Op. Atty. Gen. 3a; 390a6

Op. Atty. Gen. 3a; 390a6 (Minn. A.G. Dec. 12, 2025) · Minnesota Attorney General's Office · December 12, 2025

Summary

This Minnesota Attorney General advisory opinion addresses whether Minnesota sheriffs may unilaterally enter agreements with U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement under section 287(g) of the Immigration and Nationality Act. It concludes that a county may enter such an agreement only through a resolution of the county board of commissioners under the Minnesota Joint Exercise of Powers Act. The opinion further concludes that a 287(g) agreement does not authorize Minnesota law enforcement officers to detain or hold individuals solely on the basis of ICE civil immigration detainers.

Court
Minnesota Attorney General's Office
Writing for the Court
Keith Ellison
Decision date
December 12, 2025
Procedural posture
Advisory opinion requested by Ramsey County Attorney pursuant to Minn. Stat. § 8.07
Precedential value
advisory
Disposition
other

Topics

immigration detentionimmigrationmandamus immigrationmunicipal lawfederalismstatutory interpretation

Practice areas

immigration lawmunicipal lawlaw enforcement authorityintergovernmental agreements

Questions Presented

  1. Whether Minnesota sheriffs may unilaterally enter 287(g) agreements with ICE
  2. Whether 287(g) agreements permit local law enforcement officers to detain persons based solely on ICE civil immigration detainers

Holdings

  1. Minnesota law does not authorize sheriffs to enter 287(g) agreements. Instead, a county may execute a 287(g) agreement if approved by a resolution of the county board of commissioners.
  2. Minnesota law prohibits local law enforcement officers from detaining or holding persons based solely on ICE civil immigration detainers regardless of whether the agency is operating under a valid 287(g) agreement.

Key quotations

Minnesota law does not authorize sheriffs to enter 287(g) agreements. Instead, a county may execute a 287(g) agreement if the agreement is approved by a resolution of the county board of commissioners.
Minnesota law prohibits local law enforcement officers from detaining or holding persons based solely on ICE civil immigration detainers regardless of whether the law enforcement agency is operating under a valid 287(g) agreement.
The fact that the legislature took care to enumerate certain types of contracts that sheriffs are authorized to enter into but did not authorize sheriffs to enter contracts to perform enforcement activities on behalf of the federal government implies this was an intentional omission.
Section 287(g) authorizes agreements only 'to the extent consistent with State and local law.'

Factual background

Some Minnesota sheriffs have signed 287(g) agreements with ICE. ICE issues civil immigration detainers requesting local law enforcement hold individuals beyond their release time. The Ramsey County Attorney sought an opinion on the validity of these agreements under Minnesota law and whether they authorize detention based on immigration detainers.

Procedural history

Ramsey County Attorney John Choi requested an advisory opinion from the Minnesota Attorney General regarding the authority of Minnesota sheriffs to enter 287(g) agreements with ICE and whether such agreements permit detention based on ICE civil immigration detainers.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…