Issue 2: October 16, 2025

Community Action Alert

As of October 2025, 14 local law enforcement groups in Kentucky, including Marshall County, have signed 287(g) agreements, and nine county jails were contracting with ICE to hold detainees.

This increase in partnerships is linked to a federal push under the Trump administration, which encourages local police to help enforce federal immigration laws. In general, a Kentucky officer deputized under any 287(g) agreement is given the authority to perform certain functions of a federal immigration agent, transforming a minor local police encounter into a potential pathway for deportation. Any agreement with ICE places our public trust in local law enforcement in jeopardy because ICE has been acting outside the law.

Constitutional Violations in Enforcement Actions

• Warrantless and Unlawful Arrests: ICE agents have been subject to court orders and consent decrees—such as the Castañon Nava decree—to ensure they have a warrant signed by a judge or probable cause before making an arrest. However, there are documented cases where agents have been accused of:

• Arresting individuals without a warrant or sufficient probable cause in their neighborhoods or vehicles.

• Violating the Fourth Amendment by entering private residences without a judicial search warrant (an administrative immigration warrant signed by an ICE official is generally not sufficient for entry into a home).

• Detention of U.S. Citizens: Despite ICE policy stating it does not arrest or deport U.S. citizens, numerous instances and lawsuits have alleged that agents have wrongfully detained and/or attempted to deport U.S. citizens.

• Violations of the First Amendment (Free Speech): Federal agents, including ICE and DHS personnel, have been accused of using force (e.g., tear gas, pepper balls, rubber bullets) to suppress, harass, and intimidate peaceful protesters and members of the press covering immigration enforcement actions and detention facilities.

Violations of Due Process and Detention Standards

• Denial of Due Process Protections:

• Denying access to legal counsel and violating the right to an attorney.

• Coercing detainees to sign forms agreeing to voluntary departure or expedited removal without first seeing an immigration judge, thereby bypassing their due process rights.

• Violating a person's right to remain silent and using statements against them in deportation proceedings.

• Inhumane Conditions and Violations of Constitutional Duty to Care: Complaints and lawsuits have alleged that conditions in ICE detention centers violate the government's constitutional duty to provide basic human needs, including:

• Inadequate Medical Care: Allegations of deliberate indifference to serious medical needs, leading to neglect.

• Substandard Conditions: Reports of insufficient or spoiled food, undrinkable water, lack of hygiene supplies (like soap and toilet paper), and overcrowding.

• Abuse and Hostile Environment: Allegations of staff creating a hostile environment, excessive use of force, and racialized abuse.

• Violations of Religious Rights: Detainees have reported being denied appropriate food for their religious beliefs, violating their First Amendment rights.

Procedural and Statutory Violations

• Obstruction of Congressional Oversight: ICE has faced legal challenges for implementing policies that grant the agency "sole and unreviewable discretion" to deny or cancel visits by Members of Congress to detention facilities, which critics argue is a violation of federal law that explicitly allows for congressional oversight without prior notice.

• Reckless Conduct During Operations: Agents have been accused of reckless and dangerous tactics during vehicle pursuits and raids, sometimes resulting in car crashes, injuries, and deaths, which raises questions of negligence and excessive force.

• Improper Court Procedures by ICE Attorneys: ICE attorneys have been documented as increasingly requesting case dismissals at immigration hearings to funnel non-citizens into expedited removal, a process with fewer due process protections, sometimes with immigration judges granting these motions on the spot in alleged violation of court procedures.

• Violations of Local Sanctuary Policies: The federal government has sued and threatened to target local jurisdictions for policies that restrict local police cooperation with ICE, which those jurisdictions argue are protected by the Tenth Amendment (prohibiting the federal government from commandeering local resources).