ATLANTA — Republican legislators across the nation are intensifying efforts to bolster President Donald Trump’s initiative to curb illegal immigration by taking aggressive measures against local officials who resist federal mandates. These lawmakers are considering legal actions, fines, and even jail time for local leaders who do not comply with federal immigration policies, which they see as essential to enforcing the law.
In over 20 states this year, bills have been introduced aimed at eliminating sanctuary policies that restrict cooperation with federal immigration enforcement. A review of current legislative actions indicates that some states, having previously enacted bans on such policies, are now contemplating further repercussions for mayors, council members, and other municipal officials who disregard these regulations.
The intention behind this legislative push is to empower those who feel aggrieved by local governments that allegedly fail to uphold state immigration laws. Georgia state Senator Blake Tillery noted that his proposed legislation, which has cleared the Senate and is advancing in the House, would enable individuals to sue local governments or officials that implement sanctuary policies.
Critics of such legislation warn that it may lead local law enforcement to unjustly detain immigrants longer than federal law permits due to the fear of legal repercussions. “We risk jeopardizing the effectiveness of our local law enforcement while they strive to ensure community safety,” expressed Georgia state Senator Nikki Merritt, a member of the opposition party.
These legislative measures are taking shape alongside legal actions from the Trump administration against jurisdictions that have adopted policies limiting arrests and deportations by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE). The Justice Department has begun lawsuits aimed at jurisdictions like Illinois and Chicago, alleging noncompliance with federal immigration directives.
In Georgia, a law enacted last year already compels local law enforcement to collaborate with federal authorities in identifying and detaining undocumented immigrants. This year’s legislation further intensifies that requirement, permitting legal actions against local entities for violating the ban on sanctuary policies. Advocates fear this legislation could enhance anxiety within communities, where families are already distressed by the possibility of ICE enforcement actions in spaces like homes, schools, or places of worship.
“This mirrors Trump’s broader crackdown on immigrants, with some local governments seeking to align themselves with this agenda through legislation that fails to address fundamental issues,” contended Charles Kuck, an immigration attorney based in Atlanta.
While the Georgia Sheriffs’ Association has taken a neutral stance regarding the new bill, its deputy executive director, Mike Mitchell, emphasized that sheriffs are already fulfilling their obligations under immigration law. Meanwhile, in Louisiana, a law was passed last year to require law enforcement agencies to actively enforce federal immigration laws, leading to a lawsuit by the state attorney general against the Orleans Parish Sheriff’s Office for allegedly flouting state mandates.
The Orleans Parish Sheriff’s Office has policies designed to restrict ICE’s access to local detainees, only holding them for additional time when faced with serious charges such as murder or kidnapping. The Attorney General is seeking to modify a previous federal court order that limits ICE’s interactions with the Sheriff’s Office. Despite ongoing litigation, the Sheriff’s Office maintains that it complies with all relevant laws and court orders regarding ICE detainers.
Additionally, in South Dakota, an initial anti-sanctuary law was enacted by Republican Governor Larry Rhoden shortly after taking office. This legislation restricts state and local officials from limiting communication with federal immigration authorities, although it lacks specific penalties for noncompliance.
In contrast, other states have introduced more stringent measures. A comprehensive immigration law in Florida, enacted by Governor Ron DeSantis, mandates that the attorney general pursue legal action against local governments that fail to comply with federal immigration detention requests, with penalties reaching $5,000 for mayors and council members who defy the ban.
Tennessee’s legislature has already denied state economic development funds to municipalities that breach sanctuary policy bans, but a new law under Governor Bill Lee escalates the consequences, imposing felony charges on local officials who support such policies—potentially carrying prison sentences of up to six years. Some legal advisors have expressed concerns that these penalties could infringe upon constitutional protections for elected officials.
In Wyoming, a proposed bill currently in the Senate aims not only to prohibit sanctuary policies but also to prevent residents from introducing such initiatives via petition. This legislation envisions severe penalties, enabling governors to withhold state funding from noncompliant jurisdictions, and imposing felony charges with prison terms ranging from five to ten years and fines reaching $20,000 for local officials who fail to cooperate with federal immigration regulations.
Republican Representative Joel Guggenmos highlighted that while Wyoming has no existing sanctuary jurisdictions, the proactive legislation aims to address potential future challenges, lamenting, “As I observe developments in other states, this is an impending issue.”
In New Hampshire, two distinct bills targeting sanctuary policies are making progress. One Senate bill grants the state attorney general the authority to sue local governments that hinder federal immigration law enforcement, with penalties being 25% of their state funding. Meanwhile, a corresponding House bill outlines detailed directives for local governments without imposing fines.
