Why Virginia’s Cooperation with ICE is a Misguided Policy & Practice
Following Indiana Governor Mike Braun’s lead, Virginia Governor Glenn Youngkin recently signed an executive order enabling state and local law enforcement agencies (and jails) to assist federal authorities, specifically Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), in detaining and extraditing undocumented immigrants. This policy is neither new nor effective—it has been tried with predictable consequences, including strained community relations, legal challenges, and misallocation of law enforcement resources.
Proponents of these efforts argue they enhance public safety by removing dangerous criminals and strengthening immigration enforcement. However, data from previous implementations challenges these claims. A 2019 study by the Cato Institute found no statistically significant impact on crime rates in jurisdictions that implemented similar cooperation agreements.
Focusing on law enforcement agencies, if police departments effectively manage crime control, order maintenance, and prevention, they have little surplus capacity to devote to federal immigration enforcement. Under Youngkin’s order, local agencies would be required to inquire about immigration status during arrests and notify ICE of undocumented individuals in custody—tasks that require additional training, personnel hours, and administrative resources.
Most agencies already operate with limited resources, and any excess funding, personnel, or expertise should be reinvested in initiatives that foster community engagement and reduce crime.
Law enforcement should focus on proven programs that build trust and deter criminal activity at its roots rather than acting as an extension of ICE.
For example, law enforcement agencies could strengthen their community policing efforts by engaging more with local schools and neighborhoods. Programs like the discontinued Police Athletic League (PAL) centers in Baltimore once provided police led after-school supervision, organized sports, and academic support—initiatives that have been shown to steer young people away from crime.
Similarly, the Gang Resistance Education and Training (GREAT) program (including a very successful one operating in Alexandria, VA) has demonstrated long-term success in reducing gang involvement and delinquency among high school students. A 2013 longitudinal study found participants were 39% less likely to join gangs than their non-participating peers. Instead of diverting resources to immigration enforcement, law enforcement agencies should expand these evidence-based programs that directly contribute to public safety.
Past collaborations between local police and ICE have not only failed to reduce crime but have also undermined trust between law enforcement and immigrant communities. A 2020 study by University of California San Diego Professor Tom K. Wong found that 287(g) agreements reduced crime reporting in Latino communities by approximately 22%. When local officers are seen as immigration enforcers, undocumented residents become less likely to report crimes, serve as witnesses, or cooperate in investigations, making communities less safe for everyone.
Rather than enabling federal immigration enforcement, which stretches resources thin and weakens public trust, state and local law enforcement agencies should focus on strategies that improve safety. Investing in community policing, youth engagement, and crime prevention programs is a far more effective and responsible use of taxpayer dollars.
Governors, law enforcement agencies, and communities need to carefully think through whether assisting ICE makes sense to deal with crime and illegal immigration. While it may align with current federal immigration priorities, the evidence suggests it does more harm than good for local public safety.
Photo Credit:
HSI Special Response Team (SRT) members training using armored vehicle at Fort Benning, Georgia
