As federal immigration efforts have intensified across the country, Ohio city councils are preparing for increased ICE presence.
Many cities have passed legislation to limit local law enforcement’s cooperation with the federal immigration agency.
In Cincinnati, recent legislation prohibits city property from being used as staging areas for ICE and bans the city from sharing any surveillance data for the purpose of immigration enforcement, among other measures. In Columbus, measures prevent local police from entering into 287(g) cooperation agreements with ICE and put a moratorium on detention facilities within the city.
Other measures have been more symbolic. In Toledo, they passed a non-binding resolution encouraging federal agents not to wear masks and to carry identification. Springfield passed a similar measure, ahead of when temporary protected status for Haitians was expected to end.
Why are cities passing immigration policies?
Ohio’s metropolitan areas are saying these policies are necessary to help protect residents in their communities. Many of the measures were passed following the murder of protestors Renee Good and Alex Pretti by ICE agents in Minneapolis.
Sylvania city council member Doug Haynam said the deaths were a wake up call for his community, about 10 miles outside of Toledo.
“I felt frustrated, angry,” he said. “I thought, ‘This isn't the America that I've grown up in or that I want my grandchildren to grow up in.’”
Soon after, Haynam introduced a measure that would prohibit city resources from being used for federal immigration enforcement.
He said he’s not trying to make the town a sanctuary city or stop ICE from doing their job, but he wants to ensure local law enforcement focuses on local matters.
“We’re not gonna get involved in that activity,” Haynam said. “Because we have more important things to do for our citizens.”
He sees the bill as a “resource conservation”, something he said is particularly important in small towns.
Unlike in those in bigger cities, Haynam's proposed legislation has stalled. He’s now working to put a citizen-led measure on the ballot.
How is the state getting involved in immigration matters?
The debate isn’t just being held by municipalities. State lawmakers on both sides of the aisle have proposed legislation around immigration enforcement.
Republican lawmakers have proposed four bills that would require cooperation with ICE.
HB26, in particular, dictates that cities would lose 10% of local funding and be ineligible for any grants from the Department of Homeland Security if they don’t assist federal agents.
“We will remove the barriers for federal immigration enforcement in our state, thereby protecting the citizens and workers of Ohio from those who are here illegally and seek to take advantage of our great state and its resources,” said Representative Josh Williams, R-Sylvania Township, as he introduced the bill to the public safety committee last April.
The bill proposal, like other immigration bills at the statehouse, is still in committee.
State Democrats have also filed a flurry of bills that would limit data-sharing and immigration raids in schools and hospitals and measures that would prohibit ICE agents from wearing masks or other face coverings.
Who has power over immigration enforcement?
Immigration enforcement is a federal power, but legal experts say that cities have the right to refuse participation in federally run programs, under the 10th amendment.
“The federal government cannot say, in so many words, you must cooperate with ICE,” said Jonathan Entin, Constitutional law expert and professor emeritus at Case Western Reserve University.
Ohio also has ‘home rule’ – meaning municipalities can govern themselves.
Even so, Entin said a lot of times state law supersedes municipal law. If Ohio passed legislation requiring cooperation and cities decided to challenge it in court, he said sympathies have historically lied with the state.
“Given the Ohio Supreme Court's track record over the last 20, 30 years, it would probably be a bit of an uphill battle for the local government,” he said.
In testimony for HB26, Rep. Williams said that home rule wouldn’t be an issue for his legislation. He said the state is not mandating cooperation, but rather incentivizing it through funding.
“You can decide whether or not you want to do this, but [if not], then you’re gonna have to go to your local taxpayers and say we need to fill the gap in our budget because we lost 10% of our local government funds,” he explained.
Some municipalities, like Sylvania, even have language baked into their ordinances that say they will comply with the state, should the law change.
What is law enforcement saying?
Some law enforcement have spoken out against measures that limit cooperation with ICE.
Ken Kober, president of the Cincinnati Fraternal Order of Police, posted a statement criticizing Cincinnati’s legislation on Facebook.
“Police officers take an oath to defend the Constitution of Ohio and the United States. It’s terrible that a mayor can adopt a policy requiring law officers to violate that oath,” he wrote.
The Ohio Fraternal Order of Police did not respond to The Ohio Newsroom's request for comment.
