Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the 287g Ice topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Residents urge council to reject 287(g) partnership with ICE; council says any agreement would involve public engagement
Summary
More than a dozen residents, immigrant advocates and community groups urged the Wicomico County Council at public comment on Sept. 2 to reject any participation in the federal 287(g) immigration enforcement program; council members said nothing is finalized and public engagement would occur before any local action.
At the Sept. 2 public comment period, numerous residents, immigrant-rights advocates and NAACP representatives urged the Wicomico County Council to oppose any local participation in the federal 287(g) immigration enforcement program.
Speakers representing community groups and service providers described the program as costly to local governments and harmful to immigrant families and community trust. Samuel Henry, first vice president of the Wicomico County NAACP, said 287(g) "is about racial profiling" and warned that giving local law enforcement expanded immigration powers would magnify existing inequalities. Monica Brooks, president of the Wicomico County NAACP, said expanding local immigration enforcement "will only further harm" communities of color and urged the council to oppose removing petition-of-support requirements for liquor licenses (a separate agenda item discussed later).
Several presenters including nonprofit legal service providers and immigrant community members described concrete harms they say can follow 287(g) participation: family separations, the need for relatives to pay to reunify detainees, and the diversion of local police time and overtime to federal priorities. One commenter cited the federal training center at Brunswick, Georgia as the training site for deputized officers and noted ongoing local costs such as travel, per diem and overtime that the county would carry.
Council members acknowledged the volume of public comment and said that no county-level agreement was final. Council leadership said existing efforts are on hold and that should the county executive or sheriff pursue an agreement staff and the council would seek public engagement and provide answers; members also said they are collecting information from the Maryland Association of Counties about other counties' experiences.
Why it matters: Participation in 287(g) changes the roles of local law enforcement, can create fiscal obligations for localities and affects immigrant community trust in reporting crime and accessing services.
No formal action was taken at the meeting; public comment will be part of the record if the council or executive pursues future steps.
