Most Maryland sheriffs drop arrest agreements with ICE despite vows to fight a new state law – WTOP News

Maryland sheriffs vowed to fight legislation, passed early in this year’s legislative session, prohibiting formal agreements between local police agencies and federal immigration officials, and giving sheriff’s departments 90 days to get out of any deal they were in.

But as the 90-day clock expires Monday, it turns out that at least seven of the nine counties that had the so-called 287(g) agreements with Immigration and Customs Enforcement have pulled out of those plans and an eighth said the agreement will not be enforced, even though it’s still on the books.

Most of the local departments dropped the 287(G) agreements either the same day or the day after Gov. Wes Moore (D) signed Senate Bill 245 and House Bill 444 into law Feb. 17. The emergency legislation took effect immediately upon his signature.

While they appear to have given up the 287(g) fight, however, sheriffs are still assessing a challenge to another immigration bill that passed during the waning hours on the last day of this year’s session: the Community Trust Act. It is one of several immigration enforcement bills the governor has yet to sign, with just one more bill signing scheduled for May 26.

The majority Democratic legislature and the supporters of the 287(g) ban argue it eliminates and distrust of police in communities where aggressive immigration tactics have been conducted and enforced by President Donald Trump (R) and his administration.

As of Sunday, according to ICE, the agency had 1,832 law enforcement agencies in 39 states and two U.S. territories signed on to participate in the 287(g) program. Seven of the nine Maryland counties – Allegany, Carroll, Cecil, Frederick, Harford, St. Mary’s and Wicomico – already informed the agency they had to terminate their partnerships due to the passage of the law.

“I thank you for your partnership since 2019 and your efforts to help me keep our communities safer,” wrote Cecil County Sheriff Scott Adams in a Feb. 17 letter addressed to Vernon Liggins, acting field office director in the Baltimore ICE office.

But the agency’s website lists two Maryland counties still participating: Garrett and Washington.

A representative from the Garrett County Sheriff Office didn’t respond to requests for comment Friday.

Washington County Sheriff Brian Albert said that because the 287(g) ban took effect immediately, the agreement “is pretty much null and void. We’re not participating in the 287(g) program. We just don’t have a lot of people with detainers on them that are processing through the jail. There’s not a large immigrant community here in Washington County.”

But Albert and some other sheriffs are assessing legal advice about the Community Trust Act.

Senate Bill 791, sponsored by Sen. Clarence Lam (D-Anne Arundel and Howard), which was made an emergency measure, would prohibit local or state police from holding a person for ICE, except in limited scenarios: If a person was convicted of a felony in the United States; is a registered sex offender; served between 12 to 18 months in a state prison; or committed an offense in another state and served at least five years in prison.

A major part of the bill requires federal officials to present a judicial warrant to hold someone, not just an administrative warrant.

One of the main complaints from Republican lawmakers and some sheriffs is the act will not only decrease cooperation with federal officials, but also force law enforcement agencies to follow both federal and state law they say conflict with each other.

“We’re sworn to uphold the constitution of the United States and the state of Maryland. The Community Trust Act puts us in a very tough predicament,” Albert said.

‘Have some standing’

Harford County Sheriff Jeffrey Gahler posted a video April 15 on social media urging the governor to veto the Community Trust Act.

“This legislation is a direct assault on public safety. It officially bans our law enforcement and correctional officers from communicating with our federal partners at the Department of Homeland Security,” Gahler said in video.

He reiterated that point said in an interview Thursday.

“The governor hasn’t signed it. We’re waiting on [whether] if he vetoes it, or allows it to become law after 30 days if he doesn’t veto it or sign it,” Gahler said. “We have talked with attorneys. We think we might have some standing. I hope we don’t get there. I hope he does the right thing and vetoes this terrible bill.”

Another immigration-related bill awaiting the governor’s signature is the Data Privacy Act, which seeks to close loopholes in the state’s Public Information Act and prohibit a business from selling personal data of an individual “for the purpose of immigration enforcement.”

“The signing of these bills are going to be career defining for our governor and going to mark his legacy on immigration at a time when our communities are under attack,” said Cathryn Jackson, policy director for We Are CASA.

As for the 287(g) legislation advocates pushed for more than a decade to get, Del. Nicole Williams (D-Prince George’s) said “it’s a big deal.”

“It’s just really unfortunate we are in this political climate we are in today with a federal administration in trying to prevent people from obtaining the American dream,” said Williams, who sponsored the House version of the 287(g) legislation.

“It’s about people who are searching for a better life for their family. When we talk about American exceptionalism, our immigration system is a part of that,” she said.

Maryland Matters is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Maryland Matters maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Steve Crane for questions: editor@marylandmatters.org.