BALTIMORE — What is believed to be the first legal challenge to the new Maryland law banning agreements between local law enforcement and U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement was thrown out by a Harford County judge.

The case illustrates confusion over Maryland’s new law, which some lawmakers heralded as prohibiting local law enforcement from cooperating with ICE agents under what are known as 287(g) agreements. But the law allows cooperation in many instances, as Gov. Wes Moore himself sought to clarify when it was initially described.

In this case, an Ecuadorian man sued the warden of Harford County’s detention center, filing a petition arguing that his detention on March 6 was illegal. Jose Toaquiza-Ugsha’s emergency petition states how many have interpreted the law: “Maryland law enforcement officials have no authority to make civil immigration arrests, with or without the existence of an administrative ‘immigration warrant.'”

Harford County Circuit Court Judge Kevin Mahoney ruled that the petition filed by Toaquiza-Ugsha against Daniel Galbraith, warden of the Harford County Detention Center, was moot and closed the case March 24, according to court records.

The case was moot because local law enforcement officials are permitted to cooperate with ICE on immigration detainers, as clarified by Moore shortly after he signed legislation in February prohibiting certain agreements between local police and correctional officers and ICE.

Moore, a Democrat, issued three directives on Feb. 17 clarifying that state and local agencies may still cooperate with ICE on criminal matters and immigration detainers. That drew criticism from Republicans who said the bills appeared largely symbolic. And some political scientists called Moore’s move to explain the legislation as a political balancing act, given that some polls show Marylanders oppose the law.

In a letter to local elected officials, Moore emphasized that the newly signed law does not prevent local governments from working with federal authorities on criminal investigations or the removal of dangerous offenders. It also does not prohibit notifying ICE of impending releases or coordinating custody transfers within constitutional limits.

Harford County State’s Attorney Alison Healey, who represented Warden Galbraith, said Toaquiza-Ugsha’s petition had no merit, since local law enforcement can still use 48-hour detainers, and he was picked up by ICE within 24 hours.

When asked if challenges to the common 48-hour ICE detainers could become more frequent in the wake of the new state law, Healey said: “It certainly felt like this is something you are going to continue to battle.”

But, she added: “This was not the case to test those waters.”

Toaquiza-Ugsha was found guilty on March 5 of driving while impaired by alcohol and fleeing police in Belcamp related to a Jan. 28 incident, according to court records. He’s also scheduled for an April 13 trial for a Jan. 28 traffic charge in Baltimore City.

After the guilty finding, the Harford County Detention Center held Toaquiza-Ugsha, who Sheriff Jeffrey Gahler said is a citizen of Ecuador and is in the U.S. illegally, to allow ICE to pick him up.

Toaquiza-Ugsha’s attorney, Ashley Travis, did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

Harford County had a 287g agreement with ICE. And Gahler has been among the most vocal proponents of working with federal immigration officials and fighting the emergency statewide ban.

In his Facebook post, Gahler called Toaquiza-Ugsha’s petition “ultra sanctuary-state craziness” and wrote he’s “thankful we won in court!”

________

(Mennatalla Ibrahim contributed to this article.)

________

©2026 The Baltimore Sun. Visit at baltimoresun.com. Distributed by Tribune Content Agency, LLC.