Proposed bill in Maryland would increase protections for personal data in immigration enforcement cases

Maryland lawmakers want to increase protections for personal data in immigration enforcement cases.

Senate Bill 977, the Maryland Data Privacy Act would prohibit state and local agencies in Maryland from sharing personal information, granting access to databases, or allowing federal agencies to enter facilities for immigration enforcement without a valid warrant.

Under the bill, anyone attempting to gain access to a government building or facility would also need a warrant and be required to disclose their name and contact information, including a phone number, email address, and physical address. 

Additionally, the bill would prohibit state or local law enforcement from collaborating with federal agencies to share information for the purpose of enforcing federal immigration laws. 

Trump administration immigration crackdown

The proposed legislation comes amid a push from the Trump administration to crack down on illegal immigration, which began in January with an executive order deploying 1,500 troops to the southern border - in addition to the 2,500 who were already stationed there under federal orders. 

Part of that crackdown has included lifting restrictions on where U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) officials can operate.

Shortly after President Trump's inauguration, his administration ended a policy that prohibits ICE arrests at or near schools, places of worship, and other sensitive locations.

The executive action has sparked fear and concern among some schools and parents across the nation.

Under current law, ICE agents are permitted to enter public areas without permission, the National Immigration Law Center (NILC) told CBS News. 

ICE agents cannot enter private areas such as a home, or an employee-only space without permission or a judicial warrant, according to the NILC.

In another executive order, Mr. Trump attempted to end birthright citizenship by ordering federal agencies to stop issuing passports and citizenship documents to children born in the U.S. to parents who are not legal citizens. 

More than 20 states sued Mr. Trump over allegations that the order violated the 14th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, which grants citizenship to individuals born on American soil.

On Feb. 13, Mr. Trump's executive order was blocked by a federal judge for the fourth time.    

States challenge warning from the Justice Department

In January, the U.S. Justice Department warned that state or local officials who attempt to impede the administration's immigration enforcement efforts could face criminal charges. 

"The Supremacy Clause and other authorities require state and local actors to comply with the Executive Branch's immigration enforcement initiatives. Federal law prohibits state and local actors from resisting, obstructing, and otherwise failing to comply with lawful immigration-related commands and requests," Acting Deputy Attorney General Emil Bove said in a memo. 

But the warning was met with pushback from state leaders, who said that the U.S. Constitution prevents the federal government from forcing state officials to enforce federal laws. 

"While the federal government may use its resources for federal immigration enforcement, the court ruled in Printz v. United States that the federal government cannot "impress into its service—and at no cost to itself—the police officers of the 50 States," Maryland Attorney General Anthony Brown said in a joint statement with 11 other attorneys general.

Immigration advocates push for more protections

Advocates of the Maryland Data Privacy Act include CASA, a local immigration advocacy organization. 

Earlier this month, CASA held a rally, urging legislators to pass Senate Bill 977, along with the Protecting Sensitive Locations Act, which would require Maryland Attorney General Brown to develop guidelines for immigration enforcement at certain locations. 

That bill would define sensitive locations as schools and colleges, medical and mental health care facilities, places of worship, service centers and shelters, and childcare centers or other locations where children gather. Locations, where funerals, weddings, and other religious or civil ceremonies are held, would also be considered sensitive locations under the bill.