Excess Ownership of Single-Family Residences Excise Tax (End Hedge Fund Control of Maryland Homes Act of 2026)
Summary
HB1188 would require Maryland law enforcement agencies, certified law enforcement agents, and local detention facilities to run an NCIC search whenever they take custody of an individual. If that search shows the person is not lawfully present in the United States and is the subject of an outstanding criminal warrant, the agency or facility must notify federal immigration authorities, provide custody and release details, and, if requested, hold the person for up to 48 additional hours to allow federal immigration authorities to arrange transfer. The bill also requires an interpreter during the investigation when needed for effective communication.
The bill further prohibits the State, local governments, county sheriffs, and related agencies from adopting or enforcing policies that limit or prohibit cooperation with federal immigration authorities in the investigation or apprehension of individuals who are unlawfully present and have outstanding criminal warrants. It is scheduled to take effect October 1, 2025, and would amend Maryland criminal procedure law by repealing and replacing existing Section 5-104 of the Criminal Procedure Article.
Impact
HB1188 would significantly alter Maryland law governing cooperation between state and local law enforcement and federal immigration authorities. It creates mandatory screening, notification, and potential detention obligations for agencies and local detention facilities, and it restricts the ability of state and local entities to maintain sanctuary-style policies that limit such cooperation. The bill would affect law enforcement agencies, sheriffs, detention facilities, and individuals in custody who are not lawfully present and have outstanding criminal warrants, while also implicating procedures for interpreter access during custody-related investigations.
Sentiment
Based on the bill text and the absence of recorded committee testimony or votes in the provided materials, the bill appears to be framed as a public-safety and immigration-enforcement measure rather than a consensus proposal. Its sponsors suggest support for stronger cooperation with federal immigration authorities, but the subject matter is likely to draw divided views because it expands local enforcement duties and limits local policy discretion. No formal vote history or transcript evidence is provided to show broader committee sentiment.
Contention
The main point of contention is likely the bill’s requirement that local law enforcement and detention facilities notify and cooperate with federal immigration authorities, including holding individuals up to 48 hours beyond planned release. Supporters would view this as necessary to aid apprehension of individuals with outstanding criminal warrants, while opponents may argue it burdens local agencies, raises civil liberties and due process concerns, and undermines local control over immigration-related enforcement policies. The prohibition on policies that limit cooperation is another likely flashpoint, especially for jurisdictions that have adopted sanctuary-type practices.