LegisTrack
Back to all bills
HR 864119th CongressIn Committee

Freedom to Cooperate Act

Introduced: Jan 31, 2025
Standard Summary
Comprehensive overview in 1-2 paragraphs

The Freedom to Cooperate Act would strengthen federal control over immigration policy and shrink the reach of sanctuary policies at the state and local level. It would amend federal law to prohibit states from restricting cooperation with immigration enforcement, requiring State and local authorities to allow inquiries about a person’s immigration status, notify federal authorities about encounters, and comply with information requests related to immigration. The bill also expands the use of detainers under the 287(d) framework, setting stricter procedures for when and how federal authorities can take custody of individuals who may be inadmissible or deportable, and it provides liability protections for states, local governments, and contractors that comply with federal detainers. Additionally, the bill updates terminology (INS to DHS) and explicitly states that reporting victims or witnesses is not required. Overall, it aims to codify aggressive federal-employee cooperation in immigration enforcement and limit sanctuary-style protections.

Key Points

  • 1Congressional intent and preemption: Federal immigration policy takes precedence, and state sanctuary laws or directives should not hinder local enforcement from complying with or assisting federal immigration enforcement.
  • 2Strengthened 8 U.S.C. 1373 (sanctuary provisions): States may not prohibit or restrict government entities or personnel from (a) complying with immigration laws or helping with federal enforcement, and (b) engaging in specified law enforcement activities related to immigration status (inquiries, notifying the federal government, and responding to information requests).
  • 3Expanded law enforcement activities: States may not block inquiries about immigration status, notifications to federal authorities, or cooperation with federal requests for such information.
  • 4INA terminology and reporting caveat: Replaces references to the Immigration and Naturalization Service with the Department of Homeland Security; clarifies that the act does not require reporting or arrest of victims or witnesses.
  • 5287(d) detainer overhaul: The Secretary of Homeland Security may issue detainers for individuals believed to be inadmissible or deportable, with a defined probable-cause standard (biometric confirmation or other DHS records, ongoing removal proceedings, prior final removal orders, voluntary statements or reliable evidence, or other reasonable grounds).
  • 6Transfer window and custody: If a detainer is complied with, federal authorities may take custody within 48 hours, but no more than 96 hours after the individual would have been released by the partnering law enforcement entity (weekends/holidays excluded).
  • 7Immunity and litigation: States or local subdivisions and contracted nongovernmental detention entities acting under a DHS detainer are deemed to be acting under color of federal authority and are typically shielded from liability; the United States would be the proper defendant in civil actions arising from detainer compliance, with a bad-faith exception for mistreatment.

Impact Areas

Primary group/area affected- Immigrant individuals, particularly those who are undocumented or targeted by immigration enforcement, and communities they live in.- Federal immigration agencies (e.g., Department of Homeland Security and its components), which would see expanded authority and a clearer legal framework for detainers and cooperation.Secondary group/area affected- State and local law enforcement agencies, which would face stronger federal expectations and potential liability protections when cooperating with federal detainer requests.- States and localities that currently maintain sanctuary policies or restrictions on sharing immigration information.Additional impacts- Civil liberties and community trust: Could affect relationships between immigrant communities and local police, possibly increasing fear of contact with law enforcement.- Legal and financial exposure: Municipalities and contractors could face new liability dynamics, though they receive substantial federal protections when complying with detainers.- Policy and political dynamics: Likely to intensify debates over state sovereignty versus federal authority in immigration policy, and could trigger legal challenges related to preemption and due process.
Generated by gpt-5-nano on Nov 18, 2025