North Carolina Debates Senate Bill 153 as Immigration Policy Divide Grows

Dive Right Into

Key Takeaways

Senate Bill 153 mandates MOA agreements with ICE under 287(g), enforcing federal immigration law functions at the state level.
State employees must verify custody individuals’ immigration status and provide ICE with requested information about non-citizens.
The bill introduces liability for cities non-compliant with immigration laws and reflects alignment with federal and Trump administration policies.

On February 24, 2025, Senate Republicans in North Carolina introduced Senate Bill 153, known as the “North Carolina Border Protection Act.” This legislation aims to strengthen collaboration between state and federal authorities concerning immigration enforcement. The bill reflects an effort to align North Carolina’s policies with President Donald Trump’s priorities on immigration following his re-election.

Main Features of Senate Bill 153

North Carolina Debates Senate Bill 153 as Immigration Policy Divide Grows

Senate Bill 153 lays out several key provisions focused on enhancing immigration enforcement across the state:

Mandatory Cooperation: The Department of Public Safety (DPS) Secretary must sign a Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) with U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE). This agreement will operate under section 287(g) of the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996, which allows local authorities to perform federal immigration law enforcement functions.
Legal Status Verification: State employees are required to verify the immigration status of individuals in custody or under state supervision. If the status cannot be determined, they must consult ICE.
Information Sharing: When a person in custody is verified as a non-citizen or not legally present in the U.S., state employees are obligated to provide all relevant information requested by ICE.
Extensive Cooperation: The DPS must assist ICE to the fullest extent permitted by law.
Involvement of the SBI: The State Bureau of Investigation (SBI) Director is also required to sign an MOA with ICE. Policies will be established to ensure comprehensive immigration status verification processes.

Present Stance on Immigration Enforcement in North Carolina

The state of North Carolina remains divided on the issue of immigration enforcement, with political affiliations playing an important role in shaping the current policies.

Republican-Driven Changes: The introduction of Senate Bill 153 reflects an intensified push by Republican legislators to tighten immigration laws and enhance cooperation with the federal government. This aligns closely with initiatives promoted by President Trump.
Governor Stein’s Opposition: Democratic Governor Josh Stein has not actively directed state agencies to work alongside federal immigration authorities. This resistance is cited in the bill as a significant concern, fueling Republican frustrations.
Existing Legislation – House Bill 10: Another key immigration-related law already in place is House Bill 10. Effective since December 1, 2024, HB 10 requires:
- Verification of immigration status for individuals charged with felony offenses or serious misdemeanors.
- Compliance with ICE detainer requests, which mandate holding detainees for immigration purposes.
- A maximum detention period of 48 hours to allow ICE time for custody transfers.
Varied Reactions Among Sheriffs: County sheriffs have responded differently to HB 10:
- Democratic sheriffs in urban counties, such as Wake and Mecklenburg, have raised concerns about how these policies might harm trust between immigrant communities and local law enforcement.
- Republican sheriffs, like Terry Johnson of Alamance County, support the legislation, arguing that it promotes public safety.

Early Outcomes and Concerns Following HB 10

Though HB 10 has come into effect recently, several developments and perceptions have emerged.

Limited Rise in Detainer Use: According to reports, HB 10 has not led to a significant increase in ICE detainers being issued.
Community Mistrust: Concerns have grown about the potential for harsh immigration enforcement practices, leading to mistrust among immigrant communities. Rumors of “raids” have caused fear, possibly harming relationships between residents and local law enforcement.
Fear of Courthouse Arrests: Wake County District Attorney Lorrin Freeman has highlighted her worries that heightened ICE visibility at courthouses may discourage victims or witnesses from attending proceedings, undermining the criminal justice system.
Potential for Minor Offense Impact: While HB 10 primarily targets those accused of serious crimes, individuals charged with minor offenses may also face consequences under immigration enforcement actions, depending on the cooperation level in specific counties.
Reports of Racial Profiling: Some attorneys specializing in immigration law have raised claims of racial profiling in areas where local law enforcement collaborates closely with ICE.

Broader Legal and Political Dynamics

North Carolina’s approach to immigration enforcement sits at the intersection of state, federal, and local policies. Several factors clarify the political and legal backdrop affecting recent developments.

Republican Dominance: With a Republican majority controlling the North Carolina General Assembly, stricter immigration measures such as HB 10 and SB 153 have advanced, even when opposed by the Governor through vetoes.
Constitution and Federal Alignment: The proposed SB 153 emphasizes fidelity to both the North Carolina Constitution and federal directives. It specifically references the Governor’s duty under the state constitution to faithfully execute laws.
Liability Risks for Cities: SB 153 additionally introduces potential liability for cities that fail to comply with immigration laws. Civil immunity could be waived if these cities harbor offenders whose actions harm local residents.
Executive Orders from President Trump: President Trump has issued executive orders reinforcing border protection and stricter immigration enforcement since January 20, 2025. State-level policies like SB 153 aim to align with this federal agenda.

Anticipated Developments and Challenges

The introduction of SB 153 marks the beginning of a legislative and policy debate in North Carolina. Over the coming months, the following factors may unfold:

Legislative Timeline: SB 153 has been sent to the committee stage for review. Its path through the legislative process will be closely observed, as amendments or adjustments may shape its final version.
Possibility of Legal Action: The bill’s controversial directives, such as mandatory MOAs or reduced civil immunity for cities, could lead to court challenges. Questions of constitutionality and federal overreach may arise.
Expanded Law Enforcement Roles: The successful implementation of SB 153 would require significant cooperation among state law enforcement agencies, local authorities, and ICE. Additionally, training sessions on immigration laws would be necessary for personnel.
Public Demonstrations: Advocacy groups and immigrant rights organizations are likely to voice their opposition to these measures. Potential protests or public forums may highlight concerns about civil rights and humanitarian outcomes.
Consequences for Immigrant Communities: While the actual enforcement targets individuals involved in serious felonies, there are risks that perceptions of the law could harm broader immigrant communities facing uncertainty and fear of deportation.

Conclusion

North Carolina is at a pivotal moment in shaping its role within federal immigration enforcement. The introduction of Senate Bill 153 underscores a broader effort by Republican lawmakers to align with President Trump’s immigration objectives. While proponents of tighter immigration enforcement see these measures as a path to ensuring public safety and promoting accountability, critics argue they may weaken trust between immigrants and local authorities.

Further outcomes hinge on how these laws move forward through legislative, legal, and community responses. A clearer understanding of the bill’s implications will develop as the policy debate evolves in North Carolina. For more details on current U.S. immigration policies, refer to the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services website.

As reported by VisaVerge.com, debates over immigration laws in North Carolina will remain a contentious issue, shaping the state’s laws and impacting diverse communities across the state. Lawmakers, advocates, and residents will closely follow developments surrounding SB 153 and its long-term effects.

Learn Today

Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) → A formal agreement between two parties, detailing cooperation and responsibilities, often between state and federal agencies.
287(g) Program → A provision allowing local law enforcement to perform certain functions of federal immigration enforcement under ICE supervision.
ICE Detainer Requests → Official requests by Immigration and Customs Enforcement to hold individuals in custody for potential immigration enforcement actions.
Civil Immunity → Legal protection against lawsuits or liabilities, which may be waived for cities not complying with immigration laws under certain conditions.
Racial Profiling → Discriminatory practices where individuals are targeted based on race or ethnicity rather than specific evidence of wrongdoing.

This Article in a Nutshell

North Carolina’s proposed Senate Bill 153, introduced February 24, 2025, seeks tighter immigration enforcement by aligning state policies with President Trump’s federal agenda. Mandating local cooperation with ICE, the bill amplifies tensions between Republicans and Democrats. Critics warn of community mistrust and profiling risks, while advocates emphasize public safety and federal alignment.
— By VisaVerge.com