Dunn County sheriff urges warrant-service agreement with ICE, citing liability and public-safety concerns

Sheriff Kevin Biggs told the Dunn County Executive Committee that entering a warrant-service officer agreement with U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement would authorize trained county jail staff to serve federal immigration detainers on people already in custody and provide legal protections for holding them for up to 48 hours.

"The warrant service officer agreement authorizes trained Dunn County staff to serve a federal retainer on individuals already in custody in the jail," Biggs said, adding that the program "provides additional liability protection when holding someone on federal retainer for up to 48 hours." He said the arrangement would allow the jail to hand people to ICE within the federal window while avoiding ICE agents conducting street-level searches in the community.

Biggs described three models for cooperation: a task-force model that most resembles federal enforcement, a jail-enforcement model that requires substantial training, and the simpler warrant-service officer model that he recommended for Dunn County because it focuses on serving detainers for people already jailed. He told the committee that his legal advice came from attorney Sam Hall and that Wisconsin County Mutual handles the county's liability insurance.

Committee members asked whether adopting the agreement would expose the county to lawsuits; Biggs said five sheriffs in Wisconsin are currently being sued over similar detainer-holding practices but argued that a formal agreement, training, and counsel review reduce civil risk. He warned that refusing to honor ICE detainers could, in some circumstances, expose the county to federal obstruction charges or risk designation as a "sanctuary county," with potential effects on federal funding.

Members also raised operational questions: how often detainers arrive (Biggs said the county averages about one annually), whether the county could bill for extra custody days, and if data-sharing provisions would give ICE new access to county databases (Biggs and counsel said no new data access was granted beyond publicly available rosters). Corporate counsel told the committee he had reviewed the proposed agreement and noted a termination provision should the Wisconsin Supreme Court rule against the current practice.

Several supervisors urged caution, saying pending litigation and political concerns make immediate adoption premature. The sheriff said he will present the same briefing to the full county board so all supervisors can review the material before any formal action.

The committee took no formal vote on entering an agreement at the meeting.