Washington County Sheriff, 287(g) and ICE Detainers: What Changes on a Jobsite
Start a free AI-assisted chat and connect with an experienced immigration attorney, with no obligation.
Reviewed & verified by A. Jason Velez, Esq.*
Founding Attorney, 1LAW · Last reviewed September 23, 2026
Legal Inquiry
Consumer Legal Issue
Is the Washington County Sheriff's Office, which runs the Purgatory jail, participating in 287(g) or honoring ICE detainers, and how does that change our interactions with local law enforcement on our jobsites?
Attorney Answer
Yes on both. ICE's 287(g) participating-agencies list (updated September 21, 2026) shows the Washington County Sheriff's Office under both the Jail Enforcement Model and the Task Force Model, each signed March 21, 2025, with about thirteen credentialed deputies reported in February 2026; Iron, Kane, Beaver and Sevier counties also have agreements. The sheriff changed in 2026 (Sheriff Brooksby resigned March 27; Barry Golding was selected May 6). The sheriff's office has not published the scope of its agreements, so ask the office directly what its deputies are authorized to do.
What it changes on a jobsite: a 287(g) delegation is officer-by-officer. The written agreement must name each officer's powers and duration (8 U.S.C. § 1357(g)(5)), and deputies without that certification 'remain typical state employees, unable to enforce federal immigration law' (United States v. Alas, 4th Cir. 2023). So ask the officer's agency and whether that individual is 287(g)-certified, and route the company's response through the designated contact. Local officers may not arrest someone solely for a suspected civil immigration violation on their own authority (Arizona v. United States; Santos v. Frederick County), though they may cooperate with federal officers at federal request without a written agreement (8 U.S.C. § 1357(g)(10); United States v. Ovando-Garzo).
A detainer is a different instrument: 'a request' that the jail advise ICE before release (8 C.F.R. § 287.7(a)), with a 48-hour cap on holding someone after the local charge clears (§ 287.7(d)). Courts treat it as a request, not a command (Galarza v. Szalczyk), and holding someone past the point of release is a new seizure that needs its own probable cause (Morales v. Chadbourne). A detainer confers no jobsite entry or questioning authority. No Tenth Circuit or District of Utah decision addresses local officers honoring detainers; the nearest Tenth Circuit authority describes a detainer as a request in the bail context (United States v. Ailon-Ailon). Preserve any access objection without obstruction.
Cases Cited
Published decisions relevant to this issue, provided as legal background rather than advice about any particular case.
- United States v. Alas, 63 F.4th 269 (2023) — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
A 287(g) delegation is officer-by-officer; uncertified deputies cannot enforce federal immigration law. - United States v. Ovando-Garzo, 752 F.3d 1161 (2014) — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit
No written agreement is needed for a state officer to cooperate with federal officers at their request. - Arizona v. United States, 567 U.S. 387 (2012) — U.S. Supreme Court
State officers may not arrest someone solely on suspected removability absent federal direction. - Santos v. Frederick County Bd. of Comm'rs, 725 F.3d 451 (2013) — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Local officers may not arrest solely for a suspected civil immigration violation. - Galarza v. Szalczyk, 745 F.3d 634 (2014) — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit
ICE detainers are requests, not commands, and a county that honors one answers for the detention. - Morales v. Chadbourne, 793 F.3d 208 (2015) — U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit
Holding a person on a detainer after release is due is a new seizure that needs its own probable cause.
*Attorney review is supported by AI-assisted drafting and legal research algorithms. Use of this Chat does not create an attorney-client relationship.
By using this service you agree to our Terms of Use and our Privacy Policy.
Federal Immigration Resources
- Visit U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) to check case status, forms, and official immigration guidance.
- Visit Executive Office for Immigration Review (EOIR) to find immigration court information and hearing details.
- Visit ImmigrationLawHelp.org to find nonprofit immigration legal-service providers near you.
- Use the LSC — Find Legal Aid to find a local legal-aid office by ZIP code.
- Use the LawHelp.org to browse free legal information and self-help resources.
- Use the ABA Lawyer Referral Directory to get matched with a local attorney through your state bar.
Frequently Asked Questions
Does Washington County have a 287(g) agreement with ICE?
Yes. ICE's participating-agencies list shows the Washington County Sheriff's Office under both the Jail Enforcement Model and the Task Force Model, each signed March 21, 2025.
Can any deputy enforce immigration law under 287(g)?
No. A 287(g) delegation is officer-by-officer, and deputies without that certification remain ordinary state employees who cannot enforce federal immigration law. Ask the officer's agency and whether that individual is certified.
Does an ICE detainer give officers authority on a jobsite?
No. A detainer is a request that a jail notify ICE before releasing someone, with a 48-hour cap on further custody. It confers no jobsite entry or questioning authority.