Conflict between state and local authorities in Indianapolis continues to escalate as Attorney General Todd Rokita warns of legal consequences for the Indianapolis Metropolitan Police Department (IMPD) and Indianapolis Public Schools (IPS) over their stance on immigration sweeps. According to FOX59, Rokita sent letters asserting that under Indiana law, neither the IMPD nor the IPS could restrict cooperation with U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE).

In January, IMPD Chief Chris Bailey and IPS officials openly declared their intent not to partake in or assist with immigration enforcement actions; Bailey emphasized the department's focus on community relations rather than immigration status checks, while IPS assured families that students were protected from ICE operations on school grounds without judicial warrants, both moves have drawn the ire of Rokita, the WTHR reported, linking their actions to a refusal that negates a policy of "full, robust cooperation" with federal authorities.

Referencing concerns from Rokita about alleged rising crime and fiscal burdens attributed to undocumented immigrants, the Attorney General's office points to a duty to enforce policies set by the Indiana General Assembly. This directive comes despite the IMPD's previous assurances that they would maintain their commitment to the safety and well-being of all Indianapolis residents, which includes maintaining a distance from federal immigration law enforcement—a position supported by the local police union president and quoted in an IndyStar article.

This legal pushback coincides with Indiana Gov. Mike Braun's endorsement of statewide cooperation with ICE, signified by a recent executive order mandating such collaboration to identify and remove undocumented persons in the state, making Rokita's letters a part of a broader enforcement approach that, in spite of local law enforcement and educational authorities' positions, is laser-focused on aligning state efforts with federal immigration policies, as Rokita emphasized the absence of any discretion that local bodies have when ICE's assistance is requested, a decision that could signal a significant shift in the way immigration laws are handled within the state's borders.