A Texas Senate panel, led by Republicans, is considering a new bill that would require sheriffs in larger counties to work with U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) to help enforce immigration laws and support President Donald Trump’s mass deportation efforts.
Senate Bill 8, introduced by State Senator Charles Schwertner, R-Georgetown, would force sheriffs in counties with more than 100,000 residents to partner with ICE under a program known as the 287(g) agreement. This agreement allows local law enforcement to assist ICE with immigration enforcement, including questioning people about their immigration status.
The bill, which is a priority for Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick and has the backing of Gov. Greg Abbott, would provide some funding for sheriffs in counties with fewer than 1 million residents to work with ICE. However, the largest counties in Texas would not receive this funding.
There are three types of 287(g) agreements, two of which involve local jails, where officers can ask inmates about their immigration status or serve warrants. The third allows officers to question people in the field. The Trump administration revived the field program after it was criticized for causing racial profiling.
As of early March, 43 Texas law enforcement agencies had 287(g) agreements, most of which were for jail programs.
At the Senate hearing, opinions on the bill were mixed. Some sheriffs expressed concerns that the bill would add more financial and staffing burdens to their offices. For example, Chambers County Sheriff Brian Hawthorne, who also represents the Sheriffs’ Association of Texas, said his group supported the bill but didn’t want to make the ICE agreements mandatory. Many sheriffs already struggle with tight budgets, and adding more duties would cost money. He suggested that the state legislature should fund the program.
Other sheriffs raised concerns about the time and resources needed to train officers for the program, which often requires traveling to the East Coast for several weeks. Schwertner responded by saying that ICE might offer regional training sessions to address these concerns.
Chris Russo, president of the anti-immigration group Texans for Strong Borders, supported the bill but argued that it should apply to all Texas law enforcement agencies, not just sheriffs.
On the other side, Luis Figueroa of Every Texan, a public policy group, said the bill could be improved by limiting it to the jail programs and requiring training for officers. He also raised concerns about the bill potentially blurring the lines between local and federal authority over immigration enforcement. Figueroa said that with these changes, his group could support the bill.
However, several groups, including the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) and the Texas Civil Rights Project, opposed the bill, calling it a waste of money and a step toward racial profiling. Sarah Cruz from the ACLU of Texas pointed out that Harris County, Texas’ most populous county, stopped participating in the program years ago after deciding that the funds could be better spent on public safety initiatives. “How much more are we willing to put toward an anti-immigrant agenda than the needs of our communities?” Cruz asked.
