Virginia Senate Passes Measure Restricting Local Cooperation With Federal Immigration Enforcement
Get AI-powered insights, summaries, and transcripts
Sign Up Free
Summary
After hours of floor debate, the Senate narrowly approved SB 783, a bill that sets rules for how local law enforcement may cooperate with federal immigration authorities, emphasizing judicial warrants and bans on routine immigration questioning in sensitive spaces.
The Virginia Senate passed SB 783 on Feb. 17, 2026, after a prolonged, partisan debate that stretched across the morning and early afternoon. The bill, led on the floor by the senator from Central Fairfax, creates a statutory framework limiting routine cooperation between local law enforcement and federal immigration authorities and requires judicial warrants for certain enforcement actions.
Senator from Central Fairfax, the bill's sponsor, told colleagues: "Virginia law enforcement should not be drafted into doing federal immigration agents work in ways that make our communities less safe, less trusting, and less free." He argued the measure keeps immigration enforcement out of polling places, schools, hospitals and houses of worship and requires judicial oversight "before sensitive information is shared for immigration enforcement or before entering a person's home."
Opponents warned the bill would hamstring local police. The senator from Colonial Heights said the measure "effectively tells Virginia law enforcement that they cannot cooperate with federal immigration enforcement" and characterized floor amendments as turning the Commonwealth into a sanctuary state. The senator from Rockingham and others raised operational concerns about restricting tools such as phone-location and digital forensics.
The Senate recorded the vote Ayes 21, Noes 19; the motion to pass was renewed following a reconsideration vote earlier in the debate. The chamber’s action means the bill will proceed to the House for consideration.
Why it matters: Supporters said SB 783 seeks to preserve trust between immigrant communities and local police, arguing that cooperation without safeguards discourages 911 calls and reporting of crimes. Opponents said the bill could impede investigations into violent crime and human trafficking and shift responsibilities in ways that leave localities exposed.
Next steps: The bill now moves to the House of Delegates. If both chambers approve and the governor signs it, enforcement provisions and any interagency rules will be implemented according to statutory timelines and administrative rulemaking.