The second year of California’s legislative session is off to a charged start. A pair of fatal shootings by federal immigration agents in Minnesota involving ICE have reignited debates over immigration enforcement and state sovereignty. The ripple effect is being felt across the Capitol.

In response, lawmakers have introduced and previewed a growing slate of proposals aimed at limiting how and where ICE operates in California. Some would block the use of state-owned parking lots, warehouses, or even rental cars for immigration enforcement. Others would restrict courthouse arrests, prohibit local officers from working second jobs with federal agencies, or prevent former ICE personnel from taking certain public-facing state roles like teaching or law enforcement.

While some of these measures are still being drafted, the momentum is clear: many legislators want to pull the state back from what they see as complicity in aggressive federal immigration tactics.

For PORAC members, these developments raise important questions about interagency coordination, mutual aid, and how conflicting state and federal priorities could reshape law enforcement practice in the months ahead. That’s why PORAC is engaging early and often in these conversations — to ensure members’ voices are heard and to help shape policies that support both public safety and the integrity of the profession.

It’s early in the year, but one thing is clear — the debate over ICE’s footprint in California has become a central theme of 2026.