SALT LAKE CITY, UT — As the Trump administration ramps up its immigration enforcement efforts, local law enforcement agencies, including the Salt Lake City Police Department (SLCPD), are navigating their roles in assisting U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE). While SLCPD has stated that it may provide limited support to ICE, the department’s policy remains nuanced and non-committal when it comes to direct cooperation with federal immigration authorities.
According to the SLCPD policy, the department may offer “available support services” like traffic control or peacekeeping efforts to ICE, but it does not obligate officers to actively assist with immigration enforcement. The policy adds that any requests from ICE or other federal agencies should be directed to a supervisor, leaving the decision for cooperation to the discretion of department leadership.
“No individual should be held based solely on a federal immigration detainer under 8 CFR 287.7 unless the person has been charged with a federal crime or the detainer is accompanied by a warrant, affidavit of probable cause, or removal order,” the policy states. This reflects the department’s commitment to upholding civil rights, as individuals will not be detained without clear legal justification.
ICE detainers are often issued for individuals suspected of being removable due to their immigration status, particularly in cases involving serious criminal offenses such as burglary, robbery, sexual assault, or drug trafficking. While SLCPD is not restricted from sharing information with ICE about an individual’s immigration status, it is not required to either. The department’s policy makes it clear that officers may exchange such information but are not mandated to do so.
The approach of the SLCPD contrasts with the stance of some state lawmakers. During a Capitol hearing on Wednesday, Senate President Stuart Adams expressed support for mandatory cooperation between local governments and ICE. Adams stated that he was unaware of any communities in Utah actively resisting cooperation, adding that the priority should be ensuring that criminals are removed from the country.
“We’ve had conversations with the minority party, and we have common ground,” Adams said. “The common ground is criminals ought to go home. Let’s start there.”
Meanwhile, Salt Lake County law enforcement agencies have been less transparent about their interactions with ICE. The Unified Police Department and the Salt Lake County Sheriff’s Office did not respond to inquiries regarding their cooperation with ICE at the time of publication.
The discussion has gained further attention with the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) filing a lawsuit against ICE in September over its immigration detention practices. The lawsuit challenges the lack of transparency surrounding ICE’s detention system, particularly its solicitation of contracts with cities, including Salt Lake, to identify potential detention facilities. The ACLU claims that ICE has repeatedly failed to provide sufficient information about its practices, raising concerns about accountability.
As the debate continues, the SLCPD’s policy on immigration enforcement remains a key point of discussion, highlighting the complex relationship between local law enforcement and federal immigration authorities. While the department may offer support when necessary, it is clear that any significant collaboration with ICE will be determined on a case-by-case basis, leaving room for ongoing debate about the appropriate role of local police in federal immigration efforts.