Breaking Down the Sheriff’s Office 287(g) Agreement with ICE

By ERIC SANTOMAURO-STENZEL
COOPERSTOWN

This past fall, the Otsego County Sheriff’s Office entered into a 287(g) Warrant Service Officer agreement with Immigration and Customs Enforcement.

The Warrant Service Officer model “allows ICE to train, certify and authorize state and local law enforcement officers to serve and execute administrative warrants on aliens in their agency’s jail,” according to ICE’s website. The WSO is the least expansive option available for law enforcement agencies to partner with ICE for immigration enforcement, only allowing immigration enforcement actions against individuals already in criminal custody. Generally, the agreements allow LEAs to continue to hold individuals with immigration warrants for up to 48 hours after the conclusion of their criminal custody to facilitate transfer to ICE custody.

Otsego County Sheriff Richard J. Devlin’s (R) signature on the 287(g) Memorandum of Agreement is listed as September 26, 2025 and then-ICE Deputy Director Madison Sheahan’s on October 17. The MOA allows the Sheriff’s Office to execute warrants of arrest for immigration violations on individuals in the county jail, serve warrants of removal on individuals in the county jail, and detain and transport “any aliens arrested pursuant to the immigration laws, to ICE-approved detention facilities.”

“This program does not involve deputy sheriffs, nor does it grant them authority to enforce immigration laws in the community, on the streets, or at places of employment under this model,” Devlin wrote in an e-mail to county board members and other senior county officials, obtained by AllOtsego.

Devlin told AllOtsego he designated five jail supervisors who have been trained and “that work various shifts for 24-7 coverage” to enforce the WSO agreement. The MOA does not designate a specific number of personnel to be trained and includes the option for more.

“This program does not involve deputy sheriffs, nor does it grant them authority to enforce immigration laws in the community, on the streets, or at places of employment under this model,” Devlin wrote in an e-mail to county board members and other senior county officials, obtained by AllOtsego.

Devlin confirmed on January 20 that no one in Sheriff’s Office custody has been subject to the agreement’s terms. It is not clear as of press time how many non-citizens pass through the Sheriff’s Office’s custody per year.

Asked whether he felt signing the agreement reduced the chances of a large ICE operation of the kinds seen in Minneapolis, Los Angeles, or Chicago, or whether he had received assurances as much from the agency, Devlin said “In-custody arrests occur within a secure, private, and controlled environment, which significantly reduces risk to the public.”

When acting as an immigration officer, the MOA says, personnel “will be supervised and directed by ICE” and their actions “will be reviewed by ICE officers on an ongoing basis” to ensure compliance with immigration laws and procedures, and to assess performance. The agreement also requires the Sheriff’s Office to “provide access to appropriate databases, personnel, and documents necessary” to “Federal personnel conducting reviews to ensure compliance with the terms of this MOA.”

The agreement says the Sheriff’s Office “is responsible for personnel expenses, including, but not limited to, salaries and benefits, local transportation, and official issue material.” As of press time, no outside funding for the program has been announced. Costs could include the extra boarding time, staff hours used for training and transportation.

Asked about costs of the agreement now or in the future, Devlin replied “$0.” Asked to clarify, he said “Everything is currently in place at no cost.” He also said all budget lines will remain the same.

That means it could be difficult to track what portion of overall corrections funds are utilized for 287(g)-related purposes.

In the e-mail to county officials, Devlin said training consists of an “eight-hour course conducted online at the officer’s own pace” to be “completed while on duty, consistent with how all training within this office is conducted.” Devlin added that, “If we were to transport the detainee to an ICE facility or to another county approved to house ICE detainees, it would constitute one of the 800–900 transports we conduct annually across the state.”

The liability section of the document says that the Sheriff’s Office “will be responsible and bear the costs of participating LEA personnel with regard to their property or personal expenses incurred by reason of death, injury, or incidents giving rise to liability.” Participating personnel will be treated as federal employees only for the purposes of the Federal Tort Claims Act and worker’s compensation claims.

Sheriff’s Office personnel “will enjoy the same defenses and immunities from personal liability for their in-scope acts that are available to ICE officers based on actions conducted in compliance with this MOA.” If named as personal defendants, the personnel can also seek defense by the U.S. Department of Justice. The agreement also requires posters be put up in the jail outlining a complaint process for detained individuals.

The MOA requires the Sheriff’s Office to coordinate with ICE on releasing information about the agreement to the public. While the Sheriff’s Office can “communicate the substance of this agreement” to groups expressing interest at their discretion, including sharing the text of the document, the Sheriff’s Office “agrees to coordinate with ICE prior to releasing any information relating to, or exchanged under” the MOA.

With limited exceptions like state records laws and ICE approval, “information obtained or developed as a result of this MOA” is “under the control of ICE and shall not be disclosed.”