Dallas Rejects ICE Partnership While Houston Grapples With Controversy — Texas Cities Face Hard Choice

San Antonio — Police leaders in Texas’ largest cities are confronting a fraught dilemma: whether to ally with federal immigration authorities and risk alienating local communities, or refuse and potentially invite federal enforcement to operate in their jurisdictions.

Different paths in Dallas and Houston

Dallas Police Chief Daniel Comeaux declined an offer from Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) to enroll Dallas officers in the 287(g) program, according to city officials. Comeaux and a joint City Council committee concluded that diverting patrol and investigative resources to immigration enforcement would undermine hard-won gains in public safety — including lower homicide and violent crime rates, fewer traffic fatalities and improved response times — and could erode community trust. The committee voted against partnering with ICE.

Money, oversight and trust

ICE publicly offers financial incentives to jurisdictions that join 287(g), covering portions of salaries, benefits and overtime for trained officers and offering quarterly performance awards. Dallas officials said ICE proposed up to $25 million in reimbursements, but Comeaux rejected the offer, saying it would not cover overtime costs and that reassignment of officers under federal oversight could harm response times and community confidence.

Houston’s controversy

Houston has taken a different tack. Mayor John Whitmire acknowledged some cooperation with ICE, and public records reported by local outlets show calls from Houston officers to ICE — often initiated after traffic stops or warrant checks — have surged roughly 1,000% since President Trump’s re-election. The Houston Police Department has not signed a formal 287(g) agreement, but in March officers were directed to notify immigration authorities when a national database shows an outstanding deportation order or administrative warrant.

The department says it does not routinely ask about immigration status and that officers are required to notify the issuing agency when they encounter someone listed on a warrant; after verification, an officer may detain the person and transfer custody to ICE. Critics say the widespread addition of administrative warrants — civil, non-judicial orders lodged in the National Crime Information Center database — creates pressure on officers to detain people who surface in routine checks.

State pressure and nationwide trends

State lawmakers and the governor have generally pushed for increased cooperation with federal immigration enforcement. Texas law now requires sheriff’s offices in counties with populations above 100,000 to sign an agreement with ICE by December 2026, and the Texas Department of Public Safety has already entered a partnership with the agency.

Across the U.S., many local and county law enforcement agencies have signed on to the 287(g) program in recent years. Advocates argue these partnerships help remove serious offenders; opponents warn they divert resources, damage community policing efforts and chill cooperation with police among immigrant communities.

Arguments from both sides

ICE officials told Dallas council members that local assistance helps close enforcement gaps — for example, flagging individuals who have been deported, re-entered and later committed crimes, or identifying people previously flagged by international alerts. At a council meeting an ICE official argued that those partnerships can help keep cities safer by recovering individuals who might otherwise slip through the cracks.

Local leaders pushing back emphasize that local police are charged with enforcing state and city laws, not federal immigration statutes, and that prioritizing violent crime and response capabilities better serves community safety. Comeaux, a former DEA special agent in charge, said his decision was rooted in maintaining both public safety and the public’s trust in police.

What’s at stake

For many large Texas cities, the question of whether to cooperate with ICE is not only legal and operational but political and moral. Officials must weigh the financial incentives and federal pressure against the potential for decreased trust, reduced cooperation from immigrant communities, and the operational costs of shifting officers away from local priorities.

As deadlines and state requirements approach, city and county leaders will continue to face intense scrutiny from residents, unions and state and federal officials — and their choices will shape how immigration enforcement and local policing interact in Texas communities.