Two months before the Butler County sheriff signed an agreement to work with U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement without formal approval by the county commissioners, the sheriff in Bucks County in eastern Pennsylvania did the same.

Now, Bucks County Sheriff Frederick Harran is facing a lawsuit.

The American Civil Liberties Union’s Pennsylvania chapter claims Harran violated the Pennsylvania Constitution and the Pennsylvania Intergovernmental Cooperation Act by signing the agreement in April.

The ACLU and Community Justice Project filed the lawsuit June 6 against Harran and Bucks County on behalf of Make the Road States, the BuxMont Unitarian Universalist Fellowship, the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People Bucks County Branch 2253 and county resident Juan Navia.

The sheriff attempted to move the case to the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania. Judge Juan Sanchez blocked the change, sending the case back to Bucks County Common Pleas Court, because the lawsuit revolves around state laws instead of federal and includes only county-level parties.

Attorneys are in the process of preparing preliminary objections, according to Keith Armstrong, an ACLU fellowship attorney for immigrants’ rights.

Here in Butler County, Sheriff Mike Slupe recently said he has a dozen deputies interested in working with ICE through a 287(g) agreement approved by the federal agency on June 23.

“I can’t stress enough that there will be legal paperwork before we act, and that when we do, it is under the supervision and direction of an ICE supervisor,” Slupe said.

Upon learning about the agreement the week of June 30, the sole Democratic commissioner, Kevin Boozel, expressed concern about the legality of the agreement, saying an associated resolution needed to be passed by the Butler County commissioners at a public meeting before it could be adopted.

“He can’t take additional resources from taxpayers without running it through a public meeting,” Boozel said. “We are fiscally and contractually responsible as the commissioners.”

He further raised concerns about the taxpayer expense to carry out ICE-related enforcement, an expansion of power that may not be covered under county insurance.

His Republican counterparts, Commissioners Leslie Osche and Kim Geyer, instead supported the sheriff’s decision, saying the agreement will provide additional training for deputies and curb the potential for bad actors to travel through Butler County.

At the next commissioners’ meeting on July 9, a handful of county residents raised issues with the situation during the public comment period, but a resolution regarding the agreement was not listed on the agenda.

No vote took place.

Meanwhile, the legality of the sheriff’s agreement in Bucks County will be decided by the county Common Pleas Court, prompted by the lawsuit.

The sheriff signed its 287(g) agreement with ICE in April.

“It’s been a recent trend that a lot of sheriffs are making this agreement with ICE,” Armstrong said.

Following Harran signing the agreement, Bucks County commissioners passed a resolution affirming only they may make contracts on behalf of the county. The resolution was sparked by threats of litigation against the county from the ACLU, according to Bucks County solicitor Amy Fitzpatrick.

“This resolution is the Board of Commissioners reaffirming publicly that they have the sole contracting authority,” she said.

The resolution was passed in Bucks County by a 2-1 vote with Democratic Commissioners Robert Harvie Jr. and Diane Marceglia voting in favor and Republican Commissioner Gene DiGirolamo voting against it.

The resolution opened the door for the ACLU lawsuit, as Harran was openly defying the commissioners by signing the agreement.

“He entered into the agreement completely behind the back of the county commissioners,” Anderson said.

In both Butler and Bucks counties, proposals were not submitted to the commissioners before the sheriffs signed the agreement.

To support its claim, the ACLU highlights Article 9, Section 5 of the state Constitution, which authorizes local agencies to cooperate with the federal government by act of the associated municipality’s governing body. The associated governing body in this case is the Bucks County commissioners.

Armstrong said there is Pennsylvania case law that supports the sheriff is not a separate legal entity from the county and cannot sign the agreement.

The lawsuit claims the sheriff, as an individual row officer, does not have the authority to work with the federal government except through the commissioners or with vested authority from the commissioners.

“Case law in Pennsylvania is quite clear he can do the duties he’s authorized to (do),” Armstrong said.

While the Constitution allows local agencies to cooperate with the federal government, the Intergovernmental Cooperation Act outlines how they should cooperate, Armstrong said.

The lawsuit said the Intergovernmental Cooperation Act requires the associated municipal government — again, the Bucks County Board of Commissioners — to pass an ordinance or resolution before the local body — the Bucks County Sheriff’s Office — can cooperate with the federal government.

However, Armstrong said commissioners can also pass an ordinance after the agreement is signed.

The Intergovernmental Cooperation Act also requires the agreement be submitted to the state Local Government Commission for review and recommendation, according to the lawsuit. The commission, under the direction of state Sen. Scott Hutchinson, R-21st, is a bipartisan group comprised of 10 members appointed from the state House and Senate.

Hutchinson did not immediately respond with comment Friday.

Armstrong said the ACLU is still reviewing legal theories outside those established in the lawsuit on how the sheriff signing the agreement violates state law. The organization plans to take the lawsuit to other counties if it’s successful in Bucks County.

However, odds that such a lawsuit would reach Butler County are low because of a key difference between Bucks and Butler — Democratic Party majority commissioners versus Republican Party majority commissioners.

Boozel is the sole Democratic commissioner on the three-person Butler County board. Osche and Geyer hold the majority as Republicans and have both expressed support for the agreement.

Osche did not respond Friday for comment, but in an earlier interview she and Geyer expressed their support of the sheriff.

“I would personally say, after having reviewed the (Memorandum of Understanding with ICE), I support him,” Osche said of the sheriff in a June 30 interview.

“I know there’s a lot of consternation about this, but I support Sheriff Slupe and what he’s trying to do,” Geyer added.

Neither has previously spoken about their thoughts on the legality of the agreement, and attempts by the Butler Eagle to reach Butler County solicitor Julie Graham about the ICE agreement were unsuccessful.