MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT WITH IMMIGRATION AND CUSTOMS ENFORCEMENT – Adds to existing law to establish provisions regarding law enforcement entering into a memorandum of agreement with Immigration and Customs Enforcement.
Summary
House Bill 659 would require every law enforcement agency in Idaho to apply for a federal Section 287(g) memorandum of agreement with U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, if eligible. The bill specifically points to ICE’s jail enforcement model and warrant service officer model, and it also requires agencies to participate in any future successor program if one becomes available. Section 287(g) is a federal program that allows ICE to delegate certain immigration enforcement functions to trained local officers under federal oversight.
If an agency cannot enter into a Section 287(g) agreement, the bill requires it to publicly state the reasons for that inability and describe any efforts made to pursue alternative cooperation with ICE’s Enforcement and Removal Operations. The bill also includes an emergency clause, making it effective July 1, 2026.
Impact
The bill would add a new section to Chapter 6, Title 19, Idaho Code, creating a statewide mandate for local and county law enforcement agencies to seek federal immigration-enforcement agreements. It would affect municipal police departments, county sheriff’s offices, and other political-subdivision law enforcement agencies by imposing an application requirement and a public reporting obligation when an agreement cannot be secured. The measure would not itself create new state immigration powers, but it would direct local agencies toward participation in a federal-local immigration enforcement framework and increase transparency around nonparticipation.
Sentiment
The available voting history suggests the bill has meaningful support but also notable opposition, with the House Third Reading vote passing 41-24. That margin indicates the proposal is politically significant and likely aligned with lawmakers favoring stronger cooperation with federal immigration enforcement. No committee transcript is available, so the discussion record does not show detailed testimony or amendments, but the vote pattern suggests the bill is generally supported by proponents of immigration enforcement collaboration and opposed by a substantial minority.
Contention
The main point of contention is whether the state should require local law enforcement agencies to seek and participate in federal immigration enforcement agreements, rather than leaving that decision to local discretion. Supporters are likely to view the bill as a public-safety and immigration-enforcement measure, while opponents may object to the mandate on local agencies, the administrative burden of applying and reporting, and the potential diversion of local resources toward federal immigration duties. The requirement to publicly explain any inability to enter an agreement may also be controversial because it could be seen as pressuring agencies that lack capacity, legal authority, or willingness to participate.
Adds to existing law to establish provisions regarding law enforcement entering into a memorandum of agreement with Immigration and Customs Enforcement.
Amends existing law to revise fee provisions regarding recreational vehicles and to establish provisions regarding an off-highway vehicle law enforcement program.