Immigration enforcement is often portrayed as a single system. But in reality, it involves multiple layers of law enforcement, each with different responsibilities.
That distinction is easy to miss in public conversations. When news stories show immigration raids or protests involving federal agents, many people assume local police departments are involved in the same work.
According to retired Police Chief Mike Tupper, that assumption is usually wrong.
After **32 years in law enforcement**, including **13 years as Chief of Police in Marshalltown, Iowa**, Tupper brings a practical perspective to a topic that often feels abstract or political. His experience working in a diverse community gives him a unique view of how immigration, policing, and public trust intersect.
In a recent conversation with Women of Welcome, Tupper helped clarify some of the most common misunderstandings about immigration enforcement.

The Difference Between Local and Federal Law Enforcement

One of the most important points Tupper makes is simple: local police officers do not enforce federal immigration law.

That responsibility belongs to the federal government. Local law enforcement agencies focus on enforcing state and local laws and protecting public safety in their communities. Federal immigration enforcement agencies, on the other hand, are responsible for enforcing immigration laws.

“For over 30 years in law enforcement,” Tupper explains, “at no point was it ever my responsibility to enforce immigration law.” While local police may collaborate with federal agencies on certain criminal investigations, immigration enforcement itself remains a federal responsibility.

Understanding this distinction helps explain why local police departments sometimes receive calls from concerned residents when federal immigration officers are operating in a community—even when local officers have no involvement.

Why Trust Matters in Community Policing

For local law enforcement, trust within the community is essential.

Police departments rely on residents to report crimes, provide witness information, and cooperate during investigations. When people feel safe contacting law enforcement, communities are safer. But when residents fear that interacting with police could lead to immigration consequences, that trust can erode.

Tupper says this concern becomes especially important in communities with significant immigrant populations. If people worry that reporting a crime could put themselves or their families at risk, they may choose to stay silent.

Criminals sometimes exploit that fear. In his career, Tupper saw situations where perpetrators of domestic violence or sexual assault warned victims not to contact police because they might be deported. When fear replaces trust, justice becomes harder to pursue and communities become less safe.

This is one reason many local police leaders emphasize the importance of keeping immigration enforcement separate from local policing.

The Challenge of Coordination

Another challenge arises when federal immigration enforcement occurs without clear communication with local authorities.

According to Tupper, ideal collaboration involves open communication between agencies. Local officers understand the dynamics of their communities and often have established relationships with residents. When federal officers operate without that coordination, confusion can follow. Residents may call local police asking what is happening, only to learn that local departments have little information to share.

This lack of communication can also make it harder to manage public tensions when enforcement actions spark protests or large gatherings. Better coordination between federal and local authorities, Tupper says, can help prevent situations from escalating.

The Debate Around 287(g) Agreements

Some communities choose to partner more directly with federal immigration enforcement through agreements known as 287(g) partnerships. These agreements allow certain local law enforcement agencies to carry out specific federal immigration enforcement duties.

Tupper believes these partnerships present serious challenges for local departments.

First, many police agencies already face staffing shortages and limited resources. Taking on additional federal responsibilities can stretch departments even further.

Second, these agreements may weaken the trust that local officers work hard to build in their communities. If residents believe local police also function as immigration enforcement officers, they may become less willing to report crimes or cooperate with investigations.

For Tupper, maintaining community trust remains central to effective policing.

A System in Need of Reform

While debates about enforcement continue, Tupper believes the deeper issue lies elsewhere.

“Our immigration system has been broken for a long time,” he says. Over the years, he observed how enforcement alone cannot solve complex social and policy challenges. Arrests and crackdowns may address symptoms, but they rarely address root causes.

Real solutions, he argues, require thoughtful reform at the national level. Until then, law enforcement officers often find themselves navigating complicated situations created by a system that has struggled to keep up with modern realities.

Why These Conversations Matter

Immigration is one of the most complex topics in public life. It touches policy, law, community safety, and human dignity. Conversations like this one remind us that behind the headlines are real people doing difficult work in complicated circumstances.

Understanding the roles of different law enforcement agencies can help us move beyond confusion and toward more informed, thoughtful dialogue. And in the process, it may help communities build the trust that makes both safety and welcome possible.

Watch the Full Conversation

Hear more from retired Police Chief Mike Tupper about immigration enforcement, policing, and the challenges facing communities across the country.

Former Police Chief Explains Immigration Enforcement (What Most People Get Wrong)