Campus Police at FIU to Act as Federal Agents Under ICE Partnership

University Police in Florida to Enforce Federal Immigration Law Under 287(g)

In a move drawing national attention and fuelling debate, Florida International University (FIU) has become one of thirteen universities in Florida to formally enter into a 287(g) agreement with the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE). This agreement, part of ICE’s most expansive “Task Force Model,” will deputise selected members of FIU’s police force to act as federal immigration officers. Under the arrangement, trained university officers will gain the authority to enforce federal immigration laws, including making arrests for immigration violations and accessing federal immigration databases. These powers significantly exceed the traditional remit of campus policing.

The decision to adopt the agreement at FIU was reportedly made by University Police Chief Alexander Casas, who stated that it would give the university more control over immigration enforcement on campus. University President Jeanette Nuñez is said to have endorsed the move during a faculty meeting, although such agreements remain voluntary for university police departments. Notably, Florida now leads the nation in finalised 287(g) agreements, surpassing Texas, following public encouragement from Governor Ron DeSantis for wider law enforcement participation. Nationwide, 306 agencies have joined the programme.

Before the agreement’s finalisation, Casas told the Miami Herald that immigration enforcement had become a state and federal priority. He explained that his decision to join the programme aligned with broader enforcement objectives, comparing immigration offences to other areas of policing such as drug control, traffic enforcement, or human trafficking. Although FIU officers had not yet begun the mandatory 50-hour online training and no official timeline had been set, Casas confirmed that once completed, officers would be permitted to make arrests based on probable cause. He added that such determinations would be evaluated on a case-by-case basis, stressing the importance of adhering to judicial standards requiring a reasonable belief that a crime has been committed.

Although there was no formal agreement with ICE in the past, Casas explained that FIU police had previously cooperated informally with ICE agents on campus, especially when judicial warrants were presented. Over his 14-year tenure, he recalled only two such instances. In the past, if immigration concerns arose during investigations, FIU police would notify ICE but had neither access to federal databases nor the authority to act independently.

Casas further explained that the rationale behind formalising the agreement was to establish clear protocols and responsibilities. He argued that codifying procedures would help avoid confusion and disputes over accountability, especially as immigration-related encounters may become more frequent. Once trained, FIU officers will gain access to immigration databases, enabling them to check visa status or deportation orders even in the absence of a state-level warrant, something not previously possible under routine background checks.

Importantly, Casas clarified that the agreement is not intended to overhaul the university police department’s core operations. Rather, it is aimed at defining their role in immigration enforcement more precisely. He added that FIU will determine the number of officers to be trained, and that participation in specific ICE operations will remain at the discretion of the university.

Nonetheless, the agreement grants campus police the ability to act independently, rather than solely assisting ICE. In certain cases, officers could carry out deportation orders themselves, for example, by transporting individuals to detention centres without ICE being physically present. This expanded authority has prompted significant criticism. Since the 287(g) programme's introduction in 1996, civil rights groups and academic researchers have argued that it disproportionately affects individuals with minimal or no criminal history and erodes trust between law enforcement and immigrant communities. Acknowledging these concerns, Casas, who has repeatedly emphasised the importance of maintaining student trust, addressed the issue during a university town hall and faculty senate meeting in May.

Despite these assurances, opposition at FIU and other institutions has intensified. Students and faculty have organised demonstrations, rallies, social media campaigns, and public forums, calling for their universities to terminate the agreements with ICE.

At FIU, senior student Dariel Gomez has been particularly vocal, warning that students might face wrongful arrest and be detained at the new immigration facility in the Everglades, widely referred to as “Alligator Alcatraz.” His concerns were heightened following a recent case involving a DACA recipient, now in his early thirties, who had lived in the United States for two decades before being detained at the facility. In response, Casas, who is of Cuban descent, has attempted to reassure the university community, stating that his department's approach is shaped by a deeper understanding of the campus’s diverse population and that empathy remains central to their enforcement practices.  While FIU’s 287(g) agreement with ICE marks a significant shift in campus policing, it has also ignited intense debate over accountability, trust, and the role of universities in federal immigration enforcement.

Editor’s Note:

The decision by Florida International University (FIU) to formally enter into a 287(g) agreement with U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) represents a significant and controversial development in the landscape of campus policing and immigration enforcement. By granting its police officers the authority to act as federal immigration agents, FIU joins a growing list of Florida universities adopting ICE’s most expansive enforcement model, one that effectively blurs the traditional boundaries between university safety and national immigration policy. FIU's decision to allow university police to enforce federal immigration laws, particularly deportation orders, raises questions about higher education's role in law enforcement. While Chief Casas emphasises clarity and transparency, concerns persist regarding student trust, civil liberties, and community cohesion, with fears of unwarranted scrutiny for vulnerable individuals. Supporters see enhanced safety; critics view it as normalising immigration enforcement in safe spaces. The case highlights the need for transparent dialogue and oversight as universities nationwide grapple with policy, law enforcement, and community values.

Skoobuzz asserts that this development challenges us to reflect on how far institutions of learning should go in aligning with federal enforcement priorities and what is at risk when trust on campus is compromised in the process.