The Capitol LedgerEvery move in Congress, on the record
HomeBillsRecordsLedger AI

The Capitol Ledger

Built from the Congressional Record and Congress.gov. Every summary links to its source.

AboutFAQFeedbackTerms of ServicePrivacy Policy
Follow us onlineInstagram

Summaries are AI-generated from primary sources. Verify anything important against the original record.

The Capitol Ledger

Built from the Congressional Record and Congress.gov. Every summary links to its source.

The projectAboutFAQFeedback
LegalTerms of ServicePrivacy Policy
Follow us onlineInstagram

Summaries are AI-generated from primary sources. Verify anything important against the original record.

All bills
H.R. 8077·119th Congress·Introduced Mar 25, 2026

287(g) Cooperation Act of 2026

IntroducedImmigrationMajor
View bill text
Sponsor
Rep. Cline, Ben [R-VA-6]
Committees
Judiciary Committee (primary)
Last action
Mar 25, 2026

Bottom line

The bill links eligibility for federal policing grants to local law enforcement's participation in immigration enforcement partnerships with ICE.

What it actually does

This bill amends the Immigration and Nationality Act to require state and local law enforcement agencies to enter into a 287(g) memorandum of agreement with U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) within 180 days of the bill's enactment to remain eligible for federal Community Oriented Policing Services (COPS) grants. It mandates that the Attorney General consult with the Secretary of Homeland Security to verify compliance before awarding such grants, starting in fiscal year 2027.

Proponents argue

Supporters argue this bill strengthens immigration enforcement by incentivizing local cooperation with federal authorities, thereby enhancing public safety and national security. They contend that local law enforcement agencies are critical partners in identifying and detaining undocumented individuals who may pose a threat, and that federal funding should support agencies willing to uphold immigration laws.

Opponents contend

Opponents argue that this bill federalizes local police, diverting their resources from community policing to immigration enforcement, which could erode trust between immigrant communities and local law enforcement. They contend that making COPS grants conditional on 287(g) participation could disproportionately harm communities that choose not to engage in immigration enforcement, potentially reducing their capacity to address local crime.

The bill text is very short and straightforward, allowing for quick comprehension of its core mechanism.

Section 2, amending Section 287(g) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1357(g))

Conditionality of COPS Grants on 287(g) Program Participation

prominently featuredstraightforward

This provision makes it mandatory for any state or local law enforcement agency to have a written agreement with U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) under the 287(g) program. If an agency does not enter into such an agreement within 180 days of this bill becoming law, it will no longer be able to apply for or receive federal Community Oriented Policing Services (COPS) grants from the Department of Justice, starting with fiscal year 2027.

GroupImpactMechanismScale
GroupState and local law enforcement agenciesImpactFinancial incentive/disincentive, operational changeMechanismLoss of federal grant eligibility if 287(g) MOA is not established.ScalePotentially affects all state and local law enforcement agencies that currently receive or wish to receive COPS grants.
GroupCommunities served by law enforcement agenciesImpactChanges in policing priorities, potential impact on community trustMechanismAgencies may shift resources to immigration enforcement or lose funding for community policing initiatives.ScaleBroad, affecting communities nationwide, particularly those with significant immigrant populations.

Supporters argue

Proponents argue this provision ensures that federal funds for policing are directed to agencies that actively support federal immigration laws, enhancing overall national security and border integrity. They believe it promotes a consistent approach to immigration enforcement across jurisdictions.

Critics contend

Opponents contend that this provision coerces local agencies into federal immigration enforcement, potentially straining local budgets and diverting resources from addressing local crime. They argue it could foster distrust within immigrant communities, making them less likely to report crimes or cooperate with police.

Tradeoffs

The provision balances the federal government's interest in consistent immigration enforcement with local control over policing priorities and the potential impact on community relations and local public safety resources.

About this analysis. AI-Generated from the official bill text and available committee reports. Gaps in available data are noted explicitly. Verify important details with the official Congress.gov record.

On this page

  • Executive summary
  • Key provisions
  • Follow the money
  • Critical analysis
  • Questions to ask
  • Implementation
  • Political analysis
Ask Ledger AI about this