Pops of purple and teal marked the crowd at Greensboro City Council’s first meeting of the month as residents spoke out against immigration enforcement activity in the city. Among them were activists from Siembra NC, who handed out the colorful shirts in their signature colors to supporters as they filled the room.
Concerns surrounding Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) have intensified in Greensboro over the last month after an American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) report revealed a private company had identified the old American Hebrew Academy (AHA) as a potential federal immigration detention site. City leaders and AHA owners stated they had not been contacted about the site’s use.
Still, community members attended council meetings last month, asking elected officials to denounce detention centers in Greensboro. In response, council unanimously passed zoning changes that add extra protocols for any such site in the city. This month, speakers returned to ask the council to do more.
“Safety doesn’t stop at the doors of [the American Hebrew Academy],” said speaker Alison Gutierrez. “If ICE is coming into Greensboro, the priority should be making sure they never touch our city’s perimeter, our neighborhoods, or our people.”
“Fencing in one building while the rest of the city is left open for lack of protection is performative,” Gutierrez said. “We demand the city to keep harm out of Greensboro entirely, not manage it once it’s already here.”
As Greensboro reckons with what it can legally do to curb immigration enforcement activity, other cities across the country—and some in North Carolina—have taken action in the past few months. Chicago and San Jose have prohibited federal agents from using city-owned properties. Durham, Carrboro, and Boone have signed on to be Fourth Amendment workplace cities, emphasizing the need for warrants should federal officers want to enter and search buildings owned by municipalities.
But in a time when federal enforcement is increasing at breakneck speed, some city staff say they want to proceed with caution. Others say proactive measures are necessary to protect vulnerable communities.
“I hope you’ll…make it a priority to stay on the cutting edge of municipal resistance to federal overreach to ICE,” said Geoffrey Palo at the March 2 council meeting. “It’s what your constituents deserve, and it’s what we’re going to continue to demand.”
The Local and National Landscape
Last year, Congress allocated $45 billion to ICE for immigration detention. Since then, the agency has swiftly ramped up enforcement across the country, including increasing detention capacity through the outfitting of warehouses, tent camps, former prisons, and sites like the AHA.
After the release of the ACLU report last month, Greensboro’s city council voted to change its zoning ordinances to add detention facilities as a land-use category. This means applicants have to undergo the same level of scrutiny as other facilities included in ordinances.
Other municipalities in North Carolina are reckoning with similar issues.
In Concord last month, city officials said they were aware of rumors that ICE was looking in their city for a potential detention facility. In Cary, residents pushed back after a WIRED report listed a commercial space as a potential ICE office. Last week, Cary Mayor Harold Weinbrecht opposed residents’ requests to do more to keep ICE out of the city.
“We have no idea what’s going on [at Regency Parkway],” Weinbrecht said. “If we did, we have absolutely no authority to stop it… “Take action against the decision-makers. I’m not one of them.”
Across the country, however, other states and cities are passing ordinances and executive orders to curb ICE activity. Legal experts say that may be possible in North Carolina, too.
“I think that it’s time for localities to fortify themselves against reckless federal immigration enforcement,” said Hadi Sedigh, senior strategist with the National Immigration Law Center (NILC).
‘We Have Ways to Address It’
During a call in early March, Greensboro Assistant City Manager Andrea Harrell was careful in outlining what the city can and can’t do regarding blocking federal immigration enforcement.
Many residents have called for the city to ban detention centers outright. That’s not really possible, Harrell said. But because of the new zoning changes, the city would be heavily involved in any approvals or rejections of such sites. The community would also be notified due to the public comment requirement.
The federal government could convert a piece of property it owns into a detention center, Harrell said. But it would still be difficult. They would have to talk to neighbors, get approval, and go through several steps outlined in the rezoning process. Then, the city would have multiple ways to block such a center, including issuing violations, taking the issue to the board of adjustments, or even filing a lawsuit, Harrell said.
Other arms of the city could get involved, Harrell said, such as the minimum housing standards commission, the planning and zoning commission, the board of adjustment, or the human rights commission. The city could also file a temporary restraining order or a preliminary injunction to stop the action.
“Even if someone were to bypass all of the things that we have on the front end,” Harrell said. “We have ways to address it on the back end to still enforce the rules and procedures that we have in place.”
If a detention center were to be approved, there are other local-level actions that could keep them from getting off the ground, said Jennifer Ibañez Whitlock, senior policy counsel for NILC.
“Localities can…make sure they’re not contributing in any way to the opening of detention centers,” Whitlock said. “They have to get their electricity from somewhere. They have to get their water from somewhere. It inevitably requires some support from the locality.”
Local community members should voice their support for leaders who push against the expansion of federal immigration enforcement, she said.
“I think where local leaders have the most power, it’s not necessarily in legislation,” Whitlock said. “But having the backing of the community so when they go into a meeting with a business owner, they can draw on that.”
Moving With Caution
Several speakers at the March 2 city council meeting asked Greensboro leaders to pass a resolution making the city a Fourth Amendment workplace like Durham, Carrboro, and Boone. Signing onto the resolution would mean protecting city workers from ICE raids or arrests, they said.
But Greensboro is already a Fourth Amendment workplace, Harrell said, because every city has to honor the Fourth Amendment. When ICE agents conducted activity in North Carolina last fall, Harrell said, the city issued instructions for employees on what federal officials can and can’t do.
Updated guidance outlined in a Feb. 10 email explains that access to non-public areas such as staff-only offices requires a judicial warrant signed by a judge. It also makes clear the difference between administrative warrants and judicial ones and tells employees not to physically interfere with ICE officers. Employees have the right to remain silent and aren’t required to answer questions from ICE. City employees are urged to let the city attorney’s office handle any inquiries from the agency.
Councilmember Tammi Thurm and Mayor Marikay Abuzuaiter both said they are cautious about passing a Fourth Amendment city resolution.
Thurm said she would need more information about what it entails, but is “open to looking at things.”
Abuzuaiter said she wants to hear more from the city’s immigrant and refugee committee before deciding. She fears a declaration like that would put a target on people’s backs and on the city itself, she said.
“In speaking with the leaders that I know, they are asking that we try to keep Greensboro in a low profile,” she said.
Another major concern is the cooperation between local police and federal agents.
One of the national programs—known as 287(g) agreements—allows local law enforcement to act as immigration agents. Neither the Greensboro Police Department nor the Guilford County Sheriff’s Office has 287(g) agreements with the federal government.
“If we make a traffic stop, we don’t inquire or care about a person’s immigration status,” Harrell said. “We don’t give [ICE] a heads up. We don’t call the feds. Sometimes the federal government will reach out to the county and say, ‘Hey, we have an arrest warrant out for that person, and we need you to hold him until we can come get him.’ The county doesn’t do that. They don’t honor detainers.”
However, the passage of HB10 in 2024 and HB318 last year requires all sheriffs to hold undocumented immigrants accused of violent crimes for an extra 48 hours.
In November, Guilford County Sheriff Danny Rogers confirmed in a social media post that the department does uphold the recently passed laws and will honor ICE detainers if presented with a judicial warrant. The county also has an agreement with the U.S. Marshals Service to hold federal prisoners in the Greensboro jail.
“Under the Radar”
In other cities across the country, elected officials have taken steps to ban federal agents from using city-owned property.
In Chicago, Mayor Brandon Johnson signed an executive order blocking ICE from using city property for staging, processing, or any other types of operation. In February, Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass signed similar directives.
Greensboro Mayor Abuzuaiter said she doesn’t have that kind of power.
“I think it’s imperative for the public to know that we don’t have the same kind of government as Chicago and Minneapolis,” she said. “We don’t have a strong mayor form of government. We are a weak mayor form of government.”
In Greensboro, the mayor doesn’t have the authority to sign executive orders or directives. Instead, the city manager oversees city departments through department heads. The mayor, like every other council member, gets one vote, runs council meetings, and takes on largely ceremonial tasks.
The city council would potentially be able to pass such a resolution, as was done in San Jose, Harrell said, where the city’s council voted unanimously to ban ICE from using city parking lots, garages, community centers, and libraries.
“That would be something that would be in [city council’s] purview,” Harrell said.
Still, Abuzuaiter said she understands people look to her to set the tone. But from conversations she’s been having with immigrant leaders, she said, she is cautious.
“I personally don’t want to bring attention to Greensboro because I have worked with the immigrant and refugee community for the last 45 years, and I know a lot of them are fearful for the attention,” she said.
Harrell agreed.
“We have intentionally tried to stay under the radar,” she said. “Some cities have made statements, and we don’t want to attract that kind of attention. We don’t want the federal government looking at us.”
But immigrant advocates say not taking action puts communities at risk.
“I think it’s a big gamble to say that you can just stay out of [the federal government’s] way or to assume that the question of whether they’ll come to your city is up to you,” said NILC’s Sedigh.
Still, other hurdles may stand in the way of local governments taking action against federal immigration enforcement—including the Republican majority in the state legislature.
“I’ve looked into some of those places that have passed things,” said Greensboro councilmember Irving Allen. “Those places have the support of state legislatures. That plays a role in what cities are able to do. We want to do what we can, but this is North Carolina.”
The State of Things
After hearing from dozens of concerned residents about a potential ICE office in Greensboro, Cary Mayor Harold Weinbrecht said state localities have little power to enact change. That’s because North Carolina is known as a “Dillon’s Rule” state compared to “home rule” states.
Local governments operating in Dillon’s-rule states typically only have powers that the state legislature gives them, according to Jim Joyce, assistant professor of public law and government at the UNC School of Government. Local governments in home-rule states, on the other hand, have broad authority unless the state limits what they can do.
Whitlock, with NILC, also pointed out that the supremacy clause may be used by the federal government to supersede state and local laws. But that doesn’t mean localities shouldn’t try, Sedigh said.
“In some places, localities are more empowered via the state constitution or state laws, and in some places they have less power,” Sedigh said. “But all localities have levers of authority that can be exercised.”
Recently, a coalition of organizations, including NILC, published a toolkit outlining actions local and state governments can take to curb immigration enforcement activity.
Among them are ending 287(g) agreements, canceling detention contracts, prohibiting the use of locally-owned spaces by ICE, and requiring law enforcement agents to identify themselves while on duty.
An online petition circulated by local immigrant advocates echoes many of the actions listed in the toolkit. The asks include cutting ties with ICE, passing laws to end cooperation with the agency, and banning detention centers. As of March 9, the petition has roughly 1,400 signatures.
Several of the issues highlighted in the petition would be under the purview of the state rather than local governments.
That’s why N.C. Rep. Pricey Harrison, a Democrat representing N.C. House District 61, plans on introducing a bill during next month’s short session that addresses some of these concerns.
“I’m doing an ICE detention center ban,” Harrison said last week. “I’m trying to write it in a way that won’t run afoul of the recent court decision.”
Harrison, whose district includes a large portion of Greensboro, said she’s talked to Reps. Deb Butler (D-New Hanover) and Amanda Cook (D-Guilford) on some of these policies.
Harrison’s plan is to draft a bill that combines several items. She’s considering repealing 287(g) requirements across the state, banning federal agents from masking, and requiring them to show identification. She also wants to share data with ICE as well.
But with the state legislature’s current makeup, it’s unlikely any of Harrison’s measures will make it to the governor’s desk.
Last year, she filed two bills that would ban ICE from farms, construction sites, hospitals, schools, and churches. Both have been stalled in committees.
Republicans currently control both the state house and senate. Democrats don’t have enough votes to sustain vetoes by Gov. Josh Stein, a Democrat.
“It’s nearly impossible to get bills passed in the current legislature,” said Harrison, who has been in office since 2005. “But we’re going to keep pushing for it because we care about our communities and people’s constitutional rights.”
Democrats shouldn’t expect any of their ICE-related bills to move in Raleigh until at least after November, said N.C. Rep. Alan Branson (R-Guilford).
“I’m not sure what will happen in November,” Branson said. “There are a lot of people who are not that happy with things on the federal level right now.”
“Personally, I think the cities ought to be cooperating with ICE,” Branson said. “I think the police and the sheriff’s departments should be cooperating with ICE.”
Municipalities that make a public point of not cooperating are likely to be noticed by both state and federal government, he said.
“I think the people who are saying be cautious about that probably have something there,” he said.
With seats at the local, state, and federal levels on the ballot in November, Harrison said a political shift could make it easier to codify some of the protections in other states here in North Carolina.
“It is incumbent on voters to make sure they are registered to vote,” Harrison said. “Because if we end up with more enlightened legislatures, it will be easier to enact some of these policies and put better ones in place.”
In the meantime, Sedigh said, it’s important for people to stay engaged at the local level.
“I think people should use their voice in every possible way,” Sedigh said. “It’s using your voice at the dinner table, with your friends, to advocate at city council, put things on social media, write op-eds in local media. I think this is a big moment for the country, and I think we can all feel it.”