Physical Address
304 North Cardinal St.
Dorchester Center, MA 02124
EXCLUSIVE Three states have recently solidified new agreements with Immigration and Customs Enforcement, reflecting a range of operational approaches. One governor, located 1,700 miles from Mexico, argues that his state effectively qualifies as a border state due to its severe fentanyl crisis.
On Wednesday, West Virginia Governor Patrick Morrisey is set to unveil one of the most comprehensive agreements between a state and ICE. His administration will engage the West Virginia State Police, the Division of Corrections and Rehabilitation, and the National Guard to bolster immigration enforcement under the 287(g) authority that gained prominence during President Donald Trump’s administration.
West Virginia has consistently ranked among the states with the highest rates of drug-related fatalities. Gov. Morrisey highlights this crisis as a primary reason for collaborating with ICE to combat fentanyl trafficking.
Under the Biden administration, unprecedented numbers of individuals have entered the U.S. unlawfully, leaving local officials apprehensive about the identities and potential threats posed by these individuals. “We had no knowledge about who they were, or whether they were a threat to our nation,” Morrisey told Fox News Digital prior to his scheduled announcement in Parkersburg.
The National Guard and state police will possess task force authority, empowering them to interrogate individuals suspected of being illegal immigrants. These operations must occur under federal supervision.
Law enforcement officers will be equipped to address immigration-related violations for those arrested for state or federal offenses and can enact warrantless arrests of suspected illegal immigrants if they deem those individuals a flight risk while awaiting a warrant.
The governor has also permitted state law enforcement to serve immigration warrants and collect evidence necessary for processing detained individuals. This includes gathering fingerprints and conducting interviews with suspects.
West Virginia distinguishes itself by enabling its law enforcement to issue immigration detainers, preparing documents for federal ICE officer approval and apprehending undocumented felons likely to evade arrest.
The West Virginia Division of Corrections will be authorized to detain immigrants in compliance with federal directives, ensuring adherence to federal immigration law.
Corrections officials will also follow the federal warrant officer model, which includes serving warrants for immigration violations in jails and facilitating the transfer of custody to federal authorities.
To the west, South Dakota Governor Larry Rhoden recently announced a collaboration with ICE through a program dubbed Operation Prairie Thunder. This initiative represents a more restrained agreement compared to West Virginia’s.
Upon assuming the governorship after Kristi Noem’s departure, Rhoden unveiled Operation Prairie Thunder as a comprehensive public safety campaign targeting key areas such as Sioux Falls.
This initiative aims to combat drug trafficking, investigate gang activities, and deter criminal behavior throughout the state.
The South Dakota Highway Patrol has been instructed to assist ICE in apprehensions, while six members of the National Guard will provide administrative support to the agency.
“Our work alongside ICE boils down to this: Highway Patrol will support ICE with arrests,” Rhoden stated. “The National Guard will support ICE with processing, and our Department of Corrections will assist ICE with transportation and identifying illegal immigrants in our custody.”
In Arkansas, significant legislative changes took effect this week that increase penalties for illegal immigrants engaging in serious violent felonies. The Defense Against Criminal Illegals Act, signed by Governor Sarah Huckabee Sanders, grants authority for Arkansas sheriff’s departments to collaborate with ICE.
This law allows local law enforcement to apply for 287(g) authority, enabling them to serve immigration warrants on individuals already in custody for other crimes.
Arkansas State Police are preparing to exceed the minimum cooperation expectations outlined in state law, according to reports from local media. Officers will now have the discretion to stop individuals in public and inquire about their immigration status, with the potential to detain those who are suspected violators.
A spokeswoman for the Arkansas State Police confirmed that officers will undergo rigorous training prior to engaging in immigration enforcement activities. This training includes an extensive 40-hour online course covering immigration law, civil rights, cultural sensitivities, liability issues, complaint procedures, and adherence to federal regulations.
Governor Sanders emphasized the importance of securing the borders and praised Trump’s efforts to prioritize this issue. “The Defense Against Criminal Illegals Act unequivocally states: Arkansas will not tolerate violent, criminal illegal immigrants, and we will assist the Trump administration in keeping our citizens safe,” she remarked.
These states join Florida and Wyoming, which were the first to enter substantial 287(g) agreements with ICE. As immigration enforcement becomes a growing focus for these states, the implications on public safety and community relations remain to be seen.
Addressing the Complexities of Immigration Policy
As these agreements roll out, they illustrate the ongoing tension in American immigration policy. The efforts by West Virginia, South Dakota, and Arkansas to engage more forcefully with ICE reflect a national conversation surrounding immigration enforcement.
The increasing presence of state law enforcement in immigration matters raises questions about the balance of power between state and federal authorities. While some governors view these agreements as critical for ensuring public safety, advocates argue that they may undermine trust within local communities.
As the national debate evolves, the role of states in immigration enforcement continues to come under scrutiny. The nuances of these agreements could very well shape the future of how states engage with immigration laws and may provoke further legislative measures across the country.
