The Colorado Court of Appeals has overturned a previous ruling that permitted Teller County sheriff’s deputies to enforce federal immigration laws by detaining individuals in the country illegally.
In 2019, a lawsuit was filed against Teller County Sheriff Jason Mikesell by a group of county residents and the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) of Colorado. This legal action challenged the sheriff’s office’s partnership with U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), which trained and empowered deputies to carry out federal immigration enforcement.
Initially, Teller County District Court Judge Scott Sells ruled in favor of Sheriff Mikesell in February 2023, concluding that the 287(g) agreement did not violate state law.
However, the appeals court disagreed with Judge Sells’ decision, asserting that deputies cannot act solely under federal law when performing duties as immigration officers. The court emphasized that Congress did not intend for federal agreements with ICE to supersede state legislation.
According to the court’s summary released on Wednesday, any provisions within the Teller County Sheriff’s Office agreement allowing deputies to arrest or detain individuals based on civil immigration detainers are deemed invalid under state law.
Upon the announcement of the ruling, ACLU officials expressed approval, stating, “Local law enforcement officers should not assume federal immigration enforcement roles, particularly when state law expressly prohibits such actions. The court’s decision underscores that no Colorado sheriff is exempt from state statutes,” remarked ACLU of Colorado Legal Director Tim Macdonald.
This case marks a significant legal precedent as the first instance nationwide where a sheriff’s enforcement of a 287(g) agreement has been found to violate state law, according to the ACLU.
The matter will now return to district court to determine whether a permanent injunction, sought by the ACLU, should be imposed.
As of Wednesday, the Teller County Sheriff’s Office has not responded to requests for comment on the appeals court’s decision.
