Prohibits any act intended to hinder, delay, prevent, or otherwise interfere with or thwart federal immigration enforcement efforts. (8/1/25) (EN SEE FISC NOTE GF EX)
Summary
SB 15 expands Louisiana’s obstruction of justice and malfeasance in office statutes to reach conduct that interferes with federal immigration enforcement. Under the bill, a person commits obstruction of justice by knowingly taking an act intended to hinder, delay, prevent, or otherwise interfere with federal immigration enforcement efforts. The bill also adds new penalty provisions when obstruction involves a civil immigration proceeding or an official act of a governmental employee.
The bill further amends the malfeasance in office statute to cover public officers and employees who take official action, fail to perform an official duty, or refuse a lawful cooperation request from U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, Customs and Border Protection, or Citizenship and Immigration Services with the intent to interfere with immigration enforcement. It also requires compliance with certain lawful written requests or detainers to release individuals into federal custody when the request alleges unlawful entry or unlawful presence in the United States. In addition, it penalizes the release of an arrested or booked person without advance notice to ICE when the agency is aware the person is unlawfully present.
Impact
SB 15 changes Louisiana criminal law by expressly tying obstruction of justice and malfeasance in office to immigration enforcement activities. It creates new grounds for criminal liability for both private actors and public officials, and it imposes specific fines and jail exposure for interference involving civil immigration proceedings or governmental official acts. The bill also affects state and local law enforcement practices by requiring compliance with certain federal immigration detainers and cooperation requests, which may alter jail release procedures and agency coordination with federal immigration authorities.
Sentiment
The bill appears to have strong support among its backers and passed both chambers despite some opposition. The vote history shows clear majorities in the House and Senate on final passage and concurrence, suggesting the measure was broadly favored by legislative leadership and supporters of stricter immigration enforcement. The caption and enacted text indicate the bill was framed as a public-safety and enforcement measure.
Contention
The main point of contention is the bill’s expansion of criminal penalties for conduct that could be viewed as noncooperation with federal immigration authorities, especially by public officials. Critics would likely focus on the requirement to honor certain detainers and cooperation requests, the potential conflict with local law enforcement discretion, and the risk of penalizing actions taken in the course of official duties. Supporters, by contrast, appear to view the bill as necessary to prevent interference with federal immigration enforcement and to ensure state and local officials do not obstruct those efforts.