According to Just the News, New Hampshire’s Senate just slammed the door on sanctuary policies, passing bills to force local police to play ball with federal immigration enforcement. Two measures now await Gov. Kelly Ayotte’s signature, promising to reshape how the state handles immigration detainers. It’s a bold move, but not without its critics.
The bills, already greenlit by the House, ban cities and towns from adopting policies that shield unauthorized migrants from ICE and mandate cooperation with federal detainers. They also allow local governments to ink 287(g) agreements, letting trained officers assist ICE directly. In short, New Hampshire is gearing up to align with the Trump administration’s immigration crackdown.
One bill requires local law enforcement to hold suspects flagged by ICE for up to 48 hours. This ensures federal authorities can take custody for deportation proceedings. It’s a practical step to enforce existing laws, though some argue it oversteps local autonomy.
The second bill opens the door for counties to join the 287(g) program, revived by President Trump’s April executive order. Currently, 20 agencies nationwide are enrolled, with 56 more pending. New Hampshire’s state troopers already have a similar deal, showing the state’s not messing around.
State Sen. Regina Birdsell, R-Hampstead, championed the bills, saying police should “honor” ICE detainers. Her stance is clear: letting unauthorized migrants slip through cracks undermines the rule of law. After nearly a decade of debate, she’s ready to call this a win.
“I never thought it would take us nearly a decade to get this through,” Birdsell said on the Senate floor. Her frustration resonates with conservatives tired of progressive foot-dragging. But her opponents aren’t staying quiet.
State Sen. Tara Reardon, D-Concord, fired back, claiming these bills force communities to enable “mass deportations.” She argues they erode justice and compassion, painting a grim picture of families torn apart. Her emotional plea, though, sidesteps the reality of illegal immigration’s impact on local resources.
“Communities like ours should not be put in the position of enabling mass deportations,” Reardon said. It’s a classic progressive talking point—prioritizing feelings over enforcement. But safety, as conservatives see it, starts with accountability.
Cities like Manchester, with ordinances limiting ICE cooperation, now face a reckoning. The bills empower the state attorney general to crack down on sanctuary policies, including cutting funds. Turns out, actions have consequences.
Gov. Kelly Ayotte, a Republican, is expected to sign both bills into law. Ending sanctuary policies is a cornerstone of her administration, aligning with her tough-on-crime platform. Her signature would cement New Hampshire’s shift toward stricter immigration enforcement.
New Hampshire’s move puts it at odds with neighbors like Massachusetts, where sanctuary policies flourish. While Massachusetts resists Trump’s agenda, New Hampshire is betting on a different path. It’s a regional divide that’s bound to spark debate.
The 287(g) program, revitalized under Trump, equips local officers to act as immigration enforcers after federal training. Critics call it overreach; supporters call it efficiency. Either way, it’s a tool New Hampshire’s ready to embrace.
These bills don’t just tweak policy—they signal a broader cultural shift. New Hampshire is rejecting the progressive notion that local governments should shield unauthorized migrants. It’s a stance that resonates with voters fed up with open-border rhetoric.
Democrats warn of fractured communities and eroded trust in police. But conservatives argue that enforcing immigration laws strengthens, not weakens, public safety. The debate’s far from over, but New Hampshire’s picking a side.
As the bills head to Ayotte’s desk, the state braces for change. Sanctuary policies are on the chopping block, and local governments will have to adapt. For better or worse, New Hampshire is drawing a line in the sand.
