuits and potential damage to the relationship between immigrant communities and law enforcement. They also say this could lead to people being held without solid legal reasons, something the U.S. Constitution is designed to prevent.

How Does HB 318 Change the Law?

To understand what makes HB 318 different, it’s helpful to look at how things stood before. To do this, we can use a side-by-side comparison:

The bill builds on House Bill 10, which North Carolina 🇺🇸 lawmakers passed in 2024. HB 10 started the trend toward mandatory sheriff cooperation with ICE but did not say exactly which crimes would mean mandatory holds. Nor did it say how long sheriffs had to keep people in jail when ICE asked. HB 318 fills in those blanks and makes the detention rules much stricter and broader.

What Does This Mean for Counties and Immigrants?

Right away, if enacted, HB 318 would change the daily work of sheriffs in every county. Those who already go along with ICE detainers would not see much change. But counties like Mecklenburg County 🇺🇸, where the sheriff has chosen not to follow every ICE request, would now be required by law to do so.

For county jails, that could mean:
– More paperwork and tracking for every inmate held on the new, longer list of crimes.
– More interactions with ICE for coordination.
– The need to hold inmates longer, which could mean spending more money on jail costs.

For immigrants, especially those without legal status, the bill could make a big difference. Even being charged with one of the many listed offenses—before a trial or conviction—could lead to extended time in county jail and higher chances of being picked up by ICE.

VisaVerge.com’s investigation reveals that such “mandatory hold” laws have led to legal challenges in other states because of concerns over due process and the cost to local taxpayers.

Political Future of HB 318

Passing the NC House was just the first step for HB 318. The bill now goes to the state Senate, where its supporters think it will do well. But even if the bill passes there, it may not become law right away. North Carolina Governor Josh Stein is expected to veto the measure if it crosses his desk.

If Governor Stein does veto HB 318, backers would need help from Democratic lawmakers to get enough votes for an override. In the initial House vote, only one Democrat, Representative Carla Cunningham, voted in favor. This means getting support to overturn a veto will be difficult and depends on any changes in support as the bill moves through the Senate.

Comparing State and Federal Roles

It’s important to remember that immigration is under the control of the federal government. However, ICE depends on local partners to help carry out immigration enforcement, especially in jails and prisons. Laws like HB 318 put more pressure on local law enforcement agencies to become a part of federal immigration enforcement efforts—a subject of debate nationwide.

In recent years, several counties across the United States 🇺🇸 have either scaled back cooperation with ICE or adopted policies limiting how local officers can work with federal immigration agents. Supporters of HB 318 argue that when states and counties refuse to cooperate, it weakens security. Critics, on the other hand, maintain that this practice goes against the spirit of local policing and may even harm the trust between immigrant communities and police, which can be necessary for solving crimes and keeping neighborhoods safe.

Immediate and Long-Term Effects

If enacted, HB 318 could have several effects right away:
– More inmates would be held longer in county jails if ICE asks for it.
– More alerts to ICE before releases, increasing the odds of immigration arrests.
– Higher costs for local jails having to house people for longer.

In the long run, several possibilities may play out:
– Legal battles could arise over whether keeping someone in jail longer at ICE’s request breaks constitutional law.
– Counties might face lawsuits resulting from people being held beyond their court-ordered release dates.
– The relationship between sheriffs’ departments and immigrant communities could change, possibly making it harder for police to gather information or help for crimes if people fear officers will help ICE.

Different Views From North Carolina Leaders

Sheriffs in North Carolina 🇺🇸 are split on this issue. Some, like Mecklenburg Sheriff Garry McFadden, have openly refused to keep inmates longer than ordered by a judge unless clearly required by state law. They argue this follows the Constitution and court decisions saying sheriffs can’t hold people just because ICE asks. Others believe working closely with ICE is part of the job, especially when it comes to public safety.

NC House Speaker Destin Hall, who is a leading force behind HB 318, says, “This bill ensures that sheriffs do their job: protect citizens—not shield criminals.” His focus is on public safety and making sure there is no confusion about a sheriff’s duties under the law.

Opponents, including civil rights groups such as the ACLU of North Carolina, keep pointing out the legal risks and possible harm to community trust. They say local officers should not be required to hold inmates at ICE’s request if there’s not a clear legal order from a judge.

Next Steps: What Should You Expect?

With the bill now moving to the North Carolina Senate, those watching the outcome—immigrants, sheriffs, policymakers, and advocates—should keep close track of its progress. Even if passed and signed into law, challenges in state or federal court could slow down or limit the bill’s impact.

• Immigrants and families are urged to understand their rights if detained. Organizations often provide help and advice to those who may be affected.
• County sheriffs will need training and careful planning to stay within the rules, avoid lawsuits, and handle the costs of longer jail stays.
• Anyone interested in learning about ICE’s role or detainer requests can find official information on the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement website.

For more updates about House Bill 318—including possible changes, the actions of the NC House and Senate, and Governor Stein’s final decision—people can check trusted news sources and follow official North Carolina 🇺🇸 legislative pages.

As the debate over immigration and sheriff cooperation continues, the outcome of HB 318 will serve as a sign of where the state stands on sharing the responsibility for enforcing federal immigration laws at the local level. Lawmakers, sheriffs, and community groups will keep discussing whether these changes make the state safer, or if they create more problems than they solve.

To sum up, HB 318 brings new, stricter rules to sheriff and ICE cooperation statewide, closes old loopholes, and widens the range of crimes covered—even as it ignites new debate. The fate of the bill and its real-world effects will become clear in the coming months, as stakeholders in North Carolina 🇺🇸 and nationwide pay close attention to whether the law will go into effect, and if so, how it’s carried out.

Learn Today

Detainer → A formal written request from ICE asking local authorities to hold an inmate for up to 48 hours beyond release.
ICE (Immigration and Customs Enforcement) → The federal agency responsible for enforcing immigration laws and handling deportations within the United States.
Mandatory Holds → Legal requirement that sheriffs detain individuals beyond normal release if requested by ICE for immigration purposes.
Immunity for Deputies → Legal protection from lawsuits or punishment for officers complying with House Bill 318 when handling ICE requests.
Felony → A serious crime, such as burglary or embezzlement, which under HB 318 can trigger mandatory immigration detention.

This Article in a Nutshell

North Carolina’s HB 318 raises stakes in immigration enforcement by mandating sheriff-ICE collaboration on broader crimes. Set for October 1, it expands required jail holds and officer immunity, but faces opposition over rights concerns. Pending Senate approval and a possible governor’s veto, its statewide impact remains hotly debated.
— By VisaVerge.com

Read more:

• Traffic tickets can now lead to student visas being revoked by ICE
• Post Office law enforcement aiding Trump Administration in deportation
• ICE raids wrong Oklahoma City home, traumatizes U.S. citizens
• Raul Ical detained by ICE after hours hiding in San Antonio tree
• 287(g) Program lets local police help Department of Homeland Security enforce immigration laws