Idaho bill wants every cop and sheriff to work with ICE by July 2026

Committee sends immigration bill to full House

Idaho’s House Local Government Committee voted 12-4 on Feb. 26 to advance House Bill 659 to the full House.

The bill would require every city and county law enforcement agency in the state to apply for a 287(g) agreement with U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement.

Rep. Dale Hawkins, R-Fernwood, introduced the bill as part of a package of immigration proposals this session. It includes an emergency clause that would make it effective July 1, 2026.

The 287(g) program pairs local cops with ICE

The 287(g) program comes from the Immigration and Nationality Act.

It lets ICE team up with local law enforcement so trained local officers can handle certain immigration duties under ICE’s direction.

There are three models: jail enforcement, which screens people already in custody; task force, which adds immigration checks to routine police work; and warrant service officer, which serves ICE warrants in jails.

ICE covers the cost of training. The bill does not say which model agencies must apply for.

Agencies must apply or explain why not

Under the bill, all city and county law enforcement agencies would need to apply for a memorandum of agreement with ICE. Officers would then screen people already in custody to check immigration status.

Any agency that cannot get an agreement would have to publicly explain why and describe what else it does to work with ICE. Idaho State Police are exempt because they already have a separate ICE agreement.

The bill’s fiscal note claims no added cost at the state or local level.

Sheriffs and police chiefs push back hard

The two biggest law enforcement groups in Idaho oppose the bill.

Canyon County Sheriff Kieran Donahue testified against it on behalf of the Idaho Sheriffs’ Association, calling it an overreach into the constitutional office of sheriff.

“We do state and constitutional duties, not federal work,” he said. He pointed to costs like backfilling positions while officers travel for training.

Hailey Chief of Police Steve England also testified against the bill on behalf of the Idaho Chiefs of Police Association.

Fiscal note and testimony tell different stories

The bill’s fiscal note, prepared by Hawkins, says the legislation carries no cost at the state or local level. Law enforcement leaders disagreed.

Donahue said he has avoided entering a 287(g) agreement specifically because of training and staffing costs.

Rep. Monica Church, D-Boise, noted the bill does not require the federal government to cover any expenses and does not require Idaho to accept federal money if offered.

Donahue added that his office already cooperates with ICE through other channels.

Supporters say the bill closes enforcement gaps

Backers argued the bill would create a consistent statewide standard and hold agencies accountable. Rep. Clint Hostetler, R-Twin Falls, said it gives law enforcement options to protect their communities.

Secure Idaho co-founder Michael Angiletta testified in support, citing a reported increase of nearly 800% in immigration arrests across Idaho in 2025.

William Mostoller told the committee the law would help ensure criminals leave the system. Hawkins said the federal government holds sole authority over immigration, and local agencies should help enforce it.

Civil rights groups and communities raise concerns

Four committee members voted no: Reps. Church, Steve Berch, D-Boise; Rick Cheatum, R-Pocatello; and Josh Wheeler, R-Ammon.

The ACLU of Idaho opposes the bill, arguing that 287(g) agreements have a track record of encouraging racial profiling and civil rights violations.

Members of Idaho’s Latino and immigrant communities have raised similar worries about profiling and growing distrust of local police.

Donahue also flagged a concern that the public disclosure rule could force agencies to reveal normally protected information.

Idaho already has 10 active ICE agreements

Idaho has 10 active 287(g) agreements with local agencies, according to the ICE website.

The Owyhee County Sheriff’s Office became the first local agency in the state to sign a task force agreement in February 2025.

Idaho State Police entered a separate deal in mid-2025 focused on transporting convicted inmates to ICE detention. That agreement authorized ISP to spend up to $300,000 for up to 100 transports over 12 months.

Gov. Brad Little’s February 2025 executive order encouraged all state agencies with law enforcement power to consider 287(g) partnerships.

Governor Little pushed enforcement before the bill

Little signed Executive Order 2025-03, the Border Security and Immigration Enforcement Act, in February 2025. The order called on state agencies to help the federal government enforce immigration laws.

The ISP agreement that followed focuses on transporting people convicted of crimes like domestic violence, robbery, and DUI who are in the country without authorization. But HB 659 goes further than the governor’s approach.

It would make 287(g) applications mandatory for every local agency, not voluntary.

Idaho joins a growing national push

President Trump signed Executive Order 14159 on Jan. 20, 2025, directing ICE to maximize use of 287(g) agreements.

Nationally, those agreements have grown from about 135 before Trump’s second term to more than 1,400 across 40 states as of late February 2026.

Florida and Georgia passed similar laws pushing local agencies toward ICE partnerships.

On the other side, states like New Mexico, Maine, and Maryland passed legislation in 2025 and 2026 banning 287(g) agreements. ICE now covers training costs and launched a reimbursement program for participating agencies.

The bill still has a long road ahead

The full House will debate and vote on HB 659 at a date not yet announced.

If it passes, the bill moves to a Senate committee for a hearing and then needs a full Senate vote before reaching the governor’s desk. With the emergency clause, it would take effect July 1, 2026.

Local agencies would then need to apply for 287(g) agreements or publicly explain why they cannot.

Stakes run high for Idaho communities

If the bill becomes law, every city police department and county sheriff’s office in Idaho would need to seek an ICE partnership or publicly say why it could not.

Supporters say this would create a statewide enforcement standard.

Opponents say it would strain local budgets, pull officers from daily duties, and damage trust between police and immigrant communities.

Idaho’s dairy industry, which reports close to $11 billion in total sales, says about 90% of dairy jobs go to Spanish-speaking workers, many of whom lack legal status.

This article was created with AI assistance and human editing.

Read more from this brand:

• The March 1973 riot that gutted Idaho State Penitentiary and accidentally created a museum
• Idaho’s California Trail holds the last happy footprints of doomed pioneers
• Idaho scenic hot springs to enjoy in September