States Propose Laws to Limit ICE Powers After Minneapolis and Portland Shootings
1 week ago
Democratic lawmakers in several states are pushing a new wave of legislation aimed at limiting the role and tactics of federal immigration enforcement following recent high-profile incidents, including the fatal shooting of Renee Good by an ICE agent in Minneapolis and the wounding of two people by federal agents in Portland, Oregon.
The proposals, gaining momentum as state legislatures return to session, would give residents more tools to challenge federal actions and impose restrictions on how and where federal agents operate. In New York, Gov. Kathy Hochul has endorsed a plan to allow individuals to sue federal officers for alleged constitutional violations and would require judicial warrants for certain federal actions in sensitive locations like schools and hospitals.
Oregon Democrats are preparing a bill that would let residents pursue legal claims if federal agents violate their Fourth Amendment rights against unlawful search and seizure. Meanwhile, New Jersey’s Democrat-led legislature recently approved measures to bar state law enforcement from cooperating with federal immigration enforcement — bills awaiting Gov. Phil Murphy’s decision.
In California, lawmakers are proposing restrictions that would prohibit local and state officers from acting as federal agents and make it a state-law violation for immigration agents to conduct “indiscriminate” arrests around court appearances. Similar ideas are also being floated in Georgia and other states.
Republican lawmakers and Trump administration officials have pushed back, arguing that such state-level limits undermine federal immigration law and public safety, and have taken legal action to challenge some measures in court.
The debate reflects a deepening clash between state efforts to assert local control and the federal government’s immigration enforcement priorities.
The proposals, gaining momentum as state legislatures return to session, would give residents more tools to challenge federal actions and impose restrictions on how and where federal agents operate. In New York, Gov. Kathy Hochul has endorsed a plan to allow individuals to sue federal officers for alleged constitutional violations and would require judicial warrants for certain federal actions in sensitive locations like schools and hospitals.
Oregon Democrats are preparing a bill that would let residents pursue legal claims if federal agents violate their Fourth Amendment rights against unlawful search and seizure. Meanwhile, New Jersey’s Democrat-led legislature recently approved measures to bar state law enforcement from cooperating with federal immigration enforcement — bills awaiting Gov. Phil Murphy’s decision.
In California, lawmakers are proposing restrictions that would prohibit local and state officers from acting as federal agents and make it a state-law violation for immigration agents to conduct “indiscriminate” arrests around court appearances. Similar ideas are also being floated in Georgia and other states.
Republican lawmakers and Trump administration officials have pushed back, arguing that such state-level limits undermine federal immigration law and public safety, and have taken legal action to challenge some measures in court.
The debate reflects a deepening clash between state efforts to assert local control and the federal government’s immigration enforcement priorities.
