Idaho is not a sanctuary state. State law prohibits any city or county from adopting sanctuary policies, and Idaho agencies are required to cooperate with federal immigration authorities. The policy is uniform statewide, and recent executive action has pushed it further in the direction of active enforcement rather than away from it.
The Law That Bans Sanctuary Policies in Idaho
Idaho Code § 19-6102, titled “Local Government Policy Regarding Immigration Enforcement,” bars local jurisdictions from limiting cooperation with federal immigration authorities.1Idaho State Legislature. Idaho Code Title 19, Chapter 61, Section 19-6102 – Local Government Policy Regarding Immigration Enforcement Cities, counties, and other local entities cannot enact ordinances or internal policies that would shield individuals from federal immigration enforcement, and no local agency can adopt rules restricting the exchange of immigration status information with federal authorities.
Governor Little reinforced that framework in 2025 by signing Executive Order 2025-03, the Border Security and Immigration Enforcement Act, which further aligned state agencies with federal immigration priorities. Between the statute and the executive order, there is no legal space for an Idaho jurisdiction to declare itself a sanctuary city or to adopt policies that would function as one.
What Happens If You’re Arrested in Idaho
Every Idaho law enforcement agency participates in the federal fingerprint-sharing system. When someone is booked, their prints go to the FBI, which shares them with the Department of Homeland Security. If a match suggests the person may be removable, ICE can act on it.2Immigration and Customs Enforcement. Immigration Detainers
One common step is an ICE detainer on Form I-247A, which asks the local jail to hold the person for up to 48 hours past their normal release so ICE can take custody.3U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement. Immigration Detainer – Notice of Action Detainers are technically requests and do not impose obligations on local agencies under ICE’s own guidance.2Immigration and Customs Enforcement. Immigration Detainers In Idaho, though, state law requiring cooperation with federal immigration authorities means local jails honor them in practice. If ICE does not pick the person up within 48 hours, the facility must release them.
Ten Idaho agencies go further through 287(g) agreements, which let ICE delegate certain immigration enforcement functions to trained state and local officers.4Immigration and Customs Enforcement. Delegation of Immigration Authority Section 287(g) Immigration and Nationality Act As of early 2026, the Idaho State Police and sheriff’s offices in Kootenai, Bonneville, Bingham, Owyhee, Power, Gooding, Washington, Caribou, and Franklin counties hold active agreements, most of them signed in 2025 or 2026. In those jurisdictions, local officers can directly handle immigration-related processing rather than waiting on ICE to arrive.
Driver’s Licenses and Employment Verification
Idaho does not issue driver’s licenses to people who cannot demonstrate lawful presence in the United States. Idaho Code § 67-7903 governs verification of lawful presence for state-administered benefits and services and requires that enforcement happen without regard to race, religion, gender, ethnicity, or national origin.5Idaho State Legislature. Idaho Code Section 67-7903 – Verification of Lawful Presence
On the employment side, Executive Order 2009-10 requires every Idaho state agency to run new hires through the federal E-Verify system. That rule applies to public employers. Private employers in Idaho are not subject to a statewide E-Verify mandate, though federal contractors fall under separate federal rules.
Why No Idaho City Can Opt Out
Idaho uses state preemption to keep immigration policy uniform. The state statute overrides any conflicting local ordinance, city council resolution, or internal department policy. A mayor cannot direct city police to ignore immigration inquiries, and a sheriff cannot adopt an informal practice of declining to contact federal authorities about a person’s status. Any such policy is void before it takes effect.
Local governments that try to deviate also risk administrative sanctions, including the potential loss of state-shared revenue that funds basic municipal operations. The practical result is that a person’s experience with local law enforcement on immigration matters looks the same in Coeur d’Alene, Twin Falls, and Pocatello. Idaho’s approach has grown more active in recent years, and the combined weight of the statute, the 2025 executive order, and the expanding list of 287(g) counties leaves no realistic path for a sanctuary-style policy anywhere in the state.