Committee advances SB 615 requiring law enforcement to notify ICE after a determination of unlawful presence; senators raise due-process concerns

The West Virginia Senate Judiciary Committee agreed to a committee substitute for Senate Bill 615 and voted to report it to the full Senate with a recommendation that it pass.

Counsel summarized the substitute as creating a new code section that expands existing 2023 immigration-related language: when a law-enforcement agency determines an individual is in the United States illegally, the agency would be required to notify U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and cooperate to the full extent permitted by federal and state law. The substitute moved some language into chapter 15 and removed a criminal provision the counsel described as unconstitutional under a 2012 U.S. Supreme Court decision; it also incorporated penalty and enforcement mechanisms established in the 2023 law.

Several senators pressed counsel on what it means to be "determined to be in the United States illegally." Counsel said the term is not defined in the substitute, but he described the practical meaning as more than mere suspicion and less than a formal adjudication — for example, a determination could occur during processing of an arrest when fingerprints or booking checks reveal immigration status.

Lonnie Faircloth, president of the West Virginia Troopers Association, told the committee the troopers' practice is to request identification and, when reasonable suspicion arises, contact ICE, which then makes a determination and places detainers when appropriate. "We will contact ICE to have them come on scene," Faircloth said, and ICE usually performs the formal determination, he told senators.

Senator for Marion voiced strong concerns that the bill's language is unclear and could lead to profiling or detentions of U.S. citizens. "It sounds like ... that sounds more like adjudicated," the senator said, adding that immigration determinations belong to immigration courts and that the statutory ambiguity could push the state in a troubling direction. The senator stated opposition to the bill on those grounds.

After discussion and no amendments, the committee agreed to the substitute and moved it to the full Senate with a recommendation that it pass.