The city of Glendale terminated its contract with ICE during heated Los Angeles anti-immigration protests, sparking questions about sanctuary policy and state–federal power.
At a Glance
- Glendale’s decade-long contract to hold ICE detainees ended on June 9 due to growing community division
- City officials emphasized the move was guided by public safety, local accountability, and trust—not partisan politics
- Under California’s SB 54 sanctuary law, Glendale already prohibited local police from enforcing federal immigration statutes
- Since January, the facility housed about 82 ICE detainees held briefly (6–12 hrs) without booking or fingerprinting
- The decision follows a weekend of anti-ICE protests in L.A., with three days of demonstrations, property damage, National Guard deployment, and more than 60 arrests
A Contract in the Crosshairs
For over a decade, Glendale’s municipal jail provided temporary shelter for detainees under a federal contract with U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE). The agreement specifically excluded fingerprinting, booking, or long-term detention, instead allowing for short stays while family visits and legal access could be arranged. Yet growing public opposition forced city leaders to reassess whether cooperation with ICE aligned with community values.
Though officials denied any political motivation, they cited “divisiveness” and “perception issues” that undermined public safety and trust. “This has become a distraction,” one council member noted during the unanimous vote to terminate the contract. “This is about our community, not Washington politics.”
Sanctuary Law and Civic Trust
Glendale’s move is consistent with California’s SB 54 “sanctuary state” law, which restricts local cooperation with federal immigration enforcement. In compliance, Glendale police had already ceased all immigration-related tasks, and city officials reaffirmed that no city resources would be used to assist in detentions or deportations.
Critics of the contract argued it gave ICE a foothold in the region despite sanctuary protections. Civil rights groups, including the ACLU, applauded the decision, calling it “long overdue” and framing the facility as a symbol of “covert complicity” with the federal deportation machine.
Context: L.A. Unrest and State–Federal Flashpoints
The contract’s end came as Los Angeles reeled from three days of unrest following ICE raids that swept through immigrant neighborhoods. Protesters clashed with law enforcement, blockaded major roads, and targeted government buildings. The National Guard was deployed, more than 60 were arrested, and solidarity protests erupted as far north as San Francisco.
Governor Gavin Newsom denounced the Trump administration’s use of federal forces in California cities, calling it a “dangerous escalation” and pledging legal action. Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass called for de-escalation while defending protesters’ rights to peaceful assembly.
In a climate where federal and local governments are increasingly at odds over immigration, Glendale’s decision may signal a larger shift. With contracts like these under scrutiny statewide, the next battleground may be not in courtrooms, but in city halls.
