Baldwin County Jail Ends ICE Holds, Citing Concerns Over Detention Policies

Dive Right Into

Key Takeaways

• Baldwin County Jail will no longer hold detainees for ICE due to resource strain and criticisms of ICE’s detainer process.
• The Gonzalez settlement, effective March 4, 2025, mandates major ICE detainer changes, emphasizing constitutional protections and neutral reviews.
• Ending the ICE contract will reduce Baldwin County Jail’s funding, highlighting nationwide tensions over local costs of federal immigration enforcement.

Baldwin County Jail in Alabama recently announced a major shift in how it handles immigration enforcement. The jail will no longer hold detainees for Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), citing what Baldwin County Sheriff Huey “Hoss” Mack described as a flawed system where, in his words, “immigrants have more rights than U.S. citizens.” This decision aligns with growing debates about the role of local jails in federal immigration enforcement and comes at a time when immigration policies are under sharp nationwide scrutiny.

Why Baldwin County Jail Is Making the Change

Baldwin County Jail Ends ICE Holds, Citing Concerns Over Detention Policies

Sheriff Mack highlighted several concerns with ICE’s current detainer system, explaining that the jail has faced a “flow problem” due to the way detainees are processed. Under this system, ICE can issue a detainer that requests local jails to hold individuals suspected of being undocumented immigrants for up to 72 hours beyond their normal release time. During this period, ICE interviews detainees to identify their immigration status and decide whether an immigration case can proceed. Such cases typically lead to a court hearing scheduled two to three years in the future. In the meantime, detainees are quickly released back into the community, a process Sheriff Mack criticized as creating a “revolving door.”

This repetitive process has placed strain on the county’s resources and left law enforcement frustrated. According to Sheriff Mack, many individuals released after ICE holds fail to show up for their immigration court hearings. He pointed out that this lack of accountability contrasts with the consequences U.S. citizens face if they miss court dates in regular criminal proceedings.

Beyond operational challenges, Baldwin County Jail has seen a significant increase in ICE detainees over recent years. Following changes in federal immigration enforcement under the new administration, the number of immigration-related holds in the jail reportedly quadrupled, adding further pressure on county resources.

The Impact of the Gonzalez Settlement

The timing of Baldwin County’s decision coincides with a major legal settlement expected to reshape how ICE operates. The Gonzalez settlement, set to take effect on March 4, 2025, mandates significant changes to ICE’s detainer process. It centers on Fourth Amendment rights, which protect against unlawful searches and detentions. A key provision will require ICE to implement a neutral review process before issuing immigration detainers.

Under the settlement, a modified document called the “Request for Notification of Release” will replace the traditional ICE detainer forms. Unlike a detainer, this form clarifies that local law enforcement cannot detain individuals solely for immigration purposes, unless they are doing so based on other lawful grounds. Baldwin County Jail’s move reflects an early response to the broader changes the settlement will bring.

The Gonzalez settlement impacts ICE procedures nationwide, especially in 42 states where ICE’s Pacific Enforcement Response Center (PERC) issues detainers during non-business hours. The reforms aim to address long-standing concerns about overreach, ensuring all actions are subject to constitutional protections.

Sheriff Mack’s Concerns and Public Reactions

Sheriff Mack has voiced strong frustrations with ICE’s detainer system, expressing that it inadvertently creates a system of leniency for undocumented immigrants compared to U.S. citizens. He emphasized that the current approach undermines the jail’s ability to enforce accountability. Drug offenses, alcohol-related crimes, and domestic violence are among the most common offenses linked to undocumented immigrants detained in Baldwin County Jail, with individuals coming from countries including Venezuela 🇻🇪, Argentina 🇦🇷, Haiti 🇭🇹, and Jamaica 🇯🇲.

However, critics argue that Baldwin County’s stance simplifies a complex issue. Multiple organizations, including the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), believe ICE’s detention practices violate constitutional rights. The ACLU has been active in challenging immigration policies that they say fail to respect due process rights and protections against unreasonable detention. Civil rights advocates have long pointed out concerns about the private detention facilities ICE often relies on for holding detainees. As of July 2023, 90% of individuals in ICE custody were held in privately operated facilities, representing a 10% increase from previous years. Critics argue that such facilities prioritize profit over detainee welfare and have called for greater oversight.

Financial and Systemic Implications for Baldwin County

Baldwin County’s decision to stop collaborating with ICE will also have financial consequences. The jail previously had a contract with ICE that provided revenue to hold detainees until federal facilities became available or detainees were moved forward in their immigration cases. Terminating this agreement stands to reduce funding for the local jail system, a trade-off Sheriff Mack appears willing to make in order to address what he describes as systemic inefficiencies and fairness concerns.

This move, however, reflects broader frustrations felt by local jails nationwide about the burden of federal immigration enforcement. Across the U.S., community resources often have to absorb the costs of ICE detentions, with little support from the federal government. This has left counties like Baldwin navigating a challenging balance between fiscal responsibilities and their desire to cooperate with immigration agencies.

Broader Trends in Immigration Enforcement

The decision in Baldwin County comes amid an increase in ICE’s enforcement operations. Reports from early 2025 highlighted growing pressure on ICE field offices to ramp up arrests, with daily arrest quotas between 1,200 and 1,500 taking effect. Many local jails have seen corresponding spikes in detentions, a trend that Sheriff Mack says is unsustainable for Baldwin County’s limited resources. The increase in enforcement stems from a policy shift under the current administration, which has prioritized heightened immigration actions in response to rising unauthorized border crossings.

Nationwide, legal and constitutional challenges surrounding immigration enforcement continue to draw attention. One issue raised by advocacy groups is the long backlog of immigration court hearings, which means individuals frequently wait years for their cases to move forward. This delay complicates both law enforcement efforts and immigrant communities’ ability to plan their futures.

Baldwin County Jail’s situation mirrors dilemmas faced by other jurisdictions that enter contracts with ICE. Critics and supporters alike are watching closely to see if more local governments will follow Baldwin’s lead in distancing themselves from ICE’s current detention practices.

What Comes Next?

Baldwin County Jail’s landmark decision to end its involvement with ICE detainees reflects a growing conversation about fairness, functionality, and constitutional safeguards within U.S. immigration enforcement. As the Gonzalez settlement takes shape in 2025, it is expected to reshape how detainers are used nationwide. These changes are likely to spark further discussion, particularly as local authorities adjust to ICE reforms.

In the meantime, Baldwin County’s example raises important questions about the future of immigration enforcement at the local level. Will other counties face similar challenges with “revolving doors” caused by immigration cases, or will federal reforms resolve some of these frustrations? The answers remain uncertain.

For now, communities like Baldwin County must contend with the ripple effects of federal immigration policies and decide how deeply to engage with ICE enforcement efforts. As this complex issue evolves, it highlights the ongoing intersection of local governance, constitutional rights, and immigration law.

For official information about ICE detainer processes and the Gonzalez settlement, you can refer to ICE’s page on Immigration Detainers. As reported by VisaVerge.com, Baldwin County’s decision underscores both tensions and opportunities for reform within the broader immigration system. How this decision impacts the county and ICE enforcement nationwide will no doubt shape future conversations about immigration detention and constitutional protections.

Learn Today

Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) → A U.S. federal agency responsible for enforcing immigration laws and detaining undocumented immigrants.
Detainer → A request by ICE for local jails to hold an individual beyond their normal release time for immigration processing.
Fourth Amendment → A constitutional protection in the U.S. against unlawful searches and detentions without probable cause or legal justification.
Gonzalez Settlement → A legal agreement reforming ICE’s detainer process by requiring a neutral review to protect constitutional rights.
Privately Operated Facilities → Detention centers run by private companies, often criticized for prioritizing profit over detainee welfare and rights.

This Article in a Nutshell

Baldwin County Jail’s bold move to stop holding ICE detainees spotlights frustration with flawed immigration enforcement. Sheriff Mack criticized the “revolving door” system, where releases outpace accountability, straining resources. This decision aligns with upcoming Gonzalez settlement reforms, emphasizing constitutional protections. Baldwin’s stance could influence nationwide debates on balancing local responsibilities and federal immigration policies.
— By VisaVerge.com