Idaho bill would require local law enforcement to work with ICE

BoCo Sheriff Wheeler: Agreements would make his office ‘subservient to ICE’

By Zach Hagadone
Reader Staff

The Idaho House of Representatives twice delayed hearing floor debate on a bill that would require all local law enforcement in the state to enter into agreements with the U.S. Department of Homeland Security, which oversees Immigration and Customs Enforcement, in order to work more closely with those federal agencies.

House Bill 659 passed the Local Government Committee on a 12-4 vote Feb. 26 — with Dist. 1B Rep. Cornel Rasor, R-Sagle, in support — seeking to add a section of Idaho Code “to require local and county law enforcement agencies to apply for a memorandum of agreement with U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement pursuant to section 287(g) of the Immigration and Nationality Act.” 

The bill however contains an opt-out clause, stating that if a law enforcement is “unable” to enter into the 287(g) MOA it must “publish a statement declaring the reasons” for its inability and describe “any efforts made to establish alternate cooperation with enforcement and removal operations of immigration and customs enforcement.”

The legislation had advanced to a full reading in the House, but was tabled on March 3 and March 4 — along with all other bills on the third-reading calendar — and could be taken up as early as Thursday, March 5.

If approved by the full House and Senate and signed by Gov. Brad Little, the bill introduced by Reps. Dale Hawkins, R-Fernwood, and Kyle Harris, R-Lewiston, would go into effect July 1 and “require agencies to look into programs that include but are ‘not limited to’ the jail enforcement model and warrant service model,” the Idaho Capital Sun reported.

According to the Sun, “The jail enforcement model allows local law enforcement to identify and process people who are in local jails who may be deported by ICE authorities. The warrant service office program allows local law enforcement to serve warrants to undocumented residents in jails. There are additional models, including ‘task force,’ which allow officers to perform limited immigration enforcement in the field.”

Bill co-sponsor Hawkins told the committee on Feb. 26 that H.B. 659 isn’t overreach, it’s the people of Idaho who “want to see change, they want to see transparency, they want to see their state take action … That’s what this is about. … This is answering a call that the people have given, this isn’t answering anything that I have dreamed up on my own.” 

Prior to casting his vote in favor on Feb. 26, Rasor described H.B. 659 as “a targeted accountability focus push for immigration enforcement cooperation between the state and federal government in an arena that satisfies some of the concerns that I always have: this is constitutional.”

Also testifying before the committee Feb. 26, and speaking for the Idaho Sheriffs’ Association, Canyon County Sheriff Kieran Donahue called the bill “an attack on the office of sheriff in so many ways,” the Sun reported.

“We are a constitutional office,” he added, according to the Sun. “We do not do the [federal] government’s work. We do the state government and our constitutional duties.”

The Idaho Chiefs of Police Association also came out against the bill, citing similar concerns, which Sandpoint Police Chief Corey Coon shared.

Coon told the Reader in an email that throughout his career he’s “encountered significant challenges regarding the role of Immigration and Customs Enforcement in assisting local law enforcement with immigration-related matters.”

Meanwhile, he wrote, “following a recent change in leadership, there is now a demand for us to enter into a memorandum of understanding, despite the fact that they have refrained from providing assistance over the past 30 years.” 

That’s also despite local authorities already cooperating with ICE without a “mandate,” Coon added.

Bonner County Sheriff Daryl Wheeler told the Reader in an email that while he has “always supported closing our borders to illegal immigration” and “also oppose[es] sanctuary cities,” he joined the Sheriffs’ Association in pushing back against agreements under the 287(g) program.

“I would never agree to sign this MOA,” he wrote. “This program is one of the first steps taken by the federal government in the creation of a federal and state law enforcement agency. I love the 10th Amendment and would never consent to such an agency.”

That said, Wheeler — who has long identified himself as a “constitutional sheriff” — added that he has “a great working relationship with our local U.S. Border Patrol agents,” and told the Reader that Bonner County has held 30 individuals arrested by ICE in its jail since Jan. 1, 2025. 

According to a billing statement for “U.S. Customs/Border & Protection” obtained from the Bonner County Sheriff’s Office in a public records request by the Reader, 32 inmates were held from Jan. 1, 2025 to present and for a cost of $4,750.

Despite that collaboration, Wheeler said, “Local law enforcement agencies enforce Idaho state laws and ICE enforces federal laws. I will not start enforcing federal laws, and I do not want federal agencies to enforce Idaho state laws.”

Sandpoint Mayor Jeremy Grimm told the Reader in an email that while, “Collaboration with state and federal agencies makes good sense, and as far as I am aware already takes place,” he expressed hesitation about “‘requirements’ coming from federal or state officials, mainly because the practical reality is that seldom do ‘requirements’ come with associated funding.”

Grimm wrote that Sandpoint is “a small community struggling to pay for and maintain even the most basic services. Adding the potential requirement to coordinate — which could cause overtime, disruption of standard services or include other costs — is nothing I am keen to see. Seems like a solution looking for a problem, as they say.”

According to an email Wheeler said he’s received from “approximately 35 persons from around the state” encouraging him to support H.B. 659, the only counties signed up for the 287(g) program so far are Bingham, Bonneville, Gooding, Kootenai, Owyhee, Power and Washington, in addition to the Idaho State Police.

“I seriously don’t think that those who wrote to me have actually studied the memorandum of agreement,” he told the Reader. “There would be no benefit to Bonner County if my office participated in the program. More importantly, I would never consent to give up my autonomy as the elected sheriff of Bonner County.” 

In a copy of the 287(g) MOA shared with the Reader, Wheeler included numerous highlighted sections accompanied by his specific concerns, summarized by one comment that H.B. 659 “nationalizes the local police. The sheriff gives up authority as the chief law enforcement officer of the county and becomes subservient to ICE.”

Wheeler, as with other Idaho law enforcement leaders, expressed worries that signing a 287(g) agreement with DHS and ICE would shackle municipal authorities with onerous training and program-related expenses without funding support from the federal government.

Boise Democratic Rep. Monica Church said at the Feb. 26 committee meeting that H.B. 659 represents “an unfunded mandate.”

“The bill does not require that the feds pay for anything related to the costs, both up front and then to our communities by losing officers through all this training, and then, more importantly, maybe for this body, it does not even require that the state take the federal money if it were to be given to us,” she said, according to the Sun. 

Church and fellow Boise Democratic Rep. Steve Berch opposed the bill in committee, alongside Republican Reps. Rick Cheatum, of Pocatello, and Josh Wheeler, of Ammon.

Sheriff Wheeler underscored one section of the MOA related to training and assignments that requires local law enforcement officers to “successfully complete mandatory training on relevant administrative, legal and operational issues tailored to the immigration enforcement functions to be performed as provided by ICE instructors and therefore pass examinations equivalent to those given to ICE officers.”

In the margin, he noted, “Required mandatory training that has not been vetted by POST [Peace Office Standards and Training] or the elected sheriff to confirm that training follows Idaho state laws.”

He went on to write that sheriffs who perform extra duties under the agreement are not compensated for that work, and “would be creating reports for ICE, instead of performing regular duties.” 

What’s more, the MOA specifically states that local law enforcement would “carry out designated functions at [their] expense, including salaries and benefits, local transportation and official issue material.” That would be in addition to DHS/ICE installing its own IT infrastructure, which includes security policies, practices and accreditation for which additional training is required and — again — the costs for which local agencies would be responsible for bearing.

Meanwhile, ICE would control “information obtained or developed” as a result of the agreement, and local law enforcement would be required to “cooperate with any federal investigation related to this MOA to the full extent of its available powers, including providing access to appropriate databases, personnel, individuals in custody and documents.”

“This is not a task force, but instead, sheriff’s deputies are under the direct supervision and direction of ICE,” Wheeler wrote, later adding, “Complaints made against ICE and sheriff’s deputies are investigated by ICE, not the elected sheriff.”

Coon also expressed his discomfort with the conversion of a previously voluntary program into a required agreement, and, “Moreover, Section 2 states that agencies shall participate in any future program or successor to an existing program pertaining to non-citizens, which is undefined and unknown.”

In addition, he questioned “the hidden costs” associated with the agreement and whether it is, in fact, “an unfunded mandate.”

“There are too many unknowns for my support for a state statue,” Coon wrote.