The Idaho Department of Correction (IDOC) officially joined the federal 287(g) immigration enforcement program on Aug. 28, marking a significant expansion of state cooperation with U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), according to idahocapitalsun.com.
This agreement makes IDOC the second state agency in Idaho to participate in the federal initiative, following the Idaho State Police, which entered its own pact in June 2025. The new arrangement formalizes processes that corrections officials had already been utilizing for years, including sharing information on inmates with felony convictions and coordinating with federal agents regarding immigration detainers.
Under the “warrant service” model adopted by IDOC, designated state officers are authorized to serve immigration warrants to undocumented individuals currently in state custody. The agreement ensures these actions remain under federal supervision while allowing state resources to assist in transferring individuals to federal jurisdiction upon the completion of their criminal sentences.
Governor Brad Little emphasized the administration’s commitment to border security and local safety. He stated that Idaho has a responsibility to uphold the rule of law and protect residents, noting that the agreement provides another tool to ensure those subject to federal immigration enforcement are transferred to federal custody after serving their time in Idaho prisons.
The 287(g) program allows state and local law enforcement agencies to perform limited immigration enforcement duties within their jurisdictions. While the IDOC signing brings statewide participation, local adoption has been uneven. As of mid-August, only 12 local law enforcement agencies across Idaho have signed similar agreements with ICE.
Gooding County and Power County sheriffs’ offices were among the earliest adopters, entering agreements in 2020. Most other participating jurisdictions joined in 2025 or later. Notably, the Kootenai County Sheriff’s Office and the Owyhee County Sheriff’s Office each hold two separate 287(g) agreements, reflecting broader cooperation in those regions. The Post Falls Police Department also signed an agreement on June 25, becoming the first and only city-level police agency in Idaho to participate in the program.
Data from the state indicates that participation has led to tangible enforcement results. From the beginning of 2025 through Aug. 6, 2026, a total of 19 arrests in Idaho were attributed to the 287(g) program. Of those, only three occurred in 2025, while 16 were reported in 2026 through early August. The Idaho State Police, funded by emergency funds from the governor’s office for their participation, had transported more than 80 individuals out of correctional facilities as of May.
Despite the growth in voluntary participation, efforts to mandate statewide involvement have faced resistance. During the 2026 legislative session, lawmakers introduced proposals requiring all local agencies to join the 287(g) program. These measures encountered strong pushback from law enforcement leaders concerned about resource allocation and jurisdictional boundaries.
Payette County Sheriff Andy Creech highlighted the operational constraints faced by rural departments when discussing federal cooperation. He noted that while local agencies work with ICE, they lack the manpower to perform duties that are fundamentally the responsibility of federal agents.
The IDOC agreement does not represent a new policy direction for the department but rather codifies existing practices. Staff continue to coordinate due process hearings for individuals undergoing deportation proceedings and maintain communication channels with ICE regarding inmate status. By formalizing these interactions, the state aims to streamline the transfer process and ensure that individuals subject to removal are processed efficiently upon release from state custody.
The expansion of 287(g) participation in Idaho reflects a broader trend among conservative-leaning states seeking to utilize federal tools for immigration enforcement without assuming full jurisdictional responsibility. As local agencies weigh the benefits against resource costs, the division between participating and non-participating jurisdictions remains a focal point for state leaders.