Republican Sheriffs Resisting Trump’s New ICE Initiatives: A Nationwide Look

As President Donald Trump’s second term begins, his administration has rolled out ambitious Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) initiatives aimed at mass deportation and stricter border control. Central to these plans is the reliance on local law enforcement, particularly sheriffs, to assist federal agents in identifying, detaining, and deporting undocumented immigrants. While many Republican sheriffs have enthusiastically aligned with Trump’s agenda, a notable subset across the country is showing reluctance or outright refusal to fully cooperate. This article explores specific examples of Republican sheriffs who are not fully cooperating with Trump’s new ICE initiatives as of the time of releasing this story, and examines the reasons behind their stances.

Sheriff Chad Bianco — Riverside County, California

Riverside County Sheriff Chad Bianco, a Republican known for his conservative stance, has taken a nuanced position on Trump’s ICE initiatives. Despite his personal support for stricter immigration enforcement, Bianco operates under California’s sanctuary state law, SB 54, which limits local law enforcement’s cooperation with federal immigration agents. In a video statement released on February 6, 2025, Bianco sought to reassure his constituents, saying, “We are not involved in immigration enforcement,” while also expressing a desire to assist ICE “within the confines of the sanctuary state laws” by focusing on undocumented immigrants already in his jails for criminal offenses. This selective cooperation suggests a reluctance to fully engage with ICE’s broader mass deportation goals, constrained by state law and local political pressures. Bianco’s approach reflects a balancing act between his Republican leanings and the realities of governing in a blue state.

Sheriff David Hathaway — Santa Cruz County, Arizona

In Arizona, Sheriff David Hathaway of Santa Cruz County, a Republican elected in a border region with a significant Hispanic population, has voiced strong reservations about Trump’s ICE plans. Hathaway, who leans more moderate than some of his GOP counterparts, has explicitly stated that his department will not participate in widespread immigration sweeps. “This would be a disaster for me, because I would be sued for racial profiling,” he told NPR in late 2024, a sentiment that carries into 2025 as Trump’s policies take shape. Hathaway’s county, overwhelmingly Hispanic, relies heavily on community trust, and he sees full cooperation with ICE as a risk to public safety. His refusal to fully align with the administration’s initiatives highlights a pragmatic resistance rooted in local dynamics rather than ideological opposition.

Sheriff Keith Swank — Pierce County, Washington

Sheriff Keith Swank, a Republican who took office in Pierce County, Washington, on January 15, 2025, has adopted an ambiguous stance on ICE cooperation. In a survey conducted by InvestigateWest and Cascade PBS, Swank stated, “The Pierce County Sheriff Office will abide by all enforceable U.S. immigration laws and legal mandates,” but he stopped short of committing to proactive collaboration with ICE. Washington’s Keep Washington Working Act limits local law enforcement’s role in federal immigration enforcement, and Swank’s focus appears to remain on local public safety rather than federal priorities. His vague response suggests a reluctance to fully integrate his department into Trump’s deportation machine, prioritizing state law compliance over federal pressure.

Sheriff Dave Rosado — Chesapeake, Virginia

Sheriff Dave Rosado, a Republican, enforces policies limiting cooperation with ICE. As per the Chesapeake Sheriff’s Office policy (effective Jan. 28, 2020, revised Sept. 1, 2021), detainees with ICE holds are not held beyond their local release date unless ICE acts within 30 days or the final five days of sentencing. The policy prohibits holding individuals solely on ICE detainers.
Rosado reaffirmed this stance in a Nov. 1, 2024, memo, continuing the cautious approach of his predecessor, Sheriff Jim O’Sullivan. This policy prioritizes local legal obligations and resource management over federal immigration enforcement.

Sheriff Bob Songer — Klickitat County, Washington

Another Washington Republican, Sheriff Bob Songer of Klickitat County, presents a complex case. A self-described “constitutional sheriff” who believes sheriffs hold supreme local authority, Songer posted a video on Facebook in December 2024 inviting ICE to “put me on speed dial.” However, when pressed by reporters in early 2025, he did not confirm active participation in ICE operations, and he failed to respond to further inquiries from InvestigateWest and Cascade PBS. Songer’s rhetoric aligns with Trump’s base, but his lack of concrete action as of March 2025 suggests a hesitancy to fully commit resources or personnel to ICE’s initiatives, possibly due to logistical constraints or local opposition in a state with strong sanctuary policies.

Sheriff Daniel Scesney — Grand Prairie, Texas

In Texas, a state largely supportive of Trump’s immigration agenda, Sheriff Daniel Scesney of Grand Prairie stands out as a Republican outlier. At an event in late 2024, Scesney told NPR, “My officers would not be using their time efficiently if they were driving around trying to find people who might have been born in another place.” This stance, reiterated in early 2025 as ICE ramped up operations, indicates a refusal to redirect his department’s focus toward immigration enforcement beyond existing criminal justice duties. While Texas Governor Greg Abbott has pushed for local cooperation with ICE, Scesney’s emphasis on efficiency and local priorities signals a resistance to fully embracing Trump’s broader deportation goals.

Why the Resistance?

The reluctance of these Republican sheriffs stems from a mix of legal, practical, and political factors. In states like California and Washington, sanctuary laws impose strict limits on cooperation with ICE, tying sheriffs’ hands regardless of their personal views. Elsewhere, sheriffs like Hathaway and Scesney prioritize community trust and public safety, fearing that aggressive immigration enforcement could alienate residents and increase racial profiling lawsuits. Sheriff Rosado’s policies in Virginia reflect a similar concern for legal liability and resource allocation, ensuring that his office does not overstep its authority or incur additional costs for federal priorities. Additionally, the financial burden of detaining immigrants for ICE — without clear federal funding — poses a practical challenge, as noted by experts in The New York Times, which reported that mass deportations could cost upwards of $86 billion.

What Does This Mean?

While Trump’s administration counts on sheriffs as key allies in its ICE initiatives, not all Republican sheriffs are fully on board. From Chad Bianco’s cautious compliance in California to Dave Rosado’s structured limitations in Virginia, these sheriffs illustrate a spectrum of resistance driven by state laws, community needs, and resource constraints. Their partial or outright refusal to cooperate underscores the challenges Trump faces in executing his ambitious immigration agenda, even among his own party’s ranks.

The coming months will reveal whether federal pressure — or funding — can sway these holdouts into fuller alignment — but for now, they are telling President Trump to focus on his immigration reforms without their help.