Idaho Bill Requiring ICE Partnerships Held in Senate Committee

Measure would have mandated local law enforcement seek federal immigration enforcement agreements.

Mar. 16, 2026 at 5:48pm

Got story updates? Submit your updates here. ›

A bill that would have required local law enforcement agencies across Idaho to seek cooperation agreements with federal immigration officials through the 287(g) program failed to advance out of the Senate State Affairs Committee. The committee voted 5-4 to hold the bill, rather than send it to the full Senate for further consideration.

Why it matters

The proposed legislation aimed to create a more consistent statewide approach to immigration cooperation, but faced opposition from some law enforcement leaders who raised concerns about potential staffing and resource burdens on already stretched agencies.

The details

Under the bill, police departments and county sheriff's offices would have had to apply for partnerships with U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement through the federal 287(g) program, which allows trained local officers to assist with certain immigration enforcement duties under ICE supervision. Supporters said the proposal would create a more consistent statewide approach, while opponents, including Canyon County Sheriff Kieran Donahue, argued it could place additional burdens on agencies.

  • The Idaho House passed the bill earlier this month on a 41–27 vote.
  • The Senate State Affairs Committee voted 5-4 on Monday morning to hold the bill in committee.

The players

Kieran Donahue

Canyon County Sheriff who testified against the bill, reiterating concerns about requiring local departments to participate and the potential to strain staffing and resources.

House Bill 659

The proposed legislation that would have required local law enforcement agencies across Idaho to seek cooperation agreements with federal immigration officials through the 287(g) program.

Got photos? Submit your photos here. ›

What they’re saying

“Many agencies already cooperate with federal authorities when needed and warned the mandate could strain staffing and resources.”

— Kieran Donahue, Canyon County Sheriff

The takeaway

The defeat of this bill in committee highlights the ongoing debate over the role of local law enforcement in federal immigration enforcement, with concerns about potential resource strains and unfunded mandates playing a key role in the decision.