State Finance and Procurement - Employers Receiving State Public Funds - Unfair Labor Practices
Summary
HB1307 would require Maryland law enforcement agencies, certified law enforcement agents, and local detention facilities to notify federal immigration authorities when they take custody of an individual who is the subject of an outstanding criminal warrant, if federal authorities request that notice. It also would require those entities to retain custody of the person for up to 48 hours beyond the planned release time and to cooperate with federal immigration authorities in arranging transfer so federal officials can determine whether the person is a priority for removal under Department of Homeland Security enforcement priorities.
The bill further requires an interpreter during the investigation process when needed for effective communication. It also 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 investigating or apprehending individuals who are not lawfully present in the United States and who are subject to outstanding criminal warrants. The bill would take effect October 1, 2025, and would replace existing Criminal Procedure § 5-104 with a new version expanding mandatory cooperation requirements.
Impact
HB1307 would amend Article - Criminal Procedure, § 5-104 of the Maryland Code by repealing the current section and replacing it with a broader mandate for cooperation with federal immigration authorities. It would affect law enforcement agencies, certified officers, local detention facilities, county sheriffs, and state and local government entities by imposing notification, detention, and transfer-related duties in cases involving individuals with outstanding criminal warrants. It would also restrict local sanctuary-style policies that limit cooperation with federal immigration enforcement in these circumstances.
Sentiment
The available context suggests the bill was introduced by a group of delegates supportive of stronger immigration enforcement cooperation, but there is no committee transcript or recorded vote history provided to show broader debate. The fact that the bill was later withdrawn by the sponsor indicates it did not advance to enactment and may not have had sufficient support or may have been set aside for strategic reasons. Overall, the bill appears aligned with a pro-enforcement position, though the public record provided here does not show formal opposition or support statements.
Contention
The main point of contention is likely the bill’s requirement that state and local agencies cooperate with federal immigration authorities and its prohibition on policies that restrict such cooperation. Supporters would view this as a public safety and warrant-enforcement measure, while opponents would likely argue it pressures local agencies to assist in federal immigration enforcement and undermines local discretion or sanctuary policies. The 48-hour custody retention requirement and the mandate to notify federal authorities when requested are also likely to be disputed because they can affect jail operations, release timing, and the treatment of individuals who may be subject to immigration holds.