BLOOMINGTON — Monroe County Sheriff Ruben Marté has filed a federal lawsuit against Indiana Attorney General Todd Rokita, seeking to block a controversial new state law that mandates local law enforcement’s cooperation with federal immigration authorities.
The lawsuit, filed Wednesday in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Indiana, challenges Senate Bill 76 (also known as the FAIRNESS Act). Signed into law by Governor Mike Braun in March, the act is scheduled to take effect on July 1, 2026.
The Legal Conflict: State Mandates vs. Constitutional Rights
At the heart of the lawsuit is the use of ICE detainer requests. These are administrative requests from U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement asking local jails to hold an individual for up to 48 hours beyond their scheduled release date to allow federal agents time to take them into custody.
Sheriff Marté argues that the FAIRNESS Act creates an unconstitutional “impossible situation” for local law enforcement:
- The State Mandate: SB 76 requires local officials to comply with all ICE detainer requests. Failure to do so could result in lawsuits from the Attorney General and civil penalties of up to $10,000 per violation.
- The Federal Conflict: Marté contends that detaining someone without a judicial warrant or probable cause of a new crime violates the Fourth Amendment protection against unreasonable searches and seizures.
“I cannot order my officers to comply with SEA 76 without violating my oath to protect and uphold the Constitution and exposing the Monroe County Sheriff’s Office to significant civil liability,” Marté stated in the complaint.
Understanding the FAIRNESS Act (SB 76)
The FAIRNESS Act is one of the most comprehensive immigration enforcement bills passed in Indiana’s history. Beyond detainer mandates, the law includes several aggressive measures:
- Sanctuary City Crackdown: It clarifies Indiana’s existing ban on “sanctuary” policies, allowing the Attorney General to sue any local government or university that limits immigration enforcement.
- Employer Sanctions: The law prohibits businesses from knowingly hiring undocumented workers and empowers the state to revoke business licenses for repeat violations.
- Public Benefits Reporting: Requires state agencies to file annual reports detailing the number of non-citizens enrolled in programs like SNAP or Medicaid.
- Legal Protections: While the law grants state-level immunity to officers who comply, legal experts like Katie Rosenberger note that state immunity does not shield officers from federal civil rights lawsuits.
This lawsuit is the latest chapter in a long-standing battle between Sheriff Marté and Attorney General Rokita.
In 2024, Rokita sued Sheriff Marté after he implemented a policy directing deputies not to honor ICE detainers without a judicial warrant. Rokita argued that the policy turned Monroe County into a “safe haven” for illegal immigration. That case remains active in the Monroe County Circuit Court, with oral arguments scheduled for May 29, 2026.
Attorney General Rokita remains undeterred by the new federal challenge. “Hoosiers deserve sheriffs who enforce the law fully and without selective carve-outs that put politics ahead of safety,” Rokita said in a statement. “Our office will vigorously defend the FAIRNESS Act.”
The Institute for Constitutional Advocacy and Protection at Georgetown University is representing Sheriff Marté. They are seeking an immediate injunction to prevent the law from being enforced this July. If the court rules in favor of the Sheriff, it could set a major precedent for how much control state governments have over local police participation in federal immigration matters.
