While corporate media talking heads are hyperventilating over the Trump administration deporting foreign gang members, another important development with law enforcement is getting far less attention but is just as important to the nation’s security.

U.S. Customs and Immigration’s (ICE) 287(g) program is a series of cooperative agreements with local law enforcement to remove criminal aliens from communities. It has been a polarizing issue. Communities that prioritize law and order tend to love it; places where anti-borders thinking and sanctuary city ideology prevail loathe it. After Trump’s November election reinvigorated border security, new 287(g) communities have emerged in some unlikely places. 

Recently, five Minnesota sheriffs from Cass, Crow Wing, Freeborn, Itasca, and Jackson counties joined the program, aligning their offices with federal efforts to identify and deport illegal aliens who commit crimes. These sheriffs represent a coalition of rural counties determined to address immigration enforcement in a state often characterized by its progressive, sanctuary-leaning policies.

Why would sheriffs in a deep-blue state still governed by Kamala Harris’s former running mate side with the Trump-friendly program? The lawmen oversee jurisdictions where resources are stretched thin, making federal cooperation a practical necessity. Since President Trump took office, they’ve joined Sherburne and Kandiyohi counties in embracing 287(g), bringing the state’s total to seven participating sheriff’s offices. Their decision reflects a rejection of Minnesota’s broader sanctuary ethos, prioritizing instead a partnership with ICE to target criminal offenders for deportation.

While the number of participants fluctuates, ICE’s website reports that it has signed 444 Memorandums of Agreement for 287(g) programs covering 38 states, with 67 other program applications pending. After the anarchy of the Biden administration’s see-no-evil approach to immigration enforcement, it is getting harder to defend resistance to 287(g), even in states like Minnesota.

Other jurisdictions are still clinging to their pro-sanctuary positions that bring crime and squalor. In Maryland, the legislature passed a watered-down, so-called immigrant protections bill, HB 1222, in the final moments of the April 7 session. Initially, the bill aimed to ban 287(g) agreements outright—a move championed by extremist anti-borders groups like CASA. Though the prohibition was stripped from the final version due to Senate resistance, the effort reveals a clear intent: to sever ties between local law enforcement and ICE.

Counties like Cecil, Frederick, and Harford, which currently participate in 287(g), faced the prospect of losing a tool their sheriffs defend as essential. Maryland’s push reflects a broader and more partisan ideological stance, one that prioritizes illegal alien rights over the enforcement of federal immigration law, even when it involves aliens with criminal records.

The Trump administration’s threat of withholding federal money to communities that continue anti-borders policies has created useful leverage. In counties with limited budgets and manpower, sheriffs can’t afford to ignore federal support. The five Minnesota sheriffs, for instance, gain access to ICE training and resources, amplifying their ability to detain and process dangerous individuals. In contrast, Maryland’s resistance risks leaving sheriffs without this lifeline, potentially allowing criminals to slip through cracks widened by ideological posturing. Nationwide, 287(g) has facilitated the removal of thousands of offenders—1,795 from Frederick County alone, as Sheriff Chuck Jenkins has noted—demonstrating its efficacy in reducing recidivism by those who shouldn’t be here in the first place.

Opponents of 287(g) cling to the argument that the program sows distrust in immigrant communities, making aliens less likely to report crime. But this represents a dangerous inversion of priorities—changing law enforcement’s primary role to community comfort rather than effective law enforcement.  

The Maryland legislators and their ilk are now akin to the Iraqi military’s “dead-enders” who continued to fight a war that they clearly lost. Americans spoke definitively in the 2024 election. Our experiment with loose borders, sanctuary cities, and prioritizing aliens over citizens has been a colossal failure. Pockets of fervent resistance may remain, but America as a nation has moved on.

The 287(g) program isn’t about profiling or mass deportation; it is about accountability. By empowering sheriffs like those in Minnesota to act decisively, it reinforces a system where legal residency and public safety go hand in hand. Maryland’s reluctance may appease activists, but it weakens the very security Americans deserve.

In an era of porous borders and strained resources, 287(g) isn’t just good—it’s essential. The 287(g) program, far from being a divisive gimmick, is a pragmatic solution to enhance American security, and its expansion should be celebrated, not curtailed.