Maryland Sheriffs Criticize 'Nonsensical' ICE-Related Budget Amendment

The amendment threatens to withhold millions in state aid to local law enforcement unless they confirm they are not working with ICE.

Mar. 19, 2026 at 2:09am

Got story updates? Submit your updates here. ›

A new amendment added to Maryland's state budget threatens to withhold millions in state aid to local law enforcement unless they confirm they are not working with U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE). The amendment is seen as a backup to ensure law enforcement is following a previous law that banned 287(g) agreements with ICE. However, local sheriffs have criticized the amendment as "completely nonsensical" and "ridiculous", arguing it will punish law enforcement for something happening on the corrections side.

Why it matters

The amendment is part of an ongoing debate in Maryland over the state's relationship with ICE and immigration enforcement. Supporters say it's necessary to ensure compliance with existing laws, while critics argue it will label Maryland as a sanctuary state and make it a target for less federal funding.

The details

The budget amendment threatens to withhold $124 million in state aid to local law enforcement until each department certifies it does not have a written agreement with ICE. The amendment was introduced after two Americans died and on the heels of other ICE tactics, with the goal of further distancing the state from cooperating with the federal agency.

  • The Maryland Senate passed the nearly $71 million budget with the amendment in a bipartisan vote.
  • The budget now goes to the House for consideration, where the Democrat majority is not expected to strike the amendment.

The players

Guy Guzzone

D-District 13, chairman of the Senate Budget and Taxation Committee.

William Folden

R-District 4, Frederick County Senator.

Justin Ready

R-District 5, Senate Minority Whip.

Jeffrey Gahler

Harford County Sheriff.

Got photos? Submit your photos here. ›

What they’re saying

“This sort of backs it up to make sure they are actually living up to what we passed.”

— Guy Guzzone, D-District 13, chairman of the Senate Budget and Taxation Committee

“We are going to penalize them for doing their job to keep our communities safe by taking money away from them. I'm just puzzled by this. It's baffling to me.”

— William Folden, R-District 4, Frederick County Senator

“What it says is, 'We don't want you to document or have a written, transparent agreement with ICE. We prefer you do what several counties are doing, which is a shadowy agreement. We are still working with ICE, but we are not going to say exactly how or why.'”

— Justin Ready, R-District 5, Senate Minority Whip

“It's completely nonsensical. It is ridiculous. Those jurisdictions that had to cancel their MOU right away did cancel their MOU right away — in compliance. It's threatening to punish law enforcement for something that happens on the correction side of the House. It's like getting mad at your right hand for what your left hand did. It makes no sense whatsoever.”

— Jeffrey Gahler, Harford County Sheriff

What’s next

The budget now goes to the House for consideration, where the Democrat majority is not expected to strike the amendment.

The takeaway

This amendment highlights the ongoing debate in Maryland over the state's relationship with ICE and immigration enforcement. While supporters see it as necessary to ensure compliance with existing laws, critics argue it will label Maryland as a sanctuary state and make it a target for less federal funding.