Concord, New Hampshire — Governor Kelly Ayotte and Colonel Mark Hall recently announced the New Hampshire State Police has joined numerous law enforcement agencies nationwide in a Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) with U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE). This agreement seeks to enhance collaboration on immigration enforcement.
In a statement, Governor Ayotte emphasized that New Hampshire must not adopt what she termed “sanctuary policies,” which she claims have led to increased crime and an immigration crisis in states like Massachusetts. She expressed her support for the collaborative efforts between state troopers and federal agencies, stating that individuals who pose a risk to public safety should be removed from the country. “I thank our law enforcement for their ongoing commitment to protect and serve our communities,” she added.
The MOA, effective April 25, 2025, will empower state troopers to carry out specific immigration enforcement tasks after receiving training and certification from ICE in the coming weeks. Other New Hampshire law enforcement agencies have also engaged in similar agreements with ICE.
Readers of InDepthNH.org have expressed a range of opinions regarding local law enforcement’s partnership with ICE. Debora Hatcher from Dover voiced strong opposition, questioning the transparency of such agreements and expressing concern over potential violations of due process by ICE. Hatcher criticized the lack of public information surrounding the agreements and argued that local law enforcement should not divert resources towards federal immigration enforcement.
Nancy Marashio of New London echoed these sentiments, advocating for municipal control over decisions regarding collaboration with ICE rather than state mandates. May Youngclaus from Exeter raised concerns about the financial implications of housing ICE detainees, claiming county officials may be making decisions without public knowledge.
Other residents like Janet Metcalf from Bristol argued that budgeting for local police should be a community decision. Gail Mitchell emphasized the importance of qualified training for those involved in ICE operations, calling for heightened standards and caution in enforcement actions.
Concerns about local control were further highlighted by Sue Hunt and Ann Schultz, who criticized what they see as an inconsistency in the state’s advocacy for local governance while pushing for state control over immigration enforcement. Proposed motions for town meetings in New Castle reflected similar sentiments, urging local officials not to cooperate with ICE in deportation actions.
In contrast, Adam Whittier from Sunapee voiced a vehement rejection of any state-imposed collaboration with federal immigration enforcement, arguing that such measures placed an undue burden on small-town police departments and risked collaboration in what he deemed unethical practices by ICE.
The debate continues to resonate across the state as residents weigh the implications of such agreements between state law enforcement and federal agencies. Conversations surrounding the impact of these collaborations on community safety, individual rights, and law enforcement resources remain urgent and complex.
This article was automatically generated by OpenAI, and the people, facts, circumstances, and story may be inaccurate. Any article can be requested to be removed, retracted, or corrected by writing an email to [email protected].