Citizen in a RepublicNH Bill Briefing
← All bills

HB 1142 · 2026 · House · Criminal Justice and Public Safety Committee

ID rules for immigration enforcement officers

AI-generated

relative to requirements for law enforcement officers assisting in immigration enforcement.

Requires state, county, and local law enforcement officers participating in the federal 287(g) immigration enforcement program to identify themselves by name, badge number, and agency, and to remain unmasked while operating under that authority.AI-generated

Status

Committee recommended Inexpedient to Legislate; died at adjournment · February 24, 2026
  1. ✓Introduced
  2. ✕House
  3. Senate
  4. Governor
  5. Law

Analysis

This bill establishes requirements for any state, county, or local law enforcement officer that is assisting with federal immigration enforcement pursuant to the federal 287(g) program.

From the bill's official ANALYSIS section.

In the bill's words

Quoted verbatim from the bill as introduced.

“Any state, county, or local law enforcement officer that is participating in the federal 287(g) program as outlined in RSA 106-P:1 shall be required to identify themselves by name, badge number, and agency and shall state that they are operating under the authority of United States Immigration and Customs Enforcement while they are operating under the authority of the 287(g) agreement.”
RSA 106-P:2, I

The identification requirement: name, badge number, agency, and whose authority the officer is acting under.AI-generated

“Any state, county, or local law enforcement officer that is participating in the federal 287(g) program as outlined in RSA 106-P:1 shall remain unmasked while they are operating under the authority of the 287(g) agreement.”
RSA 106-P:2, II

The unmasking requirement — the provision that drew the national argument to Concord.AI-generated

“New Section; Participation in Federal Immigration Enforcement; Requirements for Law Enforcement Officers. Amend RSA 106-P by inserting after section 1 the following new section:”
Section 1

The bill would have written these duties into RSA 106-P, the anti-sanctuary chapter enacted the year before.AI-generated

“This act shall take effect 60 days after its passage.”
Section 2

A two-section bill: the requirement, and when it starts.AI-generated

Official record

Bill page — docket & status

gc.nh.gov · the authoritative source

Sponsors

Rep. Alexis SimpsonDPrimeDemocratic Leader
  • Rep. Alissandra MurrayDClerk· Criminal Justice and Public Safety
  • Rep. David MeuseDDeputy Ranking Member· Criminal Justice and Public Safety
  • Rep. Linda Harriott-GathrightDRanking Member· Criminal Justice and Public Safety
  • Rep. Matthew WilhelmDDemocratic Caucus Chair

Also: Rep. Buzz ScherrD, Rep. Chris MunsD, Rep. Zoe ManosD

Public testimony

3,468 signed in online · 1,712 wrote testimony

94% support6% oppose0% neutral

ForTransparency and accountability require visible ID

AgainstMasks protect officers and families from doxxing

AI-generatedLeading arguments, summarized by the testimony tool.

Read the arguments

In their wordsVerbatim, exactly as submitted

“I support HB1142 because I am afraid that ICE agents ARE SO POORLY TRAINED AND HAVE NO BACKGROUND CHECKS that they need to have identification so that we know they are actually ice agents.…”
— Emma Stamas, Keene · My friends and neighbors at KUUCsupports
“I do not want to live in a state where law enforcement officers and federal agents who are potentially committing crimes against citizens to be masked. If they are doing everything legally, they should be able to do so without covering their faces.”
— Kimberly Porter, Concordsupports
“All law enforcement should be held accountable for their actions. They should identify themselves via a valid badge and not cover their faces. Otherwise, anyone could impersonate an officer (which is a crime) and harm innocent people in the process.…”
— Heather Gollnick, Goffstownsupports
“Give additional funding to these brave ICE agents. All illegals must GO.”
— Marc Bergeron, Hudsonopposes
“The safety and security of our ICE agents and others is being compromised by nefarious individuals purposely investigating agents identities. Using this information to terrorize agents and create fear and threats of Han to their families.…”
— Stacey Carroll, Wiltonopposes
“I feel ice should be able to wear masks and do their jobs privately and protected without concern of who they are. They are protecting us and America. God bless America and god bless ice”
— Michael Krasny, Nashuaopposes

Verbatim excerpts of submitted testimony, quoted from the testimony tool.

Read the testimony · as of Aug 12, 2026

Votes

yeanay
Starting text: Bill as introduced
  • Feb 11, 2026HouseCommittee report· regular calendar: Inexpedient to Legislate7–6
    Overall
    54% yea

Hearings and debates

  • Jan 28, 2026Public hearingHouse Criminal Justice and Public Safety6:26:10–6:34:538m 43slocated in the stream transcriptPublic Hearing

Timestamps locate where this bill is taken up in the chamber's YouTube stream.

Legislative history

  1. Jan 7, 2026HouseIntroduced 01/07/2026 and referred to Criminal Justice and Public Safety HJ 1 P. 8
  2. Jan 28, 2026HousePublic Hearing: 01/28/2026 03:30 pm GP 159
  3. Feb 11, 2026HouseExecutive Session: 02/11/2026 03:30 pm GP 159
  4. Feb 11, 2026HouseMajority : Inexpedient to Legislate 02/11/2026 (Vote 7-6; RC) HC 10 P. 80
  5. Feb 24, 2026HouseMinority : Ought to Pass

Coverage

Background reading

Evergreen reading on the policy area — spanning perspectives — not coverage of this specific bill.

  • “Sanctuary” Jurisdictions: Legal OverviewExplainer — legal

    Congressional Research Service — What federal law does and does not require of state and local governments, including 8 U.S.C. § 1373 and the constitutional limits on commandeering local police.AI-generated

  • Sanctuary Policies: An OverviewExplainer

    American Immigration Council — A plain-language primer on what “sanctuary” policies actually say, how detainers work, and why the term covers a wide range of local rules.AI-generated

  • Delegation of Immigration Authority: Section 287(g)Federal program — primary source

    U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement — ICE's own description of the three 287(g) models and what a participating sheriff or police department agrees to — the program the New Hampshire laws protect from local interference.AI-generated

  • Fact Sheet on Sanctuary Policies and 8 USC 1373Immigrant-rights / legal

    Immigrant Legal Resource Center — Argues that § 1373 reaches only information sharing, so most local limits on detainer compliance remain lawful — the counter-reading to the anti-sanctuary case.AI-generated

  • Map: Sanctuary Cities, Counties, and StatesEnforcement advocacy

    Center for Immigration Studies — The restrictionist tally of jurisdictions that decline detainers, built from ICE detainer-refusal data — the dataset most often cited by supporters of bans like this one.AI-generated

  • Sanctuary policies reduce deportations without increasing crimeAcademic — national evidence

    PNAS (Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences) — A 2020 study finding sanctuary policies cut deportations by about a third, with no measurable effect on crime rates and no drop in deportations of people with violent convictions.AI-generated

  • Know Your Rights: Immigrants’ RightsNH context — civil liberties

    ACLU of New Hampshire — New Hampshire-specific guidance on encounters with police, ICE, and Border Patrol — the practical side of what changes when local agencies cooperate.AI-generated

Documents (PDF)

Bill text & amendments link direct to gc.nh.gov; committee reports stream from the state record.