ICE Reshuffle Meets Resistance: Maryland Values Act Gains Steam

CALIFORNIA, Md. — As the Trump administration intensifies its crackdown on immigration enforcement across the country, Maryland is undergoing a transition in federal leadership with local reverberations.

Matthew Elliston, the former director of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE)’s Baltimore field office, has been promoted to a deputy assistant director of field operations at ICE headquarters in Washington. In his place, veteran ICE official Nikita Baker steps in as interim director—just as enforcement activity in Maryland escalates under President Trump’s renewed directives.

Baker, previously second-in-command, inherits leadership of ICE’s Maryland enforcement and removal operations at a time when the agency has been increasingly active across the state. She has previously emphasized a tough-on-immigration stance aligned with the administration’s approach. Speaking last year on an arrest in Charles County, Baker said ICE would continue to prioritize what it calls “egregious noncitizen offenders,” underscoring the agency’s public safety mission.

In recent months, ICE has dramatically increased its presence in Maryland communities, with agents making so-called “collateral arrests”—detaining individuals who are not the target of a warrant but are found to be undocumented during an encounter. The agency has also resumed detaining people with final deportation orders during routine check-ins—many of whom have lived in the U.S. for years without criminal records.

Baker’s appointment and Elliston’s promotion come as Maryland lawmakers clash over the state’s role in federal immigration enforcement. At the center of the debate: the controversial 287(g) agreements that allow local detention officers to carry out immigration enforcement duties.

Six Maryland counties, mostly in western and northern regions, have entered into 287(g) partnerships. Southern Maryland counties—St. Mary’s, Charles, and Calvert—have not. Still, local law enforcement in these counties often cooperates with ICE in informal ways, such as honoring detainer requests or alerting the agency of releases.

That could change under proposed state legislation known as the Maryland Values Act. The bill, which passed the House and is now under Senate review, would ban 287(g) agreements statewide and restrict the ability of local agencies to engage in immigration enforcement. However, it would still require local officials to notify ICE 48 hours before releasing individuals with convictions for violent crimes or felonies.

Supporters argue the bill protects due process and public trust, particularly in immigrant communities that may fear interaction with police. Opponents, including several sheriffs and Republican lawmakers, say the law would effectively turn Maryland into a sanctuary state and undermine public safety.

Sheriffs from across Maryland, including those not currently participating in 287(g), have traveled to Annapolis to oppose the bill. Frederick County Sheriff Chuck Jenkins called the proposal the “Place Maryland in Danger Act,” warning it would invite criminal activity and impede cooperation with ICE.

Meanwhile, ICE has come under fire from advocates over detention practices in Baltimore. Multiple reports in March detailed overcrowded holding conditions at ICE’s Baltimore field office. Detainees were allegedly held for days in rooms without beds, showers, or consistent access to food or medication. Advocates have filed complaints and are weighing legal action. ICE responded by stating that the Baltimore location is a short-term holding facility and maintains compliance with federal standards.

Locally, immigration enforcement in Southern Maryland remains closely watched. In Charles County, ICE recently arrested a man previously convicted of second-degree assault and living in the U.S. without legal status. The arrest, coordinated with local officials, was cited by ICE leadership as a success under its public safety priorities.

Though Southern Maryland counties have not entered into 287(g) agreements, legislation like the Maryland Values Act would prevent any future partnership and standardize what cooperation with ICE looks like. As immigration policies continue to evolve under the Trump administration, communities across the region are likely to see an increase in enforcement actions—and renewed questions about the balance between federal authority and local autonomy.

The state’s final decision on the 287(g) ban could determine whether counties like Calvert, Charles, and St. Mary’s remain informally cooperative—or become part of a growing state-led pushback against federal immigration enforcement.

Contact our news desk at news@thebaynet.com