When federal immigration authorities were searching for a man accused of driving drunk in Connecticut last year, they turned to local law enforcement for help.
Meriden police charged the man with illegal operation of a motor vehicle under the influence of alcohol and other driving violations after he rear-ended a minivan on Oct. 18, 2025.
Roughly a month later, the Meriden Police Department’s records division received an email from an enforcement and removal assistant working in Hartford.
"The Department of Homeland Security, Immigration and Customs Enforcement, is conducting a preliminary inquiry involving the following individual," the ICE assistant wrote. The email asked for a range of information about the man, including a copy of his booking photograph.
It wasn’t the only request of its kind. Records reviewed by Connecticut Public show local police departments have received dozens of requests for information about people targeted for immigration enforcement, amid a push by the federal government to dramatically increase the scale of its removal operations.
Those who were targeted were charged with a range of offenses, from serious crimes — including negligent homicide — to shoplifting and other low-level violations. In a handful of cases, charges had already been dropped when ICE contacted the departments seeking information.
The records, which date from January 2025 onward, show that ICE was frequently in contact with local law enforcement, despite efforts by state officials to limit police from engaging with federal immigration authorities.
In the view of some immigrant advocates, the communications also undermine efforts to build trust between law enforcement and the community, and underscore the limitations of Connecticut's Trust Act, which restricts police from coordinating with ICE.
"They're clearly coming up with innovative ways of being able to go after immigrants," said Gus Marks-Hamilton, advocacy and organizing manager at the American Civil Liberties Union of Connecticut.
Marks-Hamilton said he was concerned, but not surprised by the federal government's tactics.
"Clearly, the Trump administration has unleashed ICE in ways that we've never seen before — in ways that are incredibly concerning [and] obviously very scary to immigrants and immigrant communities in Connecticut," he said.
Records show that in some cases, police departments supplied the information to ICE representatives speedily — occasionally within minutes. Responding to questions, several departments said they were required to release the material, which is subject to public disclosure under state law.
Supporters argue that type of close coordination is necessary to uphold the nation's immigration laws.
Ben Proto, chairman of the Connecticut Republican Party, said the records also demonstrate how the Trust Act has complicated the work of local police by requiring them to assess their legal position when they receive requests from federal counterparts.
"They've been trained on how to interact with other law enforcement, and now they're being told to ignore all that training and do something completely different," Proto said.
He added that he thinks law enforcement agencies should always assist one another.
"If the person who committed the crime is a citizen or an immigrant here legally or an immigrant here illegally, police should investigate that and make appropriate arrests," he said.
Police communications with ICE
Connecticut Public sent Freedom of Information requests to more than a dozen local police departments asking for any communications with the U.S. Department of Homeland Security, as well as any of its subordinate agencies, since Jan. 1, 2025.
Nine provided records showing contact with federal immigration officials. The communications typically sought copies of arrest reports and booking photos for people who were previously in police custody.
ICE staffers conveyed most requests by email, though some arrived by fax. Some were formulated as requests made pursuant to the Connecticut Freedom of Information Act, though many didn't explicitly invoke the law, which guarantees public access to government records.
New Britain police alone received more than 20 requests, most dating to 2025.
In most cases, ICE agents provided dates of birth and alien numbers of the people of interest. Alien numbers are assigned to non-U.S. citizens who have opened an immigration file.
The requests largely came after the person was charged by local police, though the length of time between an arrest and when ICE requested documents varied.
In the longest gap, an enforcement and removal assistant with DHS and ICE emailed the department’s records division requesting information about a person who they said had a charging date nearly 13 years prior.
In the closest instance, a mission support specialist at ICE’s Boston field office sought information about someone a day after they were charged.
Those under investigation ranged in age from their mid-20s to mid-40s.
New Britain Police Chief Matthew Marino said in an email that the materials his department provided were legally subject to disclosure.
"Information exempt from disclosure or otherwise protected by law was not provided," Marino wrote. "The New Britain Police Department fully complies with the Connecticut Trust Act and does not coordinate its law enforcement operations with ICE."
Danbury police also received numerous requests from ICE seeking police reports and booking photos, and provided most of the information.
In one instance, a staffer identified as an assistant chief counsel for ICE emailed the department’s records division regarding someone who was arrested for two misdemeanors, which took place roughly three months earlier.
In less than 24 hours, the department supplied an incident report.
"Good morning, please see attached," a clerk typist at the department’s records division replied.
The department did not respond to requests for comment.
Information police departments share
Communications between local police and federal immigration agencies aren't necessarily disallowed under state law. Connecticut’s Freedom of Information Act guarantees public access to records held by governmental bodies, like arrest reports and booking photos.
However, one expert said other factors should be taken into consideration.
"It’s a very technical thing," said Mike Lawlor, who worked at the state legislature when the Trust Act was first adopted more than a decade ago.
The act prohibits local police from expending time and resources to cooperate with federal immigration authorities regarding a person's custody status or release, with a few exceptions.
"I suppose you could argue if you're a police agency, 'Well, but it's public information. We can give it out if we want to, right?'" said Lawlor, who is now associate professor of criminal justice at the University of New Haven.
"If, however, they're treating ICE differently than a journalist or an ordinary citizen asking for the same stuff, I think now they're going above and beyond, and that would be a violation, certainly, of the spirit of the Trust Act," Lawlor said.
To provide greater insight into police contacts with ICE, Connecticut requires departments to document some interactions in a public database, though interpretations about what to record vary by department. Requests for arrest records aren't typically included.
In 2025, records show the Milford Police Department provided arrest reports and booking photos to ICE agents regarding five people who were arrested for driving under the influence.
The department logged three contacts that year in the ICE database, which largely serves to catalogue whether departments granted access to people in custody. Milford police didn't provide access to anyone during that time, the records show.
It's unclear what kinds of interactions the department had with ICE, though in an email, Milford Chief of Police Keith L. Mello said the department doesn't log requests for records because the information must be disclosed, with permissible redactions.
"Any contact or correspondence our staff had with ICE was, in our analysis, not in violation of the CT Trust Act and therefore was not reported … on the portal provided," Mello wrote.
Branford police also received requests for arrest reports and booking photos, some of which were provided. Deputy Police Chief John Alves said the records were released in accordance with the Freedom of Information law and state statutes.
The public database shows that a few agencies in Connecticut did grant ICE access to people in custody in 2025, including the Farmington Police Department.
Farmington police Lt. Matthew S. Corcoran said the department received a faxed immigration detainer from DHS related to a person who had active arrest warrants linked to a series of attempted residential burglaries in the area. The person was also on a national security watch list — a circumstance that permits police to coordinate with ICE.
"Therefore, in compliance with the Trust Act, the agency completed the form and returned it, notifying them of the arrest," Corcoran said.
Separately, the Orange Police Department informed ICE that a person in their custody was being transported to a courthouse after receiving a fax and phone call inquiring whether the person was in custody. Department spokesperson Christina DeRubeis said in an email the communication was permitted under the Trust Act, and the department declined a request to elaborate further.
The Wallingford Police Department said it received 18 requests from ICE in 2026 alone, which included requests for arrest reports and booking photos.
Police spokesperson Lt. Stephen Jaques said the communications were treated as Freedom of Information requests.
“The Wallingford Police Department values its immigrants and refugees; they are our neighbors, family, and friends," Jaques said. "Although Connecticut is a sovereign state, it cannot and does not have the power to limit federal immigration officials' actions."
The department also complied with a civil immigration detainer, according to the ICE Access database.
"The Trust Act has changed how we interact with ICE/DHS in many ways, which is clearly established in the act itself," Jaques said.
Role of the Trust Act
Connecticut’s Trust Act was first passed in 2013, and strengthened in 2019 and again in 2025 to add more protections.
Lawlor, the criminal justice expert, said one goal of the law is to prevent immigrants from fearing local police.
"We wanted to make it clear to people that the state and local police here in Connecticut are not an extension of the immigration police," Lawlor said. "Our local police are there to protect us all."
The law prohibits police departments from using time, money or other resources to communicate with federal immigration authorities regarding the custody status or release of someone targeted by a civil detainer.
An updated version of the Trust Act added more exceptions that allow law enforcement to comply, such as in cases that involve serious crimes, including certain sexual offenses, kidnapping and domestic violence.
A terrorism watchlist match or signed judicial warrant also allow local law enforcement to cooperate with ICE.
A DHS spokesperson said in an email that its partnerships with law enforcement are "critical to having the resources we need to arrest criminal illegal aliens across the country."
The spokesperson said the agency has ramped up its efforts with local law enforcement to assist its federal immigration officers.
"When politicians bar local law enforcement from working with DHS, our law enforcement officers have to have a more visible presence so that we can find and apprehend the criminals let out of jails and back into communities," the spokesperson said.
The state's Office of Policy and Management oversees administration of the ICE Access Database, but doesn’t enforce the reporting requirements.
That’s one weakness of the Trust Act, said Tabitha Sookdeo, executive director of Connecticut Students for a Dream.
"There's not a body within the government that is looking at all of the violations, right? And then there's not really a body that is ensuring the enforcement of these newer laws, and so I think that's a huge problem," Sookdeo said.
Some records withheld
Some law enforcement agencies also provide little transparency into their interactions with ICE. Bridgeport police did not respond to a FOIA request filed in November 2025.
Police in four communities — Fairfield, New Haven, Shelton and Waterbury — said they had no responsive records.
The Stamford Police Department said it located records, but would not disclose them because prosecution is pending, and other arrest records are sealed.
"The State’s Attorney has advised the City that it is his position that disclosure of the records regarding pending cases is prejudicial to the prosecution of the arrests," wrote Burt Rosenberg, assistant corporation counsel for the city. "This includes correspondence from and to federal immigration enforcement insofar as such documents contain records of the arrests."
