In Des Moines, Iowa, a legal clash has emerged between the state’s Republican attorney general and a county sheriff regarding a contentious Facebook post. The post, published by Winneshiek County Sheriff Dan Marx, suggested that his department might not comply with all detention requests from federal immigration authorities. This lawsuit threatens crucial state funding for the northeastern Iowa county, which boasts a population of approximately 20,000. The legal battle aligns with former President Donald Trump’s aggressive deportation policies.
Following an investigation, the attorney general’s office determined that Marx’s department had, in fact, responded appropriately to nearly two dozen requests from U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) dating back to 2018. These requests involved detaining individuals suspected of immigration violations. However, the lawsuit claims Marx’s Facebook post contravened Iowa law by allegedly discouraging cooperation with federal immigration officials.
The sheriff’s controversial post, which was quickly removed on Thursday, conveyed his reservations about the trustworthiness of federal agents and labeled requests to hold individuals without court orders as breaches of constitutional rights. Despite the post’s removal, Iowa Attorney General Brenna Bird criticized Marx for failing to comply with a remedial deadline.
The lawsuit contends that Marx knowingly disseminated false claims in his post, which “impeded and discouraged cooperation with federal immigration authorities,” an action deemed illegal under Iowa’s legislative framework. Republican policymakers in Iowa enacted a 2018 statute requiring complete compliance with federal immigration laws, effectively prohibiting “sanctuary cities” that otherwise limit cooperation with immigration authorities. Similar legislative endeavors are underway nationwide to bolster Trump’s immigration agenda by imposing harsher penalties on officials who contravene these laws.
While neither Sheriff Marx nor County Attorney Andrew Van Der Maaten responded to requests for comments, the sheriff’s office did reiterate its intention to comply with both state and federal immigration laws. Despite their adherence, the office asserted in a new Facebook post that they disagree with the attorney general’s interpretation, claiming the original post did not violate the law.
The department’s updated statement failed to satisfy the attorney general’s demands, as confirmed by spokesperson Alyssa Broulliet. Marx was reportedly informed of the 5 p.m. deadline to address the legal infraction but did not comply adequately.
Under the Trump administration, similar legal challenges have been launched against local governments that resist ICE enforcement measures. The Department of Justice has lodged lawsuits against jurisdictions like Illinois and Chicago for eschewing collaboration with federal immigration authorities.
Marx’s February critique of ICE detainment requests revolved around their potential conflict with the Fourth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, safeguarding against unreasonable searches and seizures. In his post, Marx pledged to prevent federal actions deemed unconstitutional, highlighting the complexities and tensions within local and federal immigration enforcement.