Do states have authority over federal ICE activity?

Can state and local governments refuse to cooperate with the federal enforcement for immigration laws? This issue extends past just immigration enforcement and covers all federal law enforcement.

Paul Charlton, former U.S. Attorney and Partner at Dentons, joined “Arizona Horizon” to explain how far the federal government’s power can go and how much states have to cooperate.

While federal law holds a high power over the country, states also have their own jurisdiction. Charlton explained there are many examples where state and local governments are already having strong disagreements with federal law enforcement.

Charlton says that the short answer is yes. In other words, if the federal government decides to send ICE agents into a city, local law enforcement can choose to not participate in the sweeps. However, they are unable to obstruct the agents if they do come into their city.

One could argue that local law enforcement could be seen standing in the way of the federal agents if they refuse to help them. However, these police departments are protected by long-standing U.S. Supreme Court case decisions. One influence was the Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act or more commonly known as the Brady Bill.

The Brady Bill requires a national background check system, a five-day waiting period, and police checks for handgun purchases. When the law first went into affect, the U.S. government required states to pay for and enact each of the background checks on their own.

Both local and Arizona sheriffs objected to this and said that the federal government could not compel them to do something in compliance with their own federal laws.

“You, federal government, cannot compel the state to do something they don’t wish do to, and for something which you haven’t provided them funds,” said Charlton.

This example works the same for states having the ability to not participate in ICE raids.