Article Summary
- Illinois sheriffs had mixed views on the TRUST Act, which restricts state law enforcement officials from cooperating with federal officers on civil immigration matters.
- Of 28 sheriffs surveyed by the Medill Illinois News Bureau for Capitol News Illinois, 25 said they would adhere to the TRUST Act because it is the law.
- But 17 of those sheriffs also expressed reservations, confusion or disagreement with the TRUST Act’s purpose.
- Two sheriffs said they would not comply with the TRUST Act if ICE requested their assistance. One said he has already cooperated with ICE in violation of the state law.
This summary was written by the reporters and editors who worked on this story.
CHICAGO, Ill. (Capitol News Illinois) — As the U.S. government escalates immigration raids in Illinois and nationwide, some Illinois sheriffs are expressing support and a desire for greater cooperation with federal immigration enforcement despite state laws that limit their involvement.
A survey of Illinois sheriffs by the Medill Illinois News Bureau for Capitol News Illinois revealed that over two-thirds of those who responded are frustrated by the state law and would favor repeal or changes. A few described actions that appear to conflict with state restrictions.
“What are they going to do to you?” Adams County Sheriff Anthony Grootens asked regarding the consequences of violating state law. “Are they gonna have me lock myself up in my own jail?”
The Illinois TRUST Act, signed in 2017 by Republican Gov. Bruce Rauner, and the Illinois Way Forward Act, signed in 2021 by Democratic Gov. JB Pritzker, limit sheriffs’ involvement in civil immigration enforcement. Under state law, local officers may not hold someone for U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, grant agents access to jails or share nonpublic information unless there is a federal criminal warrant or court order.
The Medill Illinois News Bureau and Capitol News Illinois sought to survey Illinois sheriffs about how they perceive their roles in immigration enforcement. Of the 102 Illinois sheriffs, 28 responded to reporters or answered survey questions electronically. Medill Bureau reporters reached out to unresponsive sheriffs at least three times over several months by phone, mail, email and sometimes in person.
Sheriffs surveyed come from geographically diverse regions of the state, although the state’s 21 northernmost counties, aside from Cook County, did not respond. Sheriffs’ views varied widely. Some said they had no opinion due to their county’s lack of immigration activity. Others said they favor repealing or revising state limits to allow more cooperation with federal immigration enforcement.
Grootens — who formerly worked for the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration — said, in his opinion, sheriffs are “obligated” to cooperate with federal immigration agents, and any state laws contrary to that violate federal law.
“It’s kind of like when you’re in the military, you don’t follow illegal orders,” Grootens said.
Contrary to Grootens’ interpretation of the law, legal scholars and a federal judge have cited the precedent set in the U.S. Supreme Court’s 1997 ruling in Printz v. United States to note that the federal government cannot compel state and local officers to administer federal programs.
Illinois Attorney General Kwame Raoul reiterated the legality of the TRUST Act in a statement, noting that his office is currently reviewing potential violations but “will not conduct any investigations in the media.”
“The courts have spoken on the constitutionality of the TRUST Act, and my office has successfully defended the law in court against multiple challenges. The Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals has made clear that the Supremacy Clause does not preempt the TRUST Act,” Raoul said. “Any law enforcement officer or agency that unilaterally declares that the TRUST Act violates the Supremacy Clause, contrary to the courts’ rulings, is wrong.”
The Pew Research Center estimated in 2023 that roughly 550,000 people were living without legal status in Illinois, making the stakes of local law enforcement cooperating with ICE high.
Of the 28 responding sheriffs, 25 said they recognized the state law as binding, while three said they have or would cooperate with ICE. But 17 of the sheriffs who recognized the law as binding also expressed reservations, confusion or disagreement with its purpose. Some expressed support for the mission of ICE, while acknowledging that they have limited scope to cooperate with the agency.
“I’ve got no problem getting on the news and supporting what ICE is doing,” Jefferson County Sheriff Jeff Bullard Sr. said. “We believe in what they’re doing.”
Bullard said he would not break the law to work with ICE but hoped lawmakers or the courts would overturn the TRUST Act so that he could do so legally.
Fred Tsao, senior policy counsel at the Illinois Coalition for Immigrant and Refugee Rights, said the “underlying premise” of the Trust Act is to build trusting relationships with immigrant communities and help them feel safe that they can come forward to report suspected criminal activity.
“Local police cooperation with ICE, on the other hand, discourages immigrant victims and witnesses of criminal activity from coming forward, driving wedges between local police and immigrant communities that damage public safety for everyone,” Tsao said.
Opponents argue the law shields immigrants from federal enforcement and puts communities at risk. The Illinois Sheriffs’ Association has long opposed the TRUST Act.
“The ISA has consistently opposed legislative efforts to restrict local involvement in federal immigration enforcement. Our position remains that local agencies should retain the discretion to cooperate with federal authorities when public safety is at stake,” the association said in a statement.
What the sheriffs shared
The survey asked Illinois sheriffs:
- Whether they regard immigration enforcement as solely a federal responsibility or one shared with local law enforcement.
- Whether they had observed any increased ICE presence in their county.
- Whether they had received requests for cooperation from ICE, including access to databases, facilities or people in custody.
- Whether they did or would comply with those requests.
- About their opinions on the TRUST Act.
Responses fell along a spectrum, and reporters organized them into four primary categories — from sheriffs who steadfastly support the act to those who feel it shouldn’t be followed.
Follow TRUST Act, echoed bill rationale
These sheriffs include: Dustin Heuerman (Champaign) and Ronnie Stevens (Fayette).
Sheriffs in this category said they comply fully with the TRUST Act and would not cooperate with ICE detainers or other requests for assistance, as limited by state law. They also drew a distinction between civil and criminal code violations, rather than treating immigration as a criminal issue.
These sheriffs said they considered those without legal status in their communities to be law-abiding, hardworking or less likely to report crimes if local law enforcement participated in civil immigration enforcement — echoing the rationale behind the bill.
“Undocumented immigrants are less likely to do that (report crime) if they feel their citizenship status will be requested or they may be deported,” Champaign County Sheriff Dustin Heuerman wrote. “I have tried to make it very clear to the immigrant community that citizenship status does not matter to my deputies — just crimes against the Illinois Compiled Statutes.”
Fayette County Sheriff Ronnie Stevens said he did not think those in his community would be less likely to report crimes without the TRUST Act. At the same time, he didn’t see a need for those without legal status, a civil issue, to be considered potential criminals.
“I’ll be quite honest with you, we know quite a few of those are probably here illegally, but they don’t cause no problems,” Stevens said in an interview. “I mean, granted, the federal government says they are (breaking laws), but on the criminal side of it, they are pretty law-abiding. They stay pretty low key, and they stay in the residences usually at night.”
Both sheriffs referenced the TRUST Act unquestionably as the law. Stevens said he “absolutely would not allow” ICE access to his facilities or databases.
“What I think about the Trust Act doesn’t matter. It is the law,” Heuerman wrote.
Follow TRUST Act, expressed no opinion
These sheriffs include: Justin Oliver (Brown); Bruce Kettelkamp (Christian); Thomas Dart (Cook); William Rutan (Crawford); Chad Howard (Perry), and Richard Watson (St. Clair).
Sheriffs in this category said they comply fully with the TRUST Act, but either had no opinion or declined to share it. In some cases, adherence to the TRUST Act was not an active choice, but simply the reality of living in a small, rural area with little to no immigration activity.
Several of these sheriffs reported they’ve had no ICE presence for many years and said immigration enforcement does not impact them. Brown County Sheriff Justin Oliver, for example, said he had not engaged with ICE in around 10 years. Crawford County Sheriff William Rutan, who has served since he was initially elected in 2014, similarly said he had never spoken with ICE agents about anyone in his community.
Rutan emphasized his intention to uphold the law both for those with legal status and those without it. “The only thing that I’m concerned with is people who’re breaking the law as far as hurting people in my community,” Rutan said.
Christian County Sheriff Bruce Kettelkamp said he would adhere to the state laws. “We follow the legislation that says, if they’re not being held for a local crime, then that’s up to the federal government,” Kettlekamp said of immigration enforcement. “I would say, due to the lack of presence currently, it does not affect how we do our daily operations as is.”
Perry County Sheriff Chad Howard said he does not ask or retain information about citizenship status and would not provide ICE access to databases, facilities or individuals in custody. He declined to comment on what he thought of the TRUST Act.
St. Clair County Lt. Jesse Carmack issued a statement on behalf of Sheriff Richard Watson but declined to participate in the full survey. “The position of the St. Clair County Sheriff’s Office in Illinois is that the immigration laws have not affected us,” Carmack said.
Cook County recently has been at the center of federal actions to deport immigrants, putting tremendous public attention on Sheriff Thomas Dart’s office. The Department of Homeland Security began its immigration enforcement campaign called “Operation Midway Blitz” earlier this month, already resulting in hundreds of arrests in the Chicago area, according to a DHS official.
On Sept. 12, federal agents conducting a traffic stop fatally shot a Franklin Park man who legally immigrated from Mexico, sparking protests and calls for transparency from Gov. JB Pritzker.
Dart’s office responded to questions about the TRUST Act by saying the department “follows the laws of Illinois and does not have an opinion on this matter.”
The response said the sheriff’s office does not ask for or retain citizenship status or allow ICE access to their databases, facilities or people in custody.
Following recent ICE operations targeting individuals detained in the Cook County Jail, DHS accused the jail of not cooperating, consistent with Dart’s response to the survey.
However, an investigation by South Side Weekly found that ICE is able to indirectly access sensitive data through a loophole in the jail’s contract with a system used for notifying crime victims of changes in offender custody status.
Follow TRUST Act, but expressed reservations
These sheriffs include: Kent Martin (Coles); Paul Kuhns (Effingham); Matthew J. Link (Henderson); Jeff Bullard Sr. (Jefferson); Pete Sopczak (Johnson); Shawn Kahl (Macoupin); Wayne Strawn III (Marshall); Nicholas Petitgout (McDonough); Matthew R. Lane (McLean); Mark Oller (Menard); Gary Carroll (Moultrie); David Greenwood (Pike); Randy Kern (Pulaski); Joshua Boedigheimer (Putnam); Andrew Hires (Richland); Martin Edwards (Warren), and Ross Schultze (Washington).
Sheriffs in this category said they comply with the TRUST Act and would not cooperate with ICE detainers or other requests for assistance prohibited under state law. However, these sheriffs also described the TRUST Act as problematic or overly restrictive.
Safety and transparency concerns
A subset of sheriffs surveyed mentioned safety concerns resulting from the TRUST Act, either for the public, for officers or both. McLean County Sheriff Matthew R. Lane and Putnam County Sheriff Joshua Boedigheimer both stated they believed it would be safer for all parties for ICE to collect individuals from the custody of local law enforcement rather than tracking them down in public.
“It’s much safer in my opinion and other sheriffs’ opinions that ICE would be able to take that individual from a jail area rather than trying to find them in public and create more of a situation that may not be necessary,” Boedigheimer said.
The jail handoff also minimizes chances for the public to intercede, he said.
Coles County Sheriff Kent Martin similarly mentioned concerns that sheriffs’ inability to assist could jeopardize the safety of ICE agents. Sheriffs also said the law limits their capacity to manage traffic where ICE is operating or provide ICE with pertinent local information, such as directions or neighborhood dynamics.
Martin said he thought it could lead to somebody getting hurt.
“I don’t understand why we can’t even do anything to assure the safety of our fellow officers,” Martin said. “I don’t understand the logic behind that.”
Warren County Sheriff Martin Edwards and Moultrie County Sheriff Gary Caroll said the inability to talk with ICE hinders their ability to provide accurate information about ICE operations to their communities.
“People call up, they see excitement, they see activity, they want to know what the hell’s going on,” Edwards said. “I wouldn’t know. So again, what good does that do us to operate in the dark?”
Limiting resources
Some sheriffs expressed frustration that they could not cooperate with federal agents on immigration in the way they can work across agencies for other issues.
“I believe that all law enforcement should be able to cooperate with federal law, so I don’t know what the difference would be between federal immigration and a federal warrant for drugs or murder or anything else,” said McDonough County Sheriff Nicholas Petitgout. “We’re held to help them in any other type of criminal enforcement, so for the state of Illinois to tell us that we can’t help them with this specific topic, I don’t agree with it.”
Petitgout said he considered immigration to be a shared responsibility between federal and local law enforcement but said he would not give ICE access to databases, facilities or people in custody, stating that such actions are illegal.
Henderson County Sheriff Matthew J. Link and Warren County Sheriff Martin Edwards similarly mentioned the conflict between state and federal law.
“It’s a frustrating position for us because we do everything in our power to hold criminals accountable and protect our communities, but you have a federal law that says one thing and an Illinois law that says another, and we’re sworn to uphold the constitution of both,” Link said.
For Link and others in this group, the conflict was mostly theoretical — Link said he has never had contact with ICE in 23 years working in law enforcement in the county. Edwards, too, said he had not seen ICE agents in years, but he took issue with the TRUST Act on principle.
Marshall County Sheriff Wayne Strawn III said he did not “personally” agree with the TRUST Act, mentioning the federal government’s responsibility for controlling U.S. borders.
Menard County Sheriff Mark Oller said he would not be interested in proactively seeking out and arresting individuals residing in his county without legal status but said the prohibition on cooperation with federal law enforcement did not sit well with him.
“I wouldn’t see myself being the person to go and shake them (a family) down to see their status, but if it was some kind of a foreign gang or foreign criminal, I would be for protecting the law-abiding people in the area,” Oller said. “It’s just kind of weird where they make a law where you don’t cooperate with federal law enforcement.”
Sheriff Paul Kuhns of Effingham County said he’d like a chance to use ICE and immigration law to remove individuals arrested for other crimes.
“I’m not so concerned about the people that are here working hard, feeding their families, obeying the law,” Kuhns said. “But if I have someone that’s breaking the law or a threat in my community, I should be able to use federal immigration laws and federal enforcement officers to help me deal with that.”
The sentiment was echoed by Macoupin County Sheriff Shawn Kahl.
“I think that if they’re violent criminals and they’re running loose and they have a detainer, we should be able to detain them and hold them until they can be picked up,” Kahl said. “If you’re a violent illegal citizen, you should be arrested. Period.”
The Attorney General’s office stated that the TRUST Act does not prevent local law enforcement from coordinating with federal officers “related to criminal court proceedings or to execute a federal judge’s orders.”
Legislative disconnect
Many sheriffs expressed frustration that they felt legislators did not properly consider their input on the TRUST Act.
“We’re at the table on just about any situation that moves through, but again, it often times feels like we’re not heard or not listened to and they have an agenda and they push it through,” Richland County Sheriff Andrew Hires said.
Hires added that sheriffs’ inability to cooperate with federal immigration officials is “completely wrong” and said it “should be corrected.”
Johnson County Sheriff Pete Sopczak used stronger language when discussing the TRUST Act and its passage by the General Assembly.
“We call things ‘TRUST’ Act and we call it the ‘HOPE’ Act,” Sopczak said. “Springfield doesn’t run the state, Chicago does, and they’ve masterminded the language they use to make everything sound great.”
To Sopczak, the state law does not reflect that ideal.
“They can’t even use our bathroom,” Sopczak said, referring to the prohibition on allowing ICE agents to use facilities or equipment for investigative or immigration enforcement purposes. “It’s sad, is what I think. All law enforcement has to be able to work together.”
Hoping for repeal
Several sheriffs shared a hope that a lawsuit filed by the U.S. Department of Justice in February against the city of Chicago and the state would overturn the TRUST Act. The lawsuit attacked the jurisdictions’ sanctuary laws, claiming they deliberately impeded the work of federal immigration officials.
U.S. District Court Judge Lindsay Jenkins dismissed the lawsuit in July, stating the federal government “may not compel the States to enact or administer a federal regulatory program.”
Prior to Jenkins’ dismissal of the suit, Washington County Sheriff Ross Schultze and Jefferson County Sheriff Jeff Bullard Sr. had been confident it would succeed.
“We’re waiting for that to get to the Supreme Court because we’re very sure that the Supreme Court will overturn the TRUST Act and all the sanctuary state policies in this state,” Bullard said in May.
The Justice Department did not amend its complaint by the required August deadline and the case was dismissed with prejudice, according to the court docket. However, Pulaski County Sheriff Randy Kern suggested that he and other sheriffs are working to devise plans to fight the TRUST Act.
“We’re getting a game plan together,” Kern said when asked for clarification.
Have cooperated or would cooperate with ICE
These sheriffs include: Anthony Grootens (Adams); Shannon Bradley (Gallatin), and Jerry Suits (Pope).
Sheriffs in this category said they cooperate with ICE detainers or other requests for assistance, in apparent conflict with the TRUST Act, or would do so given the opportunity. They cited safety concerns or the laws of the federal government as taking precedence over those of the state.
“Whether you’re federal, local, state — whatever level you’re at — I just feel like we all need to work together,” Gallatin County Sheriff Shannon Bradley said.
While Bradley said he has not had communication with ICE, he said he would cooperate with a request from the agency.
Bradley said his office currently asks someone when arrested whether they are a U.S. citizen through a “generic form” the sheriff’s office has used since he has been there, at least 15 years. Asking an individual arrested about citizenship status appears inconsistent with the TRUST Act’s limits on inquiring about immigration status in most contexts.
While Pope County Sheriff Jerry Suits said immigration is not significant in his county and he has not had communication with ICE, he said he would cooperate with a request from the agency.
“We don’t want to break any laws but we want to do the right thing,” Suits said. “I’m going to do whatever it takes to keep Pope County people safe.”
Grootens, the Adams County sheriff, was the only Illinois sheriff who said that he has already cooperated with ICE on a civil immigration matter.
His rationale, he said, is: “It’s not whether they commit a crime here or not, they committed a crime by crossing over into the United States illegally.”
In an apparent violation of the TRUST Act, Grootens said the Adams County Sheriff’s Office has transferred two men into ICE custody this year.
Grootens said he was “obligated” to follow federal law above any state statute, including by cooperating with federal law enforcement. “I don’t think that we can just turn our backs on federal law enforcement.”
While he said he understands Pritzker’s stance and the state’s position, Grootens said he believes the federal government “trumps” it.
Advocates express concern
Activists have responded with concern that Illinois sheriffs would cooperate with ICE in violation of the TRUST Act.
The ACLU of Illinois sued two sheriffs in 2019 — from Ogle and Stephenson counties — for allegedly violating the TRUST Act. Court dockets show that both cases resulted in settlements for the plaintiffs represented by the ACLU.
Edwin C. Yohnka, director of communications and public policy at ACLU of Illinois, said some of the comments by sheriffs in this survey were “deeply disturbing.”
Both the ACLU and the Illinois Coalition for Immigrant and Refugee Rights emphasized the role of the Illinois Attorney General in upholding the TRUST Act.
Raoul said his office has provided guidance to law enforcement about the TRUST Act since its enactment and remains committed to working with agencies to bring them into compliance. But he didn’t comment specifically on whether he’s currently investigating any county.
“We rely on Illinois law enforcement officers to enforce state laws, and we expect that they will comply with those laws – including the TRUST Act,” Raoul said. “The TRUST Act gives my office the responsibility to investigate violations where appropriate.”
Tsao, the senior policy counsel at the Illinois Coalition for Immigrant and Refugee Rights, called on sheriffs to remember their oath.
“Sheriffs and other law enforcement officers are sworn to uphold our laws,” Tsao said. “They might disagree with some parts of the law, but they must enforce it.”
Maggie Dougherty and Tom O’Connor are recent masters in journalism graduates from the Northwestern University’s Medill School of Journalism, Media, Integrated Marketing Communications, and were fellows in its Medill Illinois News Bureau working in partnership with Capitol News Illinois.
Sonya Dymova and Simon Carr contributed reporting for this story. Dymova and Carr are undergraduate students in journalism with Northwestern University’s Medill School of Journalism, Media, Integrated Marketing Communications, and fellows in its Medill Illinois News Bureau working in partnership with Capitol News Illinois.
Capitol News Illinois is a nonprofit, nonpartisan news service that distributes state government coverage to hundreds of news outlets statewide. It is funded primarily by the Illinois Press Foundation and the Robert R. McCormick Foundation.
Comments