州和联邦； 红蓝有别

ICE agents do not derive their primary authority from state law, as they are federal officers under the Department of Homeland Security (DHS). However, state laws significantly influence their operations in 2026 by either mandating cooperation or restricting it. 

 

Mandatory Cooperation Laws (Pro-ICE)

In many states, new 2025 and 2026 laws require local agencies to assist ICE:

• Arizona: The "Arizona ICE Act" (2025) requires local law enforcement to use "best efforts" to support federal immigration enforcement and mandates participation in the 287(g) program by January 1, 2026.
• Texas: Senate Bill 8 (effective Jan 1, 2026) requires county sheriffs to enter into 287(g) agreements by late 2026.
• New Hampshire: Effective Jan 1, 2026, local law enforcement must follow ICE detainer requests to hold individuals for up to 48 hours. 

 

Restrictive Laws (Sanctuary Policies)

Conversely, several states have enacted laws to limit ICE’s reach:

• Data Restrictions: States like Illinois, Massachusetts, Minnesota, New York, and Washington have blocked ICE access to driver’s license records and other personal data to prevent automated targeting.
• Warrant Requirements: Maryland's 2025 legislation requires ICE to present a judicial warrant signed by a court to enter private areas of state or local government facilities.
• Maryland "ICE Breaker Act": Proposed in early 2026, this bill aims to bar former ICE agents (hired during certain administrations) from joining state police. 

 

State Jurisdiction Over Agents

While ICE agents generally have federal immunity for actions taken in their official duties, they are not exempt from state criminal law if they act outside their authority or use objectively unreasonable force. For instance, following a fatal shooting in Minneapolis in January 2026, local prosecutors asserted they have jurisdiction to charge federal agents if the actions are found to be "unlawful" or "outside their authority".