Indiana Sheriff Sues Over Law Requiring Immigrant Detention

An Indiana sheriff is suing the state to invalidate a law slated to go into effect July 1, which he says will force him to engage in unconstitutional conduct and subject his office to civil liability.

Indiana Senate Enrolled Act 76 would require Sheriff Ruben Marté to order his officers to hold people who’re subject to a federal immigration detainer request beyond the time limit for such a hold without a judicial warrant or probable cause, he said in a suit filed Wednesday in the US District Court for the Southern District of Indiana.

Such detentions would violate detainees’ Fourth Amendment rights, Marté’s oath to uphold the US Constitution, and potentially expose his office to civil liability, he said.

Marté asked the court to declare SEA 76 unconstitutional and issue an order stopping it from taking effect.

The case shows the tension between state and local law enforcement officers and federal Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents.

The Fourth Amendment protects people against warrantless searches and seizures by the government, including arbitrary arrests, but ICE has said it doesn’t need either a judicial or administrative warrant to detain an individual who has been deemed removable.

State and local law enforcement officers have only limited authority to detain undocumented people, such as where there’s probable cause to believe they’ve committed a crime, the plaintiff said. Additionally, while ICE has no statutory authorization to ask them to detain people outside specific circumstances, it has adopted a regulation that allows them to issue immigration detainer requests to local authorities.

A detainer request tells the state or local authorities they’re holding a person the Department of Homeland Security wants custody of so it can remove them. It also asks the authorities to hold that person for up to 48 hours after they should have been released. It doesn’t require evidence of probable cause to believe the person has committed a crime or probable cause for removability, and isn’t required to be reviewed by a neutral magistrate, the plaintiff said.

SEA 76 requires custodial entities to comply with all DHS requests, the plaintiff said. There’s no exception for requests that would violate state or federal law, such as when it would require holding a person beyond 48 hours, which would constitute a new seizure, he said.

Marté currently directs his officers not to honor ICE detainer requests absent a judicial warrant. He’s already involved in a lawsuit over the policy.

The Indiana Attorney General’s Office didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment.

Georgetown University Law Center’s Institute for Constitutional Advocacy & Protection and the Monroe County Legal Department represents Marté.

The case is Marte v. Rokita, S.D. Ind., No. 26-cv-701, filed 4/8/26.