1. 1
State and Local Law Enforcement:
Policy of Illegal Immigration
Jonathan Bell & Aaron Hanna
University of North Texas
CJUS 4901.001
Senior Seminar: Criminal Justice Public Policy
5W2 2013

2. STATE AND LOCAL LAW ENFORCEMENT 2
Abstract
In recent years, our nation’s immigration laws have been receiving large amounts of
attention; primarily after the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001 were carried out. It’s
debated that, since the spike of attention on illegal immigration, the federal government
does not exhibit the capability of effectively enforcing illegal immigration. If state and local
law enforcement does get involved it could divert their economic resources that’s typically
directed toward basic law enforcement responsibilities. While most of us agree that our
local safely should not be limited; government, state and local law enforcement is joining
forces to develop ideas on how to effectively combat illegal immigration. In this paper, we
examined policies and studies involving immigration within the United States emphasizing
on how state and local law enforcement agencies can effectively fight to stop illegal
immigration and possible problems they may encounter while enforcing immigration laws.

3. STATE AND LOCAL LAW ENFORCEMENT 3
State and Local Law Enforcement: Policy of Illegal Immigration
Immigration has been part of the United States since the first English colony started
in Jamestown, Virginia in 1607. An Immigrant is a person who migrates to another country
seeking permanent residence. The first immigrants to settle in the United States were
British, French, Spanish, and Portuguese; with majority consisting of British. Over the next
four centuries, the United States would experience four great waves: the colonial period,
mid-nineteenth century, beginning of the twentieth century, and post 1965. This brought
many new races and ethnicities to the United States. On March 2, 1819, Congress passed its
first immigration law called Steerage Act, which regulated passenger ships and vessels
entering the United States by certain standards. Problems with illegal immigration did not
start to begin until after the passage of the 1921 Emergency Quota Law and the 1924
Immigration Act; limiting immigration as a set quota system according to nationality. This
led to a rise of illegal immigration resulting with the formation of the U.S. Border Patrol on
May 28, 1924. In recent years our nation’s Immigration laws has been receiving large
amounts of attention; originating from the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001. It’s been
debated that the federal government doesn’t have the means to affectively enforce
immigration laws and that this should be a responsibility of the state and local law
enforcement agencies. In result, many local law enforcement agencies have been tasked
with enforcing immigration laws, but it’s being argued that these local law enforcement
agencies lack the economic resources and training to combat illegal immigration
effectively. How do local law enforcement agencies effectively fight to stop illegal
immigration and what are possible problems they encounter while enforcing immigration
laws? With better understanding of these problems in addition to the implementation of an
effective policy aimed toward illegal immigration, encountered by the state and local law

4. STATE AND LOCAL LAW ENFORCEMENT 4
enforcement agencies, the number of illegal immigrants residing inside the United States
should begin to decrease.
Literature Review
Legal Immigrant - Illegal Migration
On March 1, 2003, the U.S. Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) was
divided from the Department of Justice into three groups: U.S. Customs and Border
Protection (CBP), U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), and U.S. Citizenship
and Immigration Services (USCIS); operating under the new Department of Homeland
Security. Currently, DHS has a yearly budget of ninety-nine billion and does joint
operations with local and state law enforcement agencies. According to studies by the
Urban Institute in Washington, D.C., four out of ten immigrant’s daily crosses the southern
border illegally, while others enter the United States legally through airports or at the
Canadian border. Eighty-five percent of the CBP resources are exercised at the U.S. -
Mexico border to prevent illegal immigrants from coming into the United States. With that
being said, how are illegal immigrants migrating into our country? Republican Candice
Miller states that over forty percent of all illegal immigrants in the United States are here on
either an expired I-94 form or visa (Jimenez, 2000).
Fake Identification
Immigration policies have certain roles between federal, state and local law
enforcement in policing violations of immigration law: federal law enforcement agencies
enforce both criminal and civil violations of the immigration law, although state and local
law enforcement agencies are only capable of enforcing criminal violations of immigration
laws. Thus, entering the United States illegally is a federal violation of civil law but not

5. STATE AND LOCAL LAW ENFORCEMENT 5
criminal law. State and local law enforcement agencies mostly encounter immigration
violations that fall outside their legal jurisdiction, civil violations, whereas they continue to
maintain the capability of enforcing all criminal violations associated with immigration
laws (Creek & Yoder 2012).
What happens when state and local law enforcement arrests an illegal immigrant for
committing a criminal violation? State and local law enforcement have expressed problems
in regards to the common practice of state and federal prosecutors dismissing criminal
cases if the illegal immigrant agrees to voluntary removal. This action allows the illegal
immigrant to get off with a clean record, and a free ticket back home at the expense of the
taxpayers. Illegal immigrants committing crimes within America’s borders know the
system and how it operates. An example of this was conveyed by Sheriff Pendergraph with
the National Sheriff’s Association. “The first week we were processing, we came across an
individual who had been removed from this country 22 times. His last deportation was from
the Arizona Department of Corrections back to Mexico, and he was arrested a short time
later in Charlotte for trafficking methamphetamines.” (Hoops, Summerill, Goodwin, &
Henning 2009)
In 2005, the Real I.D. Act was passed setting national standards for driver’s
licenses and non-driver identification cards. This Act allowed immigrant to receive a
driver’s license and I.D. card by showing a minimum requirement of a lawful status. The
Real I.D. Act was design to restrict illegal immigrant’s abilities to function in society by
restricting their ability to get a driver’s license to obtain employment. Going back to what
Republican Miller stated, over forty percent of all illegal immigrants in the United States
entered the country legally. This is a major problem for state and local law enforcement
agencies; who is legal and who is not? (Newton, 2012)

6. STATE AND LOCAL LAW ENFORCEMENT 6
State and Local Law Enforcement: Enforcing Immigration
The federal government has approximately 2,000 federal agents and is unable to
effectively enforce the federal immigration laws. It is estimated that there are between eight
to twelve million illegal immigrants living in the United States, with a rising number of
eight-hundred thousand joining yearly. Out of all of the illegal immigrants, four-hundred
thousand are estimated to be immigrant absconders: illegal immigrants that have been
issued a deportation order, but have did not show up to their hearing. With that said, it is
estimated that eighty-six thousand of these illegal immigrants have been convicted of
multiple deportable crimes (Booth, 2006).
The number of illegal immigrants in the United Stated outweighs federal agents by
five-thousand to one. The government expects their federal agents to find all them within
our borders? The federal government clearly does not have the manpower to enforce
immigration laws. It is the goal of the federal government to enforce the immigration laws
by requesting state and local law enforcement’s aid in the efforts against illegal
immigration. This is expected to be accomplished by conjoining federal immigration agents
with the participating state and local law enforcement agencies, thus resulting with an
effective force to uphold all immigration laws (Booth, 2006).
What could happen if the state and local law enforcement agencies got involved
with a federal obligation? If the state and local law enforcement decides to aid the federal
government, it would divert limited state and local police resources to the federal
government and it would leave fewer for typical law enforcement abilities such as
protecting facilities and serving as first responders. Requiring state and local law
enforcement to enforce immigration laws may even play a toll with the relationships that
the agencies have developed with other immigrants in their communities; making it less

7. STATE AND LOCAL LAW ENFORCEMENT 7
likely, due to the fear of deportation, to report crimes. This is defiantly problematic
involving crimes such as domestic abuse and sexual assault (Booth, 2006).
On June 30, 2005, The Clear Act of 2005 was passed, stating that states and local
law enforcement personnel “have the inherent authority of a sovereign entity to investigate,
identify, apprehend, arrest, detain, or transfer to federal custody of illegal immigrants in the
United States; the purpose of assisting in the enforcement of the immigration laws of the
United States,” and that any state that “has in effect a statute, policy, or practice that
prohibits law enforcement officers from assisting or cooperating with federal immigration
law enforcement” shall not receive certain federal funding (Booth, 2006).
Collaboration with State and Local Law Enforcement
State and local law enforcement have begun to play a larger role in the fight against
illegal immigration into the United States. In previous years this was an issue solely
handled by the federal government not local law enforcement. Illegal immigration had
never been a direct responsibility of any state or local law enforcement unless it was
somehow linked into an ongoing investigation. The distance between federal agencies
tasked with illegal immigration, Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), and state or
local law enforcement has begun to progressively shrink. States dealing with heavy
amounts of illegal immigration face issues involving: drug and violent crime as a result of
cartels, money in relation to benefits being used such as Medicaid, and the overwhelming
toll it has taken on the state’s law enforcement entities. The Federal government’s first big
step toward implementing state and local law enforcement in the fight against illegal
immigration was with the passing of the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant
Responsibility Act (IIRIRA). IIRIRA amended the Immigration and Nationality Act of

8. STATE AND LOCAL LAW ENFORCEMENT 8
1952; thus implementing Section 287(g), Congress’ plan to aid the federal immigration
system (Hoops, Summerill, Goodwin & Henning, 2009).
Section 287(g) allows the Department of Homeland Security, more specifically
Immigration and Customs Enforcement, to deputize state and local law enforcement
officers. The importance of these officers being deputized under Section 287(g) is to legally
allow them to enforce federal immigration laws. ICE was given the discretionary powers to
specify what the duty of these newly deputized officers would be, how these officers would
be supervised by ICE, and how long their authority as a deputy could last (Hoops,
Summerill, Goodwin & Henning, 2009). For participation in the Section 287(g) program
Sheriffs were required to submit a Memorandum of Understanding with ICE (McKain &
McKain, 2007). The MOU was created to outline each deputy’s level of authority and their
responsibilities when executing any federal immigration policies. In addition, the MOU
contains the structure in which ICE agents will be supervising the deputies, as well as
clarifying that each aspect of Section 287(g) is being carried out within the department
(Hoops, Summerill, Goodwin & Henning, 2009).
Upon qualification for the Section 287(g) program the deputies are typically
required to take part in ACCESS, Agreements of Cooperation in Communities to Enhance
Safety and Security, training at the Federal Law Enforcement Training Center in South
Carolina (Hoops, Summerill, Goodwin & Henning, 2009). Deputies that become ACCESS
certified are then qualified to act as an ICE agent, thus giving them the capability to combat
felony crimes such as: human and drug trafficking, gang activity, and violent crime (Hoops,
Summerill, Goodwin & Henning, 2009). Another large benefit to local law enforcement
agencies upon adopting this program is gaining direct access to ICE databases. By allowing

9. STATE AND LOCAL LAW ENFORCEMENT 9
access to these databases, local departments are able to quickly identify and obtain the
immigration status of the suspects in custody (McKain & McKain, 2007). Since this
program is federally funded, and deputies have the authority to transfer illegal aliens to ICE
incarceration facilities, it help to alleviate the state and local jails of any additional costs
associated with detaining the overabundance of aliens in their jurisdictions (Hoops,
Summerill, Goodwin & Henning, 2009). There has been a strong correlation between this
program and the number of deportations since its implementation. By 2011, it was recorded
that 186,000 immigrants were identified for removal based on the program; of these
186,000 immigrants, 126,000 voluntarily deported (Parrado, 2012).
Section 287(g), like all legislation, was not exempt from government criticism.
Critics claim that this program promotes racial profiling of Hispanics, and a clear violation
of human rights. The Government Accountability Office conducted a review of the
program to speculate what changes could be made to significantly improve the system. This
review brought up issues concerning a lack of ICE supervision over the consistency of
authority displayed by participants, the structure of ICE agents supervising tactics, and ICE
had not expressed any clear direction in reference to what information they are obligated to
obtain (Hoops, Summerill, Goodwin & Henning, 2009). Their report concluded that ICE
should clearly state the specific authority given to participants, provide detailed reporting
guidelines as well as guidelines on how supervision of participants should be successfully
conducted, and finally to create an action plan aimed toward rectifying these issues (Hoops,
Summerill, Goodwin & Henning, 2009). In response to this report ICE began developing a
strategic plan to create a universal template allowing for each agency to operate in a

10. STATE AND LOCAL LAW ENFORCEMENT 10
uniform fashion, as well as introducing Standard Operating Procedures distinct to each
participating agency (Hoops, Summerill, Goodwin & Henning, 2009).
State and Local Law Enforcement: On the Frontlines
Agencies tasked with enforcing federal immigration laws have helped lead to the
deportation of a large amount of illegal immigrants. These state and local law enforcement
agencies continue to encounter numerous situations involving human and drug trafficking,
gang activity, and violent acts of crime on a daily basis. Departments in some cases have
banned patrol to certain areas within their jurisdictions due to an increased threat level set
forth by dangerous suspects illegally entering the United States. In Phoenix, Arizona the
Sheriff Department has been actively enforcing all federal, state, and local immigration
policies while patrolling their beats. Upon apprehension and being placed in jail, every
suspect is subject to investigation by detention officers to determine each individual’s
immigration status (Allen & Sousa, 2011). The suspects, once it’s determined they are in
America illegally, are documented with an immigration hold and immediately deported
upon the completion of their criminal case (Allen & Sousa, 2011). Officers within this
department claim to be specifically trained in identifying indicators that an individual could
possibly be in the country illegally, while maintaining their constitutional rights. To
execute such a questioning the deputies must have strong probable cause before inquiring
whether or not an individual is illegally within the United States (Allen & Sousa, 2011). In
crime ridden areas along the border it is common for local law enforcement to receive a
typical disturbance call, and upon arrival at the scene be presented with a human trafficking
situation. It’s these types of situations that are ultimately affecting everyday law
enforcement activities; they draw attention away from their jurisdiction’s domestic issues

11. STATE AND LOCAL LAW ENFORCEMENT 11
and focus it mostly on problems caused by illegal immigration (McKain & McKain, 2007).
Some departments involved in Section 287(g), or that have their own state’s laws
permitting the policing of illegal immigration laws, have created specific units with the sole
purpose of combating aspects of illegal immigration. Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office
created a unit with the objective of combating human trafficking called the Human
Smuggling Unit (HSU) (Allen & Sousa, 2011). This unit is just one example of this type of
task force that is popping up throughout the country to more effectively fight illegal
immigration.
Conclusion
The United States was founded solely based upon immigration. Our country has
commonly been referred to as a “Melting Pot” of different races, ethnicities, and cultures.
It’s because of this fact that over time we had begun to introduce legislation regulating
different aspects of immigration. Two key pieces of legislation, 1921 Emergency Quota
Law and the 1924 Immigration Act, kick started the illegal immigration process. It was by
these policies that the country began to limit the amount of individuals immigrating to the
United States based on their nationality. Upon the rise of illegal immigration the United
States formed the U.S. Border Patrol with the sole purpose of policing our borders and the
individuals wishing to cross over them. There has always been a continuous problems
brought on by illegal immigration throughout our country’s history. Although in recent
years, following the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, immigration has once again
become a large focal point. It has been speculated that the federal government, since the
spike of attention on illegal immigration, does not exhibit the capability of effectively
controlling illegal immigration. Based on these speculations, an idea arose stating that state

12. STATE AND LOCAL LAW ENFORCEMENT 12
and local law enforcement agencies should be indirectly responsible, under federal
supervision, for enforcing immigration laws within their jurisdictions (McKain & McKain,
2007). In result, these agencies have now become tasked with enforcing immigration laws
in addition to their existing responsibilities. How do local law enforcement agencies
effectively fight to stop illegal immigration and what are possible problems they encounter
while enforcing immigration laws? There are many problems associated with illegal
immigration, but certain issues hold higher concern. Immigrants are finding ways to
circumvent immigration policies by entering America legally, with I-94 forms or visas, then
deciding to never leave upon the expiration date of their documentation (Jimenez, 2000).
Individuals that fall into this category become increasingly difficult to apprehend once they
no longer hold an active citizenship status. In response to illegal immigration becoming an
increasing large problem for states like Arizona, state and local governments have created
their own immigration laws to enforce alongside the preexisting federal immigration laws
(Allen & Sousa, 2011). Many departments while dealing with serious illegal immigration
problems face multiple complications against their efforts to contain this issue. Levels of
illegal immigration were becoming overwhelmingly high, so much so that state and local
law enforcement greatly lacked the amount of resources necessary to effectively fight the
problem (McKain & McKain, 2007). These departments did not have the monetary
resources, manpower, training, or equipment needed to effectively enforce the immigration
laws within their areas. The Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act
(IIRIRA) amended the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952, thus implementing the
Section 287(g) program (Hoops, Summerill, Goodwin & Henning, 2009). It was through
this program that allowed the Immigration and Customs Enforcement agency to authorize
state and local law enforcement agencies the power to enforce federal immigration laws. By

13. STATE AND LOCAL LAW ENFORCEMENT 13
taking part in this program it helped to provide the state and local law enforcement agencies
with federal funding and access to ICE’s collective information (Hoops, Summerill,
Goodwin & Henning, 2009). Section 287(g) and other systems like it have shown to be
very effective. Studies have shown that by 2011 there had been 186,000 immigrants
identified for deportation, and of these 186,000 immigrants 126,000 voluntarily deported
(Parrado, 2012). After analyzing all the information it appears obvious that the efforts to
include state and local law enforcement has helped to lower the number of illegal
immigrants making their way into the United States. The routes taken by the government to
ultimately stop this problem display more advantages than disadvantages.

14. STATE AND LOCAL LAW ENFORCEMENT 14
References
Allen, L., & Sousa, J. (2011). Maricopa county sheriff Joe Arpaio's fight on illegal
immigration. Sheriff, 63(2), 24-26. Retrieved from
http://libproxy.library.unt.edu:2055/docview/862093984?accountid=7113
Booth, D. (2006). Federalism on ice: State and local enforcement of federal immigration
law. Harvard Journal Of Law & Public Policy, 29(3), 1063-1083.
Creek, H. M., & Yoder, S. (2012). With a little help from our feds: Understanding state
immigration enforcement policy adoption in american federalism. Policy Studies
Journal, 40(4), 674-697. doi:10.1111/j.1541-0072.2012.00469.x
Eastman, J. C. (2012). Papers, please: Does the constitution permit the states a role in
immigration enforcement?. Harvard Journal of Law & Public Policy, 35(3), 569-
592.
Hoops, R., Summerill, J., Goodwin, D., & Henning, P. (2009). Immigration and custom
enforcement's 287(g) program: Empowering sheriffs to address illegal immigration.
Sheriff, 61(4), 30-33. Retrieved from
http://libproxy.library.unt.edu:2055/docview/199462555?accountid=7113
Jimenez, M. (2000). The U.S-Mexico Border: A Strategy of Low-Intensity Conflict Social
Justice, 27(4), 32-36.
McKain, G., & McKain, D. (2007). Empowering local law enforcement to combat illegal
immigration. Sheriff, 59(2), 11-12. Retrieved from
http://libproxy.library.unt.edu:2055/docview/199443988?accountid=7113
Newton, L. (2012). Policy innovation or vertical integration? a view of immigration
federalism from the states. Law & Policy, 34(2), 113-137. doi:10.1111/j.1467-
9930.2011.00360.x

15. STATE AND LOCAL LAW ENFORCEMENT 15
Parrado, E. A. (2012). Immigration enforcement policies, the economic recession, and the
size of local mexican immigrant populations. Annals of The American Academy of
Political & Social Science, 641(1), 16-37. doi:10.1177/0002716211435353