In the small border town of La Joya, Texas, the streets are quiet these days—eerily so, according to Sgt. Mayra Garza. Not long ago, the city of just over 5,000 found itself at the center of a surging wave of migrants and asylum seekers. "They weren’t running. They were turning themselves in," Garza reflected, recalling the daily encounters that defined her early law enforcement career in 2021. But a month had passed since her last encounter with a migrant lacking documentation, an absence that speaks volumes about the shifting landscape of immigration enforcement in Texas and across the United States.
The dramatic drop in illegal crossings is no accident. According to reporting by KTSM and Fox News Digital, a combination of toughened federal immigration rules and a significant ramp-up in border security—initiatives that began under President Donald Trump and have continued under subsequent administrations—has pushed the focus of enforcement away from the border and into the nation’s interior. The result: towns like La Joya are no longer overwhelmed by daily arrivals, while federal and local authorities recalibrate their roles in the ever-contentious debate over immigration.
Driving this shift is a historic influx of federal funding. Congress recently approved more than $170 billion for the Department of Homeland Security over four years, with U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) alone receiving a staggering $29.9 billion for enforcement and deportation operations—triple its previous allocation. The Biden administration has publicly set an ambitious goal: deporting one million immigrants per year, many of whom entered the country through humanitarian parole or temporary protected status.
As part of this push, ICE rolled out a new financial incentive program in early October 2025, hoping to entice local police departments to join the federal effort through the 287(g) program. This arrangement allows local law enforcement to partner with ICE, effectively deputizing officers to carry out certain federal immigration tasks. Departments that sign on are fully reimbursed for participating officers’ salaries and benefits, plus 25% of overtime. There are even quarterly performance-based bonuses for those who meet federal benchmarks.
For La Joya Police Chief Ramon Gonzalez, the offer is hard to refuse. “We have been doing this such a long time, it’s kind of second hand to us,” Gonzalez said, emphasizing his department’s longstanding cooperation with federal agents. With the new funds, he sees an opportunity to bolster his small force. “It might even free up to hire a new person because now this would fund that officer that is assigned to that task force,” he explained. Sgt. Garza, for her part, welcomes the additional revenue. “If that money is awarded to the department, that would be great,” she remarked.
But while small towns like La Joya are eager to embrace the partnership—and the cash infusion that comes with it—larger cities are far more hesitant. Nowhere is this divide more apparent than in Dallas, where Police Chief Daniel Comeaux recently made headlines by rejecting a $25 million offer from ICE to join the 287(g) program. The move, first reported by KDFW and Fox News Digital, has ignited a fierce debate among city leaders and residents alike.
Comeaux, who took the helm at the Dallas Police Department (DPD) in April, had initially indicated a willingness to cooperate more closely with federal agencies, signaling a potential shift from the city’s previous sanctuary-style policies. But last week, during a meeting with the Community Police Oversight Board, he surprised many by revealing, “We were contacted by the federal government, I think it was last week or within the last two weeks, and we were offered $25 million to be part of 287 G. And we said, absolutely no, not, no, that was me who said that. Turned it down.”
Comeaux was unequivocal: “No one is going to be wearing a DPD uniform enforcing federal laws. It just won't happen. We as DPD are not doing any immigration enforcement. We don't have the authority to do that, nor have we done that, nor will we do that.” Yet, he clarified that his department remains committed to working with federal partners on violent crime. “I want to be clear: we will not prevent any agency from conducting lawful activity in Dallas, but we will remain focused on our primary mission: responding to emergencies and continuing to fight violent crime in Dallas.”
The decision drew immediate fire from Dallas Mayor Eric Johnson, who argued that such a significant financial offer should have been brought before the city council for public discussion and a thorough cost-benefit analysis. "Mayor Johnson strongly believes that the Dallas City Council should have the opportunity to hear the details of ICE’s offer and to conduct an informed cost-benefit analysis of it," a spokesperson from the mayor’s office told Fox News Digital. Johnson has previously expressed support for federal efforts to deport undocumented migrants accused of violent crimes, underscoring the tension between public safety priorities and community trust.
Backing Comeaux’s stance, however, were four city council members—Chad West, Jaime Resendez, Adam Bazaldua, and Paula Caldwell Blackmon—who issued a statement emphasizing that immigration enforcement is a federal responsibility. “Joining ICE’s program would turn local law enforcement into an arm of federal immigration enforcement and could result in betrayal of trust between the Dallas Police Department and the community they are sworn to protect,” they wrote, echoing concerns that participation in 287(g) could undermine relationships with immigrant residents and erode public safety.
Meanwhile, in El Paso, yet another model is emerging in response to new state mandates. Senate Bill 8, signed into law earlier this year, requires sheriff’s offices in Texas counties with populations over 100,000 to enter into a 287(g) agreement with ICE. According to KTSM, El Paso County Sheriff Oscar Ugarte announced on October 23, 2025, that his office will comply by adopting the Warrant Service Officer (WSO) model. Under this approach, immigration checks are limited strictly to inmates already booked into the county jail, rather than conducting street-level enforcement or forming joint task forces.
Sheriff Ugarte was candid about his reluctance, stating, “This is not an option. This is not something that I wanted to do. But the sheriff’s office needs to do it because it’s a state law.” He explained that the WSO model is designed to minimize the impact on community trust, noting, “If we go out there and enforce federal law, and if we choose the task force model for the streets, I believe that’s going to create a big disconnect between the community and local law enforcement.” The state has allocated a grant of around $100,000 to help implement the program, though Ugarte warns that actual costs for staffing, equipment, and training could exceed that amount. Details about who will be trained and how the program will be rolled out are still being finalized, with a contract deadline looming in December ahead of the law’s January 2026 effective date.
Across Texas, these divergent responses to federal and state immigration enforcement initiatives reveal the complex balancing act facing local leaders. For some, the lure of federal funding and the promise of safer streets outweigh concerns about community trust. For others, the imperative to protect vulnerable residents and maintain local autonomy drives a more cautious approach. As new laws and incentives continue to reshape the landscape, Texas cities and counties are left to navigate the fault lines of policy, politics, and public opinion—one decision at a time.
In the end, the debate over who should enforce immigration law and how best to do it remains as contentious as ever, with no easy answers in sight.
