Memphis mayor disputes Noem’s immigration remarks, drawing a sharp line between crime partnerships and ICE actions

City pushes back after federal rhetoric links Memphis to national immigration enforcement debate

Memphis Mayor Paul Young said the city has not worked with U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement on immigration enforcement, directly disputing comments made by Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem as the national debate over local cooperation with federal immigration operations intensifies.

Young’s statement, delivered in a video message, rejected the idea that Memphis has coordinated with ICE on immigration matters. His response came after Noem publicly contrasted Memphis with other jurisdictions that have openly resisted aggressive immigration operations, framing Memphis as a place where federal efforts face less friction.

What the mayor is denying — and what remains contested

Young’s denial is specific: he said there has been no collaboration with ICE “on immigration.” That wording matters in a city where federal, state and local law enforcement agencies have overlapping roles, particularly in initiatives focused on violent crime. In recent months, Memphis has been discussed nationally as an example of how federal teams can be integrated into broader public-safety efforts, even as immigration enforcement draws protests elsewhere.

The distinction between joint crime-fighting activity and immigration enforcement has become a fault line in Memphis politics. Young has previously faced community questions about the extent of contact between local police and federal agents, including whether cooperation includes sharing information, responding to detainer requests, or participating in joint operations tied to immigration enforcement.

Shelby County’s separate relationship with ICE

Complicating the city’s position is the fact that immigration-related cooperation can occur through county detention operations rather than municipal policing. Shelby County Sheriff Floyd Bonner has said he signed a 287(g) agreement under the “jail enforcement model,” which is designed to allow a county jail to hold inmates for a limited period if federal immigration authorities request it. Bonner has indicated the arrangement was aligned with state law and followed consultations with legal offices.

Community groups have urged the sheriff to end that agreement, arguing it damages trust and could deter residents from reporting crimes or cooperating with police.

Tennessee’s broader shift toward formal partnerships

Tennessee has seen rapid growth in local agencies entering 287(g) partnerships with federal immigration authorities over the past year. Statewide reporting has documented a sharp increase in participating agencies between mid-2025 and early 2026, reflecting an expanded footprint for formal local-federal collaboration mechanisms.

What happens next

The public dispute leaves unresolved questions central to residents and local institutions: what operational boundaries exist between Memphis policing and federal immigration enforcement, what data or custody practices apply in Shelby County facilities, and how state policy influences what local officials can refuse or must implement.

• City Hall says Memphis is not collaborating with ICE on immigration enforcement.
• County jail policies may still allow cooperation through a 287(g) jail model framework.
• Statewide participation in federal immigration partnership programs has expanded significantly.

Key issue: whether “cooperation” refers to violent-crime task work, jail detainers, information sharing, or immigration enforcement operations.