Nevada’s Attorney General Aaron Ford (D) has released new “model immigration policies” that have sparked a heated debate about law enforcement’s role in immigration matters. These policies, which Ford says are simply guidelines and not mandates, would limit how much local police can help with federal immigration enforcement.
Governor Joe Lombardo (R) quickly fired back, saying Nevada “will continue to follow federal law” and rejecting any move toward sanctuary state status.
Is This a Sanctuary State Power Grab?
What many Nevadans may not realize is that this isn’t AG Ford’s first attempt at creating sanctuary policies. In 2017, as a state senator, Ford co-sponsored legislation that would have effectively turned Nevada into a sanctuary state.
That history raises serious questions about his current motives and whether these “model policies” are simply another attempt to achieve the same goal through different means
What the Model Policies Say
According to the document itself, Nevada law enforcement agencies would be instructed to limit their involvement in federal immigration work:
“Immigration enforcement, which is mostly civil rather than criminal, is a federal responsibility. The roles and responsibilities of state and local law enforcement officers are distinct from federal immigration authorities.”
The policies explain that Nevada officers should not be pulled away from their primary duties:
“These model policies relieve Nevada law enforcement of the burden of doing unpaid, unfunded federal immigration enforcement and allow our state and local law enforcement agencies to focus on protecting Nevadans from violent and serious crime.”
Specifically, if these policies are adopted, state and local law enforcement agencies:
“Will not act as unpaid federal immigration agents by participating in operations that solely involve federal civil immigration enforcement.”
“Will not divert resources away from fighting crime by detaining or arresting anyone solely to enforce federal civil immigration laws.”
Governor Fires Back: “Not On My Watch”
Governor Lombardo was direct in his response:
“Let me be clear: The Attorney General does not have the authority to make Nevada a sanctuary state or jurisdiction. As long as I am Governor, Nevada will continue to follow federal law.”
The Governor also emphasized that the policies are “non-binding and non-mandatory guidelines.”
Let me be clear: The Attorney General does not have the authority to make Nevada a sanctuary state or jurisdiction. As long as I am Governor, Nevada will continue to follow federal law. pic.twitter.com/I0O79ECod8
— Governor Joe Lombardo (@JosephMLombardo) February 26, 2025
AG Ford fired back, defending the policies:
“Let me be clear: I do not support sanctuary policies. Period. The Governor’s claim that my office is trying to make Nevada a sanctuary state is false.”
Ford says he was simply following the Legislature’s directive:
“The Legislature mandated my office to provide model policies to help entities understand their legal responsibilities when it comes to immigration enforcement. That’s exactly what we did — nothing more, nothing less.”
Why Governor Lombardo Is Right to Take a Stand
Governor Lombardo’s position deserves strong support for several key reasons:
First, the AG’s policies could hamstring cooperation between local and federal authorities at a time when border security is already under enormous strain. By limiting information sharing and cooperation with federal immigration authorities, these policies create dangerous gaps in enforcement.
Second, while packaged as “guidance,” these policies put pressure on local law enforcement to adopt practices that contradict federal immigration enforcement priorities. They effectively create a two-tier system where federal agents must work around, rather than with, local authorities.
Third, and perhaps most importantly, the Governor correctly identifies this as an overreach by the Attorney General’s office. Immigration policy is primarily set at the federal level, with the Governor responsible for overall state policy direction.
An administrative guidance document should not reshape how Nevada handles immigration enforcement.
Four Principles Behind the Policies
The document outlines four key principles that guide the approach:
- Public safety:
“When victims and witnesses are afraid to come forward and seeking justice, it threatens the very foundations of our public service systems.”
- Prudent use of public money:
“Immigration enforcement is the responsibility of the federal government. The cost of immigration enforcement is also a federal responsibility.”
- Focus on core services:
“When police, court staff, teachers, and health care workers are on the job, they should be able to focus on their primary responsibilities.”
- Fairness:
“Nevada’s government does not discriminate on the basis of race, ethnicity, and national origin.”
Comply or Explain: What Happens Next?
Law enforcement agencies across Nevada must now either adopt policies consistent with the AG’s models or explain to him why they chose different approaches. The document confirms this requirement:
“Upon publication of the model policies, all state and local law enforcement agencies, courthouses, public schools, institutions of higher education, and health care facilities must either: (1) adopt policies consistent with the model policies; or (2) decide not to adopt policies consistent with the model policies.”
The battle between federal authority and state autonomy is playing out right now in Nevada, and the outcome will affect border security, law enforcement effectiveness, and the proper role of government. This is the time to stand firm for law and order – before unelected bureaucrats decide that immigration laws simply don’t matter in the Silver State.
This article was written with the assistance of AI. Please verify information and consult additional sources as needed.
