Pennsylvania judge upholds a sheriff’s ICE cooperation agreement
A Pennsylvania judge has upheld Bucks County Sheriff Fred Harran’s authority to cooperate with U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) under a 287(g) agreement, dismissing a lawsuit filed by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) that sought to block his participation in the federal immigration enforcement program. The court ruled that the ACLU plaintiffs lacked legal standing and failed to demonstrate any concrete harm from the sheriff’s cooperation with ICE.the judge also steadfast that the memorandum of understanding signed by Harran did not require approval from county commissioners, affirming that Pennsylvania sheriffs are independent constitutional officers who can work directly with federal agencies. Harran stated that the agreement would be used to check immigration status for individuals in custody or wanted by his office, emphasizing it as a public safety measure. The ACLU condemned the ruling and vowed to appeal,arguing that the sheriff lacked authority to enter into such an agreement. The decision was praised by America Frist Legal,a conservative group representing Harran,as a victory for law enforcement and the rule of law.
Pennsylvania judge upholds county sheriff’s ICE cooperation agreement
A Pennsylvania judge upheld Bucks County Sheriff Fred Harran’s authority to cooperate with federal immigration authorities on Wednesday, dismissing an American Civil Liberties Union lawsuit that sought to block his participation in a federal enforcement program.
Judge Jeffrey Trauger of the Court of Common Pleas of Bucks County ruled that the ACLU’s plaintiffs lacked standing and failed to show any concrete harm from the sheriff’s 287(g) agreement with U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement. The court found the claims were based on “subjective fears of possible future incidents,” noting that one plaintiff “alleges no actual incidents where he or others he knows were a victim of any of these unlawful events.”
The ACLU, which filed a lawsuit in June, argued that Harran exceeded his authority by signing the agreement without county commissioners’ consent. The court rejected that argument, citing similar findings from a New York appellate decision that found memorandums of understanding like the one at issue to be “unenforceable contracts.”
In a 13-page decision, Trauger concluded that “none of the Plaintiffs have proper legal standing to bring this action under Pennsylvania law,” adding that even if they could, the memorandum of understanding signed by Harran “is not an enforceable contract and therefore [was] not subject to the approval of the Bucks County Commissioners.”
The ruling affirms that sheriffs in Pennsylvania are independent constitutional officers who may coordinate directly with federal agencies. Harran’s agreement with ICE allows his deputies to perform certain immigration enforcement functions under federal supervision, part of a long-standing framework known as the 287(g) program.
Harran has said he intends to use the agreement to check the immigration status of people already in custody or those wanted by his office. In a statement posted online, he called the ruling a victory for residents and validation of what he described as a “common-sense” approach to public safety that leverages partnerships and federal resources.
“This decision affirms our ability to use this simple tool to ensure individuals who commit crimes in our county are held fully accountable — regardless of their immigration status,” Harran said.
The ACLU strongly condemned the decision and vowed to appeal, saying in a statement to the Washington Examiner that it “undermines our values, our laws, and our humanity.”
“This fight is far from over,” said Stephen Loney, senior supervising attorney at the ACLU of Pennsylvania. “It’s unfortunate that the judge in this case failed to appreciate what the law clearly states. The sheriff does not have the authority to sign onto a 287(g) agreement with ICE. We will appeal this decision, and in the meantime, we will continue to work to hold Sheriff Harran accountable for the rule of law.”
The decision for now is a win for America First Legal, a conservative legal group founded by President Donald Trump’s senior adviser Stephen Miller, which represented Harran in partnership with the law firm Zimolong. AFL said the outcome reinforces that local law enforcement agencies can assist ICE in removing dangerous criminals and ensuring public safety.
“This is a decisive victory for the rule of law and for every law enforcement officer who refuses to bow to political pressure,” said Gene Hamilton, president of AFL. “Radical activists tried to weaponize the courts to stop a sheriff from enforcing the law. The court saw through it.”
HOMELAND SECURITY DEMOCRATS EYE MEASURES TO CONDITION DHS FUNDING TO ICE REFORMS
AFL claimed the case has “sweeping implications,” saying the ACLU and its affiliates “attempted to strip an elected sheriff of his authority to assist federal immigration officials.”
The group said the court’s ruling “reaffirms that local law enforcement can lawfully work with ICE to remove criminals and keep communities safe.”
" Conservative News Daily does not always share or support the views and opinions expressed here; they are just those of the writer."
*As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases
