The Wisconsin Supreme Court is poised to deliver a decision on whether local law enforcement agencies can detain individuals in their jails based on requests from the Trump administration.

This ruling will significantly impact immigrant rights, as advocacy groups argue these rights are infringed when sheriff’s offices adhere to Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) detainers. These detainers allow law enforcement to hold suspected undocumented immigrants for up to 48 hours, enabling federal agents to take custody and potentially deport them.

The lawsuit claims that complying with an ICE detainer equates to making an arrest, a power Wisconsin law enforcement does not possess under ICE’s civil administrative warrants.

The state’s supreme court has agreed to hear the case brought forward by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU). Representing an immigrant rights organization, the ACLU urged the court to bypass lower court proceedings and directly address the issue, emphasizing that individuals across Wisconsin are being unlawfully detained for extended periods for ICE to intervene.

“The petition for leave to commence an original action is granted,” the supreme court announced on Wednesday. “This court assumes jurisdiction over this entire action, and the petitioner may not raise or argue issues not set forth in the petition for leave to commence an original action except as otherwise ordered below by this court.”

The lawsuit, filed by the ACLU and Voces de la Frontera, indicated that at the time of its submission in September, ICE issued detainers even for individuals without criminal records or those with unresolved charges in Wisconsin courts. The petition identified five county sheriff’s offices—Walworth, Brown, Kenosha, Sauk, and Marathon—as respondents, noting their compliance with ICE’s requests.

The Wisconsin Supreme Court ordered Voces de la Frontera to submit a brief within 30 days, and then the sheriff’s offices will have 20 days to respond.

The seven justices were split on whether to expedite the case. A majority is required for the state’s high court to bypass the lower courts to take a case and two justices indicated they were opposed to the decision.

The disagreement underscores the significance of the makeup of The Badger State’s high court. In the lead-up to Wisconsin’s last two state Supreme Court elections — both of which the liberal candidate won — national Democrats and Republicans funneled money into their respective candidate, recognizing how important a majority would be.

The distinction between acquiescence and opposition to ICE and the Trump administration’s immigration priorities has been a defining characteristic of many local leaders and officials. It is perhaps most notable in so-called “purple” states such as Wisconsin.

The ACLU celebrated the Wisconsin Supreme Court’s decision to take up the case.

“ICE continues to send hundreds of these detainers to Wisconsin jails, and people throughout the state are being illegally held for days so that ICE can pick them up,” said Tim Muth, ACLU of Wisconsin senior staff attorney. “ICE sends detainers even for people who have never been convicted and only have minor charges pending in Wisconsin courts. Sheriffs are overstepping their authority under Wisconsin law by honoring ICE detainers.”

Law&Crime reached out to ICE for comment.