The City of Glendale, located in Los Angeles County, has officially ended its contract with U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) following a weekend of escalating protests and growing public opposition to federal immigration enforcement actions in California.
In a statement released Sunday, city officials said the decision was “not made lightly,” but was necessary to maintain public trust, comply with state law, and preserve the city’s values of local accountability and transparency.
Legal Background: SB 54 and State-Federal Tensions
Glendale emphasized that its decision aligns with Senate Bill 54, also known as the California Values Act, which prohibits state and local law enforcement from using public resources to enforce federal immigration laws. The city reaffirmed that the Glendale Police Department has not engaged in immigration enforcement and would not do so in the future.
“Despite the transparency and safeguards the city has upheld, the city recognizes that public perception of the ICE contract—no matter how limited or carefully managed—has become divisive,” the release stated.
Facility Changes and Legal Access Concerns
Until now, Glendale’s police facility was used to house ICE detainees, offering virtual and in-person visitation, and was recognized for higher standards of care and proximity to legal and family support compared to remote or privately operated detention centers.
While city leaders acknowledged the benefits of local housing—including easier access to legal counsel and family visitation—they said those considerations were ultimately outweighed by broader concerns about public perception, legal compliance, and civic trust.
Rising Tensions Following Federal Raids and Military Deployment
The announcement comes amid widespread protests in Los Angeles, sparked by recent ICE raids and what activists describe as a troubling escalation of federal immigration enforcement under the Trump administration.
Over the weekend, the first wave of 2,000 National Guard troops arrived in Los Angeles, following reports of mass deportation operations and the alleged detention of immigrants in a federal building’s basement—claims ICE has denied.
California Governor Gavin Newsom and local officials have pushed back against the deployment, calling it “purposefully inflammatory” and an overreach of federal authority. Newsom took to social media to criticize the federal government for attempting to take control of the California National Guard, a move the Democratic Governors Association labeled a “dangerous abuse of power.”
“L.A. authorities are able to access law enforcement assistance at a moment’s notice,” Newsom posted. “There is currently no unmet need.”
ICE and Federal Pushback
ICE officials and allies of former President Donald Trump have strongly condemned local opposition to immigration enforcement. Assistant Secretary for Public Affairs Tricia McLaughlin accused California leaders of prioritizing violent offenders over public safety, while Trump posted on Truth Social, threatening federal intervention to address what he called “RIOTS & LOOTERS.”
Meanwhile, Riley Gaines, a vocal critic of federal immigration policy, praised ICE officers and questioned the motives of state and local leaders who oppose federal deportation efforts.
Legal Implications and Political Fallout
The contract termination highlights the growing legal and political divide between sanctuary jurisdictions and federal immigration authorities, especially as the White House continues to enforce aggressive deportation initiatives.
Legal experts note that while ICE operates under federal authority, local jurisdictions are not obligated to assist in enforcement unless federal law explicitly requires it. SB 54 has withstood multiple legal challenges and remains a cornerstone of California’s sanctuary policies.
What’s Next for Glendale
Moving forward, Glendale’s detention facility will be used exclusively for local law enforcement purposes. City officials reaffirmed their commitment to equitable treatment for all individuals, regardless of immigration status, and pledged continued compliance with all relevant state and federal laws.
The decision could set a precedent for other California municipalities reconsidering their relationships with ICE amid mounting public pressure and legal scrutiny.
