The Case in Plain Language
ICE issues a detainer on a non-citizen arrested by Oklahoma state police for a DUI. Oklahoma holds the person for 48 hours beyond their normal release date. ICE does not show up in that window. The person is released. They later commit a crime that ICE says it would have prevented with the detainer.
Oklahoma argument: we are not a subdivision of federal immigration enforcement. We do not have to hold people beyond our normal release procedures just because ICE asks politely.
Immigration enforcement is federal. The mechanisms include detainers. But the enforcement requires resources and personnel that states are not obligated to provide without compensation.
Under the anti-commandeering doctrine, the federal government cannot commandeer state law enforcement resources to enforce federal law. The question is whether an ICE detainer is a request or a commandeering.
The Stakes
About 78 jurisdictions have sanctuary policies. If the Court rules that ICE detainers are enforceable through federal funding conditions, the practical effect is to federalize local police in those cities against local democratic preference.
That is not necessarily wrong. But it is a major expansion of federal power that should require Congressional action, not agency guidance and Court invention.
