House Judiciary Committee advances amended SB 76 mandating broader local cooperation with federal immigration enforcement

The Indiana House Judiciary Committee voted 9‑4 to advance an amended immigration‑enforcement measure, Senate Bill 76, after more than five hours of testimony from state officials, sheriffs, business representatives and hundreds of members of the public.

Supporters, including the Attorney General’s Office, Department of Correction officials and many county sheriffs, said the amended bill closes loopholes in Indiana’s anti‑sanctuary law and restores the state’s ability to enforce detainer requests. “Enforcement matters,” said Blake Lanning, assistant chief deputy with the Attorney General’s Office, summarizing the office’s position that restoring oversight of detainer compliance is central to public‑safety goals.

The amendment adopted in committee restores authority to the attorney general to pursue enforcement over detainer compliance rather than relying solely on an annual Department of Correction inspection. It also includes a mandatory detainer‑compliance provision for jails, E‑Verify provisions for employers (described in the bill as a safe harbor), new data‑collection and annual reporting tasks for some state programs, and a civil‑penalty framework that Representative JD Prescott said could include fines up to $10,000 in some circumstances.

State Department of Correction official Lloyd Arnold told the committee the state’s Miami Correctional Facility has been used to process ICE detainees and said the facility has processed “over 1,000 detainees,” while outlining the limits of DOC’s role in transfers and the typical wait times from county jails to state custody.

Sheriffs and law‑enforcement witnesses largely supported the amended bill. Delaware County Sheriff Tony Skinner, representing the Sheriffs Association, said most county jails already notify ICE and cooperate on detainer requests and called for consistent statewide practices.

Opponents, including clinicians, educators, civil‑rights organizations and many community members, warned the measure would chill reporting and health‑care access, broaden surveillance and expose local governments to legal risk. Dr. Anita Joshi, a pediatrician and Carmel city councilor, said the bill “inspires fear” and argued mandatory cooperation with detainers could discourage families from seeking medical care and reporting crimes. Civil‑liberties groups and legal advocates repeatedly told the committee that ICE detainers are requests, not warrants, and that holding people solely on detainers risks Fourth Amendment challenges.

Lawyers and civil‑rights witnesses also raised privacy and data‑security concerns about the bill’s reporting requirements for some public‑benefit programs, and several public witnesses asked the committee to exclude K‑12 schools and other child‑serving institutions from mandatory reporting absent a judicial warrant.

Representative JD Prescott, sponsor of the amendment adopted in committee, said the reporting provisions are intended to aggregate existing administrative data so lawmakers can better understand costs and compliance. Several committee members pressed for clarity on whether reporting mandates apply to private or parochial institutions; committee staff said the language was intended to apply to public institutions, with further clarification possible as the bill moves forward.

Representative Emily Bauer offered an amendment to remove certain reporting language; that amendment failed on a 5‑8 vote. The committee then voted to pass SB 76 as amended on a roll call of 9‑4. Those voting yes included Chairman Jeter, Representatives Zimmerman, Ireland, Davis, Bascom, Meltzer, Prescott, Stewart and Lopez; Garcia Wilburn, Burton, Dvorak and Bauer voted no.

The committee’s action forwards the amended SB 76 to the next House stage for additional consideration. Supporters say the bill gives the state tools to enforce existing law; critics say it creates constitutional and practical problems that should be fixed before the measure becomes state law.