MarylandPolice and jails face limits on immigration enforcement actions
Correctional facilities and police agencies would face limits on immigration enforcement, while courts could consider immigration detainers in felony release decisions.
What it does
Correctional facilities would face limits on immigration-status questions, detention extensions, transfers, and information sharing, while some release notices and legal exceptions would remain.
Police would face limits on immigration-status questions, immigration-based detention, transfers, and information sharing, while criminal investigations and required legal duties could continue.
For felony defendants, judges and District Court commissioners could consider an immigration detainer when deciding pretrial release, bond, or bail.
Argument forClear limits on immigration actions could reduce questioning, detention, and information sharing based only on a person's perceived immigration status.
Argument againstAllowing immigration detainers to affect felony release decisions could make pretrial release harder for some defendants, even though consideration is optional.
More detail
State and local correctional facility employees and agents may not take several immigration-enforcement actions, including investigating immigration status, extending detention, transferring people, or sharing information without specified legal authority. The rules cover state and local correctional facilities, including Baltimore City detention and centralized booking facilities, with a limited exception for certain people convicted of serious offenses. A facility may act when required by state or federal law, a valid court order, or a valid judicial warrant, as specified. A document from the federal Department of Homeland Security, Department of Justice, or a successor agency does not count as a court order or judicial warrant under this section. Routine booking questions, national crime database entries, and voluntary disclosures connected to legal protections or treaty requirements remain allowed. State facilities generally must give federal immigration authorities written notice within 48 hours before releasing someone who has an active immigration detainer, but this notice rule does not apply to the two listed Baltimore City facilities. The measure states both that it takes effect October 1, 2026, and that its emergency provisions take effect when enacted; the supplied text does not resolve the conflict.
Law enforcement agents may not investigate immigration status during stops, searches, or arrests, prolong detention for immigration reasons, transfer people to federal immigration authorities, or provide immigration information without required legal authority. The rules cover Maryland-certified law enforcement agents performing regular police duties and do not include employees or agents of state or local correctional facilities. Agents may ask for information material to a criminal investigation. Transfer or information sharing is allowed when required by federal law or a valid court order. Agents may explain legal protections or requirements and allow a person to voluntarily disclose immigration status for those purposes. Each state law enforcement agency must adopt a policy with penalties for violations, and an affected person may seek damages or an injunction. The measure states both that it takes effect October 1, 2026, and that its emergency provisions take effect when enacted; the supplied text does not resolve the conflict.
A District Court commissioner or judge may consider an immigration detainer when deciding whether to release a defendant before trial or set bond or bail. This applies to defendants charged with a felony and to immigration detainers that meet the measure's definition. Considering the detainer is permitted but not required. The commissioner or judge may also consider any other factor allowed by Maryland rules or common law. The measure states both that it takes effect October 1, 2026, and that its emergency provisions take effect when enacted; the supplied text does not resolve the conflict.
Where do you stand?
Choose your position
Tell your reps
Take a position to see your representatives and ways to contact them.
Where it stands
- Introduced
- Passed Senate
- Passed House
- To Governor
- Became Law
Looking ahead
No hearings or votes scheduled.
History
- 2026
- May 31Enacted under Article II, Section 17(c) of the Maryland Constitution - Chapter 872Became Law
- Apr 13Passed EnrolledTo Governor
- Apr 13Third Reading PassedMajor
- Apr 13Senate Concurs House Amendments
- Apr 11Third Reading Passed with AmendmentsPassed House
- Apr 11Floor Amendment {
- Apr 11Floor Amendment {
- Apr 11Floor Amendment {
- Apr 11Floor Amendment {
- Apr 11Floor Amendment {
- Apr 11Floor Amendment {
- Apr 11Floor Amendment {
- Apr 11Floor Amendment {
- Apr 11Floor Amendment {
- Apr 11Floor Amendment {
- Apr 11Floor Amendment {
- Apr 11Floor Amendment {
- Apr 11Floor Amendment {
- Apr 11Floor Amendment {
- Apr 11Floor Amendment {
- Apr 11Floor Amendment {
- Apr 11Floor Amendment {
- Apr 11Floor Amendment {
- Apr 11Floor Amendment {
- Apr 11Second Reading Passed with Amendments
- Apr 11Floor Amendment {
- Apr 11Favorable with Amendments {Minor
- Apr 11Favorable with Amendments Report by JudiciaryMinor
- Apr 11Rereferred to Judiciary
- Apr 11Referred Rules and Executive NominationsMinor
- Apr 10Third Reading PassedPassed Senate
- Apr 10Second Reading Passed with Amendments
- Apr 10Floor Amendment {
- Apr 10Floor Amendment {
- Apr 10Floor Amendment {
- Apr 10Floor Amendment {
- Apr 10Floor Amendment {
- Apr 10Floor Amendment {
- Apr 10Floor Amendment {
- Apr 10Floor Amendment {
- Apr 10Floor Amendment {
- Apr 10Floor Amendment {
- Apr 10Floor Amendment {
- Apr 10Floor Amendment {
- Apr 10Floor Amendment {
- Apr 10Favorable with Amendments AdoptedMinor
- Apr 10Committee Amendment Adopted
- Apr 10Favorable with Amendments {Minor
- Apr 10Motion Laid Over (Senator Smith) Adopted
- Apr 10Motion Special Order until Next Session (Senator Hershey) Rejected
- Apr 10Favorable with Amendments {Minor
- Apr 10Favorable with Amendments Report by Judicial ProceedingsMinor
- Mar 29
- Vote recorded On Third Reading (Amend). Result: pass.Lower
- Vote recorded FLA Del. Buckel /113321/1. Result: fail.Lower
- Vote recorded FLA Del. Tomlinson /763627/1. Result: fail.Lower
- Vote recorded FLA Del. Morgan, M. /793324/1. Result: fail.Lower
- Vote recorded FLA Del. Buckel /793626/1. Result: fail.Lower
- Vote recorded FLA Del. Grammer /543022/1. Result: fail.Lower
- Vote recorded FLA Del. Pippy /483221/1. Result: fail.Lower
- Vote recorded FLA Del. Miller /213729/1. Result: fail.Lower
- Vote recorded FLA Del. Hartman /213320/1. Result: fail.Lower
- Vote recorded FLA Del. Rose /863525/1. Result: fail.Lower
- Vote recorded FLA Del. Grammer /113221/1. Result: fail.Lower
- Vote recorded FLA Del. Griffith /263227/1. Result: fail.Lower
- Vote recorded FLA Del. Rose /773921/1. Result: fail.Lower
- Vote recorded FLA Del. Buckel /623628/1. Result: fail.Lower
- Vote recorded FLA Del. Chisholm /823326/1. Result: fail.Lower
- Vote recorded FLA Del. McComas /363526/1. Result: fail.Lower
- Vote recorded FLA Del. Beauchamp /233223/1. Result: fail.Lower
- Vote recorded FLA Del. Morgan, T. /183527/1. Result: fail.Lower
- Mar 28
- Vote recorded FLA Del. Szeliga /263522/1. Result: fail.Lower
- Mar 26
- Vote recorded Bill is on Third Reading for Final Passage. Result: pass.Upper
- Feb 12Hearing 2/25 at 1:00 p.m.
- Feb 6First Reading Judicial ProceedingsIntroduced
ImmigrationCriminal JusticeCivil Rights & Voting