An Act Authorizing Law Enforcement Agencies To Hold Certain Undocumented Immigrants Pursuant To An Ice Detainer Request.
Summary
HB 6510 would amend section 54-192h of the Connecticut General Statutes to authorize state and local law enforcement agencies to hold certain undocumented immigrants for up to 48 hours in response to an ICE detainer request, even without a judicial warrant. The authority would apply only when the person has been charged with a class A, B, or C felony or a crime of family violence.
In practical terms, the bill would create a state-law exception allowing local custody to continue beyond the point a person might otherwise be released, solely to accommodate federal immigration enforcement. It is limited to people already charged with specified serious offenses, and it does not appear to change the underlying criminal charges or immigration status rules, only the conditions under which agencies may honor an ICE detainer request.
Impact
The bill would modify Connecticut law governing when law enforcement may detain individuals for immigration purposes by adding express authority to hold certain undocumented immigrants for up to 48 hours on an ICE detainer request without a judicial warrant. It would affect state and local police, sheriffs, and correctional agencies that process arrests and release decisions, and it would apply only in cases involving class A, B, or C felonies or crimes of family violence.
Sentiment
Based on the bill text and the absence of recorded committee discussion or votes in the provided materials, there is no documented public sentiment in the record supplied here. The proposal itself suggests a law-and-order framing focused on serious offenses and cooperation with federal immigration authorities, which typically draws support from proponents of stricter enforcement and opposition from those concerned about due process and immigration-related detention.
Contention
The main point of contention is likely whether state and local agencies should be allowed to detain someone beyond the normal release point solely on an ICE detainer request and without a judicial warrant. Supporters would likely emphasize public safety and cooperation with federal authorities for serious felony and family violence cases, while opponents would likely raise concerns about constitutional protections, civil liberties, and the legality or reliability of detainers absent judicial review. No specific stakeholder positions are recorded in the materials provided.