Two bills that would regulate immigration detention facilities in Maryland are moving quickly as lawmakers grapple with what power, if any, they have to influence the federal government’s plans.

At a hearing on the bills Thursday, the sponsoring delegates were careful to emphasize their legislation does not regulate federal immigration enforcement policy, over which the state has virtually no control.

Instead, the bills would require explicit zoning approval before a private immigration detention facility could operate in Maryland and would create new standards and oversight for conditions inside immigration detention centers.

“This bill is pretty narrow, and it does not decide anything about immigration policy,” said Del. Vaughn Stewart, a Democrat from Montgomery County who sponsored the oversight bill. “It just sets minimum safety inspection and readiness standards for all jails in the state.”

Stewart’s bill would mandate minimum safety standards and require state oversight of living conditions. It says it applies to immigration detention facilities. Anyone would be able to report violations of the standards, and the Maryland Commission on Correctional Standards would be empowered to inspect and, if necessary, order the closure of immigration facilities.

The Maryland Attorney General’s Office would also be able to bring legal action against private entities that fail to meet the standards, according to the legislation.

A second bill from Del. Melissa Wells, a Baltimore Democrat who chairs the House’s Government, Labor and Elections Committee, would bar private entities from operating immigration detention facilities without explicit zoning approval. The bill applies only to private immigration detention centers and is intended to allow public input before these facilities can operate in a community, Wells said.

No one testified in opposition to the bills, which received committee hearings within days of being filed and are listed as emergency legislation, meaning they would take effect immediately if they pass and become law.

The bills were filed after news of proposed immigration detention centers caught multiple Maryland communities by surprise.

This month, Howard County Executive Calvin Ball revoked a building permit for a private immigration detention facility shortly after notifying the public of its existence. He also signed emergency legislation to prohibit the permitting of detention facilities on private property in the county.

Ball testified in favor of both state bills Thursday.

“As leaders, it is our responsibility to make land use decisions that are not only right for our community but uphold human dignity,” Ball said.

There have been reports of inhumane conditions in ICE detention centers across the country, including at a holding room facility in downtown Baltimore.

In 2021, the Maryland General Assembly passed the Dignity Not Detention Act, which banned local governments from entering immigration detention agreements and using their jails to house detainees. Critics have said the law forces ICE to transport immigrants to other states for detention, placing them farther from family and community.

The state has little power to stop the federal government from running its own immigration detention centers here, though Gov. Wes Moore and the Democratic members of Maryland’s federal delegation have sent letters to the U.S. Department of Homeland Security expressing concerns.

Their letters address a proposed immigration detention facility in Washington County, where DHS bought an 825,000-square-foot warehouse in Williamsport for $102.4 million last month. Washington County officials have said they support the federal government’s plans for an immigration detention facility that would include “holding and processing spaces.”

The two bills heard Thursday are the latest effort by the Maryland Legislature to control immigration enforcement amid President Donald Trump’s aggressive mass deportation campaign. But state lawmakers are hamstrung by the fact that immigration is the domain of the federal government, and federal laws generally take precedence over conflicting state laws under the Supremacy Clause of the U.S. Constitution.

Some legislation that was already being considered in the General Assembly this year is almost certain to trigger a legal showdown with the federal government. A proposal to ban law enforcement officers from wearing masks passed the Maryland Senate despite a warning from the state Attorney General’s Office that enforcing it against federal agents would be “difficult and likely unconstitutional.”