Cumberland County commissioners spent more than two hours on a high-profile agenda item concerning immigration enforcement before voting to pause the issue for further review.

The matter brought forward was a request to authorize the county manager to notify the U.S. Marshals Service that the county wishes to amend the Marshals'operated jail contract so that Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) detainees would be excluded from use of the county jail. The original wording on the agenda also included language about relinquishing federal reimbursement for ICE detainees; commissioners amended that language during the meeting.

The meeting included a lengthy public-comment period in which dozens of residents, faith leaders, immigrant-rights advocates, academics and state legislators urged the board either to terminate or to condition the contract. Speakers described reported instances of raids, concerns about due process and the impact on immigrant communities, and urged the county not to be complicit in what they described as abusive federal enforcement practices. Other commenters raised concerns about the practical effects of a change, including where detainees would be housed, the county's legal obligations under state law, and the possible fiscal impact to county taxpayers.

Commissioners debated multiple motions and amendments. One amendment that commissioners adopted placed a deadline into the request: to authorize the county manager to provide notice no later than Dec. 1, 2025, asking the U.S. Marshals Service to remove ICE detention from the county contract. Commissioners also adopted a separate amendment that removed language from the original motion that would have stated the county 'would relinquish financial reimbursement for ICE detainees; that change was proposed to preserve the county's ability to seek compensation if detainees were later presented under state or federal law.

Following the amendments and robust debate, a motion to reconsider the main action was made and seconded. Commissioners ultimately voted to table reconsideration (and thus pause final action) for 30 days to give staff time to consult with legal counsel, gather additional financial estimates and follow up with state and federal contacts. The board instructed county management to report back with legal and budget analyses before the matter is returned to the commission.

The sheriff's office and jail leadership answered questions during the discussion and emphasized that current operations follow state requirements and longstanding procedures. The sheriff noted that county jails have statutory responsibilities to accept certain prisoners presented by federal authorities and that any change could have operational consequences. Several commissioners raised concerns about the county's staffing and capacity to handle policy change without state-level guidance or funding.

Because the board tabled the matter, no final change to the jail contract took effect at the meeting. Commissioners said they expect more information and at least one follow-up session before a final vote is scheduled.