Residents urge Butler County to end ICE detentions at county jail, cite fear and lack of transparency

Several Butler County residents used public comment time at the commissioners' meeting to urge officials to stop the use of the Butler County Jail for Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) detainees and to oppose credentialing county deputies as ICE agents. Speakers said the practice has created fear among immigrants and reduced attendance at local businesses and events.
"I don't want our immigrants living in fear," resident Anne Brown said, adding that immigrants "are paying income, property, and business taxes" and contribute to community life. Linda Spurrier said a detention contract "puts us at risk of legal liability" and called for the county to "get out of the deportation business." Dr. Elizabeth Miller described detainees as "almost all loving parents or dedicated employees" and said, based on information she had seen, that "less than 10 percent of ICE detainees at the jail had committed any non-immigration related crimes." Anne Janssen, a repeat commenter, said ICE detainees are effectively invisible in the county's public records: when a detainee's name is clicked in the county roster, it sometimes shows only "ICE detainee," she said, with no arrest date, charge, or bail information.
Speakers also described economic effects in nearby towns. Susie Lute and Jaden Lew, both from Oxford, said some residents and university students avoid visiting Hamilton businesses and events because of concerns about ICE activity and the county jail. "They're terrified because of the ICE activity in this place," Lew said.
Commissioner Mark Carpenter responded that Butler County's courts and many local justice agencies are computerized and integrated at the county level, but he said there is no integration with federal systems that would make ICE-related details public. No commissioner motion or directive regarding ICE detention policy, credentialing of deputies, or changes to jail practices was recorded during the meeting.
Public comment was subject to a two-minute time limit set by the board; six residents spoke on the issue during the allotted public comment period.