Idaho Senate Panel Advances Bill Requiring Local Police to Partner With ICE

The bill would mandate Idaho law enforcement to enter formal agreements with federal immigration authorities, but faces opposition from county sheriffs.

Mar. 31, 2026 at 6:25pm

Got story updates? Submit your updates here. ›

A photorealistic painting of a solitary police car parked on a shadowy urban street, the warm sunlight creating a sense of quiet contemplation and the potential for tension.As state lawmakers push for greater cooperation between local police and federal immigration authorities, the potential impact on community trust in law enforcement remains a key concern.Boise Today

An Idaho Senate committee has advanced a renewed legislative effort to require Idaho law enforcement agencies to enter 287(g) agreements with U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) to participate in limited immigration enforcement actions. However, the bill faces opposition from county sheriffs and may undergo further amendments before reaching the Senate floor.

Why it matters

This bill is part of a broader push by some state lawmakers to increase cooperation between local police and federal immigration authorities, despite concerns from law enforcement leaders about blurring the lines of their constitutional authorities and the potential impact on community trust.

The details

The Idaho Senate State Affairs Committee voted to send Senate Bill 1441 to the Senate floor for potential amendments. The bill would require city police departments and Idaho sheriffs' offices across the state to enter 287(g) agreements with ICE, with narrow exceptions if resources are unavailable or the city council/county commission publishes a 'finding of fact' showing the agency can't afford to. Bill sponsor Senate President Pro Tempore Kelly Anthon said the goal is to provide a 'uniform framework' across the state, but county sheriffs who testified said law enforcement already cooperates with ICE outside of the 287(g) program.

  • The Idaho Senate committee voted on the bill on Monday, March 31, 2026.
  • The bill is an updated version of House Bill 659, which passed the House but died in the Senate State Affairs Committee on March 16, 2026.

The players

Kelly Anthon

Idaho Senate President Pro Tempore and the sponsor of Senate Bill 1441.

Kieran Donahue

Canyon County Sheriff who testified against the bill, saying law enforcement already cooperates with ICE outside of the 287(g) program.

Seth Grigg

Executive director of the Idaho Association of Cities, who expressed concerns about the bill requiring county commissions to submit written reasons for sheriffs' offices not entering 287(g) agreements.

Got photos? Submit your photos here. ›

What they’re saying

“What this bill is really about is providing a uniform framework across the state. A general rule that allows for exceptions, as opposed to a situation where we don't know what the situation is in every different jurisdiction.”

— Kelly Anthon, Idaho Senate President Pro Tempore

“I would say that's not the correct approach. Because we should know what's good policy for Idaho. You're looking at the people who know what's good policy in a sheriff's office for Idaho. We do this every day.”

— Kieran Donahue, Canyon County Sheriff

“In our view, this is really blurring those constitutional authorities that are out there for the sheriff versus the board of county commissioners.”

— Seth Grigg, Executive Director, Idaho Association of Cities

What’s next

Anthon said he planned an amendment to address a concern about the bill not providing the same liability protection if law enforcement are acting as federal agents under the Idaho Tort Claim Act that they have acting as local law enforcement. He also said he's open to more amendments suggested by law enforcement.

The takeaway

This bill highlights the ongoing tensions between state lawmakers and local law enforcement leaders over the role of local police in federal immigration enforcement. While proponents argue for a uniform statewide approach, opponents are concerned about blurring the lines of constitutional authority and the potential impact on community trust in law enforcement.