It is a law that seems to come from another era – a time when rights were not protected but suspected. In Ohio, the Republican-dominated Senate has approved the bill S.B. 172. A law that allows the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement agency, ICE, to arrest people in public spaces – not based on evidence, not even on concrete indications, but simply on suspicion that they might be “illegally” in the country. The provisions are sweeping and far-reaching. They explicitly authorize ICE officers to carry out arrests wherever people are present – on school grounds, in courtrooms, in public libraries, in hospitals. Particularly alarming: the law explicitly prohibits local authorities or members of the judiciary from interfering in these operations. Even judges will no longer be allowed to intervene once S.B. 172 takes effect, even if ICE agents pull people out of a courtroom during a hearing. Anyone who tries to stop them risks criminal charges.
Immigration attorneys and human rights organizations are sounding the alarm. Carmen Nuñez, one of the leading voices in the legal resistance to the law, puts it bluntly: “This is a racial profiling law. You can’t tell by looking at someone whether they have papers – but that is now being used as the basis for arrests.” Outrage is also growing among the Democratic opposition in the state. Senator Allison Russo warns of a climate of intimidation: “This is not about safety. It’s about fear. About control. And about sending the message: You don’t belong here.” Republican supporters of the bill are attempting to portray S.B. 172 as mere support of federal law. They claim to be enforcing existing immigration laws, according to the office of the bill’s sponsor, Terry Johnson. But that justification rings hollow for anyone who has witnessed ICE raids in recent years – involving ski masks, assault rifles, opaque lists – and increasingly with collateral damage. In 2024 alone, civil society groups documented more than 50 cases in Ohio in which U.S. citizens of Latin American descent were mistakenly arrested. Because they spoke Spanish. Because they were nearby. Because they had the “wrong” last name.
Legal experts see the law as a direct provocation against the Constitution. It undermines the principle of the presumption of innocence, disregards the prohibition of discrimination, and directly interferes with the separation of powers by effectively disempowering judges. Nevertheless, the law is likely to take effect if it also passes the House of Representatives – setting a precedent for other states to follow Trump’s hardline approach. Protests have already been announced in Columbus, Dayton, and Cleveland. Many schools have issued open letters declaring that they will not allow ICE access to their buildings – fully aware that this may put them on the wrong side of the law. But for many, that risk is smaller than the alternative: watching students being arrested in the classroom because someone suspects them of being “illegal.” And tourists are not protected either – anyone who happens to be in the wrong place at the wrong time, with the “wrong” appearance or passport, can just as easily become a target as the country’s residents themselves. This is a law that no longer asks who you are – only who someone thinks you might be. A suspicion is enough. And freedom becomes a hypothesis.
English 
German 
