Article Text
Virginia Gov. Abigail Spanberger has begun separating state law enforcement from federal immigration operations, but her first actions leave existing agreements with U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement largely intact.
The measured approach comes amid national outrage over the deaths of American citizens Renee Good on Jan. 7 and Alex Pretti on Jan. 24 in Minneapolis, following a surge in ICE raids and large anti-ICE protests.
In Virginia, Democratic lawmakers are considering bills that would limit where and how federal immigration agents operate. Del. Marcus Simon of the 13th District said proposals introduced in Richmond include prohibiting masks during federal enforcement actions and restricting operations near polling places and courthouses.
Many of the measures are expected to receive review and debate in the General Assembly’s Public Safety Committee.
Simon called the events in Minnesota tragic and said they highlighted concerns about civil liberties, public trust and the need for thoughtful policy responses.
Spanberger Reverses Youngkin Order
On Jan. 17, her first day in office, Spanberger rescinded former Gov. Glenn Youngkin’s Executive Order 47.
Youngkin’s order had directed the Virginia State Police and Department of Corrections to enter into 287(g) agreements with ICE. Those agreements can authorize state and local personnel to assist with federal immigration enforcement.
Spanberger said the repeal was intended to prevent state and local resources from being diverted from first-responder responsibilities such as investigating crimes and helping communities during emergencies.
She also criticized immigration operations conducted by unidentified, masked personnel, saying such tactics create fear, distrust and confusion instead of making communities safer.
Spanberger has emphasized that residents should be willing to contact police during an emergency regardless of their immigration status. She called the prospect of someone being afraid to seek police assistance during a crisis a tragedy.
Existing ICE Agreements Remain
The repeal does not require Virginia agencies to terminate agreements already in place. It also does not prevent local governments, regional jails or sheriffs’ offices from entering new agreements with ICE.
Existing contracts will remain active until one of the participating parties ends them, and none had been terminated at the time of the report.
That limitation reflects Spanberger’s more moderate position on immigration enforcement. In August 2025, she said Virginia should cooperate with ICE when people have committed serious state or federal crimes, provided federal authorities obtain proper arrest warrants.
Spanberger, a former CIA case officer who grew up in a law enforcement family, has long presented herself as a Democrat with strong national-security and public-safety credentials. She has not yet outlined a broader plan for limiting ICE operations in Virginia.
Advocates Scrutinize Virginia’s ICE Ties
The Legal Aid Justice Center says Virginia agencies may have agreements allowing personnel to perform duties that exceed their authority or conflict with state law and the Virginia Constitution.
At least 223 state and local employees have been nominated to participate in 287(g) agreements, including two school resource officers and a behavioral health advocate, according to the organization.
ICE-related detention is also an important source of revenue for some facilities. More than half of Riverside Regional Jail’s revenue reportedly comes from holding people for ICE.
Federal immigration authorities maintain a separate detention presence in Virginia through the Caroline Detention Facility in Bowling Green and the Farmville Detention Center. Those facilities operate independently of state and local participation in 287(g) agreements.
Concerns increased after Hanover County officials received a Department of Homeland Security letter describing plans to buy a warehouse on Lakeridge Parkway and operate it as an ICE processing facility.
County officials said Hanover did not initiate the project and had 30 days to respond. The Board of Supervisors was expected to discuss the proposal at its Jan. 28 meeting.
Virginia regional jails, including the Virginia Peninsula Regional Jail, also hold detainees under contract. Advocacy organizations warn that expanding processing and detention capacity could increase fear in nearby communities.
Political and Legal Limits Loom
Virginia Democrats may look to restrictions imposed in Minnesota as possible models. On Jan. 16, U.S. District Judge Katherine M. Menendez barred federal agents there from retaliating against people participating in peaceful, unobstructive protests.
The injunction also prohibited agents from detaining peaceful protesters or observers without reasonable suspicion of criminal activity or interference with law enforcement. It restricted the use of pepper spray, tear gas and other crowd-control weapons against peaceful demonstrators and bystanders recording enforcement operations.
Whether Virginia lawmakers will pursue similar protections remains uncertain.
Spanberger faces pressure from Democrats seeking stronger limits on ICE while Republicans argue that reducing cooperation could endanger public safety. Local governments and detention facilities may also resist changes that threaten revenue from federal contracts.
Meanwhile, the federal government retains broad control over immigration enforcement, limiting what a governor can accomplish without action from Congress.
Spanberger’s repeal of Youngkin’s order marks a change in direction, but for now it removes a state mandate without dismantling Virginia’s extensive network of ICE agreements.