Federal immigration enforcement operations have taken place across multiple East Idaho communities this month, with authorities confirming at least two detentions near Driggs and separate law enforcement activity in Idaho Falls and Victor.

Teton County Operations

U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement conducted enforcement operations in the Driggs area of Teton County on July 18, resulting in two people being detained. A video circulating online that showed a Teton County Sheriff’s Office vehicle parked alongside an unmarked ICE vehicle was later taken down.

Teton County Sheriff Clint Lemieux acknowledged the federal agency’s presence in his jurisdiction but declined to specify locations or the nature of the targets. “ICE typically gives the county advance notice before operating in the area,” Lemieux said, describing the working relationship between local and federal authorities.

Separate ICE enforcement activity was also reported in Idaho Falls, though details of that operation have not been released by federal authorities.

Multi-Agency Narcotics Operation in Victor

On July 21, a multi-agency narcotics investigation led by the Drug Enforcement Administration took place near Willow Creek in Victor, involving Homeland Security Investigations, the IRS, and several East Idaho police departments. It remained unclear whether ICE agents participated directly in that operation, though Homeland Security Investigations — the federal agency under which ICE operates — confirmed its involvement.

Community Response

The Driggs-based Hispanic Resource Center responded to news of the ICE activity, saying community members had been left shaken. “Our hearts are with everyone in our community who is feeling afraid right now,” the organization said in a statement.

Idaho’s 287(g) Partnerships

The East Idaho enforcement activity comes as cooperation between Idaho law enforcement and federal immigration authorities has expanded in recent years. Eleven Idaho law enforcement agencies currently hold 287(g) memoranda of agreement with ICE, which authorize local officers to perform certain immigration enforcement functions alongside federal agents.

Several East Idaho counties are among those with formal agreements. The Bonneville County Sheriff’s Office holds a warrant service officer agreement with ICE, as do Caribou, Bingham, and Power counties. Franklin County holds a task force model agreement, which allows for a broader scope of joint activity.

Nationally, ICE has signed 2,179 such agreements across 39 states and two U.S. territories, reflecting the Trump administration’s push to enlist local partners in immigration enforcement efforts.

Salt Lake City Detention Facility in Flux

The regional enforcement picture has been complicated by uncertainty surrounding a planned detention facility in Salt Lake City. ICE purchased a warehouse there in March for $145.4 million, with plans to create a detention center capable of holding up to 10,000 people. However, by mid-June, reports indicated ICE was abandoning or transferring the project.

Salt Lake City and Salt Lake County both filed lawsuits against the federal government in June to block the warehouse facility from moving forward. The status of regional detention capacity could affect how ICE manages enforcement operations across the Intermountain West, including in Idaho.

What’s Next

No additional details on the scope or outcome of the Idaho Falls operation have been released, and it remains unclear whether further enforcement activity is planned in the region in the near term. Local law enforcement agencies with 287(g) agreements are expected to continue coordinating with federal partners as the administration maintains its focus on interior enforcement.

The question of how deeply state law should regulate those local-federal partnerships has also been a point of recent debate at the Idaho Legislature. The Bonneville County Sheriff, for instance, has argued that decisions about ICE cooperation should remain with individual sheriffs rather than be dictated by state statute, reflecting a broader tension between local discretion and statewide immigration policy.