Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Immigration Policy topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Residents press Marquette County commissioners for resolution limiting county cooperation with ICE and DHS
Summary
Multiple residents urged the Marquette County Board of Commissioners to adopt a public resolution clarifying that the county will not collaborate with ICE or DHS beyond what the law compels, and requested that the board make that stance explicit to protect access to local services.
Dozens of residents used the meeting’s public‑comment periods to press the Marquette County Board of Commissioners for a formal statement limiting county cooperation with federal immigration authorities.
“My name is Katelyn Jensen … I am a resident of the city of Marquette,” said Katelyn Jensen, who asked the board for “the status of a draft resolution on the county's interactions with ICE and the Department of Homeland Security.” Jensen told commissioners she and others want the county to “state clearly that it does not collaborate with these agencies unless compelled to do so by a court.”
Other commenters echoed Jensen’s request. John Gumer cited a recent federal judgment emphasizing that governmental force should be traceable and accountable, and asked the county to ensure local policy addresses masked or anonymous federal agents. Donovan Young and Zeke McClure described trauma and fear among community members who have witnessed enforcement actions elsewhere and urged a public stance from county leaders.
Commissioners responded in the meeting’s discussion period by saying they heard those concerns and by debating the board’s proper role. One commissioner said the board should not overreach its statutory authority; another announced a draft non‑ordinance resolution (titled PEOPLE) intended to encourage professional standards for outside law enforcement and asked that the item be scheduled for action at the next meeting. The board did not adopt a resolution on March 3; commissioners agreed to place a draft resolution on a future agenda for formal debate.
Why it matters: Residents said a public declaration would reassure people that county services will remain accessible and that local officials will prioritize constitutional protections. Commissioners balanced those requests with repeated reminders about the limits of county authority and the need to draft language consistent with state and federal law.
What’s next: A commissioner present at the meeting said they would circulate a draft Resolution in Support of PEOPLE and asked that the board put it on the next meeting’s action calendar for consideration.
