A complaint was filed by Governor Reynold’s Office against Sheriff Dan Marx and Winneshiek County for an alleged violation of Iowa Code Chapter 27A regarding a statement from Sheriff Marx to the “People of Winneshiek County.” The Iowa Attorney General’s Office initiated its investigation of the complaint on February 7, 2025. On February 14, 2025, the Sheriff provided the information requested by the Attorney General. On March 26, 2025, the Attorney General issued her report concerning the investigation. Here is a link to the Attorney General’s investigative report. https://www.iowaattorneygeneral.gov/media/cms/03_CD0CFA355886A.pdf
Upon the conclusion of the investigation, to prevent litigation and potential loss of state funding, the Attorney General’s Office required us to take down the original post and replace Sheriff’s Marx’s original statement with a statement the Attorney General’s Office had scripted. The language of the post proposed by the Attorney General was not acceptable to the County. To demonstrate good faith, we chose to take the post down, and for the sake of transparency to the people of Winneshiek County, we are posting, below, our February 14, 2025, response to the AG’s request for information.
Sheriff Marx’s response outlines how Winneshiek County has been in compliance with Iowa Code 27A while protecting the constitutional rights of our citizens. The response also confirms the Sheriff’s Office commitment to remain in compliance with State and Federal immigration laws while staying true to the Constitutional protections afforded the citizens of Winneshiek County.
While we are disappointed and disagree with the Attorney General’s conclusion, we remain confident that this issue can be resolved. Thank you for your continued support.
Response to the Above
February 14, 2025
Attention Attorney
General Bird:
Thank you for taking the time to have a telephone conversation with me and our County Attorney concerning the investigation you opened under Chapter 27A of the Iowa Code, based upon an open letter I had sent to the citizens of Winneshiek County. I have received your letter dated February 7, 2025, requesting specific information related to your investigation. I am enclosing the following:
- The Winneshiek County Immigration Enforcement Policy adopted November 26, 2018, in compliance with then Iowa Code§ 825 (now 27A).
- Copies of all detainer requests received by my office from November 26, 2018, to present.
- My office’s response to each detainer request is written on the bottom of the enclosed detainers. You will see that Winneshiek County has honored all detainer requests. We have never refused to cooperate with an ICE detainer.
- A copy of the email sent by our County Attorney advising my deputies and jail staff of our continued commitment to follow the 2018 County Immigration Enforcement Policy and, of course, offering to answer any questions concerning the policy that may come up.
I want to make clear that the purpose of my letter was not to suggest that the Winneshiek County Sheriffs Office will not cooperate in immigration enforcement. To the contrary, in November 2018, Winneshiek County adopted the enclosed policy pursuant to then Chapter 825 (now Chapter 27A) of the Iowa Code, to confirm its compliance with then Chapter 825. It has been and remains my office’s intent to follow that policy.
My letter to the “People of Winneshiek County” was intended to make the public aware that I expect my deputies to obey all federal, state, local and Constitutional requirements as they serve the people of Winneshiek County. When my deputies work with another state, local or federal law enforcement agency, it is my expectation that those agencies will also obey the law and protect the Constitutional rights of those people that we are expected to serve. This does not mean that we will not cooperate with ICE or other agencies in the lawful execution of their duties. I acknowledge that some of the language I used in the letter could have been clearer on this point as I believe portions of the letter have been misinterpreted and taken out of context. However, it is my belief that all law enforcement officials have an obligation to conduct themselves in a manner that is beyond reproach and sets an example for the general public. I do not believe law enforcement officials should have to choose between upholding their sworn duty to the Constitution and following the State statute.
A secondary concern when the enclosed County policy was adopted was the potential liability exposure stemming from incarceration of detainees without Court ordered warrants. I understand that different federal circuit courts have addressed this issue in different ways and given that potential uncertainty, when the 2018 policy was adopted, we made an effort to work with our local judiciary to include language along the lines of the following in our orders setting conditions of release:
In the event a detainer has issued for a person under lawful detention or arrest prior to release, these conditions of release only become effective upon expiration or enforcement of the detainer.
(See Article V, subparagraph 1 of policy). Including this language in a Court order would resolve the concern over whether an administrative detainer violates an individual’s Constitutional rights by effectively supplementing the administrative detainer with an Order approved by an Iowa District Court Judge or Judicial Magistrate.1 We have been following this practice and have cooperated with ICE on its detainer cases where we have incarcerated individuals.
Obviously, I support ICE in their efforts to keep our country and community safe. They have a difficult, dangerous and important task before them. It remains my intent that our assistance be provided when those tasks are being carried out within the parameters of their legal responsibilities.
I would appreciate your taking the time to review the enclosed policy as well as my comments. Please contact me should you need any additional information. Thank you for your careful consideration of this matter.
Sincerely,
/s/Dan Marx
Winneshiek County Sheriff
1 I have been advised by our County Attorney that this process will need to be reviewed in light of a Settlement Agreement reached in the Gonzales v ICEcase in the 9th Circuit. All of the attached detainers included Box 3 and Box 4 probable cause determinations. It is my understanding that the method for making a probable cause determination for issuing these types of detainers will change on March 4, 2025. Upon receipt of information from ICE concerning the updated process, we will modify our practices.
Leave a Reply