The Senate adopted the conference committee report on Senate Bill 8, a measure intended to expand local participation in the federal 287(g) immigration‑enforcement program and provide tiered state grant funding to counties that enter into agreements.

Senator Swertner moved adoption and described the CCR as preserving local control while ensuring every county with a jail would have the ability to participate in one of three 287(g) models — jail enforcement, warrant service or task force — and receive upfront grant funding sized by county population. Under the conference report conferees described a tiered grant: $80,000 for counties under 100,000 population; $100,000 for counties between 100,000 and 600,000; $120,000 for counties between 600,000 and 1,500,000; and $140,000 for counties over 1,000,000.

Swertner and other supporters said the program would provide resources to identify and remove criminal illegal aliens while preserving sheriff discretion about which model best fits local needs. "This conference committee report for Senate bill 8 is a powerful step forward in protecting Texans and Texas communities," the author said on the floor.

But multiple senators raised concerns about operational, fiscal and civil‑rights implications. Senator Shortner asked whether the state bill made changes to address problems encountered when a similar federal program was attempted previously and whether implementation could divert local law‑enforcement resources. The author said the federal program is being revised and asserted confidence that sheriffs would choose models appropriate to their counties.

Senator Menendez and others questioned whether the state grant levels would cover actual detention costs; a back‑of‑the‑envelope exchange on the floor noted that for large counties the top tier ($140,000) would cover only a limited number of jail bed days at common per‑day cost estimates and would not meet full detention costs. Senators also pressed the author about transparency provisions; the author said the CCR includes oversight by the comptroller and possible enforcement by the attorney general and that some posting requirements from the House may have been carried or removed during negotiation.

Other senators asked whether the bill could drive immigrant communities into the shadows and discourage victims or witnesses from reporting crimes; supporters replied the measure targets criminal illegal aliens and said public safety requires coordination with federal partners.

The conference committee report passed on a roll call vote (20 ayes, 11 nays). The Senate debate included multiple questions about operational capacity, county costs and posting or transparency of contracts with federal authorities.

What this means: The CCR establishes a statewide policy encouraging county participation in 287(g) partnerships and provides modest, tiered state grants to offset implementation costs. It leaves model choice to local sheriffs but does not create an unlimited reimbursement mechanism for detention costs; counties will need to decide whether to participate based on local budgets and capacity.